The most SA wested raiders jacket since the film!

RCSignals · Post by **RCSignals** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 4:16 pm

Don't Call Me Junior! wrote:
Indiana Holt wrote:my quest about a super accurate raiders wested is over.to give you the truth,I have become a bit tired of this wole SA thing.Im tired of chasing rabbits.but that doesnt mean that I wont get another wested jacket again.
Holt, I'm with you on this 100%. As many people have said, Harrison Ford could've come right off the set of Raiders and given you the jacket right off of his back. There would still be people nitpicking THAT jacket over screen accuracy.

The ONLY thing that matters in the end is whether or not you love the jacket you received. Does it fit you? Do you like the way it looks on you and off? Do you like the leather? Amen, brother!

I, and apparently a few others, think that your latest Wested is one of the best Raiders jackets I've ever seen from Wested. But if you didn't like it what would any of that matter? (I'm glad your really do love it though!)

Having said that: Hey, I can't wait to see your next jacket, Holt!

that's it in a nutshell

Post by **Holt** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 4:23 pm

RCSignals wrote:[

Don't get me wrong Holt. I think your jacket is great, and you have a good eye for these things. i just don't think the jacket in that picture has a collar 'too large' for Ford's neck.
I can't wait to hear what you think of your ToD jacket.

LOL.well it does in this one...

try to get this look with your wested standard raiders.I bet you cant pull it of.I can with mine.so...

RCSignals · Post by **RCSignals** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 5:49 pm

I still think perspective and perception is still at play there. The jacket is barely on his right shoulder in the picture, yet it doesn't seem to effect the sleeve length position. It really looks in bad shape. Is the left side of the right pocket falling apart?

Your jacket still looks good, regardless. What is the measurement of your collar size?

Post by **Holt** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 6:12 pm

yes I know it looks good.it looks awesome.

the right pocket on his jacket is torn,yes.

Alkali Jones · Post by **Alkali Jones** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 6:24 pm

Hey all,

Does anyone have "small collar" Indy screen caps? I wonder.

Holt looks great! I was just about settled on a Todd's, but now... I'm less sure.

Dan S

RCSignals · Post by **RCSignals** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 6:39 pm

Alkali Jones wrote:Hey all,

Does anyone have "small collar" Indy screen caps? I wonder.
Holt looks great! I was just about settled on a Todd's, but now... I'm less sure.

Dan S

define small

Post by **Holt** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 7:02 pm

there are at least 2 with small collars.well IMO there are.

and this is one of them.

and believe it or not...I LIKE it

RCSignals · Post by **RCSignals** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 7:09 pm

Indiana Holt wrote:there are at least 2 with small collars.well IMO there are.

and this is one of them.

and believe it or not...I LIKE it

Not only that, but if you look close I think you'll see some 'shrunken lamb' too

Post by **Holt** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 7:19 pm

yes,at least some areas.you can see those shrunken lamb areas on all jackets in the film, if you just look closely.even the raven bar jacket has it...

Mac · Post by **Mac** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 7:40 pm

Holt, your jacket is spectacular. Soft goat – good call!

I’d like to see a side-by-side match up with this collar:

Alkali Jones wrote:Does anyone have "small collar" Indy screen caps? I wonder.

The Raven Bar jacket looks smaller to me in these pics:

Notice the “shrunken lamb” in that last photo. Also, check out the apparent taper on the fedora.

- Mac

RCSignals · Post by **RCSignals** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 7:46 pm

the shrunken lamb is all over it in those photos. It's clear in the extras video with the DVD too, in the part that shows the practice punch, also in the movie at 1 HOUR 16 MIN 03 SEC

agent5 · Post by **agent5** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 10:35 pm

What areas in particular are you seeing this shrunken lamb in those photos?

Holt,
This jacket...

...is the same jacket as this.

No smaller collar, but you can see it pulled up way more on the right side of the pic.

RCSignals · Post by **RCSignals** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 11:21 pm

agent5 wrote:What areas in particular are you seeing this shrunken lamb in those photos?

It's all over the Jacket but most pronounced on the right front panel. Look closely. The photos aren't the clearest but it is there.

