oldzy

Just a FYI in case anyone interested in nitpicking. Overall, ILT's look better.

ILT on top in package, Fusicks on bottom



ILT on top, Fusicks on bottom. ILT is off-white and finer text. Fusick is whiter color and bolder sloppier text.

MDchanic

Nice to know. Thanks!

Because of the limitations in upload size, would it be possible for you to also post just sections of the tuneup labels, like maybe the timing mark or fast idle pictures, blown up big (whatever seems best to your eyes)? On this page, you can see that the ILT label seems a bit clearer, but I think it can't be fully appreciated at this resolution level.

Also - since the label itself is their product, and the pictures you posted are pretty clear, I could imagine that in the future they may send a takedown letter to the forum for copyright infringement - you might want to obscure part of it so that they can't claim someone could print their own off of it .

- Eric

My442

Buy them direct from Jim Osborne.

RetroRanger

thanks for the pics I dont think its nitpicky there is a significant difference!!! frankly I'm surprised anyone would accept the fusick one as it looks ratty compared to the ILT one altho w out the side by side it may look better.

now can you leave them exposed to weather for about 40 years and then show us which has better longevity ???

wmachine

I have never seen any decals better than the ones Mark Cornea "Dr. Decal" has. He's been doing these for over 25 years.
http://www.drdecal.com

74 Omega

Could you send a link to ILT?
I bought one from Dr. D*c*l and it looks like the one posted, like crap, fuzzy and off color and just plain old bad. I will not put it on.
I would like to get a better one.

RetroRanger

ilt = inline tube

http://www.inlinetube.com/

mmurphy77

Inlinetube ROCKS!!

Tony72Cutlass'S'

On a side note, i got the engine compartment decal from Yearone a couple years ago. I'll be honest. I'm really not happy with it. I kinda wanna redo it with a proper one. The old one almost lasted 35 years before REALLY needing replacement..

Allan R

One more thing Ken, I bought Fusicks emissions decal for my car and installed it only 3 years ago. Within 2 years it has started lifting and bubbling. IIRC my OEM one didn't do that until it was around 20 years old and had been steam cleaned several times.

Not sure I understand this Eric. There are some folks on this site whose sig pics probably take up more space than what was posted here. My sig pic cannot be hosted by CO because of the animation - so it's just linked from my photobucket acct with help and advice from Paul (omicron). That is like nada space on this server. If you noticed, oldzy's are not hosted on CO or they would have the thumbnail attachments down below, they are from his other online account (maybe photobucket) so it really takes only the 'link' space on this site, which is next to nothing. A while back, someone suggested (and was supported by other members who thought it was a good idea) that images should be hosted by CO so they always remained as viewable images on the site. The issue of server limitations came up in that one too. If oldzy 'deletes' any of his pics or craters his photo acct, these images will simply revert to a small box with a red X. I for one, support oldzy on his post, he has not recommended one over the other, just stated he observes a difference is the quality of production. I also understand some of your concerns, but pls read on...

The resolution issue is important. I think what Oldzy did posting larger photos to show the clarity issues of the whole decal is productive to the community as a whole. It's not like he's slamming one or the other, just stating an observation. In fact he's provided a valuable service by showing what the suppliers websites do not: good quality pics of their product. They likely do make them lower quality to reduce the number of hackers taking advantage. I for one don't like to spend 7+ bucks and shipping on a decal that looks like it's a cheap forgery with obvious production issues.

re: letter of takedown? You must realize that there are literally thousands of posts on this site that show products from Rock Auto, NAPA, O'Reilly's, Autozone, Moog, B&M, Year One, Fusick, Tamraz, Parts Place, ILT, homebuilt etc etc. I really doubt that any of those companies or persons would issue a blanket injunction to 'take down' any material that we've bought from them. Once we buy it, the product is OURS to comment/show whether + or -. Besides, what kind of 'watchdog' would they need to enforce it with the hundreds or thousands of forums and contributors? I realize that you are just being cautious about the liability that may be opened up, but I don't see liability issues in oldzys post

re: Kurts post for Mark Cornea's website. Yes, he does have amongst the best you can get for reasonable pricing, and he provides free technical info whether you bought his product or not. I like him and his site. He also puts his coporate tag over each picture to ensure ownership over the web. None of the others do that though.

