Guys,

For any of you going to TPF, I'd encourage anybody interested to go look at our Addams translite-to-backglass at the Charity Table. It's one of (4) backglasses we donated, and will be on display there. Nothing like an in-person inspection.

There weren't missing elements on the Meteor glass.

That was only a point of view, based on that reviewer's glass.

- The white blob in the planet that we "missed" - we did not miss. It was not on the loaned original we used. Not kidding. So proven (as usual) there are other versions out there. So we're original. Just not to the reviewer's "original".

- The CREDITS text in the window we didn't "miss" ... we left it off. As we always typically have on every similar "CREDITS" window in the past. Why?
Because they have always been a *decal* that the factory/operator stuck to the back of the glass... as was on the loaned original we used.

We could have always added CREDITS in actual ink to all those glasses in the past ... but people always say do original. So we left the decal up to end user choice.

For anybody going to TPF, the CPR Meteor glass is also going to be on display at the Charity Table. Go have a look in person.

Our red version is made identical on the back to the standard version - except we have the press print the red tint over the score windows, as an added step at the end.

Yes, the original red version doesn't have "High Score To Date" knocked out of the lightblock backside. But ours does. So in other words, our glass is a drop-in choice for *any* Meteor owners. Those who wanted to go in the "red direction" because they simply liked the look, OR because they own a bona fide "red" build of the game from very early in production. Their early backbox won't have a "High Score To Date" bulb behind the glass... therefore it will never light up to show itself.

So both bases are covered with our repro's. Hope this helps.

After looking deeper after the review, I found most Meteors do have CREDITS in unremovable mirror, like the one in the review. Our donor-loaner's glass simply didn't. Likely the same reason it didn't have the white planet blob - another vendor, with another set of artwork. So we followed the loaner without batting an eye, as we've seen it on so many Sterns in the past anyway. Even me as a past & present owner of some. So it was intentionally left off due to that. Just wanted to distinguish it was an actual decision, not a miss or error. That's all.

My Lightning, Magic, and Star Gazer backglasses all had the clear decal with white lettering.

Yet my Flight 2000 has it screened on the glass in white ink.

Weird.

We don't make decals here, sorry. Don't have the experience, media, or cutters to do them right. Plus some makers have been out there for over a decade in the decals lane. Could be something up their alley.

Correct. Note the typical paper krinkling/rippling above Morticia & Gomez' on the translite. That's likely all over that translite, but the glare of light only exposed it there. Very typical for 20+ year old translites, warmed by the bulbs all those years.

For those of you who may have missed it - we have videos on our site for both the TZ and TAF translite-to-glass products. There is Play button on the thumbnail of the product(s), as well as a note about it in the description. They show glare of the mirror bits so you can see how they sparkle and shine in real life.

As for worries about the backlight density of the backglass imagery - it's not dark. We mimic the same throughput as the translite, except slightly less washed out, and slightly more colorfast. Meaning the (paper) translite will look much like a traditional backlit poster... while the backglass will look like a backglass - with slightly better black levels, and colors hold up better. Beyond that, everybodys' paper translite prints will have lost a bit of color over the last 20 years anyway. Depending on their environment.

Guys,

I haven't been logged into Pinside since well before our vacation weeks which started March 14. But since our internal talks last night going over this backglass, I'm going to pop by for a minute and provide some more info:

While we do use NOS glasses often, and Mike alluded that he believed this Meteor one was as well ... IT WAS NOT. We started with a donor's production glass that came out of a working production game. It wasn't even a 'perfect' glass (as you'll see below). But it was very passable and workable to get what we needed.

So the green mystery... "where did the green go on CPR's glass". I'm here to show you. It was never there.

Just to show we're not making this up, or fumbling around 'seeing colors wrong' or any of the other theories... Stu went back on the server and dug up the original, raw Cruze scan that was done at the graphics studio in Arizona that we always use. These guys are meticulous archival scanner techs, and considering it's a $500,000 fine art scanner - they have to be.

