The Paragon glass is much thinner & lighter than the original. I had to purchase new hardware to fit it (available from Marco). I ended up not using the repro in my machine. I didn't like the way it looked lit up and my original is a 9.5 out of 10 (so it's not a big deal for me). I am currently using it as wall art. Unlit, the colors look fine.

Based on your post and my experience, you didn't get a lemon.

Way harder to match colors using Process Color vs Spot Color

http://www.pantone.com/pages/pantone/Pantone.aspx?pg=19890

Cheeks go to my post (below) as Stu provided a detailed explanation for this!
http://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/cpr-backglasses

To me the artwork that is totally redrawn comes out fantastic, the ones that are not just come out so so and are better than nothing.

Earthshaker is wow and Joker Poker even with some missing colors is too.

Whilst Flash Gordon and Fathom are yuk.

Not bashing CPR I love what they do, but some backglasses have been disappointing.

What are the dimensions of the org glass compared to the CPR glass?

I've seen differences in thickness, but not square inches.

With all due respect, have you contacted CPR about this? Especially the Paragon glass being too small.

Their customer service has always been top notch for me. Maybe that was a mistake? I am almost certain they will get things corrected for you if there is any way to do so.

Chris

As I said above, after purchasing the correct trim, it fit fine (don't recall any problems). Did you purchase new trim? The original trim will not fit properly.

Wow, that's a big difference.

I think it's time to call CPR and see what they say.

All of the Classic Bally Era games have the same size glass....All of them, it was a 'standard size' for Bally. I have the CPR repro in my game & it fits just fine, never has fallen out & even if I try to take it out without Unlocking it it will not come out. The Classic Bally/Williams era have the Larger width backboxes which extend 7-8 inches beyond the neck and tend to "sag" on the sides making the opening Larger than it should be. I had this sagging problem with 2 of my Restorations ( Wizard & SBM ) and I had to Level out the Backbox so that the Glass would sit properly & not fall out.....

Edit: At some point ( not this year ) we are going to re-run the following CMYK Backglasses from New Art Films & with our New Production Formula: Flash Gordon, Centaur, Star Trek, Paragon, Medusa.......

I'd like to see a discount offered for people who bought the previous ones and are wanting something better for their restored games.

Hopefully Fathom will also be one on them.

Fathom was done from "borrowed" existing Films, however, when we do eventually re-run it we will be using our new CMYK Production Formula......

Cheeks: I NEVER said "these are sub-par"....... I said "we are going to re-run the following CMYK Backglasses from New Art Films & with our New Production Formula" meaning that we have since "improved" the process that we were using during the production process when these glasses were made.

If your not happy with any CPR product when you buy/Receive it you could have returned it for a full refund. Unfortunately at this point it's too late to return them, however, you can always sell them to someone who really needs one (i.e. either dosen't have a glass at all in there game or has a really flaking/bubbled/peeling/faded glass) to recoup some of your funds for the newer glass when they eventually get re-run......

alot of glasses are "vectorize" and use Pre-Mixed Colors of Ink (PMS Colors – a universal Color Matching Guide for Printing Inks – Pantone Matching System).....However, CMYK titles are made up of only 4 Colors: Cyan, Magenta, yellow & Black. CMYK titles are the ones that are "paintings" with what appears to be a full spectrum of colors, but it's not, if you put a magnifying glass to them you will actually only see the 4 colors as "dots" in a specific pattern called Rossettes.

CMYK titles are actually 9th Generation Copies and here is why:

Our original Scans were of an NOS Backglass in Mint Condition
Generations =
1.) Original Painting
2.) Original Film Seperations
3.) Original Mesh Screens (for printing)
4.) Original Screen Printing
---------------------------------------------------
5.) New Cruse Scan of NOS Glass
6.) Photo Retouching to Color Correct & Remove Screen Printing Pixels
7.) New Film Seperations
8.) New Mesh Screen (for printing)
9.) New Screen Printing

Did Stu / CPR offer to replace this obviously shorter BG?

cheeks can you take a picture of the two Paragon backglasses side by side. I would be interested in seeing the difference in the sharpness between the two!

With the new bg in do the windows for the score displays line up? From the picture it looks like they are a little lower.

shim it up

That's what I was going to say if the windows don't line up. A 1/4in. piece of plastic in the slot would work perfect.

your pic there has no edging on it.. that'll buy you a good eighth inch.. maybe it's not that far off?

You can order the right glass size & thickness. My sales are probably less than 1% of theirs. I always get the right size & thickness. We both use the same Canadian manufacturers of tempered glass with no logo. Can't explain how this is so hard for them. Personally it drives me crazy if this happens with wrong glass size or thickness.

