Hey Kit, I don't know if you're still checking over here (or if you're even allowed to answer this question), but do you think Orcist will end up being displayed horizontally like Hadhafang or vertically?

Anyone else have an opinion on this?

Opinions are one of the few things that are still free in this world, and yes, I do have one: it should be a vertical display, and if not, then it should be done like the High Elven Warrior Sword and be displayed on the wall, even if the blade is horizontal. Why? As nice as the Hadhfang display looks, there's only one mantelpiece in most people's homes, or a shelf wide enough to display a sword like that. Even samurai blades are often displayed on a rack-like mount that you put on a wall.

So, pretty please, make Orcrist a wall display plaque.

I really need it to be vertical, so I agree.

[quote=""Valkrist""]Opinions are one of the few things that are still free in this world, and yes, I do have one: it should be a vertical display, and if not, then it should be done like the High Elven Warrior Sword and be displayed on the wall, even if the blade is horizontal. Why? As nice as the Hadhfang display looks, there's only one mantelpiece in most people's homes, or a shelf wide enough to display a sword like that. Even samurai blades are often displayed on a rack-like mount that you put on a wall.

So, pretty please, make Orcrist a wall display plaque. [/quote]

Agreed...it needs to have a wall plaque mount.
And due to its curved blade I also agree that it should be a horizontal display.

The Hadhfang table display [still] drives me crazy even now.
I have been trying to figure out a way to mount it similarly to the HEWS...need to find an adequate sized plaque, etc.
I think someone on these forums actually did that, but I can't recall who it was or how he did it.

[quote=""Valkrist""]Opinions are one of the few things that are still free in this world, and yes, I do have one: it should be a vertical display, and if not, then it should be done like the High Elven Warrior Sword and be displayed on the wall, even if the blade is horizontal. Why? As nice as the Hadhfang display looks, there's only one mantelpiece in most people's homes, or a shelf wide enough to display a sword like that. Even samurai blades are often displayed on a rack-like mount that you put on a wall.

So, pretty please, make Orcrist a wall display plaque. [/quote]
I agree with both you & Fin. A wall mount for sure, and vertical is best. Even the HEWS eats up space on a wall so your kind of forced to put it up high so there's room under it for vertical mount swords.

I had no mantel or shelf for Hadhafang, so I modified the mount it came with and screwed the sword holding pieces to the base on their sides so I could wall mount it like the HEWS. (Btw, if anyone tries this beware; this stuff is fiber board and not wood, so pre-drilling a proper size hole is a must or it will just split).

[quote=""Thranduil""]...I had no mantel or shelf for Hadhafang, so I modified the mount it came with and screwed the sword holding pieces to the base on their sides so I could wall mount it like the HEWS. (Btw, if anyone tries this beware; this stuff is fiber board and not wood, so pre-drilling a proper size hole is a must or it will just split).[/quote]

Oh, that's right ...'TWAS you indeed, Thrandy, who made the wall mount for Hadhafang...how could I forget that?

[quote=""Thranduil""]I agree with both you & Fin. A wall mount for sure, and vertical is best. [/quote]

Ah, fie upon you both, Thrandy and Fin! Horizontal rather than vertical is the way to go!
And besides, you have the HEWS horizontal, and now Hadhafang a horizontal wall mount.
Orcrist would look perfect above those two.

All three together would take up the same block of wall space regardless of which way they were oriented. (Granted, the HEWS possibly hogging a bit more)

[quote=""Deimos""]Agreed...it needs to have a wall plaque mount.
And due to its curved blade I also agree that it should be a horizontal display.

The Hadhfang table display [still] drives me crazy even now.
I have been trying to figure out a way to mount it similarly to the HEWS...need to find an adequate sized plaque, etc.
I think someone on these forums actually did that, but I can't recall who it was or how he did it.[/quote]

Like the rest of you, I found it impossible to find a place to display it with the table display, so I made my own plaque. It was inspired by the Noble version:
photopost/showphoto.php?photo=4494&ppuser=1574
photopost/showphoto.php?photo=4495&ppuser=1574


Turned out pretty good. I actually made two versions. One ising magnets to hold the sword (pictured) and another with a craddling peg under the handle and the blade:
photopost/showphoto.php?photo=5112

Obviously, my vote for Orcrist would be a horizontal plaque.