CM · Post by CM » Tue Jan 13, 2009 11:28 pm

I don't see it. What I do see is lamb that has been hand aged and washed and twisted to give it texture. To say it is shrunken lamb without actually seeing it in person is wishful thinking.

It may well be shrunken lamb and I like shrunken lamb - but my point still holds. Some of those markings in teh better photos look like cheap stretched lamb skin, the result of poor tannery processes - but who knows since they are only photos. :|

RCSignals · Post by **RCSignals** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 11:35 pm

CM wrote:I don't see it. What I do see is lamb that has been hand aged and washed and twisted to give it texture. To say it is shrunken lamb without actually seeing it in person is wishful thinking.

It may well be shrunken lamb and I like shrunken lamb - but my point still holds. Some of those markings in teh better photos look like cheap stretched lamb skin, the result of poor tannery processes - but who knows since they are only photos.

You either see it or you don't, but it's shrunken lamb

RCSignals wrote:
RCSignals wrote:Message from Tony on Shrunken Lamb

HELLO ****** !I FINALLY TOOK THE PHOTOS TO SHOW PHYSICALLY (FACTS ) WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT .MANY DIFFERENT JACKETS WERE USED IN INDY ONE MADE OUT OF SHRUNKEN LAMB THAT ALSO VARIES A LOT , BUT THATS WHAT IT WAS . HERE IS ONE THAT IS VERY DISTINCT .THAT LEATHER BELONGS TO ME , I USED TO WORK WITH IT IN THE EIGHTIES AND THAT IS WHY IT TOOK ME ABOUT N 1 SECOND TO RECOGNIZE WHAT IT WAS WHEN I WATCHED THE RAIDERS MOVIE FOR THE VERY FIRST TIME WHILE WORKING ON THE CRYSTAL SKULL JACKET . PLEASE BE SO KIND AND SHARE THE PHOTOS AND THIS EMAIL WITH ALL THE INDY FANS OUT THERE .THANK YOU KINDLY , MY VERY BEST REGARDS ALWAYS TONY NOWAK .

http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll30 ... runken.jpg

http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll30 ... runken.jpg
The piece of shrunken lamb hide in that photo isn't new. Tony has had it for about 29 years. It's the only one he has left, so not enough for a jacket of it.
He does still have the new produced shrunken lamb though.

THAT IS WHAT I HAVE HERE NOW A FULL HIDE ABOUT 29 YEARS OLD ,T.N.

RaiderZee · Post by **RaiderZee** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 11:46 pm

Howdy,

Just curious, and maybe I missed it, but what exactly are the physical properties of shrunken lamb vs. standard lamb? Not the grain, I see that, but as far as strength, heat & water retention, etc.? Or is it simply a cosmetic difference?

RaiderZee

RCSignals · Post by **RCSignals** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 11:48 pm

As I understand it is not only cosmetic, and a result of the tanning process.

edited to add missing word.

CM · Post by CM » Tue Jan 13, 2009 11:48 pm

RaiderZee wrote:Howdy,

Just curious, and maybe I missed it, but what exactly are the physical properties of shrunken lamb vs. standard lamb? Not the grain, I see that, but as far as strength, heat & water retention, etc.? Or is it simply a cosmetic difference?

RaiderZee

Read the TN sticky - all info you need.

RaiderZee · Post by **RaiderZee** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 12:14 am

Oops! Thanks, will do.

RZ

Rom Hunter · Post by **Rom Hunter** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 5:58 am

agent5 wrote:What areas in particular are you seeing this shrunken lamb in those photos?

Holt,
This jacket...

...is the same jacket as this.

No smaller collar, but you can see it pulled up way more on the right side of the pic.

Agent5, correct me if I'm wrong, but you're saying this isn't a smaller collar and Holt says it is?

JimL · Post by **JimL** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 7:28 am

This looks quite a bit like my collar.

For those interested, I just spec'd it to fit my neck properly (as I was not going for a "look" on the collar, just a proper fit of the jacket).

In my case, I wear a 15 1/2 shirt collar, and requested a 17 1/2 - 18 jacket collar. It was made at 18, and looks great.

