Club Obi Wan

Ok, before I start to explain how to archive a DEAD ON "bulked" ribbon on your Fedoras, let me express my thanks to ERRI-WAN for buggin me we TONS of pictures and questions that I wouldn't have asked myself, during the last weeks. It was HIS questions and pictures, that turned on the light in my bold noggin.

Weather they did the same on the Raiders Fedora or not - I don't have a clue. It COULD be. But at least you'll get similar results, when you do as explained.

Here's a little background: when Errico started his picture offence to fill my inbox he pointed out the start and the end of whatever was behind that sweatband. Since always TWO lines were visible, it hat to be a piece of cardboard, tape, leather... whatever. After a dozen pictures, it hit me as a hammer: the darn piece of "whatever" is MOVING throughout the movie. If you look at the Fedora, right after Indy opens up the WOS, the marks are very low - almost on par with the brim break. But for example in the SOC scenes, they're rather in the middle of the ribbon (could have been two hats of course, but that doesn't matter though). I then experimented a little with various materials under the sweatband, but no matter what I used and how much I steamed the crown or pulled on the ribbon, I couldn't archive such drastic results. So I skipped the idea again until I received some new screen graps from Errico today. And then it hit me: the "whatever" is not under the sweatband. It's directly behind the ribbon!!!

Now, was it double tape that they used to keep the ribbon in place after a too heavy distressing or after the cotton thread had become rotten from Ford's sweat (that theory is not THAT far out)? - I don't have a clue. And also I hardly care, as long as I can get the same results. So, I took a piece of paper, folded it a couple of times to the correct width and pushed it behind the RIBBON (NOT the sweatband). And BANG!!! I almost peeed in my own pants If your ribbon is attached well, it will automaticly tighten up quite a bit, which supports the Raiders look even more.

Errico, would you please post the last two picture you sent me here?

Now, before you start throwing rocks at me: I'm NOT saying that they DID this to the Raiders Fedora. They MIGHT, but that's about it. But you can get a dead on screen accurate look from doing so.

I can unfortunately not post pictures currently. But is should be easy to try it out yourself, without doing the hat any harm.

Regards,

Marc

Interesting theory, but maybe you want to change your 'SOLVED' in your subject title to 'POSSIBLY solved', as though it's the most probable thesis I've read to date, it's not solved without the solid, tangible proof in hand of an actual hat with tape behind the ribbon.

That way you avoid the inevitible rock throwing.

Regards! Michaelson

Cool idea guys. It also makes sense if the felt shrinks during filming, but the ribbon does not. I have had this happen. I thought my head was stretching the ribbon, but in fact the hat was shrinking a little, making the ribbon appear looser.

Good point

Thanks,

Marc

I've got admit, I've never personally experienced this myself. My ribbons have always shrunk first, THEN the felt. I've even had to have a ribbon replaced in the past where it shank almost two sizes to small, and the felt itself never changed.

We're talking about HJ's here, though, and I have absolutely NO personal experience with one of them, so anything's possible.

Regards! Michaelson

So, your theory is that they tightened the hat on the outside, under the ribbon, not inside the hat? If it was not to tighten up the hat, then I can't see any reason for them to put anything under the ribbon.
Also, I've been thinking about the 'sweat stains' on the hat. After reading the latest posts from DarthJones, I think it's safe to say those were not sweat marks at all, but a product of the distressing with the bleech. You can get similar results on paper, as tough to me in art school in college. That most likely being the case (IMHO) I highly doubt that being Ford had all BRAND NEW hats they'd have had any time to wear away any threads or even acquire any stains from sweat as always thought.

See kids, it's ALL movie magic!

There are so many people here who seem to not really know much about how movies are made. These are usually the folks who think the gear, or costume as it was made for the film, was made to wear in a jungle, on some long trek or made to last. Not at all.
It was a costume, distressed for filming as though it had been worn for years, then used either one or perhaps several times and then discarded. That's how it is in the movies. It was never intended to hold up or be used over and over again and only had to maintain the illusion of being old, used and all sweated and beat up.