[quote=""Steel Servant""]Like the rest of you, I found it impossible to find a place to display it with the table display, so I made my own plaque. It was inspired by the Noble version:

Turned out pretty good. I actually made two versions. One ising magnets to hold the sword (pictured) and another with a craddling peg under the handle and the blade....[/quote]

oooo...well done, Steel. Looks very professional.
Thrandy's is the minimalist approach, and your is the maximalist version (Is there such a word???)
I'm looking for something the size of the HEWS plaque.

And btw, the shape of the HEWS plaque always reminds me of the [Bale] Batman movies...it has that stylized bat shape.
So I definitly don't want a "bat plaque"!

[quote=""Steel Servant""] Obviously, my vote for Orcrist would be a horizontal plaque.[/quote]

Obviously, another forum member with an excellent eye for proportion!

[quote=""Deimos""]Oh, that's right ...'TWAS you indeed, Thrandy, who made the wall mount for Hadhafang...how could I forget that?



Ah, fie upon you both, Thrandy and Fin! Horizontal rather than vertical is the way to go!
And besides, you have the HEWS horizontal, and now Hadhafang a horizontal wall mount.
Orcrist would look perfect above those two.

All three together would take up the same block of wall space regardless of which way they were oriented. (Granted, the HEWS possibly hogging a bit more)[/quote]
T'is true I intend to go this route, but only because these pieces tend to look great when mounted one atop the other. The HEWS pretty much looks odd when vertical. The curved blades with single edge, all of elven make, just seem to exude a horizontal mount.

I'm thinking a Rivendell themed display to accommodate them.

I'm probably going to be the only person displaying Orcist with dwarven gear, not Elven gear. Unfortunately, I don't have any spaces that aren't reserved in the LotR room (which is filling up nicely as is), so it has to go with my The Hobbit gear in the other room. I suppose if it doesn't fit in the display case, I can always find something else to hang in the middle. If they make Dwalin's massive tank of a warhammer, it would fit nicely in that gap.

well ,if i i ever get hold on hedfang,then i might not want to display my sword in a home shoo slipper,display(sorry stelservent).

do to the pic.of orcist ,the blade seems to be to long, for a dwarf to handle ,as a single blade sword. (cleaver).it need to be shorter,like the axes
and if ever a dwarf ever use a dubble blade sword ,it must be in a size of a claymore ,vs the dwars hight.as a cleave weapon ,just as they use the axe .

i agry whit sed and his great draws on this one.

I have to agree that the horizontal mount would look the most pleasing by itself. However, that kind of ruins the hope of displaying it in any kind of symmetrical fashion along side Sting and Glamdring; it's companion blades.

Oh well, just one more obstacle for me to tackle as I struggle with a way to display my collection...

Funny, I am actually going to work on the displays in a few hours. OK, here is some info on that. We have not really finalized anything yet. I was waiting on the style guide to get completed from Warner Bros (we have it now), since that will have some art elements we may use for the silk screen decor, if that is the route we end up going. That's kind of what we did for most of the LOTR products, although a few of the displays were not so appealing to me, such as Glamdring's.

Sting and Glamdring are displayed vertically on my wall, and I want Orcrist to match up with those two in style, if that gives you an idea where I want to go with it. I have already mocked a basic display shape up in Photoshop, with the other two beside it. It definitely works vertically.

Actually, all the swords will be vertically displayed that we are working on so far. Not sure about the bows as of yet. If we do anything table top, it may be for a dagger, but I am leaning for everything to be on a wall.

We may do something completely different for the true Dwarven made swords than the LOTR plaques, or not. I have some other ideas that may be more interesting, and not as distracting to the weapon designs, but costs may throw those out the window.

