New Header Pic

[Johneli]

Originally Posted by CristieKerr

I'm in concurrence with the one who said deron's logo on Savage's banner... but hooray for me finally learning how to blend two images!

IMO that looks great! The "blend" highlights that these are indeed thee two Meccas of Golf. Of "course" no one could take that title away from St. Andrews but Augusta ain't too shabby either. Really a good job CK!

[Johneli]

Originally Posted by CristieKerr

I'm in concurrence with the one who said deron's logo on Savage's banner... but hooray for me finally learning how to blend two images!

IMO that looks great! These are indeed thee two Meccas of Golf. Of "course" no one could take that title away from St. Andrews but Augusta ain't too shabby either. Really a good job CK! What strikes me is that the "blend" suggests that the two courses are EQUALLY important when you consider the number and intensity of tournaments contested at each venue.

[Leaguegolf]

Originally Posted by Keith

add smoking hot chicks to your search please and you have my vote.

Just for you buddy...................

[Keith]

Originally Posted by lwc

I could do that but I doubt that approval would be forthcoming . . .

It's worth a shot

[Keith]

Originally Posted by Leaguegolf

Just for you buddy...................

Gotta dig a chick who can handle a cigar















No I have to go throw up. Thanks buddy.

[Leaguegolf]

The information contained in Deronsizemore's post (#115) certainly sheds new and important light on the subject of a new header pic. For those of you that haven't read it, take a minute and read the first couple of pages of this.......

WARNING: Getty Images Cracking Down! - SitePoint Forums


I'm not one to believe everything I read on the internet but I'm also not one to take foolish risks. Who among you would be willing to risk receiving debt collection over a header pic? I'm certainly not.

That means any header pic submitted for use on GRW must be accompanied by proof of its point of origin. I must know where these pics come from before they are used. Any questions?

[deronsizemore]

Originally Posted by Leaguegolf

Who among you would be willing to risk receiving debt collection over a header pic? I'm certainly not.

I'm sure many would be since the risk wouldn't fall upon them The risk would fall upon the person paying the bills at GRW since the images would show up here.

I'm with you on not believing everything you read on the internet. There is some definitely bogus stuff out there. With the images thing, I don't know anyone personally that has been fined, but there is just to much talk about it and to many people claiming that it's happened for me to believe it's made up.

Even if the image didn't come from Getty and you're clear in the way of not getting their fine, using someone else's photographs without permission is still a copyright violation and is protected under intellectually property laws I believe. At which time all the owner of the image has to do is file a DMCA infringement with the website host and the host is required to remove the site or the content by law.

Anyway, I mainly just wanted to give everyone a heads up with all this stuff. I'm a web designer/publisher so I read about these things happening all the time and I didn't want it to happen here as simply pleading ignorance won't work. Chances of it happening probably are slim, but it does happen.

[Diane]

Originally Posted by deronsizemore

I'm sure many would be since the risk wouldn't fall upon them The risk would fall upon the person paying the bills at GRW since the images would show up here.

I'm with you on not believing everything you read on the internet. There is some definitely bogus stuff out there. With the images thing, I don't know anyone personally that has been fined, but there is just to much talk about it and to many people claiming that it's happened for me to believe it's made up.

Even if the image didn't come from Getty and you're clear in the way of not getting their fine, using someone else's photographs without permission is still a copyright violation and is protected under intellectually property laws I believe. At which time all the owner of the image has to do is file a DMCA infringement with the website host and the host is required to remove the site or the content by law.

Anyway, I mainly just wanted to give everyone a heads up with all this stuff. I'm a web designer/publisher so I read about these things happening all the time and I didn't want it to happen here as simply pleading ignorance won't work. Chances of it happening probably are slim, but it does happen.

I don't know about the laws for the internet, but when I worked in television, we were sued more often than I care to remember and for very small things. The only ones that are exempt are newscasts or news programs. All it takes is for one person who is familiar with a photo to log on to the forum.

[GolfSavage]

League, I think we should set some parameters before we get to far down the road with this. Width, height and file size should all be considered, as well as "fluidity". Since the forum appears to be set to adjust to the screen resolution of the viewer's monitor (in other words, it is "fluid"), a header with a fixed size may not be as attractive at some settings as others. The current header is 970x200, and on my laptop set to 1280x800 the header only makes it about 3/4 of the way across. I've also always considered it too tall for my taste, but perhaps others disagree. I just don't like a header that takes up nearly a third of my window's viewable area (considering the browser header and various toolbars, etc. that folks may have).