The photos I have of me wearing the jacket don't look great, as the collar was still FAR too new, and had not take a proper shape. I will look into a new photo with it as it is now, and post it along side this one at some point...

agent5 · Post by **agent5** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 8:25 am

Rom,
Holt said the top pic had a smaller collar but I'm saying its the same jacket as in the bottom pic with the larger collar.

RC,
I'd have to say that the shrunken lamb is inconclusive. If it is shrunken lamb then it is way less pronounced than what TN is using. The horizontal lines on the bottom b/w pic are stretch marks in the leather.

Don't Call Me Junior! · Wed Jan 14, 2009 10:59 am

agent5 wrote: RC,
I'd have to say that the shrunken lamb is inconclusive. If it is shrunken lamb then it is way less pronounced than what TN is using.

This is not trying to be argumentative but objectively the above two statements don't add up for me. The second reads like a cold hard fact and I say that thinking about how it would read if I were reading it for the first time in an archive of this post years from now.

The first statement is easy to agree with if you look at it from the stance of how many jackets were in the film, who has actually seen and handled said jackets, which jacket people consider the "hero" jacket to be, etc. I think I might be inclined to agree. There is no basis from which to form a conclusion given the available information.

Proving the second statement conclusively would be much harder. There have been people who carry some weight so to speak that have come forward and stated that the shrunken lamb is definitely what the leather was on the Raiders jacket. TN and Terry Leonard come to mind here amongst others. But let's just say that we can't go by them purely because the jacket's too old, or maybe isn't the "hero" jacket or somebody doesn't believe Terry's memory is as sharp as it once was.

What do we have next to go off of? Low resolution screen caps and pics? Too many details are lost there - any grain would be one of the first details to be lost. There are a few decent ones a guess but really there are none approaching the image quality of true 35mm still or motion. The high def broadcast that was aired a few years ago was definitely not a good representation. The image quality was horrible and not cleaned up very well if at all from my recollection. I didn't bother trying to record it so I can't back that statement up but I distinctly remember it not looking nearly as good as it could/should. I tend to be OCD when it comes to image quality sometimes to a fault. Hopefully someday soon they will go back to the source material and do a proper high-definition remaster and then maybe we'll get a better look at this. Then again maybe it too will be inconclusive. We'll have to see.

Tony believes he's got it right. I'll admit that I personally agree with Tony because of who he is and what I know of him and of course all the efforts he has made to demonstrate his case, or vision as it may be.

But this isn't a defend Tony's PoV post. This is a "let's keep the facts we know as straight as possible so we can get to the truth" post - conclusively! It may not ever be possible to accomplish this goal but we're all still giving it a go, eh?

I think that if you believe the first statement as it reads and it is inconclusive then the second statement must also be inconclusive. If you don't want to join Tony and Terry and go along with what they believe is "it" that certainly anyone's prerogative but I don't think anyone here has conclusively demonstrated that the shrunken lamb on the "hero" jacket is less pronounced than Tony's shrunken lamb (or as pronounced for that matter) offering for his Raiders jacket repros. Not yet anyway.

agent5 · Post by **agent5** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 11:39 am

I'd have to say that the shrunken lamb is inconclusive. If it is shrunken lamb then it appears to be way less pronounced than what TN is using.

That better?

Also keep in mind that the jacket pics above are not the jacket Tony had in his possession.

Dutch_jones · Post by **Dutch_jones** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 12:29 pm

There was no SHRUNKEN LAMB !!! it was sheepskin...

Shrunken lamb is what tony nowak uses on his replica's.

binkmeisterRick · Post by **binkmeisterRick** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 12:55 pm

Dutch_jones wrote:There was no SHRUNKEN LAMB !!! it was sheepskin...

Shrunken lamb is what tony nowak uses on his replica's.

And you know this conclusively because you were there, I suppose?

coronado3 · Post by **coronado3** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:11 pm

My theory is that the jacket that TN had was the one harrison swung/swam in the water in hawaii.... and low and behold 26+ yrs later, it had shrunk, and the leather became shriveled, thus the texture and the small proportions.... Just a theory! ;-)

indy1936 · Post by **indy1936** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:27 pm

Hasn't Peter stated that he did not use shrunken lamb?