Still debating on using the exact same display shape for the Hobbit Sting as we used on the LOTR Sting. The graphic will definitely be different. Since we had to retool Sting, I opted to correct the shape, as we did with the MC Sting. So this will not simply be the original Sting with the lettering removed from the blade and guard. Of course, all of the props are slightly different from one another, but I thought it was worth updating to match one of the hero props.

We also have the same issues we had with LOTR, with wood and leather colors on the props that likely will not be the colors seen in the films once they are color graded (Legolas handles anyone?) so we probably won't be able to finalize those until the last minute.

Very happy to hear that Orcrist and most, if not all, other weapons from the Hobbit will be displayed vertically on the wall. Good thing I am moving in the summer as I will definitely have an eye out for a spare room with lots of wall space to accomodate what is sure to be an e xp anding collection.

I'm also glad to hear there is going to be an attempt (at least in your preliminary planning stages) to include some consistency with the LOTR plaques so as to give the whole collection something of a uniform look.

I'm curious as to your comments on Sting, as I always felt the original UC version's blade was not quite wide enough as to what we saw on film. I always thought this was due to it having been made in 'hobbit' scale, but conversely, I always felt the Noble Collection version, which was made in actor scale, was too 'fat.' Makes sense? Whatever the case, I'm looking forward to this new version.

Marto made the Noble version, or at least assembled it. I visited the factory sometime in 2005 for a possible Conan project UC was working on was told they only had photos to work from fro Nobles LOTR line. Their hand guard proportion was close, better than UC's. I hate that grip. As I recall, their blade shape was a bit fat looking because it did not curve in at the waist area, but bulged out. The UC blade had the correct waist, but did not flare out as wide at the tang as the props did, which made the whole blade look slightly thinner. That was changed because of a machine grinder limitation. It's more accurate on the MC version.

The Museum Collection Sting hilt is dead on to the proportions of the hero prop that we were replicating, so if you lay the standard and MC version side by side you can see the differences. The cross guard width is about 3/4" too short on the standard and comes to points on the tips. Most of the hero props had a slight flat on the guard tips, which we corrected on the MC version. As I recall, and my memory is probably foggy on this now, back in 2000 we had pix of the actor scale prop, and a small film scale prop, which were very different. We went with the prop, and only after the tooling was done and we started to get photos from on set did we realize the guard on the main hero prop Elija was always seen with matched the photos, not the actual prop. Too late to change at that point. The MC is my preferred version, other than the weathering pits in the guard and pommel, which came out 2 or 3x larger than what they should have been.

Pommels and wood grip shapes were close on both versions. One pommel matched one hero prop, and the other matched another hero prop. I'm probably the only one that notices those small differences, but the pommels vary slightly on almost every prop I have seen. But being hand ground, they still are amazingly close.

Anyway, The Hobbit version should be the most accurate as far as shape. They are following the look of the LOTR hero props very close, as you can see in The Hobbit trailer.

[quote=""Nasnandos""]Funny, I am actually going to work on the displays in a few hours. OK, here is some info on that. We have not really finalized anything yet. I was waiting on the style guide to get completed from Warner Bros (we have it now), since that will have some art elements we may use for the silk screen decor, if that is the route we end up going. That's kind of what we did for most of the LOTR products, although a few of the displays were not so appealing to me, such as Glamdring's.

Sting and Glamdring are displayed vertically on my wall, and I want Orcrist to match up with those two in style, if that gives you an idea where I want to go with it. I have already mocked a basic display shape up in Photoshop, with the other two beside it. It definitely works vertically.

Actually, all the swords will be vertically displayed that we are working on so far. Not sure about the bows as of yet. If we do anything table top, it may be for a dagger, but I am leaning for everything to be on a wall.

We may do something completely different for the true Dwarven made swords than the LOTR plaques, or not. I have some other ideas that may be more interesting, and not as distracting to the weapon designs, but costs may throw those out the window.