It's all pretend. Make believe. I'm so glad this claim of using bleech came along so that we can all see just how good these people were in creating this costume. I'd be willing to bet most of my Indy collection that everything we see on this hat was a product of costume distresssing, specifically for the movie. They duped us all.

Yeah, could be bleach spots mimicing the sweat stains, although, those spots on the ribbon are identical to sweat stains. That could go either way, as I am sure Ford did his share of sweating. Mentions were made by someone on the "Making Of" films of the unbearable heat in the desert.

I got the dvd yesterday from John, and when he was thumbing through a box of HJs, all with the vintage blue and gold crest, one of those hats had a rotted out sweat, that came from sweat and wear. It was disintergrating. I doubt they would artificially distress the sweat, as it is normally not seen.

Here is the crest that was on the box of hats he examined.





But, earlier in the tour, he examined another hat, a LC looking fedora, with this crest.






Now, we all know that the HJs that were bought by us, prior to Swales leaving had the oval Borsalino type crest. Apparently, the oval crest was never used in the film hats. I do know that the blue crest was used by HJ for many years, as I have two vintage HJs that came with this same crest. And, it also appears on old signage that I have seen of the HJ shop. It was used for years apparently. What I am getting at is this. If we can take those three different crests and use that as a time line for the HJs, it would seem that the Raiders fedora came with the blue, classic HJ crest. We know that the pentagon crest was used in the LC fedora, as we can see it in the scene with Donovan. That would leave the TOD HJ with one or the other, the blue one, or the burgundy pentagon. But, what throws a rock in the gears is the HJ that Dakota bought, with the "IJ" on the sweat. His hat was an extra that Lucas and company did not pick up. This hat came with the oval crest!! It seems that suppliers many have been changed from the first run of LC HJs, and a new company was used for the later run of hats.


Back to the topic. I have no clue what we are seeing under the ribbon, or under the felt. I have seen ribbons loosen up though with the shrinkage of the hat, and this really shows up if the hat is a bit too tight, and you stretch it out by wearing it. Sometimes, when you take it off, and it shrinks back down a bit, the ribbon is left loose on the hat. One could tighten it up by shimming it, underneath. A quick fix. Fedora

So the theory is that what we are seeing is not something to tighten up the bat but possible someting to hold the ribbon in place? Ok, I can buy that as a possibility. Its certainlyas likely as any other theory I've heard.

Agent5, I agree that some of the sweat stain were done buy using bleach. particularly the "uniform" one that out lines the ribbon. However, I'm sure that some of the sweat stains were caused buy actualy use.

I doubt they would artificially distress the sweat, as it is normally not seen

Looks like you too could use a lesson in the art of moviemaking. They sometimes do things you would never think of to achieve a certain look that you may think would be overlooked.

those spots on the ribbon are identical to sweat stains

BINGO!!! These people are total professionals and it is their job to make sure nothing is overlooked at all, including stains on the hat that are supposed to look as though they've been there for years when the hat is actually brand new.
I've worked on several films and even though I wasn't highly involved, it was an incredible learning experience. I was able to sit back and view the entire process of a huge budget picture and see just how much detail goes into something we'd all overlook as an audience. That's exactly why they call it movie magic. Soooooo much of it is an illusion. Even the things you would not expect.

Could we both be right, of course. Nobody knows...yet.

Yes, it was an average temp of 120 dgs. in Tunisia, but I doubt Ford would wear his hat all the time when not filming. Sure, we see pics of him in the jacket and hat on set when not filming, but I doubt he wore it all the time, nor do I think he could wear it all the time in that heat. I think the costume designers would be more concerned with consitancy as it is their job. I think if sweat stains would arise, they'd replace that hat with a similarly distressed hat so the hat would look the same in each frame of the same scene. That is their job.

My money is still on the distressing, not sweat.

Agent5 is correct about the skill of the people that make these movies. I worked on the set of the movie, The Pelican Brief and got to see this up close and personal.

The interior sets for the Georgetown townhouse of Denzel Washington's character and the porno theater where the Supreme Court Justice was killed, were in a wharehouse in Upper Marlboro, Maryland. The workmanship on the building of those sets was truely unbelievable.