Since the actual scan is a gigantic uncompressed TIF, I've done a simple resizing to a 1000px JPG image, posted below.

- the first post is the raw scan as it comes off the Cruze. Many would say "ewww its so dark"... but there are ranges of color information in there beyond what your eye can see. A Cruze scanner doesn't need to overexpose or overlight. It's CCD sensor sensitivity is beyond even the best DSLR cameras. Look at the color bars they lay on the table. Everything is photo lab balanced and calibrated. Looking 'dark' means nothing in technical terms, all the color data is there.

- the second post is the same image, but I've pulled up the gamma and midrange levels a bit, so you can see the "colors to the eye" of what it would look like in a normally lit situation (outside the scanner, shot with a camera).

No, this glass did not have CREDIT in the window. No, this glass does not have a white blob on the planet beneath the credit window. No, this glass does not have green capsules on the rockets, they are navy blue. The bodies of the rockets are based on blues, not greens. There are no greens in the giant meteor either. They are the deep royal blues.

So that is the origin story of this glass. While it's obviously the most common to have these green-based ones, as reported here in retrospect, this too was a Meteor glass put into a production game. Not NOS. Not a cast-aside oddball/error glass from the parts room. Since the artwork master for the press is 95% the master TIFF image from the Cruze (except for some redraws of score windows, etc), this is not as simple as grabbing spots and turning them green. We'd need a whole new Cruze scan of another Meteor glass of the other color variety. Starting from scratch. That is why after a few dozen sold and shipped, and it quieting down to basically everyone who wanted one, got one... we're on the fence of taking a complete overhaul on these at this late stage.

IMHO the green is BUTT UGLY. I know, only my opinion. But when I came in here to see the pictures, my first reaction was "ewwww, yuck, seriously?" Looked like green LEDs were being used behind the glass, as some kind of amateur mod attempt. Meteor has that classic blue/purple/black Stern color scheme (like Flight 2000). There is no green in the Meteor pallate anywhere. Makes no sense to me. I think the version we got is WAYYY better of a matching look to the game. But hey, that's just me. I know it may seem biased, but I'm dead serious. Blue all the way. If it were my game, darn tootin'

Original Cruze - Raw
Original Cruze - Gamma Up, for online viewing

Guys,

I'm sorry if I don't come across with enough penance, but I'm simply trying to lay out the position of where this all is. This tidal wave of attention on this all happened so fast. It's not deflecting responsibility - it's the precise current state of where we are at with the Meteor glass, how we arrived there (complete transparency), and the unfortunate conundrum of retroactively not being able to now change the look of the past shipped ones. The sudden retrospect of linear time, and no possibility of a time machine.

Remember, it's only been a mere 24 hours since this came up. These glasses have shipped to dozens of people over the last couple months. Even the initial forensic CPR Meteor Glass overview/review on this very thread didn't catch a thing about anything green... and that was back around week 1 of shipping. Found a small blob missing, and Credit word missing in the window (both of which weren't on our donor, as I explained at the time). But no green. Then onward we all went. Dozens bought after that. Not casting blame anywhere here. Since these are made one-at-a-time, nothing was changed along the way. There was never a call to. At this point, sales of this glass have tapered down and now it's essentially quiet on the Meteor glass homefront.

So this green color thing pops up just yesterday. Here we all are. First time hearing it. That's all. Obviously we're being expected to jump. So yes, we're talking about potential for future prints. The past is prologue. Got it. Suddenly there is more/new information to go on. So we will.