Still debating on using the exact same display shape for the Hobbit Sting as we used on the LOTR Sting. The graphic will definitely be different. Since we had to retool Sting, I opted to correct the shape, as we did with the MC Sting. So this will not simply be the original Sting with the lettering removed from the blade and guard. Of course, all of the props are slightly different from one another, but I thought it was worth updating to match one of the hero props.

We also have the same issues we had with LOTR, with wood and leather colors on the props that likely will not be the colors seen in the films once they are color graded (Legolas handles anyone?) so we probably won't be able to finalize those until the last minute. The good news is that WB is not going to require us to follow the prop colors as New Line did. As you can see from the 4th production diary, they are really exaggerating the colors on set since they lose color with the cameras system being used, then the colors change even more when scenes are graded. I have already seen two completely different colors on the Orcrist grip and no one really knows as of yet what it will actually look like when the film is done. Apparently the grip colors changes as the actor uses it too, but we will get it sorted out. Lots of fun things to worry about [/quote]

Excellent update Kit! love hearing about the behind the scenes work being done. Also noticed you said bows? Does this mean we will be seeing them as well?

Kit, I was wondereing about materials that UC is planning on using on the Hobbit weapons. I hate to bring a negative note to the discussion, but a few of UC's last LOTR weapons were somewhat disappointing. Specifically, there were many gripes on the MC Samwise sword and on the sword of Isildur. That rubber grip on Isildur's sword, and the fact that UC advertised it as real leather left a pretty sour taste in allot of collectors mouths. Personally, I thought the quality of that model was just barely above the cheap knock-offs coming out of China. Has there been any discussion about negative feedback on those models and how it might effect materials used on the Hobbit weapons?

A huge thanks for the info Kit! Excited to hear about bows - I have always hoped to one day have an LOTR (or Hobbit) bow for my collection. I really like the new design for Gandalf's staff. Any chance that will be made by UC?

[quote=""Steel Servant""]Kit, I was wondereing about materials that UC is planning on using on the Hobbit weapons. I hate to bring a negative note to the discussion, but a few of UC's last LOTR weapons were somewhat disappointing. Specifically, there were many gripes on the MC Samwise sword and on the sword of Isildur. That rubber grip on Isildur's sword, and the fact that UC advertised it as real leather left a pretty sour taste in allot of collectors mouths. Personally, I thought the quality of that model was just barely above the cheap knock-offs coming out of China. Has there been any discussion about negative feedback on those models and how it might effect materials used on the Hobbit weapons?[/quote]

Many of the other weapons are made from completely different materials and styles than the Numenorian and Elvish LOTR weapons, so it is a challenge. The materials are all in the R&D phase now. Lots of woods and steels on the props, and a few things I am not even sure of. I'll spec wood, cast resin, injection molds, or whatever is going to give the best, most accurate look, and still fit in the cost window UC wants, but NO rubber.

UC did not hear much negative feedback on the new LOTR items from the last wave, other than Isildur, and that was mostly from me! I know UC was not happy with the grip at all on Isildur's sword after the tooling was made. The proto looked good, but I hated what they made in production. Real braided leather was never an option. I wanted a cast resin part, but I lost that battle. Someone goofed up the catalog descrip, and I caught a lot of catalog mistakes in those first few years. That was the first LOTR replica under the new owners, so things were a bit shaky for them getting through the learning curve. I think we had a discussion about that here. I was actually surprised at the number of my friends who collect the replicas who did NOT have an issue with it.

The Witchking dagger came out exactly as I wanted, other than it would have been better with a paint wash on that blade. Gimli's bearded axe was spot on, although a bit dark in production. The Sam sword protos looked great, other than the hilt weathering texture being reversed from my spec. UC was done with new LOTR development after that and I never saw production, so I can't comment on what they actually made. What issues were there?

[quote=""MorgulMike""]A huge thanks for the info Kit! Excited to hear about bows - I have always hoped to one day have an LOTR (or Hobbit) bow for my collection. I really like the new design for Gandalf's staff. Any chance that will be made by UC?[/quote]
Initially only a small group of items will be released in the few months before and after December. That group has not been 100% finalized, but Obviously Orcrist and Sting are in it, and 1 or 2 others.