I know when I design a website that requires "fluidity", I can usually create a header that adjusts well as the width changes. I'm not an expert on vBulletin and its options for the header, but it may be possible to do the same thing here, or we may have to determine a minimum/maximum width, and also how tall it should be. By setting parameters the designers amongst us can take those into consideration when choosing images, logos, layouts, etc.

And all that Deron mentioned about copyrights is correct and should be heeded by all, as I know some folks who got hit hard by Corbis a few years ago. While there are ways around some of the watermarking and digital signatures used to protect the images, the best thing to do is to avoid using anything you do not absolutely know you have a right to use!

[lwc]

Size parameters would be good, here is a link for another version:

Banner

[CristieKerr]

Originally Posted by Johneli

IMO that looks great! These are indeed thee two Meccas of Golf. Of "course" no one could take that title away from St. Andrews but Augusta ain't too shabby either. Really a good job CK! What strikes me is that the "blend" suggests that the two courses are EQUALLY important when you consider the number and intensity of tournaments contested at each venue.

Thanks Johneli!



I'm in concurrence with size restrictions too. My latest version is definitely way too tall. I thought Savage's was a great size (especially when he placed it over the forum in the second picture).

[deronsizemore]

Originally Posted by Diane

All it takes is for one person who is familiar with a photo to log on to the forum.

You are definitely right about that.

Originally Posted by GolfSavage

League, I think we should set some parameters before we get to far down the road with this. Width, height and file size should all be considered, as well as "fluidity". Since the forum appears to be set to adjust to the screen resolution of the viewer's monitor (in other words, it is "fluid"), a header with a fixed size may not be as attractive at some settings as others. The current header is 970x200, and on my laptop set to 1280x800 the header only makes it about 3/4 of the way across. I've also always considered it too tall for my taste, but perhaps others disagree. I just don't like a header that takes up nearly a third of my window's viewable area (considering the browser header and various toolbars, etc. that folks may have).

Good points. I hadn't even noticed this. I usually leave my browser window maximized unless I'm testing a fluid layout so I hadn't seen it. But yes, you're right. For the header to look right, it would have to be fluid I would think.

The header takes up about half of my screen now at 1680x1050.

[Darth Fader]

Originally Posted by Leaguegolf

The blue sky over St Andrews just doesn't fit my eye. Oh, and where's the brighness/contrast button on this last batch?

I think i said in an earlier post that making St Andrews brighter would lessen the impact of it.

[lwc]

Here's another . . . click on the image below to see the full size version.

[Diane]

lwc - here are my thoughts:
Logo - I like the color, font & design
Photo - looks like a night shot, light is distracting to my eye. I like that it shows mostly grass though.
Tagline - I'd rather see a different font, smaller and maybe change the placement

[lwc]

Originally Posted by Diane

lwc - here are my thoughts:
Logo - I like the color, font & design
Photo - looks like a night shot, light is distracting to my eye. I like that it shows mostly grass though.
Tagline - I'd rather see a different font, smaller and maybe change the placement

Had a little time today while watching Woods vs. Cink . . .

Photo was changed a little, I was trying for a surreal look in the first one (I liked it ). Almost any photo could be used . . . that one is just one I had on my computer.

Changed the tagline a bit.

You can click on the mockup photo in my previous post to view the changes.

I also fooled around with the original logo, just for amusement while watching TV.

[Diane]

Originally Posted by lwc

Had a little time today while watching Woods vs. Cink . . .

Photo was changed a little, I was trying for a surreal look in the first one (I liked it ). Almost any photo could be used . . . that one is just one I had on my computer.

Changed the tagline a bit.

You can click on the mockup photo in my last post to view the changes.

I also fooled around with the original logo, just for amusement while watching TV.

I like the new one except for one thing - I don't like the font on the tagline - it doesn't seem to compliment the logo.

I like the logo in your mockup better than the one here.

[lwc]

Originally Posted by Diane

I like the new one except for one thing - I don't like the font on the tagline - it doesn't seem to compliment the logo.

I like the logo in your mockup better than the one here.

I changed the font . . . have another look.

[Diane]

Originally Posted by lwc

I changed the font . . . have another look.

I like this one. Has League forgotten about the contest?

[lwc]

Originally Posted by Diane

I like this one. Has League forgotten about the contest?

Perhaps forgotten . . . this thread has been very quite for a while.

Here is another I made today with different colors, fonts, etc. To see it CLICK HERE