Help with a photo from 1986

Yes, maybe is, in this Yamaha years Stanton like this colors

It's not Stanton. This is SX from 86 and stanton turned pro for the last 500 national mx and was # 363 with Hi-point gear not answer gear.

i think it's Marty Davalos #sarcasm alert

It's not Storbeck or Frank, both earned national numbers (two-digit) by 1986.
Stanton was High Point (yeah) sponsored his first few seasons.

Might have only done one race that year - now he's got two pages on Vital ! !

Mike beier? Would he have had a national number then?

Shaun Kalos?

Holley?

Number's way too high to be Holley.

I tried looking on the photographer's website, but he only has his new stuff on there.

Technically, yes, and copyright law is pretty clear on this.
How it all actually works these days with instant reproduction and
distribution is a bigger can of worms and the discussion could go on for
pages and derail the hell out of this thread. Asking it in the photo forum
here would be the thing to do.

no copyright issue with this photo of Danny Storbeck, because I took it!
(and don't think that is him in original post)

Not Holley - #12, Storbeck - #19, or Leisk - #203.

Chris fisher ?

My first guess was Joe Wright, from Idaho, but he was 903 that year and was national #63 the year before. He also wore hi-point gear those years. and that guy is way too clean to be Joe ...
So, it is still a mystery..

It's Taco Short


p.s. This thread rules.

Maybe try getting hold of AMA records for pro numbers in 1986???

Mark Murphy is my guess. Florida local, and I think this is Daytona.

murphy was #23 in 85 i believe so that's out.

I just looked at the results from that race, theres a Mike Beier in 20th. Wonder if it's him. Other than that, im out of dice.

I'd been looking for that advert for ages,I still have that white kit that I used top run from back in 87/88ish,great find

In practice, they could only come after you if you published it without credit in some official capacity. Definitely putting it in a print mag would qualify, possibly in a blog.
It does bug me when I see a moto blogger just freely using images. It cost money and effort to get that photo.

And my wild guess on the rider is Andy Stacy?

I think I know who that is , and I can't think of the name. I have a 1986 race program from Washougal and for some reason that number rings a bell. The bad thing is , that damn race program is mixed in with about 1000 other moto magazines going back to 1979. Doug Lange was from Canby OR and was friends with one of mine named Jamie Munson back then. Jamie was quite a bit younger but a very fast pro out here as well. I got to watch Doug race many , many years up around here.

It is somebody that is fast,you dont pull up to the front of staging for practice if you aint going to rip.

And,it is probably a local that has done Daytona a few times and knows the 490 Dunlop is a good tire.

Guessing but Rich Taylor,kid out of the d29,I think rich was his first name. Or,Mark asworth.

Rick,
What number was Roller Ball in 1986?
I know he rode a Yamaha that year...
899's gear looks like Canadian colors also.

Rich Taylor as in Potato? I don't think he's old enough.

Need to sticky this thread until we ID this dude...

Whoa, haven't been back to this thread since I posted; didn't intend to be critical of Tony, just recalling that the images wouldn't be there to revisit without some slob shooting the pic. Believe me, I've scanned enough of my own images to appreciate the pain in the rear tedium of aggregating this stuff into one place for people to enjoy, and I enjoy it and am grateful for Tony's passion for it. Apologies if what I wrote implied otherwise; obviously I've got a soft spot for the photo hounds..

Here's my take on the technical copyright stuff, probably off along the edges but true enough to the law to understand it generally. A creator owns an enforceable common law copyright in what s/he creates by the mere act of creation, although the creator or its licensee cannot recover attorneys fees for enforcement in the US unless the copyright is registered with the US Copyright Office. I'm pretty sure the revisions to the copyright act pretty much run those rights out into perpetuity. The idea being that someone owns the value of what they create as a property right, like owning your car or house outright, and someone else cannot appropriate the value without compensating the creator.

Now the pragmatic take: the problem with moto images IMO is that they have little to no monetary value just by nature of the market, especially now with sheer volume of digital images generated. It's not like we're talking about proprietary rights to Ansel Adams images. I'd guess the half life of an moto image's value in this era is about 18 hours, and within a day or two an image is old news along with the other 20,000 quality images that came out from the collective photohound pack at a race weekend.

Obviously there are some exceptional iconic images, but pretty rare IMO. I love that, for example, Paul Buckley is able to generate some revenue for his past work, but that's more the exception than the rule and due a lot to Paul's mastery of a medium that was much more difficult to navigate than today's digital landscape. That means the only real value in almost all of these images, especially old mag scans, is the pleasure they bring to people, which is exactly zero when they are not available to see, and if the money's not there to drive their publication then passion is the only currency left that can bring those things to light for us to enjoy.

So, for me, I think I can live with the small moto world reality that everyone benefits by historic images being seen, with, where possible, credit to the original creator. As long as it's not a commercial appropriation; I firmly believe that if you use someone else's work to promote your profit driven business, then paying them for the right to use their work, however old it is, is a cost of doing business. But every photographer has the right to have a different opinion about how to control his or her work subject to whatever rights or licenses s/he has granted others.

I do think this can play differently with video, largely because the original production company probably sank a lot of money into production, old video and film were very resource intensive and that motivates people to be a little more protective about trying squeeze more cost recovery out. Which means an awful lot of incredible stuff stays locked up to no one's enjoyment. And certainly music is an entirely different market.

So, Tony, sorry if that came out wrong in the original post; understand the effort it takes and enjoy seeing the old stuff

Yeah,he would been really young then.

I just watched the race, there were a lot of Canadians. This guy has to be one of them. Heard a few Quebecois names.

FGR01-
FTE, as usual, has answered your question perfectly.

not Murphy or Stacy or a local that i can remember. I was thinkin Jeff Surwall but it doesnt look like him at all.so please hurry its killin me.