I've just read it all and i would like the thank you for sharing it with us Kit.

[quote=""Nasnandos""] The Sam sword protos looked great, other than the hilt weathering texture being reversed from my spec. UC was done with new LOTR development after that and I never saw production, so I can't comment on what they actually made. What issues were there?[/quote]

Speaking for myself, and I daresay for a few other folks on this forum, the issues with Sam's sword weren't so much with the crafted product itself, but the very concept of it.

I don't presume to think that the beancounters and decision makers at UC or BudK listen to what we have to say, but Sam's sword kinda came out of left field at a time when collectors knew the LOTR line was ending, yet many fan favourite and desperately wanted swords, like Guthwine (Eomer's sword) or Haldir's sword, were clearly never going to see the light of day. I know it's been e xp lained in the past that some swords, the Rohan blades in particular, were never good sellers so the decision was made to not make Guthwine, yet I think many of us still failed to find the rationale behind investing resources in making Sam's sword (and two versions at that,) aside from the fact that he was a member of the Fellowship. However, insofar as aesthetics, perceived importance to the story, and visual impact in the movies, the hobbit blades (excluding Sting) were the most underwhelming of all, and potentially the most unwanted in terms of a collectible.

Having said all that, I know that posting the same thing ad nauseum in this and other forums won't necessarily make UC bat an eyelash. Unless we communicate this directly to them, they may be unaware of what the collectors really want to see get made. That point I will concede.

Then comes the fact that Sam's sword came out advertised as a "Museum Collection" item, when many feel that that is not the case. When one takes into account the quality of crafstmanship and materials devoted to the making of the Museum Sting and Glamdring, it seems extremely puzzling that not only was Sam's sword the next blade to come out in this line, but that then the product is of nowhere the same quality as the other two. Adding some weathering and making it a limited numbered edition are not enough to place this sword in the same line as the Museum Sting and Glamdring.

Honestly, I can only attribute the release and marketing of Sam's sword as a Museum Collection sword to an error or misinformation on behalf of the persons involved. I know there was a non-weathered, non-limited version of Sam's sword released, but with the precedent of the Museum Line already being established, UC should have applied a different label to Sam's sword, because it is definitely not part of the Museum collection.

[quote=""Valkrist""]I don't presume to think that the beancounters and decision makers at UC or BudK listen to what we have to say, but Sam's sword kinda came out of left field at a time when collectors knew the LOTR line was ending, yet many fan favourite and desperately wanted swords, like Guthwine (Eomer's sword) or Haldir's sword, were clearly never going to see the light of day. I know it's been e xp lained in the past that some swords, the Rohan blades in particular, were never good sellers so the decision was made to not make Guthwine, yet I think many of us still failed to find the rationale behind investing resources in making Sam's sword (and two versions at that,) aside from the fact that he was a member of the Fellowship. However, insofar as aesthetics, perceived importance to the story, and visual impact in the movies, the hobbit blades (excluding Sting) were the most underwhelming of all, and potentially the most unwanted in terms of a collectible.

Having said all that, I know that posting the same thing ad nauseum in this and other forums won't necessarily make UC bat an eyelash. Unless we communicate this directly to them, they may be unaware of what the collectors really want to see get made. That point I will concede.

Then comes the fact that that Sam's sword came out advertised as a "Museum Collection" item, when many feel that that is not the case. When one takes into account the quality of crafstmanship and materials devoted to the making of the Museum Sting and Glamdring, it seems extremely puzzling that not only was Sam's sword the next blade to come out in this line, but that then the product is of nowhere the same quality as the other two. Adding some weathering and making it a limited numbered edition are not enough to place this sword in the same line as the Museum Sting and Glamdring.