The exterior shots of the Georgetown townhouse were actually shot at a house in Georgetown. But, they used a set for all of the interior shots. You might wonder why they just didn't use the actual townhouse for the interior shots? It seems it would be much less work, as the interior of the house already existed and they wouldn't have to build it themselves.

If you could see the construction of the sets, you would understand why they did it. The walls of the townhouse on the back, were very simple construction using 2X4 frames and support legs to hold up the walls and plywood for the walls.

However, if you walked around to the inside of these walls, the craftsmanship was amazing. These walls looked like old plaster walls that even had cracks in them simulating where the house had settled. The paint even looked smudged and aged from fingerprints and such, certainly not like it was freshly painted as I knew that it was. A big, dark backdrop outside the windows was used to make it look like night time, even though they were shooting indoors in the day time. Fake trees outside the window with small fans on them to make it look like a gentle breeze was blowing.

On one side of the walls, simple 2X4s and plywood. On the other side of the walls, you were magically transported to a townhouse in Georgetown, complete with architecture and design that the area is famous for.

Why did they go to all this trouble to build this set, when they already had a real townhouse. Because there are a lot of people needed to film a scene and there were a lot of scenes to be filmed in that townhouse. Instead of being cramped with the director, the DP, the cameramen, the grips, the dolly tracks, and on and on, they had a set with moveable walls. When they filmed a scene from one side of the set and needed room for the camera crew, they just picked the townhouse walls up and moved them out of the way. They were just 2X4 and plywood walls, remember. If they were going to shoot from the other side, they just moved the walls back in place.

I got to examine these sets up close as I said. I was amazed at the little details. Like Agent5 said, they put in the smallest of details many of which are never even seen in the movie, but which are there and lend a sense of reality that wouldn't be there without them.

I still remember the porno theater set. The movie seats that were worn and dirty from the thousands of people that had supposedly watched a movie in that theater. The dirty, lighted, exit sign with the crack in the plastic and the small piece of plastic missing. The brown spots on the dirty, worn carpet from someone's dropped chewing gum that had been trampled by the masses. The dirty worn door knob on a closet door.

Could I see any of these details in the movie when I watched it? No. But, on the screen, it causes you to sense that you are in an old, dirty, sleezy, porno theater.

In one scene in the movie, Denzel Washington's character is out jogging. They shot the exterior scene of him running up the sidewalk approaching his townhouse at the exterior set in Georgetown. As he runs up on the porch and enters through the front door, it switches to the interior set in the warehouse. The cut is so perfect that it looks real. It is not. I saw it. The suspension of disbelief, the magic of the movies.

Now, if they would go to all this trouble to build sets and add all of this fine detail to make them look real, would they go to all this trouble for a main characters hat to get it to look exactly the way they wanted it to? You bet they would. Did this hat look brand new at the start and devealop this look from wear and tear from Harrison Ford? No. It looked that way from the git go and they made it look exactly the way they wanted it to look all throught the movie. They are professionals at what they do. These things are not left to chance or happen by accident.

This seems plausible. When you add stuff behind the swaetband to tighten up the hat it typically warps the band and makes it uncomfortable. Putting something OUTSIDE the hat would eliminate that.

Agent5, I also though the tan "stains" above and below the ribbon were sweat stains. I thought that for YEARS. They are NOT sweat stains at all. If you've ever gotten a fedora really dirty and then just casually brushed it off you'd see that the remaining dirt/dust collects around the edges of the ribbon. That's all that is.

Not that consistent though. Remember the SOC shirt sweat stains...

That is a interesting theory. I had always thought that it was a lantern wick behind the sweatband. My grandfather taught me that trick, he has been wearing fedoras every day for 75 years. He said he always stuck a lantern wick behind the sweat band to make the hat a little tighter on windy days. He still puts wicks in his hats even at 90 years old. I thought that is what they did to keep the hat from blowing off in those scenes. But I guess we will never know, unless that hat magically surfaces.

greatgarlondo, what is a lantern wick?

jpenman wrote:greatgarlondo, what is a lantern wick?

Very similar to the wick in a cigarette lighter only Much bigger. They are used in kerosene and other type Lamp/Lanterns.


http://www.antiquelampsupply.com/category/130/

Marc wrote: Errico, would you please post the last two picture you sent me here?

