With Stu and the usuals behind the scenes, I'm not at all worried about the artwork. Hell, even IPB eventually got that damn near perfect.

What I am worried about, though, is will CPR get all the holes, bevels, and dimples right? 'Cause IPB sure didn't!

Oh, there's SO many different meanings I can infer from your use of the word "used". I just hope it actually means a true, low-play HUO example, or a fresh restore from HEP or someone like that.

I did see Rick @ PPS mention he might have a couple sample playfields coming in from the next shipments from IPB's old stuff.

The only real cutting differences from IPB's TAF playfields to that of B/W was the amount of "meat" left around the chair and swamp holes, the missing bevels on those same hole edges, and the CNC bit they used for most of the routed holes was too large(it looks like they used a 1/4" bit instead of a 1/8" bit).

I hope you're talking about the artwork and not the milling of the playfield. The differences in the cuts for the holes were extremely noticeable:

286256.jpg

Not for posts, no. The holes I'm referring to are for the chair, swamp, and targets. The ones that you'd actually see and/or will affect gameplay.

Click on the picture and look at the chair hole differences. The IPB chair hole looks like they cut it out, then decided to come back later with a larger drill bit and hit those front corners.

Furthermore, that front edge has no meat on it to place the bevel that is meant to be there. Same thing for the swamp entrance.

As for the picture, I'm just using what I find on Pinside and the internet. A simple Google search turns up plenty of results with people mentioning what needs to be done to an IPB TAF playfield to make it right, not the least of which is a Chris Hutchins HEP gallery of what he did to make an IPB TAF playfield just like a factory one.

Does making it a "mute" point mean we don't talk about it?

The word you're looking for is "moot".

The only "oddly shaped" inserts on TAF's playfield that might be causing the hold up are the arrow shaped GRAVE inserts and the POWER lightning bolts. But even then, those were all shapes used on many other B/W machines at the time and those particular shapes are already being repopped and are available most places. Perhaps the colors of some particular inserts were off?

I'm just wondering if there are other, more legal, disputes going on right now, like who gets to own all the materials, jigs, patterns, printing plates, etc., once the repro run is done...

Would love to get some official clarification on this form either PPS or CPR. If this is true, it's kind of a big deal. I'm quite certain CPR took their time recreating the artwork, so I know it'll as close to dead on as possible. I know of Mirco's build quality, but nothing of their artwork accuracy. I haven't heard anything negative, but that doesn't really mean anything.

I know CPR's run was to mainly to fill out the original allotment under the agreement originally brokered by IPB, which was still valid at the time PPS acquired the WMS licensing. So I'm curious as to how Mirco is able to make more… New licensing agreement? Is it because they're in another country? Or ……?

It's a very strange situation. I'm just trying to understand.

It's also extremely easy to setup an auto responder in most email systems. They could leave it on until the list is full, then change it's response to say that it's closed. In today's age of instant information and ease of communication, it'd be nice to know, as a customer, that we're safely on the list.

Even if they had a "confirmation" page where they all they did was put up your initials and city so you could go and check it. That would be enough. We're essentially hoping to spend almost $1k dollars with a company that some of us have never even heard from.

Looking forward to the playfield, not looking forward to the swap.

Or just had horrible pressmen and/or prepress technicians. I, up until a few weeks ago, worked in the flexographic printing industry for many years and it's amazing how a pressman who doesn't properly mix the specified PMS colors on the artwork proof page can really screw up how the finished product looks. It really doesn't take much of a variance in the ink ingredients(seen to the right of the Pantone number on that swatch page) and the finished product will look so off from what you originally designed, it's sad.

Also, as for the exposed white in the inserts, I can confirm it's not just a CPR thing, it's a factory artwork trapping flaw. Here are a few pics of my factory mylared playfield showing that the white wasn't trapped properly behind the black inner window lines of the inserts.

CPR got it right, folks. I know the tendency is to see what's different from what you've got, thinking yours is the standard by which all others are measured. But what most people don't realize is that what they've got might actually be 10-15% off from what the original designer had intended. Because they made so many of these machines, so fast, it's hard to nail down what the standard was if your sample is just what was produced. We all knew before CPR started this journey that there were three different versions of the playfield. It's well documented here and other places online. CPR's ability to rectify the past's sacrifices of of speed over quality presents the perfect opportunity to do right by the original artists and make our games as they were meant to be.

IMG_0462 (resized).JPG

IMG_0463 (resized).JPG

IMG_0464 (resized).JPG

IMG_0465 (resized).JPG

Oh man, I'd LOVE to see what one of those films looks like. I'm also quite curious as to the other PMS colors used on the other 10 films(or however many it was!). I've got my swatch book ready to compare how close or far off mine is(Feb. 6th, 1992, CGC) to those B/W originally dictated. I already checked the 348 for the graveyard and mine is a bit past 349, and by looking at the tine of it, it appears as though they added too much Process Blue in the mix. It's not as dark as some others posted here, but it's definitely not 348.

This isn't meant as a slight or anything, but unlike 99.9% of other folks here on Pinside, I actually know what I'm looking for, and at, when it comes to printing films, plates, screens, impressions, etc. I used to work in the flexographic printing business as a graphic artist and I also made the printing plates. I know what color separations are, I know what Pantone books are(I've got multiple sets). If you read my other recent posts here, you would have seen that.

I said I know what I'm looking at, meaning I know how to interpret what I'm seeing, NOT I know what they look like. HUGE difference.

The films are used to make the printing screens. Because B/W used all Pantone spot colors on TAF(and most everything else), I was curious about the half-toning gradients and, more importantly, where all the 348 was supposed to be used. I was particularly curious about the latter because the green in my graveyard area is a bit darker than the green "behind the fence" around the flippers. So, after viewing the original film for 348, I now know that those colors are supposed to be identical. Mine are not. I could look at that film for a solid ten minutes and find cool little tidbits and details all over the place, especially when comparing it to a final product. For someone like me who's been making four color process and Pantone spot color printing plates for the last 6 years, these things are fun to see in other industries. Especially if it involves a hobby I love.