Honestly, I can only attribute the release and marketing of Sam's sword as a Museum Collection sword to an error or misinformation on behalf of the persons involved. I know there was a non-weathered, non-limited version of Sam's sword released, but with the precedent of the Museum Line already being established, UC should have applied a different label to Sam's sword, because it is definitely not part of the Museum collection.[/quote]

You do indeed speak for other in the forum, Valkrist. I agree with you totally. I think the various things that were seen in some of these later models are a testament to the different mentality that the powers that be at the "new UC" from those at the pre-bankruptcy in relation to the LOTR line. A very different attitude toward quality, marketing and commitment to staying true as possible to the movie weapons. Just imagine where the line might have gone had Kit not still been involved. I am indeed curious and anxious to see what is released after the release of "The Hobbit". I hope the new line comes back to the standards of the early lines.

Oh, I see so you are not talking about a quality issue with Sam. The only version I worked up was the weathered version. As I recall, UC's estimated sales did not justify the MOQ, so having two versions was more of a way to simply boost sales to justify it, so I completely understand from that aspect. It simply would not have even been made otherwise. Another full sized sword would have cost double that to develop and inventory, and that was simply not going to happen. It was a tiny run regardless.

As far as it being an MC version, to be honest I was surprised at that. The purpose of the MC line was e xp lained by me to UC to be more hand made, fully functional, et cetera, but they did chose to change that. They were probably turned off from doing anything like the old UC MC line after I told them what a debacle that turned out to be.

I know I have discussed this many times here back in the day, but requested items from this forum and others were relayed to UC by me, and usually what was most requested here was spot on to what I wanted to do anyway, as anyone who was here back then knows. Folks here were a slightly different crowd than the masses though, and UC got requests and feedback directly from dealers, distributors, direct from collectors, et cetera, that were very different. The Weathertop swords WERE among the most requested swords, far more so than any more Rohan swords. No doubt the other three in the collection could have been made, along with one more proposed sword, had production on The Hobbit started on schedule and kept some interest in the line. The delays just dragged on and on though, and interest in the line dropped to nothing. It was really over and done 2 years ago.

I have been told UC is already getting questions from dealers about Orcrist and other weapons, a full year in advance, so that is a good sign interest is building again.

lol... Kit, I'll take it as a compliment when you say that we are slightly different than the masses here.

Yes, I remember well how pivotal you were back in the early days in listening to what we had to say. I've been here since early 2004, when the place was run by Swordsman, so I know what you are referring to. When I said that it didn't look like anyone was listening on the other end anymore I meant the more recent times when your involvement and input with UC seems to have been considerably lessened and strange decisions were made with the LOTR line (from our perspective.)

Whatever the case, I appreciate your e xp lanations and am encouraged that you are back in the driver's seat for The Hobbit production. It means a lot to us that someone is listening and is taking the time to come here and offer us information and answer questions when there is no obligation to do so.

I'm surprised the Weathertop blades were that popular and asked for, but different strokes for different folks, I suppose.

Thanks again for stopping in from time to time.

You know, that really does e xp lain a lot, Kit. I hadn't thought of the cost of resources that goes into the bigger swords, so I can see why UC just couldn't go with another full sized replica. And to be honest, even though there are multitudes of other pieces I'd rather have, I would've (and still would) buy the other weathertop swords. I guess we shall see what comes around in 2013, post-An Une xp ected Journey.

I would as well, but I doubt it will ever happen at this point. A large number of Sting collectors just wanted the Sam sword to go with it, so at least they got what they wanted. I like those four swords, but as with most people who read the books and know they are a film creation, they don't hold as much importance to me as others did.

If people really knew all of the things that go into making a decision of making or not making a product - financial, resources, time, risks - it would probably make your head spin. I got out of that end of it years ago to strictly focus on the design and development aspects. Much more fun.

[quote=""Valkrist""]I appreciate your e xp lanations and am encouraged that you are back in the driver's seat for The Hobbit production.[/quote]
I would not say I am in the drivers seat. UC still makes the final decisions on everything, but we have a really good working relationship now and I am doing my best to get replicas I would want to own made.