Can't tell from those pics, what type of lift channel are you trying to use on the CPR glass?

The Paragon glass was run at the correct size. Period. Our panels are cut to the official Bally size from that era (28.5" x 25.75"), which applies to all glasses from that period, and thus all the Bally backboxes. Paragon was no different for us.

Here is another instance of one single case of an odd situation (at the user-end) creating a tempest in a teapot, where quickly the implication/impression to everybody tuning into this turns to "the entire run of Paragon glasses were the incorrect size". Which I doubt was even the OP's intention.

Seriously though, in 9 years we have only run ONE incorrect glass height (Eight Ball, back in 2007) which was 1/4" too short. Ordered the correct size with the glass factory, but they delivered as 25.5" tall (instead of 25.75") and it got through the entire production without notice. Never put a ruler to them back then, and always assumed an error at a factory on the scale of 200+ tempered panels delivered would never be screwed up. Plus the artwork centered fine when silkscreening (no red flags). Wasn't until weeks after release, after over 50 sold and shipped, the first customer pointed out it didn't reach into the top of his backbox. We ended up easily selling out of that glass within a couple months, regardless. Only a few others sent emails asking many months later. All of those with fitment trouble (ability to fall forward) were able to use the glass simply by using some specific trim tricks. For most, the shorter glass still fit *without* trickery, amazingly enough.

Rest assured, since then, we check the blanks upon delivery, right from the crates. Every time. Paragon definitely was done on 28.5 x 25.75 panels. Or it would have never made it onto the press.

In looking at the photos provided by the OP, it seems that our glass is indeed an oddball one. I can't imagine what else it could be. I just measured mine, and it's a solid 25.75" tall (see photos below) - just as seen on the tape measure of the OP's original. That one repro must be stunted, where likely the factory scored the sheet shy of target, and snapped it off there. Since the artwork is a fixed size, with an equal clear border all the way around, I'd be curious to see the bottom edge of his glass. If it's 1/4" too short, that would mean the artwork would have to be touching/spilling-off the bottom edge of his glass (because he seems to have clear edge on top, left, and right). If the art touches the bottom edge, definitely a single oddball glass from the run, as you can see mine is not like that. His artwork would HAVE TO be chopped off on his (just look at where the 25.5" mark lands in my photo). Is it? I'd love to know. Then I have questions internally of how that wasn't noticed and got packed.

As for thickness, all our panels are 1/8" tempered (as stated at the top of our backglass page) - regardless of what the originals were (as we all know, many variances of thicknesses, tempered and plate, were used back in the day). CPR sticking to one glass stock has to do with several constants: the significant difference/trouble in trying to temper the thicker glass (the factory recommends against it, as it exceeds their tolerances for guaranteeing even tempering edge-to-edge). Those original "thicker" glasses were on plate anyway. We're never using plate. It sucks. It breaks easier in shipping. It can hurt people if they tripped with one. Also, all our jigs, press, and processes are based on 1/8" glass stock. Also, weight for shipping is considered for our shipping rate.

In the future, if anybody has a query of discovering a potential run-wide error they *think* they have discovered, especially one unspoken nearly half a year after sellout (and that should be telling), take a moment, make that query with us as a direct PM and communicate your case. Before heading to the forum(s). Then we can take a look, see who's got what going on, and determine if a real runwide error or single error is going on. If one simply takes it straight public, declaring or insinuating that based on their piece, an entire CPR run contains an error - trust us, that is what people will follow suit and assume. It gets yucky (yeah, for us). Plus going directly public can go two ways: a) correct, you are a sleuth and master b) pie in face. Plus going directly public leaves us in the dark, and we don't know what you've found. For me, I would have never seen this discussion, had I not been directed to come here by somebody else (and it wasn't Stu). It was one of our regular customers who was concerned. This time, it was quick. Sometimes I may not find out until days/weeks later - then threads have bantered on deeply, and by then it's almost too late to come on and explain/correct/show and change dozens of minds to another viewpoint.

At least on this one, I hope people can trust that Paragon was produced at the correct size. The OP's glass is an oddball if it's truly being measured correctly (or are differing trims confusing things, etc). That bottom edge will tell the tale. I don't know completely. Had we had this discussed back after purchase, during the active days of it in stock, an exchange could have been done immediately. Now we don't have any more. I welcome a return and refund (no problem) if the OP chooses to go that way. But I need to be contacted

KEVIN
Classic Playfield Reproductions
http://www.classicplayfields.com

Please forgive Photo #1, as the parallax of the camera view doesn't allow a straight view of the 0" point or the 25.75" point without looking straight down (as in pictures 2 and 3). I just wanted to illustrate I wasn't doing anything hokey with the tape measure.