Baldwyn · Post by **Baldwyn** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:47 pm

agent5 wrote:I'd have to say that the shrunken lamb is inconclusive. If it is shrunken lamb then it appears to be way less pronounced than what TN is using.

That better?

Also keep in mind that the jacket pics above are not the jacket Tony had in his possession.

The piece of shrunken lamb that Tony has had for 29 years looks perfect in the varied grain, and texture. There are definitely smooth sections, and even the textured sections seem less pronounced to me. I wouldn't want those stretch scars, but there's no mistaking the similarity of those marks with the hero jacket.

Hasn't the process changed in the tanning of shrunken lamb (for environmental reasons)? I could believe that the jackets were made of that old shrunken lamb. I think we're looking at something in between a Wested lamb, and a new TN shrunken lamb. One may be closer than the other, but there is definitely texture, so you can err on the side of less, or more. More, for some, is preferable to none. And I think TN's shrunken lamb has more going for it than just the texture.

That said, if Tony had his matte lamb in his shrunken lamb colour, that's what I personally would go for for screen accuracy. But I don't think I could pay that much for a lambskin jacket (I'm hoping Tony will bust out some nicely coloured, nicely figured horsehide some day)

RCSignals · Post by **RCSignals** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:50 pm

Don't Call Me Junior! wrote:
agent5 wrote: RC,
I'd have to say that the shrunken lamb is inconclusive. If it is shrunken lamb then it is way less pronounced than what TN is using.

This is not trying to be argumentative but objectively the above two statements don't add up for me. The second reads like a cold hard fact and I say that thinking about how it would read if I were reading it for the first time in an archive of this post years from now.

The first statement is easy to agree with if you look at it from the stance of how many jackets were in the film, who has actually seen and handled said jackets, which jacket people consider the "hero" jacket to be, etc. I think I might be inclined to agree. There is no basis from which to form a conclusion given the available information.

Proving the second statement conclusively would be much harder. There have been people who carry some weight so to speak that have come forward and stated that the shrunken lamb is definitely what the leather was on the Raiders jacket. TN and Terry Leonard come to mind here amongst others. But let's just say that we can't go by them purely because the jacket's too old, or maybe isn't the "hero" jacket or somebody doesn't believe Terry's memory is as sharp as it once was.

What do we have next to go off of? Low resolution screen caps and pics? Too many details are lost there - any grain would be one of the first details to be lost. There are a few decent ones a guess but really there are none approaching the image quality of true 35mm still or motion. The high def broadcast that was aired a few years ago was definitely not a good representation. The image quality was horrible and not cleaned up very well if at all from my recollection. I didn't bother trying to record it so I can't back that statement up but I distinctly remember it not looking nearly as good as it could/should. I tend to be OCD when it comes to image quality sometimes to a fault. Hopefully someday soon they will go back to the source material and do a proper high-definition remaster and then maybe we'll get a better look at this. Then again maybe it too will be inconclusive. We'll have to see.

Tony believes he's got it right. I'll admit that I personally agree with Tony because of who he is and what I know of him and of course all the efforts he has made to demonstrate his case, or vision as it may be.

But this isn't a defend Tony's PoV post. This is a "let's keep the facts we know as straight as possible so we can get to the truth" post - conclusively! It may not ever be possible to accomplish this goal but we're all still giving it a go, eh?

I think that if you believe the first statement as it reads and it is inconclusive then the second statement must also be inconclusive. If you don't want to join Tony and Terry and go along with what they believe is "it" that certainly anyone's prerogative but I don't think anyone here has conclusively demonstrated that the shrunken lamb on the "hero" jacket is less pronounced than Tony's shrunken lamb (or as pronounced for that matter) offering for his Raiders jacket repros. Not yet anyway.

Well stated.
I think it was also said that Lee Keppler believed the shrunken lamb was also correct, based on the movie jackets he had from Peter early on

RCSignals · Post by **RCSignals** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:04 pm

agent5 wrote:....