Thanks so much for your input, Kit, both here to us on whats happening behind the scenes as well as the input you take from here back to UC. We are truly fortunate to have you here taking part in discussions and educating us on what is going on and what goes into production. It always seems that your visions reflect the general sentiment felt amongst us here at the forum.

Hey Kit where can i find a link from UC so i can take a look what's new coming up about new swords they made.
Thanks.

You can check out the http://www.unitedcutlery.com website, but they only update it a couple of times a year. Are you talking about The Hobbit swords? If so, nothing will be officially released until the last quarter this year, probably around September/October.

Kit, thank you for posting on here about this. I always love it when we the collector (whatever the subject may be) have the opportunity to interact with you guys.

Will we be seeing a museum collection Orcrist? I've got the MC Glamdring & Sting, and would absolutely love if I could complete the set...

I'm just plane stoked that the sword line is ramping up again. Guess I better start saving. Cars, guns, and swords... man I need to find some cheaper hobbies!

[quote=""Nasnandos""]You can check out the www.unitedcutlery.com website, but they only update it a couple of times a year. Are you talking about The Hobbit swords? If so, nothing will be officially released until the last quarter this year, probably around September/October.[/quote]
Actualy for all the swords made by UC Kit.
Thanks I'm going take a look at the site.

UC is really not doing that many swords. The whole sword market, collectible and functional, is very slow right now. When the market a whole is hurting because of the economy, swords seem to be the first category that takes the hit. I am hoping The Hobbit will spark some interest in swords again.

[quote=""Nasnandos""]UC is really not doing that many swords. The whole sword market, collectible and functional, is very slow right now. When the market a whole is hurting because of the economy, swords seem to be the first category that takes the hit. I am hoping The Hobbit will spark some interest in swords again.[/quote]

Does that mean no Museum Collection editions from the Hobbit?

That all depends on how well the films do. UC does have the rights to do fully functional replicas, so possibly. Orcrist would obviously be first on the list if there was another true MC edition made.

Sounds good! A little extra motivation to display my interest in the new movie financially lol

[quote=""Nasnandos""]UC is really not doing that many swords. The whole sword market, collectible and functional, is very slow right now. When the market a whole is hurting because of the economy, swords seem to be the first category that takes the hit. I am hoping The Hobbit will spark some interest in swords again.[/quote]
That's really bad news Kit,seems it's hard to find UC swords these day's.
Especialy the high elven warrior sword and both MC swords.
Last year i had the chance of a lifetime,i saw a guy selling strider ranger sword made by Weta for a very low asking price 500 euro,i placeed a bid of 500 euro,the next week he changed his price into 1500 euro and i saw that the sword was sold.
These swords are very e xp ensive and very hard to find.

Can somebody take a guess if Orcrist comes for sale how much is it gonna costs.

[quote=""Dark Shadow""]That's really bad news Kit,seems it's hard to find UC swords these day's.
Especialy the high elven warrior sword and both MC swords.
[/quote]

Really? I would say you are not looking very hard Dealers selling everything in the current line can easily be found with a simple google search.

The High Elven War Sword is not in the current line (only two runs were ever produced) but many dealers stock them. You can find them on Amazon and other online dealers.

You won't find the MC swords anywhere though. Those were limited editions from 6 or 7 years ago. Ebay and Craigslist are the places to watch.

Kit What do you mean by ( Craigslist ) ???
I don't know what that means.
As for the swords,i am looking on ebay but the only problem is that in your country over seas they are alot for sale but in Europe it's really not that easy,it's more the shipping costs that's killing me.
I know Amazon but i honestly don't know any other dealers.
About high elven warrior sword i know that there are two runs produced,the first one and the second one.