No problem, sorry for posting only now... it will be hard to read all this stuff guys





I hope you were referring to these two buddy
I hope I helped ... somehow

Just from the experience of wearing Fedoras for 30+ years, no matter what I put between the sweat and the felt of the crown has ever produced a change in the ribbon appearance.

After trying Marc's method (paper between the ribbon and felt) my AB got the exact result as the SOC hat.

I do believe Marc's theory to be correct.

Thanks big guy!

Cheers,
John

ery similar to the wick in a cigarette lighter only Much bigger. They are used in kerosene and other type Lamp/Lanterns.

Thanks G-mann for the information.

Maybe we are looking at an optical illusion of sorts. Looking at the picture above, it looks like a shadow caused by something.

But look closer and you will notice that there is no dirt on that section of the hat. Where the red line is - maybe something scraped against the hat, in effect making a clean line giving the illusion of something making a bump? It almost seems that if you were trying to tighten a hat, you would put tape or whatever in the front or the back but not slap it on randomly.

I get similar wrinkles in my ribbon as the middle pictures because I do not disassemble the hat when I wet it and stretch it over the hat shaper. It gives it character.

It's what you put on the hat before you bleech it that can give it those kinds of results. Once the bleech hits and reacts to certain kinds of things it may give you different types of stains.
They taught us this in art school as a technique we could use on paper, but I don't see why it can't be applied elsewhere. Different chemicals will react differently and give you different results.

As far as I'm concerned, the recent bleech story is a great missing link to the Raiders gear story. I do think however that I'll let alot of other gearheads spray their fedoras with bleech before I think of doing it.

I know they're good, but I doubt they had beakers full of scientific chemicals at their disposal

No, that's their job. Maybe not beakers full, but what they'd need to do the distressing job they set out to accomplish.

3. I'm never spraying my AB with bleach, regardless of what it may look like afterward!

no kinding. me either.

Personally, and as a result of no experimentation on my part, but I don't see them bleaching hats. There would be too much risk of destroying it. I have seen hundreds of vintage lids and sweat stains do "bleach" hats, they will discolor them like this but usually beyond the sweat band. Though the conditions during filming were extreme.

The late 1970s early 1980s felts were still very nice compared to what is commercially available now. One must assume a high quality felt was used in the Raiders hat.

As for paper or tape stuffed here and there on that hat, we already know they were trying everything to get that hat to stay on, so a bit of gaffer's tape here or there would be expected.

Personally, and as a result of no experimentation on my part, but I don't see them bleaching hats. There would be too much risk of destroying it.

They aren't worried about that in the least. It only has to make it through the filming and then it is usually mentally discarded by the filmmakers after they get what they need on celluloid. In other words, they simply don't care about preservation at the time of filming. And the costume people would most likely already have tested whatever methods they'd use to distress the hat to make sure they'd get it right. They are hired for a reason...cuz' they are professional and can pull the wool over all of us through the process of the art we call filmmaking.

You really have to look at this through the eyes of the filmmakers, not in terms of how expensive the hats were or what museum they may be sitting in 25 years after filming so that people like us can debate about them. Alot of times they destroy costumes just to get a particular scene filmed. It's all about capturing the stuff on film, not what the costume will look like or what shape it'll be in after you hear, "CUT!". If it's destroyed they will just get another from the wardrobe trailer, then on to the next scene. If they sense they will need more, then they order them. Done...print.

I never doubted, that the hat was artificially distressed. Also I'm not claiming, that they stuffed folded paper or double sided tape under the ribbon on the Raiders Fedora. They COULD have done so, in order to make a lose ribbon stay in place again. It COULD have come lose from bleach, sweat or shrinkage of the felt, as some ribbons tend to shrink some and some tend to not shrink at all. I don't have enought long time experience with the Raiders ribbon that Steve and I use on our hats to tell so for sure yet.

All I'm saying, is that you'll get a dead on SOC look on your hats, if you'll do as explained. G-MANN did so with his and it looks like he got it to work.

I'd never use bleach on one of my hats, but if there are other ways to archive similar results without any ill effects on the felt, I would most probably try it.