These pics are from 'a repop supplier' whom I have not named. They are hosted on the repop website, so take no real volume here. Since I didn't name the repop, does that make a difference? The pics are very hard to make out details on them. These are the acutal 'large size images' they let you see when making a buying decision. My eyes are old, and don't see the details as well as I'd like. I can see them in oldzy's post.


Eric, I'm sorry if this 'rant' got out of context or offends you. The comments are all my opinions and are what I believe though.

Tony72Cutlass'S'

How did they make those old decals so that they won't peel or tarnish or bubble?

Any ideas? If I paint my air cleaner and put on a decal I want to make darn sure it's going to last.

MDchanic

Hi Allan.

I think you kinda missed my point...

... Which was, that even though those photos initially posted by Oldsy are big, they STILL don't have enough native resolution to fully make clear what the quality of the lines is.

What I was suggesting was to re-photograph easily-compared sections of each label, such as the timing tag drawings, using a macro lens, so that the section photographed fills the entire screen, and then post those more-detailed photos, so that they are as large as the photos he posted originally, so that we can all see a "microscopic" view of a portion of each one, in order to make the best comparison.

Actually, if people would post comparable shots of the same portions of the same (or very similar) stickers from ALL the suppliers, it would make a GREAT consumer service page.

As far as my concern about copyright issues, I think you have missed this one too -
Photos OF other types of products are just that, photos, but full-frame, detailed, non-obscured photos of these labels ARE the products - any of us could transfer them to sticker material if we had the resources to do so.
These stickers are published, printed, graphic materials, and as such, are copyrighted, even if they don't carry the © symbol (look it up), and reproduction of copyrighted material by any means, including electronic transmission, without the permission of the copyright holder, is a violation of their copyright.

You're right, they may never ask the site to take them down, but if they do, the site will have to comply (or fight them in court...), and then they'll be gone. Posting only a piece of a sticker for comparison, though, is considered a "fair use" of the material, and could be left up indefinitely.

Just puttin' it out there...

- Eric

Allan R

Eric, I get what you saying now, but it wasn't all that clear when you said
If you had specified to post comparisons of the same smaller areas of each decal in micro view, I would have understood that, but your post appeared to be targeting the limits of upload size, so no, I don't think I missed this at all, it was interpreted as it was written. I get how easy it is to be misinterpreted, and I think we've achieved a balance of understanding now. It's also sometimes easy to 'see ideas or words' in your head and they don't end up in a paragraph. Fingers don't work as fast as a brain, and eyes sometimes read what the brain wants them to read. Like /reading/ (reading between the lines). I know what it means, but others might not.

I agree it would be nice to have a very clear large comparison of products for review by the community.

re: copyrights. You could be right. I guess it just comes down to who actually holds the copyright and the effect using it would have on the potential market? GM or the licensee? GM is a licensed trademark and they're still in business, right? Fusick on their website even says they are under license from GM to manufacture GM trademarks associated with Olds - but nowhere does it say 'copyrighted' They do say that anything they manufacture will have the 'Fusick' lable on it. That being said, none of the decals in question appear to be manufactured by Fusick, just distributed. I disagree that the photo is the product; I think the photo represents what the product will look like, period. I think what oldzy posted was fair use of the product without intent to destroy any market share of either company. You told me to look up copyright infringement. I did and you might be surprised by this as it certainly upholds the photos posted by oldzy:

Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enterprises, 471 US 539 - Supreme Court 1985 Look, I really don't want to argue with you; I like you and respect your opinions. But I also enjoy a good challenge once in a while too. Just that this time your first post wasn't as clear as you usually try to be. Ok?

MDchanic

... Or, in my case, sometimes they work faster than my brain .