IMG_1030.JPG
IMG_1031.JPG
IMG_1032.JPG

_{Post edited by KevinCPR : grammar}

hey kevin I`ve been trying to contact you! Just want to pickup a fathom Backglass and evel plastic set.....When can we meet?

Thanks!
Tyson

Always check your products in a timely manner that you receive from CPR--or any pinball supplier for that matter. They make small runs and don't keep much of this stuff on hand after it has been produced. If there are any issues and you don't contact them promptly, there may not be more of the same backglass/playfield/plastic set available. You can certainly get a refund, though that isn't going to solve your backglass/playfield/plastics need.

Getting proper redress is even more complicated when a playfield/backglass/or plastic set sits for a period of time before being installed. The more time that passes before an issue is discovered, the harder it is to really do anything about it.

Let me state right now - that I appreciate CPR and the work they do. I own the ST Proto BG and for the most part am happy. I also own some plastics sets.

However - on topic to the OPs original posts.
It's hard to call these Repos. The colors are off on the ST Proto BG... and the wrong glass thickness is another negative.
For me; if I get a repo - I expect it to be a faithful reproduction. Right colors . Right Thickness.
The Bally Star Trek runs are just that... a duplication of the original... but not a reproduction IMHO.

Kevin - keep up the good work... but please take this as feedback. Many of us expect near spot on artwork reproduction; including color matches. Thinner glass isn't ideal either.

We hear you. Appreciate the feedback. Now I'm going to speak generally (the following is not directed specifially at you):

I think it's best for everyone to read the CMYK editorial I wrote over on this thread (scroll down to find it):

http://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/cpr-backglasses

The truth of the matter is, the results some are looking for are very very very difficult to achieve attempting CMYK reproduction from scratch. If we had the original films, we'd all be fine. I WISH we could do what you are asking. If anything, it's the goal we are trying to strive toward, CMYK run after CMYK run. And we will continue to work toward that goal, with little tweaks attempted on every run until we get there.

"Right colors" is of course subjective. Some may beg to differ with the opinion that the CPR version isn't *more* appealing than old/original because one of the perks of CMYK prints in new ink is that the colors pop more. They don't wash out as much. They don't look faded.

Just so we're talking about something concrete (and this applies to Star Trek, Medusa, Paragon, etc) let's pull up the Silverball Mania glass project as an example. We got the similar feedback back then about colors. So let's take a look:

sbm_1.jpg

So what are we looking at here? Well this is a BALLY ORIGINAL glass (NOS), in the backbox, and the machine turned on. Look at the hot spots of the bulbs. Look at the colors. This is considered "right"... right?

Now let's scroll down...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

sbm_2.jpg

So what are we looking at now? This is the CPR reproduction. Superior? Or not? Right or wrong? These are the subjectives that end up depending on each member of the audience. This new CMYK print *of course* doesn't look like the original...it's all fresh colors and ink, and not 30 years old faded and thinner ink like on the original. The bulb hot spots are helped a lot, if not mostly eliminated. The colors match better to the nice dense (unfaded) solids on the playfield. What is not to love here? Honestly, scroll back up to the previous picture...and back down here... now, truthfully, which one is "ewwww" ??? Honestly. I ask anybody to chime in with responses to this open question. Be honest, and give your resons why one or the other, in your opinion. There is no right or wrong answer. We're just curious, because the better looking glass seems obvious to me. But that's me.

"Right" colors may not be the best. But since people giving feedback run after run about differing colors from their CMYK original on our CMYK repro glasses, the tweaks we are doing every CMYK glass run are forcing our hand to move toward the more "Original" direction (ie. the first photo). Some people may say nooooooooo! Whyyyyyy! But yes, those asking for "more original" are getting the attention, and we are listening. So, in essence, we are trying to fade down and "deaden" our master images before they go to film, in order to give a result that looks older and more faded. Seems like a travesty, but this is what the louder voices are asking for. Original. So if our stuff cannot be called reproduction by some, then we'll make 30-year-old-looking glasses that can be. To some this seems silly. But it's what we're working toward. Original as possible.

I've always wondered if the original is put away in a closet, why the repro look isn't adopted by the eyes/brain (as there is nothing to A-B Compare to anymore). But I guess some people keep a perfect color memory of what used-to-be (me personally, I can't). What if I had provided the second SBM photo FIRST, and claimed it to be original. Would any have known the difference? Honestly. Then if I whipped out the first SBM photo and claimed it to be the reproduction - I'd be *slammed* for such a faded, washed out, ugly looking glass. Such irony, considering the reverse is the case.

