This is quite interesting. So many different variables.

It seems in this photo, the chipping is around that post.. where the art is printed.

I know for the Sword of rage, I was told that run had an issue due to the digital printing process with art going too close to edges of cuts etc. and no wood area to adhere to. This was new, as presumably, the screened art done before would adhere much better.

So it seems newer designs have a healthy area with no art around any pf cuts etc.

Yeah, in this case, the fix caused more damage as you point out.

Also, the new washer has created pooling at distance where the ball may be able to come in contact with it = major chipping / damage... usually pooling is ok on a post, as it is only cosmetic.

Clear coat had obviously not cured enough... so the torque on that post/washer would be important.

Yeah, I can't think of any kind of graphical image processing features in any modern sterns? Mostly just media playback and scoring, as you can see just about everything from pinballbrowser?

Meanwhile, dialed in has selfie modes and things like that going on, requiring some image processing etc... never really thought about it before..

Saw this and thought about this thread. I was curious if there had been adjustments to how the playfields are being vetted. It was such a complicated issue due likely to PF design with regard to art application, clear coat type, curing time, post torque etc.. are GNRs still being shipped with washer fixes for pooling etc? or has there been a big shift in the production? or just more quality vetting? or is this just an ad trying to sway around the issue without any actual concrete evidence of improvements to the actual product?

Really hoping JJP has brought back the special sauce that made Hobbit playfields so amazing.

chrome_2022-02-15_12-00-35 (resized).png

As I understand, many of the classic NOS PFs floating around were not suitable for use in the original runs... but at some point were acquired, and now being sold as NOS, but sometimes contain small imperfections.

It is too bad JJP is not more transparent (NPI), about the whole PF thing. Such a PR nightmare that I can't imagine how it could have been handled any worse.

I don't think this was ever about JJP cheaping out on poor quality PFs.. From a purchasing standpoint, at the time, on paper it would have been a premium product for sure...

That said, it seems like many of these issues have been resolved.. although it would be great if there was more transparency and acknowledgement to many valid cases brought up in this thread.