Going forward, there are possibly some Photoshop tricks that might be clean/sharp enough to bend specific areas of colors in the layout, without effecting surrounding edges or muddying pixels. Would have to be tried. I don't know for sure yet. The typical (best) way is to start with another glass from scratch. But that is the dilemma: Going forward, now that the initial rush is over and the bulk are served... we're left with the few future customers that may want this glass over the next months/years. I get it that there are a few that would even re-buy, I hear you. It's only been 24 hours, and this is going to take some experiments in weeks to come to see where we can go with this for future prints. Which I believe was the goal of this being reported. The benefit of being digital is that there is no sitting stock here of the current look. Just mirrored blank panels. We CAN "turn on a dime" and instantly change going forward, if we get the artwork changed to something else. The question is - how to do it.

Forgive me if any inferences of not caring were taken from my post. I'm only trying to illustrate where/how the look of the glass came from. Going forward, possibly a 'green' print master can be made. And yes, description changes for the time being can be made in our web site Store. Until if and when a changed print is the norm in the future.

As for the personal anecdote on the green itself - that is just a personal opinion. It's not going to stop looking into changing prints going forward. I don't find the artwork ugly... I find the green in it ugly and off-putting. Remember, to me the opposite effect is happening. As of today, I'm seeing green in the Meteor glass for the first time. So I'm just as shocked... just backwards. Now green doesn't look right to me. To me. But that has no bearing on anything.

Let's see where we can go with this.

Stu *is* on the hunt for a great specimen. Will certainly keep you in mind...

BUT, there is more to the hunt than meets the eye...

According to lore, Python had more than one (possibly couple) versions of this backglass artwork. The story is, his "naughtiness" in the artwork was removed for the production glass, as Williams wouldn't allow it.

Legend has it that there was a condom in one of the versions, that was removed. Naughty indeed.

So the question is - is the preference that we stick to stock? Or would it be better to hunt longer and repro one of those rare naughty ones, if one could be found?

This is, after all, Python stuff. What do Python fans say?

It could work that way, certainly. But that is the question. Do we begin the hunt for the rare one or the stock one, or both? If the layout is done in a way that it's add/subtract naughtiness (and no other version/layout changes), then yes possibly everything we need might be found on one glass. So demand for the naughty version has to be considered of even being worth the hunt or not.

A decent stock one could be lined up with a donor immediately. The naughty version is a different story. That's going to take some hunting, and some glasses took us year(s), let alone to find a donor willing to part with theirs for a few weeks to take a trip to the Arizona cruze studio.

Already done a month ago, found on Page 5 of this thread:
https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/new-backglasses-added-at-cpr/page/5#post-5005584

While I'm here, popping in for a moment, I'd also say it's amazing reading the various subjective interpretations of our Translite-To-Backglass products. Most guys are blown away, but some are meh. I do understand the memory/visual retention in some folks just can't/won't let go of the older/aged look. Something about seeing extended dynamic range (the full original translite artwork) on glass, is tricking some eyes... even believing that details are hidden or lost. Nope. Every single detail from the original translite artwork is there. Except now it's in its proper context.

Remember, just because blacks and shadow areas have washed out on the old paper prints, doesn't mean there is "more detail"... it just means that blacks and shadow areas have a maximum depth of around 80% black (rather than true 95-100%) so details are perceived more "visible"... but that is only because the shadows are now technically blown out. Just like on any photo editor today, one can certainly take the Shadows slider, and slide it up to blow out your blacks... yes, you'll make some stuff in the shadows slightly easier to see, but you'll be ruining the overall dynamic range of your photo. The black levels will be made poorer, as the darkest spots in your photo will be ~80% grey ... not approaching black anymore.

I get it though. I'm a home theater buff. Believe it or not, there are still people in the home audio/video community who spit on OLED / QLED / HDR televisions and monitors... and pine for the days of old traditional LED panels with 500-1 contrast ratio... for the very same reasons. They subjectively prefer the more film-faded washed look of their fave movies, and don't like the production companies going back to remaster from the original negatives, and restoring the dynamic range, regardless of the "superior" presentation quality of today's displays. They don't want 'technically' superior or 'technically' improved. They want what they REMEMBER. So I get it. 'Better' can be very very personal and subjective.