I hope this doesn't come across as a rant, because it's not. I'm just fascinated by the purist views, as well as the more progressive views on pinball. So polarizing, from such different camps of thought. We're stuck in the middle, with both audiences to please. But one audience certainly has a more influencing voice. Original Original. If that is the direction people want us to go (SBM photo 1) as opposed to where we wanted to be (SBM photo 2) then we'll keep going in the "original" direction. I always thought people painted, polished, and retouched almost everything when trying to restore machines, to give them an UN-faded, UN-aged appearance. Why can we not do some of that work for you when color tweaking for our reproductions? It's an interesting conversation, and an interesting topic.

Feel free anybody to jump in here and give your 2 cents. I just gave mine.

KEVIN
Classic Playfield Reproductions
http://www.classicplayfields.com

I'm all for compensating for fade... honestly tho; the blue is too blue in the Star Trek artwork.
OK if you replace everything with CPR. but when the plastics don't match in hue - it's very difficult to just replace a single part. That's my beef with the blues. IE if I wanted to run proto pieces in my machine... I have to replace every single part regardless of scratches/breaks/whatever. I'm in the camp of replacing only what's necessary to make it right. IE in the Proto Case; only 4 plastics need to be changed. Save the rest for a Rainy day.

I know others have commented that the blue in star trek is too blue. not even close.
I'd expect to walk up to any machine and say... I can't tell this is a CPR repro vs NOS. With the ProtoType ST BG and plastics and can easily walk up and figure it out.

Speaking purely from my view; I'd rather the art be fairly close when it's put in an existing machine.
Even on my Star Trek: Mirror Universe project... I've struggled with the art like you guys do. I wanted to compensate for fade and did. But I did not choose a completely new color pallet. I felt a nod to the original art was warranted and expected.

I have single pieces from seconds runs for my DE Star Trek. IE pieces that were sold per piece at TPF instead of entire sets. I bought these pieces to replace broken ones in my machine. I haven't installed them primarily due to time.... secondary because I'm concerned the pieces hot pink color is too pink vs others already in the machine.

Don't get me wrong. In the absence of anything else CPR is great addition to the hobby. I'm glad you offer the products. I'm just offering my $0.02 for whatever it may be worth.

Looking at the 2 photos, I totally prefer the repro, but are there really no images of SilverBall Mania from back in the day to decide once and for all what is correct?

Chris

Great input Kevin.

I would be in the purist group. Prefer reproductions, as close to original, even with mistakes, as they left the factory. Why "correct" something, if one group of customers would be disappointed and the other group of customers is ok with the changes? Wouldn't the latter group be just as satisfied with a more faithful reproduction even if it wasn't improved? I do realize the process itself does influence what you are able to do.

Thanks again and keep up the good work.

I've bought 8 different CPR backglasses over the years and I can honestly say that only one will never be going in a machine and that is the flash gordon.

4 of the backglasses were for games that had none, so thanks CPR for saving games that would of been parted out.

Factory Flyer, from the IPDB:

2156f1.jpg

I can confirm that my CPR Paragon backglass is correct at 28.5 x 25.75. I've also attached a couple side by side photos for comparison. Keep in mind, my original backglass does have some fading, as you can see from the condition of the cabinet.

DSC05800.JPG

DSC05805.JPG

DSC05806.JPG

DSC01569.JPG

At this point I'm wondering where the OP went (??). Looking for a response about what the bottom edge of his particular glass looks like (preferably a photo). If it's truly 25.5" tall, then you can see by the photo I provided earlier, the bottom edge should be cutting through the artwork at the 25.5" mark as seen on my tape measure. The OP's pics already show he has clear edges at the top, left, and right. So if the glass panel used for his repro is indeed 25.5" (snapped 1/4" shy by the factory), the loss in height would have to show on the bottom edge.

I either want to catch a mistake made in measurement by the OP, or catch an actual stunted panel that I can have a talk with the glass factory about... as well as my guys who didn't notice chopped-off artwork when it was packed, thus catching an obvious shorter glass before it ever got out the door.

Just trying to solve this mystery.

He's online right now.

Hit him up with a PM and see if he is anywhere near his machines to take us some pictures....

You are comparing a Prototype CPR run (rear) against a production Bally Original (front).
I'm guessing that the Art was/is drastically different on the prototype... then it was modified by the Panatone color match.

Given I've never seen a REAL prototype BG for Star Trek... I can't comment on how close they got with the repos. My GUT says they are proably "bluer" than they should be given the plastics. but no real evidence.

Looking forward to the repros. Any better idea when they may be marketed?

Not this year

Fair enough. Probably wouldn't have the money for it this year anyway.