RC,
I'd have to say that the shrunken lamb is inconclusive. If it is shrunken lamb then it is way less pronounced than what TN is using. The horizontal lines on the bottom b/w pic are stretch marks in the leather.

You know they are stretch marks in the leather because....?

I get it, you and some others don't believe the shrunken lamb, that's fine.

RCSignals · Post by **RCSignals** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:08 pm

Baldwyn wrote:
agent5 wrote:I'd have to say that the shrunken lamb is inconclusive. If it is shrunken lamb then it appears to be way less pronounced than what TN is using.

That better?

Also keep in mind that the jacket pics above are not the jacket Tony had in his possession.
The piece of shrunken lamb that Tony has had for 29 years looks perfect in the varied grain, and texture. There are definitely smooth sections, and even the textured sections seem less pronounced to me. I wouldn't want those stretch scars, but there's no mistaking the similarity of those marks with the hero jacket.

Hasn't the process changed in the tanning of shrunken lamb (for environmental reasons)? I could believe that the jackets were made of that old shrunken lamb. I think we're looking at something in between a Wested lamb, and a new TN shrunken lamb. One may be closer than the other, but there is definitely texture, so you can err on the side of less, or more. More, for some, is preferable to none. And I think TN's shrunken lamb has more going for it than just the texture.

That said, if Tony had his matte lamb in his shrunken lamb colour, that's what I personally would go for for screen accuracy. But I don't think I could pay that much for a lambskin jacket (I'm hoping Tony will bust out some nicely coloured, nicely figured horsehide some day)

Just like with all leather, the hides tanned in the shrunken lamb process will vary.
According to Tony, the original shrunken lamb from the 80's was from a small tannery in France. Tony later sourced it from New Zealand, and now Italy I think.

Kt Templar · Post by **Kt Templar** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:12 pm

RCSignals wrote:
agent5 wrote:....

RC,
I'd have to say that the shrunken lamb is inconclusive. If it is shrunken lamb then it is way less pronounced than what TN is using. The horizontal lines on the bottom b/w pic are stretch marks in the leather.
You know they are stretch marks in the leather because....?

I get it, you and some others don't believe the shrunken lamb, that's fine.

Because that form of patterning is a well known result of mechanically pulling the skin off the carcass. As such, effort is usually made to not stretch it to that point these days if it is to be used for leather.

We've has shrunken lamb from Tony, preshrunk veg lamb, washed lamb, washed goat etc, etc, from Peter, some have shown the 'croc' skin. The patterned lines are a mechanical stretch mark.

Don't Call Me Junior! · Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:12 pm

agent5 wrote:I'd have to say that the shrunken lamb is inconclusive. If it is shrunken lamb then it appears to be way less pronounced than what TN is using.

That better?

Also keep in mind that the jacket pics above are not the jacket Tony had in his possession.

I was pretty sure that was what you were saying initially and I certainly respect that point of view. Truly. Thanks for clarifying. I think, for me anyway, this is an important topic. I think that "keeping it real" as far as statements of fact goes a long way in not losing focus in continuing to uncover the true facts as best as we can, meaning some people might have interpreted the previous wording as fact and stopped questioning and/or digging for more concrete proof.

Other pieces of the Indy gear are really defined to the point of pretty much indisputable due to the facts available about said gear i.e. the whip(s), the gun(s), the bag, gloves, etc. thanks in large part to the efforts of the members here. The number one most intriguing piece out of all the Indy gear to me since I was eleven years old, the Raiders jacket, is still elusive even after all of this time as far as indisputable and conclusive information goes regarding its true pedigree. I chose to take a leap of faith and Tony has made for me what I believe is that jacket or at the very least the jacket I always had in my mind. (After what he did for me on the making of my Raiders jacket, someone could offer me five others of his jackets for this one and I would turn them down - to me it is priceless) As he has, due to his promise, been unable to share some really intriguing things about the jacket that people like us would certainly be interested in, like pics of the jacket he had in his possession and its current owner/residence, I am still interested in finding out more. I certainly won't pester Tony further about it in respect for his promise but the truth is still out there (hopefully) about that jacket and the others that were used in the film.

