my58vw

Here is my very very scratchy beginnings,

I am not in this to win... feel free to steal ideas... I am not an illustrator...

EDIT... updated!

(All hand drawn in illustrator, no taking from websites)...

ChAnMaN

We dont want a picture of lance or any famous riders...we need something that represents the forums.

This is kinda out there, but what about some names of some of our awsome members or mods or even some avatars. Just something that is unique and shows off something about the forums.

These jerseys aren't for the average joe cyclist they are for us, the people who care about this forum. I think they should be designed in someway that only we can truely appriciate them.

Guest

Joe G's hancock would suffice for me...

Koffee

ChAnMaN

Thats an awsome Idea, only what about a jersey signed by all of our moderators. Am I the only one who thinks that would be the coolest jersey on the planet?

MadMan2k

Some of them are real people though... that or they're really well programmed AI bots with AIM support.

my58vw

New graphic ^^^

No one looked at my last one so I had to make a better one

velocipedio

well... it's one thing to snap a picture of someone, it's another thing to put that picture on a commercial product. while armstrong's lawyers probably wouldn't be able to make the case that a bf jersey is a COMMERCIAL product, per se, you can be pretty sure that they'd tie joe up in court for a while.

islenska

This is absolutely untrue. In almost every case where a photograph of an individual (famous or not) is used in the media, for advertising purposes, or for a commercial product, etc., a model release is required. One may use a photo that s/he took of, say, Lance Armstrong, for his/her own personal use, (ie. s/he can frame it and put it on the mantle) but s/he can not use that photo for, say, the artwork on a Bike Forums jersey. Lance does not endorse Bike Forums. He has no affiliation whatsoever.

slvoid

Oh for the love of god, some of you are so anal retentive I can fit an entire seat post up in there along with the saddle. I'll stick a generic pic in there when I get home. BTW, you're going to have the same problems with the first submission by the other dude if that's someone else in that pic.

ChAnMaN

I kinda like this one, only you should really add the Foo to the list, what would we do without the Foo.

crosscut

Well This is not true either. If a famous or nonfamous person is in a PUBLIC setting then the photograph can be used in any manner as long as it is not degrading to the character of the person. I have several great shots of Lance and other riders, that where taken during the Tour de Georgia that I own the copyright to and use anyway I see fit. I could use the picture of him or any rider I took, on the jersey. On the other hand where there may be a problem is if the picture shows a name brand of a bike company or sponsor and it is used that is where the problem comes in. But that is easy enough to take care of in photoshop. I would say I wouldn't want a recognizable face of any rider on the jersey bec/ not every forum member is going to like this or that rider.

Let's just see what people come up with then judge it.

islenska

I did specify, "in almost every case." Obviously every bystander (or cyclist) that appears in a candid photograph does not have to sign a model release. I respectfully disagree with your comment about using a photo of Lance on a jersey. Just because you took the photo does not mean you have permission to use his likeness on a jersey, t-shirt, or anything else for that matter.

hi565

so we should photo shop the picture? considering his whole jersey is sponsorship logos

crosscut

Why doesn't it? Please explain your reasoning. Opinions are not facts.

Please find it for me.

https://www.copyright.gov/title17/

crosscut

Also can one of the mods or Joe tell us what font the Bikeforums.net is in? This will be useful in creating the vector artwork.

Thanks.

islenska

I am not going to get into this with you. If in fact you are a professional photographer then you should know that where both identifiable and non-identifiable photographic subjects, and model releases, are concerned, almost every case is different. The laws surrounding these issues is complex, and it is not my responsibility to educate you.

However, here are your facts:

