In a film "Rosie" made in 1975 (Una Stubbs, Diana Dors), the opening
shots take place in what is claimed to be Victoria underground station.

https://i.postimg.cc/HxtyKfh1/Image2.png

But the station name is shown in dark letters (black? dark blue?) on a
white background, which looks very odd: I'm used to white letters on a
dark blue bar.

Was the black-on-white-bar ever a standard, or has the film's art
department cocked up when making the signs to cover up any that may have
been there on whichever station they used?

https://www.ltmuseum.co.uk/collections/stories/design/evolution-roundel
shows photos from various times, all of which have white-on-blue/black bar.

NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:
> In a film "Rosie" made in 1975 (Una Stubbs, Diana Dors), the opening
> shots take place in what is claimed to be Victoria underground station.
>
> https://i.postimg.cc/HxtyKfh1/Image2.png
>
> But the station name is shown in dark letters (black? dark blue?) on a
> white background, which looks very odd: I'm used to white letters on a
> dark blue bar.
>
> Was the black-on-white-bar ever a standard, or has the film's art
> department cocked up when making the signs to cover up any that may have
> been there on whichever station they used?
>
> https://www.ltmuseum.co.uk/collections/stories/design/evolution-roundel
> shows photos from various times, all of which have white-on-blue/black bar.
>
>

London Transport have been quite protective of use of the Roundel in the
past sp I wonder if the film company got as close as they dare without
infringing any rights or pay anything, though it looks to close to me for
that to be defence.
That being said some stations in India have long used a version
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ghatkopar_platform_board.jpg>
I wonder if arrangements were made with LT or they just use it regardless.

Similarly this example in the forecourt of a Devon Hospital is a long way
from any London services

<https://maps.app.goo.gl/fT7PcD37uJ59fYfYA?g_st=ic>
Have they paid which if they have seems a misuse of Hospital funds, or have
TFL relaxed a bit nowadays. And why use a London logo in Devon, perhaps
because so many buggers have moved from London to there or have second
homes and being old use the hospital frequently and need something familiar
to tell them where to catch the bus.

GH

"Marland" <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:jpucl1F848gU1@mid.individual.net...
> NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>> In a film "Rosie" made in 1975 (Una Stubbs, Diana Dors), the opening
>> shots take place in what is claimed to be Victoria underground station.
>>
>> https://i.postimg.cc/HxtyKfh1/Image2.png
>>
>> But the station name is shown in dark letters (black? dark blue?) on a
>> white background, which looks very odd: I'm used to white letters on a
>> dark blue bar.
>>
>> Was the black-on-white-bar ever a standard, or has the film's art
>> department cocked up when making the signs to cover up any that may have
>> been there on whichever station they used?
>>
>> https://www.ltmuseum.co.uk/collections/stories/design/evolution-roundel
>> shows photos from various times, all of which have white-on-blue/black
>> bar.

> > London Transport have been quite protective of use of the Roundel in the
> past sp I wonder if the film company got as close as they dare without
> infringing any rights or pay anything, though it looks to close to me for
> that to be defence.

My first thought was that the scene was filmed in a real station, until I
realised that the camera was on the tracks or even looking through the back
wall of the tunnel, and therefore that it was a film set - in which case
their art department would have had to dress the set, rather than having
real signs and posters that LT happened to have displayed on the platform
that was used for filming.

I wonder you are right about them using a sign that was as close to LT as
possible but was sufficiently different to avoid licensing. The font looks
different as well: maybe not quite as bold, and maybe not genuine Johnson
typeface.

NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> "Marland" <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:jpucl1F848gU1@mid.individual.net...
>> NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>>> In a film "Rosie" made in 1975 (Una Stubbs, Diana Dors), the opening
>>> shots take place in what is claimed to be Victoria underground station.
>>>
>>> https://i.postimg.cc/HxtyKfh1/Image2.png
>>>
>>> But the station name is shown in dark letters (black? dark blue?) on a
>>> white background, which looks very odd: I'm used to white letters on a
>>> dark blue bar.
>>>
>>> Was the black-on-white-bar ever a standard, or has the film's art
>>> department cocked up when making the signs to cover up any that may have
>>> been there on whichever station they used?
>>>
>>> https://www.ltmuseum.co.uk/collections/stories/design/evolution-roundel
>>> shows photos from various times, all of which have white-on-blue/black
>>> bar.
>
>>> London Transport have been quite protective of use of the Roundel in the
>> past sp I wonder if the film company got as close as they dare without
>> infringing any rights or pay anything, though it looks to close to me for
>> that to be defence.
>
> My first thought was that the scene was filmed in a real station, until I
> realised that the camera was on the tracks or even looking through the back
> wall of the tunnel, and therefore that it was a film set - in which case
> their art department would have had to dress the set, rather than having
> real signs and posters that LT happened to have displayed on the platform
> that was used for filming.
>
> I wonder you are right about them using a sign that was as close to LT as
> possible but was sufficiently different to avoid licensing. The font looks
> different as well: maybe not quite as bold, and maybe not genuine Johnson
> typeface.