Regards,

DCMJ!

RCSignals · Post by **RCSignals** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:29 pm

Kt Templar wrote:
RCSignals wrote:
agent5 wrote:....

RC,
I'd have to say that the shrunken lamb is inconclusive. If it is shrunken lamb then it is way less pronounced than what TN is using. The horizontal lines on the bottom b/w pic are stretch marks in the leather.
You know they are stretch marks in the leather because....?

I get it, you and some others don't believe the shrunken lamb, that's fine.
Because that form of patterning is a well known result of mechanically pulling the skin off the carcass. As such, effort is usually made to not stretch it to that point these days if it is to be used for leather.

We've has shrunken lamb from Tony, preshrunk veg lamb, washed lamb, washed goat etc, etc, from Peter, some have shown the 'croc' skin. The patterned lines are a mechanical stretch mark.

I believe that's an assumption. I also have seen 'stretch' marking on leather and it isn't necessarily the same as that .
The jacket in question has more on it than those horizontal line patterns. The 20 some on year old hide Tony has shown is a good indicator that such marking can be from other treatment to the leather.

Some will see it and believe it, others won't. Some have 'studied' the jacket for so long from screen caps and drawn assumptions that they will not have dispelled. That's fine.

CM · Post by CM » Wed Jan 14, 2009 4:51 pm

RCSignals wrote:
Some will see it and believe it, others won't. Some have 'studied' the jacket for so long from screen caps and drawn assumptions that they will not have dispelled. That's fine.

RC - I think your point is wonky. Your study of the jacket is no better than the others. There is no good photographic evidence that shrunken lamb was used: period. I have no vested interest in this, beacuse I like goat leather for my jackets and I don't care what the film version was made of. But you are accusing others of doing what you are doing - making assumptions without testable proof. No offence RC. ;-)

RCSignals · Post by **RCSignals** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 5:15 pm

CM wrote:
RCSignals wrote:
Some will see it and believe it, others won't. Some have 'studied' the jacket for so long from screen caps and drawn assumptions that they will not have dispelled. That's fine.
RC - I think your point is wonky. Your study of the jacket is no better than the others. There is no good photographic evidence that shrunken lamb was used: period. I have no vested interest in this, beacuse I like goat leather for my jackets and I don't care what the film version was made of. But you are accusing others of doing what you are doing - making assumptions without testable proof. No offence RC. ;-)

I disagree, I'm not making baseless assumptions. Where I do make an assumption I will state it.
I do not think it is just 'assumption' at this point that at least some of the jackets, possibly the infamous 'protype' jacket, was made of shrunken lamb.
I haven't based by opinion on this simply on 'screen grabs'.

That said it's fantastic that we have makers willing to make these jackets out of other leathers, and who will willing accommodate our eccentricities in details. I've said before that if any of this about Indiana Jones was 'real life' I doubt his jacket would have been made of Lamb.

No offence taken as I'm sure it wasn't intended.

Post by **Holt** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 5:22 pm

Dutch_jones wrote:There was no SHRUNKEN LAMB !!! it was sheepskin...

Shrunken lamb is what tony nowak uses on his replica's.

sheep, lamb.......frog, toad...whatever...same,same.....

I dont care.....

guys,please dont make my thread into a freeroom for the shrunken Lamb war.

Baldwyn · Post by **Baldwyn** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 1:04 pm

Curious, can you do this look?

Don't Call Me Junior! · Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:03 pm

That's one of my favorite shots in all of Raiders! I never noticed until seeing this screen grab that the collar is "popped" in that particular shot though I do seem to recall folks mentioning the "popped" collar in certain scenes. I was always looking at the "Oh, <poop>!" look on Harrison's face!

RCSignals · Post by **RCSignals** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:22 pm

Baldwyn wrote:Curious, can you do this look?

Yes Holt. Come on. Do a picture side by side for us of that pose in your jacket please.