California Codes
CIVIL CODE SECTION 3344-3346

3344. (a) Any person who knowingly uses another's name, voice,
signature, photograph, or likeness, in any manner, on or in products,
merchandise, or goods, or for purposes of advertising or selling, or
soliciting purchases of, products, merchandise, goods or services,
without such person's prior consent, or, in the case of a minor, the
prior consent of his parent or legal guardian, shall be liable for
any damages sustained by the person or persons injured as a result
thereof. In addition, in any action brought under this section, the
person who violated the section shall be liable to the injured party
or parties in an amount equal to the greater of seven hundred fifty
dollars ($750) or the actual damages suffered by him or her as a
result of the unauthorized use, and any profits from the unauthorized
use that are attributable to the use and are not taken into account
in computing the actual damages. In establishing such profits, the
injured party or parties are required to present proof only of the
gross revenue attributable to such use, and the person who violated
this section is required to prove his or her deductible expenses.
Punitive damages may also be awarded to the injured party or parties.
The prevailing party in any action under this section shall also be
entitled to attorney's fees and costs.
(b) As used in this section, "photograph" means any photograph or
photographic reproduction, still or moving, or any videotape or live
television transmission, of any person, such that the person is
readily identifiable.
(1) A person shall be deemed to be readily identifiable from a
photograph when one who views the photograph with the naked eye can
reasonably determine that the person depicted in the photograph is
the same person who is complaining of its unauthorized use.
(2) If the photograph includes more than one person so
identifiable, then the person or persons complaining of the use shall
be represented as individuals rather than solely as members of a
definable group represented in the photograph. A definable group
includes, but is not limited to, the following examples: a crowd at
any sporting event, a crowd in any street or public building, the
audience at any theatrical or stage production, a glee club, or a
baseball team.
(3) A person or persons shall be considered to be represented as
members of a definable group if they are represented in the
photograph solely as a result of being present at the time the
photograph was taken and have not been singled out as individuals in
any manner.
(c) Where a photograph or likeness of an employee of the person
using the photograph or likeness appearing in the advertisement or
other publication prepared by or in behalf of the user is only
incidental, and not essential, to the purpose of the publication in
which it appears, there shall arise a rebuttable presumption
affecting the burden of producing evidence that the failure to obtain
the consent of the employee was not a knowing use of the employee's
photograph or likeness.
(d) For purposes of this section, a use of a name, voice,
signature, photograph, or likeness in connection with any news,
public affairs, or sports broadcast or account, or any political
campaign, shall not constitute a use for which consent is required
under subdivision (a).
(e) The use of a name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness
in a commercial medium shall not constitute a use for which consent
is required under subdivision (a) solely because the material
containing such use is commercially sponsored or contains paid
advertising. Rather it shall be a question of fact whether or not
the use of the person's name, voice, signature, photograph, or
likeness was so directly connected with the commercial sponsorship or
with the paid advertising as to constitute a use for which consent
is required under subdivision (a).
(f) Nothing in this section shall apply to the owners or employees
of any medium used for advertising, including, but not limited to,
newspapers, magazines, radio and television networks and stations,
cable television systems, billboards, and transit ads, by whom any
advertisement or solicitation in violation of this section is
published or disseminated, unless it is established that such owners
or employees had knowledge of the unauthorized use of the person's
name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness as prohibited by this
section.
(g) The remedies provided for in this section are cumulative and
shall be in addition to any others provided for by law.

lotek 

have no idea what font the logo is.
but da hats gotsta be on da jersey
or else GOOOOMPH

JJakucyk

Good grief, I don't even want a jersey with a photo of someone on it. How about just dropping that idea altogether?

CyLowe97

How about kirke's toes in her avatar..... (or would she sign a model release to allow such a thing?)

* jack *

It looks like a skewed 'Eurostyle'. I used Mac Illustrator CS, and it looks pretty darn close.

Does anybody have a design template for a jersey? I went to the Verge website, and the link
to download a custom template doesn't work. I could create one myself, but I'm lazy.

Also, is it a consensus to use the navy and gold color scheme to match the website,
and does everybody want to use the same logo and font on the title banner?

crosscut

Voler has the template I am using, shorts and inset shirts also (pdf format) Thanks Jack for the font. If you need it (templates), I can email it to you. drop me a note.

On the copyright issue.....
Plain and simple.....a credentialed photographer can use the images. People should have all the facts before they speak.

End of story as far as I am concerned.

And I am not using a Lance image in my jersey design. Many jersey companies use the standard reflex blue and process yellow in there jersey so that is the color scheme I am using.

slvoid

Good, I'm gonna go home and put her toes in my jersey design. Kinky...

crosscut

I might worry about her more than Lance......but it is kinky....

KirkeIsWaiting

Permission granted!

Next wish....

661

Please please please refrain from sanctimonious messages like, "share the road" in the designs you submit. In this venue, sentiments like that are preaching to the choir. On the road, a similar message will not cause a pi$$ed-off cager to have a sudden change of heart - likely the exact opposite reaction.

A picture of LA is another reason not to buy a BF jersey. Don't get me wrong.. I'm a fan.. just not a groupie.

Carry on...