They wouldn't be allowed to use any of the three Johnson variants, but
there are very similar ones readily available. Only an expert would be
likely to notice the error.

NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> I wonder you are right about them using a sign that was as close to LT as
> possible but was sufficiently different to avoid licensing. The font looks
> different as well: maybe not quite as bold, and maybe not genuine Johnson
> typeface.

Would a film company have needed to licence something that is ostensibly
pretending to be a tube station? They aren't selling the logo on handbags.

I'd be surprised if the modified logo wouldn't be covered by the same
trademark in any case.

I wonder whether the logo is just designed to be more conspicuous when seen
on film, especially when only seen in a shot for a second or two? Is it
important to the plot in any way?

Theo

On 03 Oct 2022 10:13:33 +0100 (BST), Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:

>NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>> I wonder you are right about them using a sign that was as close to LT as
>> possible but was sufficiently different to avoid licensing. The font looks
>> different as well: maybe not quite as bold, and maybe not genuine Johnson
>> typeface.
>
>Would a film company have needed to licence something that is ostensibly
>pretending to be a tube station? They aren't selling the logo on handbags.
>
>I'd be surprised if the modified logo wouldn't be covered by the same
>trademark in any case.

It's probably too different to need to be licensed from LU.

On 02/10/2022 22:03, Marland wrote:
> NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>> In a film "Rosie" made in 1975 (Una Stubbs, Diana Dors), the opening
>> shots take place in what is claimed to be Victoria underground station.
>>
>> https://i.postimg.cc/HxtyKfh1/Image2.png
>>
>> But the station name is shown in dark letters (black? dark blue?) on a
>> white background, which looks very odd: I'm used to white letters on a
>> dark blue bar.
>>
>> Was the black-on-white-bar ever a standard, or has the film's art
>> department cocked up when making the signs to cover up any that may have
>> been there on whichever station they used?
>>
>> https://www.ltmuseum.co.uk/collections/stories/design/evolution-roundel
>> shows photos from various times, all of which have white-on-blue/black bar.
>>
>>
>
> London Transport have been quite protective of use of the Roundel in the
> past sp I wonder if the film company got as close as they dare without
> infringing any rights or pay anything, though it looks to close to me for
> that to be defence.
> That being said some stations in India have long used a version
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ghatkopar_platform_board.jpg>
> I wonder if arrangements were made with LT or they just use it regardless.
>
> Similarly this example in the forecourt of a Devon Hospital is a long way
> from any London services
>
> <https://maps.app.goo.gl/fT7PcD37uJ59fYfYA?g_st=ic>
> Have they paid which if they have seems a misuse of Hospital funds, or have
> TFL relaxed a bit nowadays. And why use a London logo in Devon, perhaps
> because so many buggers have moved from London to there or have second
> homes and being old use the hospital frequently and need something familiar
> to tell them where to catch the bus.
>

Then there is Wittenbergplatz U-Bahn station in Berlin:
<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:U-Bahn_Berlin_Wittenberplatz_London.JPG>

But I believe that was actually donated by London Transport.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 03/10/2022 11:36, Recliner wrote:
> On 03 Oct 2022 10:13:33 +0100 (BST), Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>>> I wonder you are right about them using a sign that was as close to LT as
>>> possible but was sufficiently different to avoid licensing. The font looks
>>> different as well: maybe not quite as bold, and maybe not genuine Johnson
>>> typeface.
>>
>> Would a film company have needed to licence something that is ostensibly
>> pretending to be a tube station? They aren't selling the logo on handbags.
>>
>> I'd be surprised if the modified logo wouldn't be covered by the same
>> trademark in any case.
>
> It's probably too different to need to be licensed from LU.
I would have thought the roundel was also a registered trademark.

On Mon, 3 Oct 2022 18:03:15 +0100, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:

>On 03/10/2022 11:36, Recliner wrote:
>> On 03 Oct 2022 10:13:33 +0100 (BST), Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>>>> I wonder you are right about them using a sign that was as close to LT as
>>>> possible but was sufficiently different to avoid licensing. The font looks
>>>> different as well: maybe not quite as bold, and maybe not genuine Johnson
>>>> typeface.
>>>
>>> Would a film company have needed to licence something that is ostensibly
>>> pretending to be a tube station? They aren't selling the logo on handbags.
>>>
>>> I'd be surprised if the modified logo wouldn't be covered by the same
>>> trademark in any case.
>>
>> It's probably too different to need to be licensed from LU.
>I would have thought the roundel was also a registered trademark.

They couldn't trademark the whole concept of roundels. This implementation is probably too unlike the LU version to be
covered.

But I've seen much closer copies in many places, without TfL apparently doing anything about them. TfL itself has
stretched the use of the roundel to cover much more than the original trains and buses.