Post by **Holt** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:50 pm

I will later guys.give me an hour or two,need to eat.Im just back from work...

and yes I can do this look. ;-)

Post by **Holt** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 4:58 pm

here you go.

http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g182/ ... collar.jpg

Baldwyn · Post by **Baldwyn** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 5:27 pm

Thanks Holt. It really does look great

But hear me out, I have some ideas. I'm finding the shoulder seam different, and fascinating. I'm thinking the collar isn't longer in the front, but scooped out more on the back. This might be what Tony describes as being worn "off the shoulders". The collar doesn't sit at the back of the neck because it's cut further back. With the jacket pulled forward, it results in the long collar look. It ALSO results in a longer looking jacket at times. It also explains the shorter measured back.

Yes, in this particular shot, he may have the jacket pulled forward on the left side a bit, but the jacket has to be cut differently for that shoulder seam to be so far forward.

Whatcha think?

Don't Call Me Junior, he has his collar popped for a lot of the Temple scene! Probably to prevent the spiders from dropping into his shirt. Also has it popped when he's on the horse.

Post by **Holt** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 5:36 pm

yeah,sure,...

I have THE jacket from wested now,so that quest about making a super SA wested for me is over,from this point on I will get normal unacurrate wested's that I can beat the poop out of.

this jacket here will be archived,for manequin and display only...I dont like the idea of to wear stuff that is unique...

yeah I know,I hear ya,you might think WHY dont wear it???

I think Im just kinda weird that way,I like to collect stuff that is unique and not destroy it...

St. Dumas · Post by **St. Dumas** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 5:42 pm

I still don't see any support for the theory that the Raiders jacket was engineered to "wear off the shoulders". That last photo of Ford looking up to the boulder is evidence that it fit perfectly on his neck and shoulders. On the contrary, he just wears it a little off the shoulders during the waterfall scene. If they're two different jackets, then fine, but in most scenes, the shoulder fit is perfect.

SD

Baldwyn · Post by **Baldwyn** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 6:05 pm

Indiana Holt wrote:yeah,sure,...

I have THE jacket from wested now,so that quest about making a super SA wested for me is over,from this point on I will get normal unacurrate wested's that I can beat the poop out of.

this jacket here will be archived,for manequin and display only...I dont like the idea of to wear stuff that is unique...

yeah I know,I hear ya,you might think WHY dont wear it???

I think Im just kinda weird that way,I like to collect stuff that is unique and not destroy it...

I agree, your Wested is the best I've seen outside of the movies, I hope you didn't take offense! I was just trying to understand the jacket in this one particular shot. I think your jacket is the perfect Raven jacket.

Indiana G · Post by **Indiana G** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 6:19 pm

St. Dumas wrote:I still don't see any support for the theory that the Raiders jacket was engineered to "wear off the shoulders". That last photo of Ford looking up to the boulder is evidence that it fit perfectly on his neck and shoulders. On the contrary, he just wears it a little off the shoulders during the waterfall scene. If they're two different jackets, then fine, but in most scenes, the shoulder fit is perfect.

SD

SD, the way he is wearing the jacket in the photo is not how the jacket sits in the normal state......look at where the yoke panel is....the thing is draped over his shoulders. on a beautiful unbalanced raiders jacket, the shoulder seam does not line up across your shoulder as today's wested's do (or at least the ones i've seen). this shoulder seam starts at the neck but falls diagonally back towards the rear of your shoulder. if you every try to hang a TN or expo, you'll see that you can't physically hang it on the hanger centered on the shoulder seam (naturally).

Don't Call Me Junior! · Fri Jan 16, 2009 6:50 pm

Baldwyn wrote:
Don't Call Me Junior, he has his collar popped for a lot of the Temple scene! Probably to prevent the spiders from dropping into his shirt. Also has it popped when he's on the horse.

Yes, I've noticed it with the spiders and definitely on the horse but for some reason did notice that it was that way when the boulder is about drop. Thanks!

Don't Call Me Junior! · Fri Jan 16, 2009 6:53 pm

Indiana Holt wrote:here you go.

http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g182/ ... collar.jpg

Holt, you know what I love about you? You are a better sport than most of us could ever be especially when someone is calling for you to act out certain scene images almost as if you were a puppet. You ARE the resident Indy scene impersonator! You always rise to the challenge and you always come through. You're a class act, man! Kudos!