Talk:Ray-Ban Wayfarer

This page has (almost certainly) been used as the basis for the following news article: Jenni Epperson (September 28, 2007). "Baby, I love your shades". Philippine Daily Inquirer. {{cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help) (See this article as it existed on that date.)

Blues Brothers?

My father disputes the fact that the Blues Brothers's iconic sunglasses were in fact Wayfarers. Could someone check this fact? --Jake Papas 18:51, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

To the best of my experience watching the movie and looking at album covers, Dan Akroyd does not wear the classic Wafarer, however John Belushi does wear them, and they are clearly seen in the opening scene of the movie. A close examination of the coloring (tortise shell), and the angle of the lenses to arm pieces on Belushi's glasses are most likely Wayfarers. Dan Akroyd's glasss may have indeed been RayBan brand but usually do not appear to be Wayfarers.

They both wear legitimate RayBan Wayfarers. Aykroid has an early make of the (failed) new Wayfarer line (possibly early Wayfarer 2's). Belushi has more traditional Wayfarers.

---

there are so many models of Ray Ban stuff, any kind. many colors of wayfarer (sometimes the top and arms are multicolored, i found a few months ago a blue colored one, and saw a red/yellow/orange probably for ladies).

I use a greenish round glasses model, from B&L, on a nickeled frame, rarely seen. found it for about 4 bucks in a flea market... and have a few Wayfarer somewhere.

unfortunately a huge quantity of pirated models appeared on the market recently, (even oficial dealers don't want to keep selling the originals for such reason, here)----

just see site like this one ... http://www.tradekey.com/ks-ray-ban/

Michael Ja(c)kson?

I noticed that Michael Jackson (whose name is spelled wrong) is credited as wearing Wayfarers, but to my knowledge he never did. Michael Jackson is well know for wearing Aviators, but I have never seen a photo of him wearing Wayfarers.

Reply:

Michael Jackson was a prolific Wayfarer wearer. During the release of his Bad albumn and tour (in the late 80s) Michael was regularly seen wearing Wayfarers in photographs, public appearances and television interviews. There are innumerable photographs and video clips of him wearing them during this period. In fact, the inner sleeve of the Bad LP features a photshoot of Jackson wearing Wayfarers.

e.g.

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a122/Lover_B/MJNO%20PIxs/img87.jpg http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a122/Lover_B/MJNO%20PIxs/98.jpg http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a122/Lover_B/MJNO%20PIxs/img55.jpg http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a122/Lover_B/MJNO%20PIxs/cimg675.jpg http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a122/Lover_B/MJNO%20PIxs/images2434.jpg http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a122/Lover_B/MJNO%20PIxs/1.jpg http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a122/Lover_B/MJNO%20PIxs/46.jpg

I removed the Michael Jackson reference along with many others while cleaning up this page. Now I think the basic criterion for inclusion is finding a wp:rs that says he was known for wearing wayfarers... many people wore them during this period, so not all can be included unless there's someone reliable (not you or me or another wikipedian) who can be cited to say he was known for doing so. I didn't find anything when I was googling for it. Calliopejen1 20:13, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Reply: There sure was a period when Jackson wore Wayfarers, but he is better known for sporting Aviator-style sunglasses. http://www.selectspecs.com/blog/michael-jackson-a-life-through-sunglasses/

He wore Wayfarers when he appeared on the Arsenio Hall Show http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLe71rT03Gg —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.238.193.113 (talk) 21:33, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

chloe sevigny

a while ago chloe sevigny started wearing a pair of white wayfarers (that she said her mother got for her in a thirft store in CT). this was the start of the recent revival of these kinds of sunglasses, as they became more and more popular in hollywood/ny after she started wearing them. this was noted in a few fashion magazines (that she started the trend). don't know if this should be mentioned here or it's notable/sourceable info. i did add her to the lsit of celebrity wearers. --Doinelita 02:39, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

less than zero

"constant namedropping in Bret Easton Ellis' fiction, particularly Less Than Zero."

I dispute this. There's a lot of sunglasses wearing mentioned, but he doesn't specify wayfarers in particular at all. He does, however, namedrop them a lot in "The Informers".