I can completely see how my use of the words "upload size" was confusing.
I was, of course, thinking "The best thing to do would be to upload a 6,000 x 3,000 pixel .tiff file, but that size is not permitted."

And what's this "try to be" stuff...? Jeez.

Okay .

- Eric

oldzy

Obscured......

Allan R

Me too

70Post

Maybe there were running changes in the fonts, layouts, etc on these things over the years...I don't know. But...

When I compare both of those to an original "Keep our GM..." sticker from a '70 Buick GS air cleaner neither of the repros is the same when it comes to placement of the red lettered text below the "Keep your GM..." text. Not even close. And it's not like there's additional words, text, printing on the Buick sticker I have that would account for a change in placement or spacing.

On top of that the slightly offset blue and red semi circular dealies at the top center of the sticker are arguably more correct on the Fusick sticker. The original I have exhibits the same feature except not quite as much offset. So, did ILT change the placement of the two semi circular deals to "clean it up"?, or did they have an original example that shows no offset?

So, who's to say one is better than the other??...it depends on what parts/features you are comparing.

Jeeez.....you guys got to stop this!!! I went and pulled out one I think I got from TPP and they left the damn period off the end of the text at the bottom!!! UGGGGGHH!!! Also, definition in the "GM" logo is pretty weak as well although it's the closest rendition of the "offset" semicircles out of all of these.

What is this???? Cut and paste all three together to get a nice one??!!

joesw31

A correct air cleaner decal would be nice. The air cleaner decals being reproduced are wrong. Each year used a different decal as the decals had the air filter service part number and air cleaner part number with a two letter code and they were all different.

69HO43

Let me put my internet lawyer hat on for a second. I'm not saying anyone's wrong for having concern (because many people foolishly believe anything they find on the internet if free game) but I don't think anyone has to run out and put on tinfoil hats over this.

If they are pictures YOU took, of personally owned items, the copyrights belong to the picture taker, not the producer of a now personally owned product. It looks to me that Oldzy bought these decals, laid them out side by side for comparison (research or non-profit educational use) and took a picture. If that's the case, the picture, and said copyright of that picture, now is Oldzy's. If anyone's copyrights are violated by someone copying the pictures, then those violated rights would be Oldzy's. But copyright laws are not always clear cut. Only a court could decide an outcome.

If that were the case, GM could make you take down pictures of YOUR Olds that YOU took with YOUR camera in YOUR driveway. The copyright owner would then need to prove intent.

Now, someone puts it on their car, I walk up at a car show, take a picture of the decal with my hi-res camera and post it here. Can ILT make me take it down? Same context, right? Where does it end?

Caution is fine, But also under fair-use, you can reproduce for educational uses, or such as comparing differences. Oldzy was educating us for free, was he not? We could argue this back and forth for years. So that's all I'm going to say about it.

From the ambiguous law itself:

Now with all that said, back to the decals. Who REALLY looks that closely at an emissions decal for clarity of the lines? Really? But it's obvious without any glasses, even at my age, to see almost instantly the clarity and detail differences. I'm guessing Fusick uses osborn decals. Which make sense because 90% of osborn decals are crap quality IMO. Luckily they don't cost an arm and a leg. Buy a stack and replace them periodically. Or they could print them on mylar with a laser printer and they'd last a VERY long time.

MDchanic

Thank you for correcting me, HO!

I had been under the impression that because these were high-quality, low-noise, dead-on pictures, they were tantamount to "reproduction."

I am glad to hear that I was wrong.

- Eric

69HO43

Never said you were wrong. Just making a case from a different viewpoint. In fact, it's refreshing to know there are cautious law-abiding folks out there like you to help keep eyes out for those that wouldn't have even considered potential ramifications.

RetroRanger

wait a minute thats not internet lawyer speak...thats real lawyer talk LOL

Allan R

Naw, real lawyers don't speak english they speak legalese. And besides, there was no bill attached. So no way he's a lawyer.

IMO The guys who speak 'plain language' don't always make the most sense all the time, myself included. We know what we want to say, but sometimes not how to say it.