Are vector based decals a good thing or a bad thing?
 

This post has two purposes. The first is that I want to show off another logo that I traced.

The main question came to me while I was working on this file. Is clean, tidy and symmetrical vector based art really a good thing for old bikes? I think the real answer is probably no, the neatness looks inauthentic. I assume the originals were all probably hand-drawn. The neat-freak in me says, who cares. If you want authentic vector art, there are lots of tracing options that would probably achieve the right look.

I've purchased decals from cyclomondo and felt the same way about them.

So, what is your opinion? Which do you prefer?

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8323/8...7f7680cd_b.jpg
Simplex_Logo by mkeller234, on Flickr

THe top one.

I don't have a preference strong enough to mention, but to your fundamental question, vector graphics are a good thing because they let dilettantes like us produce a few pretty good knockoffs of classic graphics. We won't get it perfect, and the imperfection may even lie in the inauthentic perfection, which is fine.

In other words: that looks great, but no one is going to mistake it for a real one, which is as it should be.

That's a fair point. It's never been my intention to make forgeries. Maybe there is a middle ground somewhere? I learned a new word, I had to look up "delettantes".

Anyhow, now that I found all of my old screen printing materials, my plan is to try and make waterslide decals for my Schwinn that don't scream out that they don't belong.

Aaah, well, that sounds like a worthy goal (except the Schwinn part)! Carry on!

You could "enhance" the vector version with some human touches. I like the softer edges of the lower decal, but I'd imagine many customers would prefer the top version if you were producing it commercially.

And it depends on what size the repro will be. At 9 inches on my computer monitor the bottom version looks a bit rough. But it might look appropriately rough if it were a small frame decal.

I forgot to say in my message above - amazing work!

They're pretty and so much nicer to work with for people that want to change them or print a t-shirt for themselves. I think repaints tend to look better-than-new to begin with since paint technology has changed already so crisper decals are just part of that and I don't think it's a problem any way really. I should fire up illustrator since I've got the time and finish the motobecane ones I started years ago.

This is my feeling exactly - thank for putting it into words more eloquently than I might have done.

So an additional word on the subject: I've made countless reproductions myself; the anal designer in me refuses to engage in the task without relying upon the "perfection" of tools like Illustrator. I'll often nitpick tiny details in a logo file to extremes and I find satisfaction in having done so. I'm also pleased that the end result is often so much better than the imperfections of past production and printing processes for the very reason that the finished product screams out, "I'm a reproduction." The worry I have is that the uninformed - or at worst, unscrupulous - may attempt to pass off a repro as an original. I know of at least one instance where one of my restorations was complicit in a fraud. (Not by me but by someone who purchased one of my bikes.) Not a ton of money involved fortunately, but there you have it - and it was important to the purchaser. I'm considering adding some tiny line to my subsequent decals to indicate they are reproductions. I've grown uncomfortable with the idea that my labors might be viewed as forgery. Silly? Perhaps, but I'll sleep better!

Great topic, btw, and nice artwork, mkeller.

I like this idea. When I trace things, I trace them accurately - including any defects if they were in the original to begin with.

Pretty good work. I would review the lower legs of the L and E, they taper a bit in the original, and the JUY to me originally did not have sharp corners, but if you printed it at 120 dpi (ancient tech now) it might just blur out pretty well. Also, a line coming off a circle at a tangent was a trick to get right long ago.
Reproduction graphics done with vector based software are here. One has to have a keen eye to see where the original art production methods (handwork) led the original artist or designer to fudge the art to correct for errors or aesthetics.
These old logos were often printed using a platen press, with hand cut or photo etched "type" made from hand art.

Hand inked many a logo decades ago... I have those ruling pens somewhere...

Yeah, I rushed on the "JUY" part. I went back and revised some of the sharp points on the frame, I also went back to the letters too. I noticed everything had a .5 point stroke, so it was thicker too. Still can do more, I think overall "JUY" needs to be smaller.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8196/8...4342bc26_b.jpg
Simplex_Logo by mkeller234, on Flickr

Since you're silk screening them, I'd attempt to test some different thread counts in your screens. Use your precisely traced vector art, then roll from there. If there is any imprecision I see in older graphics work, it is generally due to the execution (being things like screen thread count, moving screens, etc.) and not the design. Lower your thread count some, and I'm willing to bet you'll start to get more of a warm, fuzzy, 'authentic' feeling about what you're producing.

That is assuming you have a screen set up where you can replace the cloth. I made the mistake of getting a frame with an adhered screen once. What a waste.

So, is there a T-shirt in our future, Matt? ;)

I have this logo on a T, about worn it out. Printed in white on a dark blue T shirt. Think I got it from Chuck years ago.
I really like this logo. One of my faves.

I didn't know they made them with screens that can't be removed.... that seems.... weird. That sounds like good advice, i'll definitely keep that in mind. Mine are OLD, and I have no idea how fine (or not) they are.

Not pretty, but they work:
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8184/8...b7d1a4e0_b.jpg
DSC01916 by mkeller234, on Flickr

How ARE those screens attached, Matt? My old screens had a groove and rope keeper pressed into the groove. Much like a household insect screen.

Ay, there's the rub. Personally, I've been uneasy with reproduction decals for just this reason. There are far too many uneducated newbies in C&V that are easy pickings for the unscrupulous. Sadly, it will crop up wherever there is money to be made, often even if the individual amounts are relatively small, as it all adds up in the end.

In one of my other hobbies, vintage electric trains, forgeries are fairly common. Rolling stock which is identical except for the livery, can vary from a couple dollars up to a couple thousands of dollars. Consequently, many people repaint and rescreen common models as rarer types. The ethical reproduction firms apply a reproduction indicator in an inconspicuous location, while the unscrupulous pass them off as original.

With reproduction decals, it's hard to find an inconspicuous location. However, with to-day's print quality, you can utilize something like font size. In my past career as a Quality Engineer, many industries used a two foot rule (i.e. arm's length) for determining cosmetic defects. If something does not readily stand out at two feet, it's not considered objectionable. So, I'd suggest some small, consistently placed character(s) or symbol that's not readily noticeable at two feet, but visible when examined within that range. I'd caution against using an "R" as it's easily confused with the registered trademark symbol. Perhaps we could even create a standard that we could lobby all reproduction bicycle decal manufacturers to use.

Another issue is color. The relationship between the red and the white in the original logo is just as much a part of the effect as the scribing. The hand painted red Legnano logos on my old Tipo Roma are going to be hard to replicate, more for color than for shape.

I don't think color is as important, as long as it is close. Any references we have have are aged and probably not accurate representations of the original color. That would require storage under the proper conditions, something which very few bicycles have undergone.

Ha! These are the same, there is a groove with a rope keeper.... then, some tape over top.

There is no doubt that is a real concern. I've never personally attempted to defraud someone... in fact, i'd probably brag about making the decals! RHM practices what you were suggesting with his saddles. Maybe I could fit my initials in there somewhere or something like that?

The reason for choosing the simplex logo is pretty simple. It's one color, it's iconic and Rootboy made that AWESOME key fob with one!

Oh, I missed that. Was it made out of Delrin?

If someone gets close enough to my bikes that have new decals to even see and comment on the difference, there'd better be some sex involved.

Any vector art printed with any medium will soften the edges a little or a lot depending on the process and quality of the equipment. With vector re-created art at least you can start the process with the reversed areas open and crisp edges. To produce great transfers, or any printing, the art has to be tweaked to the equipment limitations anyway.