[quote=""Dark Shadow""]Kit What do you mean by ( Craigslist ) ???
I don't know what that means.
As for the swords,i am looking on ebay but the only problem is that in your country over seas they are alot for sale but in Europe it's really not that easy,it's more the shipping costs that's killing me.
I know Amazon but i honestly don't know any other dealers.
About high elven warrior sword i know that there are two runs produced,the first one and the second one.[/quote]

Craigslist is an online website where people list things for sale. They are run regionally or by city and are meant as a kind of classified. Generally you find something you're looking for on craigslist, contact the seller, then meet up with them and buy your item. It's a great tool, but you've got to be very cautious about it too. I don't know if the news made it across the pond that you would have heard, but there was a serial killer using craigslist for a while.

[quote=""Dark Shadow""]Kit What do you mean by ( Craigslist ) ???
I don't know what that means.
As for the swords,i am looking on ebay but the only problem is that in your country over seas they are alot for sale but in Europe it's really not that easy,it's more the shipping costs that's killing me.
I know Amazon but i honestly don't know any other dealers.
About high elven warrior sword i know that there are two runs produced,the first one and the second one.[/quote]
Sorry, I am being narrow minded assuming most people on this forum are in North America. You don't have Craigslist in Europe. Most stuff is very easy to find in the USA. Some of these are a bit hard to find in Europe, especially countries that have very restrictive laws about swords. UC uses several large distributors in Europe, but I'm not sure how widespread that distribution actually gets. I know in the LOTR days, half of the product went to Europe.

I hate to say it, but I'm kind of glad UC will be producing things at a rate I can actually keep up with. I do hope that after the second film comes out, you're able to make many props, but let's keep it at an economically-friendly rate of production for awhile.

If i am type Craigslist in google is there a change that i'm into it so i can find and buy swords that i'm looking for ?
Sorry for so many questions but i like the help.
Thanks alot Kit.

[quote=""Dark Shadow""]Can somebody take a guess if Orcrist comes for sale how much is it gonna costs. [/quote]

You know, that's a very good question. Should we be e xp ecting economically-adjusted prices? I don't know how much they were when they first came out, but it seems like when I entered the market, the mean price for UC swords was about $160 from distributors and $120 on the aftermarket, and they went down rapidly from there.

Well, if you went on craigslist, you'd have to select your location and you'd see things that people listed on craigslist in Belgium and you could also search other areas in Northern/Western Europe. That's how it works.

Thanks alot for the big help you guys i love this forum with all my heart.
I will take a look right now.

Sorry guys but all i can find is a bunge crap for sake.
I hope that i on the list come because i can buy some masterswords to collect with the ones i have left.

[quote=""Nasnandos""]I would as well, but I doubt it will ever happen at this point. A large number of Sting collectors just wanted the Sam sword to go with it, so at least they got what they wanted. I like those four swords, but as with most people who read the books and know they are a film creation, they don't hold as much importance to me as others did.
[/quote]

First of all, thank you Kit for posting here. It great to get some background on the design and production processes, as well as your opinions.

I would have really liked to see the Weathertop swords as well. Have taken some screen shots with a view to making some 1060 one-offs. Anyone know if there are there any good non-in-movie photos of these swords anywhere?

Tim

Kit, you said over on therpf that you weren't sure a production version of the scabbard for Orcrist would be possible. What sort of challenges are you facing with it, if you're allowed to talk about those?

It's just related to the design, materials used and the number and size of metal parts. If something will cost so much in tooling and unit cost is so high that it is simply to e xp ensive to sell, it won't be made. Sometimes there are options that may involve altering the design slightly to make something work that can be considered, sometimes not. We are still working on it.

If the Sting scabbard costed out at the same price as the Sting sword, for example, it would not have been made (Luckily it came in at about 1/3 the sword cost). If you recall there were metal vines all across the surface of the Arwen scabbard, and a metal tip and collar, over leather, and all integrated. It was very ornate. I really wanted to get that scabbard made, but the retail would have been about the same as the sword. It just would not have worked. The actual units sold at that price would probably barely cover the tooling cost, let alone make a profit and pay royalties. That's all boring business stuff, but it's all necessary when developing a replica.

We could always make anything work at a sellable price, say if we made the steel parts out of plastic with an electroplated finish, but I'm not sure we want to go that direction quite yet.