The same with this bulked ribbon. You have the possibilty to get a more screen accurate look, by doing as G-MANN did. If you don't want to go that route, because they might have done different on the original hat, no problem. It's your hat But for those who can't get screen accurate enough, this will get you one step closer.

Regards,

Marc

Seems like a difficult process. The easiest, fastest way to do it is to fold the sweat. The regular way to it is to stuff something behind the sweat. If they did what you are suggesting Marc, wouldn't they have to remove the ribbon then sew it back on, passing the needle though the new stuffing?.. You can see 3 atatchment stitches here. Worth considering though. Also, those indents at the top of the ribbon just behind his ears in the Cairo scenes. I think this indicates that the crown was spaced away from his scull, the stuffing having to be inside the crown to do that. ....As far as the bleach goes, I'm so skeptical. I didn't want to scare darth away so I'll say it here. First, I really can't see Swales of the ritzy, conservative, purveyors to royalty, trashing a hat with bleach. Is there a demand for that? I could see the Paramont prop department doing it, but why? The hat goes from a nice even brown at the Raven, to Cairo, in what the film implys to be a few days. The hat's color is not going to fade in that period- I'd say a few years under the hot sun could do that. No, the hat got a buckket of dirt poured on it, making it look like it might have been in one of those dust storms, like hit the US troops when they were moving towards Baghdad. Look at that b&w pic. The sweat soaked felt above the ribbon has held a lot more dust than the rest of the hat, cause it's greasy- it's not bleached. Also, darth said he thougt the ribbon was "purple like the in the whip pic with the white backgroung" Here's the shot we are familiar with- Indy's shirt is purple- the whip is purple. The shot is shifted toward PURPLE. Here it is somewhat corrected. I doubt the true Raiders hat was there- The only thing that even comes close is the Ruby Slippers- There would have to be armed security guards. Darth's freind who was there was never even aware the hat was there.....Maybe they sprayed bleach on the hat to make it look like the Raiders hat when it was dusty. I don't recall darth saying he saw any dirt or dust on it at all.

If they did what you are suggesting Marc, wouldn't they have to remove the ribbon then sew it back on, passing the needle though the new stuffing?

As I said: this is to gain screen accurate results on OUR hats. Not necessaryly what they did to the original

Regards,

Marc

Your theory could be what was done on the movie hat Marc. I'm not dismissing it completely. In fact, the stitches in the b&w look uneven, too big, and too closely spaced. You might be on to something.

I agree with Marc--if you want a straight forward way to make sure the hat you have is Raiders SOC authentic, throw some tape behind the ribbon.

However, that would have to assume the hat was already about a size too small--otherwise, how would you explain the brim shape? I know my Fed needs to be stretched out a bit behind to get the proper brim swoop going on.

But, like Marc said--if you need that final touch, I say go for it.

Cheers
Craig

3thoubucks, I was so waiting for you to pop in on this one.


It's always good to hear you opinions on " the hat"

If Hollywood and the Makers of Movies are so perfect at what they do then why are there sites like this:

http://www.moviemistakes.com/film1040

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082971/goofs

http://www.erreursdefilms.com/avent/raiders.htm

http://www.indianajones.de/indy1/texte/goofs.php

etc, etc,

Cheers,
G-MANN

I always thought what you fellows are saying is bleach was simply dust.

I would like to see some photos of what you have achieved for yourselves by stuffing tape behind the ribbon.
Thanks.

I can't post pictures currently, as my digicam is packed away in some of the boxes.

John would you mind sharing your results?

Regards,

Marc

I had taken it out on mine but since this experiment takes about 15 seconds to try here:





Not perfect but you can use your imagination.
Cheers,
G-MANN

G-MANN wrote:If Hollywood and the Makers of Movies are so perfect at what they do then why are there sites like this:

http://www.moviemistakes.com/film1040

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082971/goofs

http://www.erreursdefilms.com/avent/raiders.htm

http://www.indianajones.de/indy1/texte/goofs.php

etc, etc,

Cheers,
G-MANN

Continuity is a mayor PAIN in the..... It's a whole other departement.

A mistake is a mistake and EVERYBODY makes them. Even if continuity is a pain in the butt it does not make it justifiable.
Cheers,
G-MANN

Thanks for sharing!!

Yeah, it's not perfect and probably only took 15 seconds. But even at THIS point it yields stunning results IMHO.

Regards,

Marc

G-MANN wrote:A mistake is a mistake and EVERYBODY makes them. Even if continuity is a pain in the butt it does not make it justifiable.
Cheers,
G-MANN

Well, the fake book case in LC venice library is about props and not about continuity ... anyway this belongs to another thread I guess

That looks pretty good. I must say, it does nail the look.

Now, do you fellows think perhaps the ribbon was falling off due to the hat being radically distressed by the prop department and the tape was used to try to hold it on?

Hemingway Jones wrote:
Now, do you fellows think perhaps the ribbon was falling off due to the hat being radically distressed by the prop department and the tape was used to try to hold it on?

I think that's the point, yes

erri_wan wrote:

Hemingway Jones wrote:
Now, do you fellows think perhaps the ribbon was falling off due to the hat being radically distressed by the prop department and the tape was used to try to hold it on?

I think that's the point, yes

OK, so if the ribbon was falling off, the stuffing behind it would be necessary to maintain the original tension. So, if the hat had indeed mushroomed: the bottom part of the crown shrinking and the top expanding, a little gaffers tape behind the ribbon would maintain the tightness and keep it from slipping up. And we are assuming that the top of the bow was still stitched on (or ot would have flopped down), so the problem was probably in the opposite side, correct? Yet the tape was applied to the ribbon side?

I think what they'd do is just reach for another hat if the ribbon on one started falling off. Why do all of the above when all they had to do is grab a brand new, crisp and fully distressed hat?

Also, Raiders was supposed to take place over several weeks, not days.

God forbid it may just be that the hat really was well distressed, and after shooting in the hot desert, the sweat stains really are sweat stains, and the ribbon is just wrinkled because the hat has been beat to death?

Personally, I don't think they had too many spare hats. IMO Ford wore no more than two (maybe three) hats throughout the entire movie. It looks like he just wore one hat through all of the filming in North Africa.

Just to add fuel to the fire. Why stuff something behind the ribbon? If it was loose it wouldn't be a big deal to just pull it up tight and re-tack it. Heck I've done that on my AB and I'm about as inept at sewing as a fellow can get.

J_Weaver wrote:If it was loose it wouldn't be a big deal to just pull it up tight and re-tack it. Heck I've done that on my AB and I'm about as inept at sewing as a fellow can get.

Maybe they didn't want to spend too much time fixing a hat when they had to think of worse problems ... like diarrea
A little thing put between the ribbon and the felt is so quick and it works pretty well.

Dalexs wrote:the ribbon is just wrinkled because the hat has been beat to death?

From most of the argued pictures... it doesnt look like there is just a wrinkle

Dalexs wrote:God forbid it may just be that the hat really was well distressed, and after shooting in the hot desert, the sweat stains really are sweat stains, and the ribbon is just wrinkled because the hat has been beat to death?

Oh come now, Occam's razor is soooo 20th century.

The idea that they needed to add any fake sweat stains while shooting six and eight hour days of filming in the desert, especially when we know that the same hat was used for several weeks of desert scenes, is nothing short of incredible. This logic requires that Harrison Ford did not sweat during weeks of action sequences in Tunisia...

Antone

Oh come now, Occam's razor is soooo 20th century.

But, it still hold true.

Hmm...just to get the rocks thrown at ME for a while...

...could it be a feather under the ribbon? (Nevermind.)

(The original script called for a feather tucked in the ribbon of his hat. Obviously, even if there WAS a feather originally, but they didn't want it, it wouldn't be tucked behind the ribbon. They just would have ripped it out of all the hats.)

Indiana Jerry wrote:Hmm...just to get the rocks thrown at ME for a while...

...could it be a feather under the ribbon? (Nevermind.)

Would you call it Macaroni?

I'll have to try putting some (cooked) macaroni under the ribbon later...you could be onto something, HJ...

Okay, silliness aside, I believe Marc and Agent5. There, throw rocks at me for THAT at least.

J