GA review

This is a short article, but that's OK at GA so long as the subject is adequately covered, In this case though, I don't believe that it is. The article does a reasonable job looking at the fashion and sales aspects of the Ray-Ban Wayfarers, but it's not comprehensive enough in dealing with other areas. For instance it tells me nothing about the technical specification of the lenses. What is it now? Is it the same now as when the design was introduced in 1952? What was Ray Stegeman's brief when he designed the glasses? Who was he designing them for? How were they initially received by the marketplace? Were they instantly successful?

So far as the material that is here is concerned, I've got a few more detailed comments:

• The fair use rationale for the Tom Cruise poster is missing a couple of points, like how much of the poster is being used for instance. I'd suggest taking a look at and using the {{Non-free use rationale}} template. (See Help:Image page.)
• "Wayfarers ... took advantage of new plastics technology". In what way? What new plastics technology?
• "In the following years, Ray-Ban sunglasses appeared in over 60 movies and television shows per year." That's the years following 1982 until when? It might be clearer to say something like "Between 1983 and ...".
• "Currently, Wayfarers are available in Original Wayfarer, New Wayfarer, and Wayfarer Folding styles." Currently as at when? 2007?
• I'd like to see the sales figures brought together in a chart or a table, as well being spread out in the article body.
• "After Tom Cruise wore Wayfarers in the 1983 movie Risky Business, sales soared to 360,000 per year". Was that 360,000 in 1983?
• In general, I think there needs to be some context for these sales figures. Is 360,000 good or bad in comparison with rival sunglasses during the same period?

In summary, I think this article needs a good deal more work before it can be listed as a GA. I hope that the editors will continue to work on it, and that it can soon be nominated again. In the meantime though I've got not no option other than to fail this nomination, because of the amount of work I think there is left still to be done. If you believe that this review is in error, please feel to take it to WP:GAR.

--Malleus Fatuarum 19:13, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Mythbusters' Adam Savage

Apparently Adam Savage wears Wayfarers. http://community.discovery.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/9801967776/m/1391909069 — NRen2k5^(TALK), 03:31, 3 April 2008 (UTC) <a href="http://www.oakley-rayban.com">oakley sunglasses</a>

External Links

I added an external link for the popular seller of Ray-Ban sunglasses. I thought that corresponded well with the rest of the article and the Ray-Ban article has that link, so I figured it would be helpful to include that on here as well. Sed2535 (talk) 04:33, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Audrey Hepburn & John F. Kennedy

The glasses in the pictures are apparently not Wayfarers. Hepburn's appear to be bigger and more rounded. Some people claim these were made by Oliver Goldsmith. The temples of Kennedy's don't look like Wayfarer temples at all. The references to Bob Dylan and Andy Warhol are questionable as well. Try to google for pictures of the wearing Wayfarers and all you'll find are pictures of them wearing similar styles.

Wayfarer temples used to look very much like the ones on Kennedy's shades. However the metal piece on authentic Ray Bans looked a bit different. Starman1984 (talk) 18:44, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Finally found a good picture of Hepburn's glasses in Breakfast at Tiffany's. These are definitely not Wayfarers. And I highly doubt the claim that this is a discontinued, oversized style. Too bad the only source for that claim is not available anymore. I guess most claims about icons of the 50's and 60's making them popular are just myths and this article helps to promote them. Great marketing for Ray-Ban. Starman1984 (talk) 00:12, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Upon further pondering, the statement that Hepburn wore a discontinued oversized style doesn't make much sense. If it was a different style, it would not have been called Wayfarer, even if it was a Ray-Ban model. Ray-Ban made many similar styles back then, such as the Meteor or the Myth.[1] Many manufacturers made models clearly inspired by different Ray-Ban models, Foremost for instance. [2]Starman1984 (talk) 18:21, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Design changes

Here's chronological list of changes that have been made to the design over the years:

• Shape of the temples changed significantly from thin and straight to wide and flared (happened between 1958 and 1966)
• Change from a small metal part on the temple to a Ray-Ban logo (1980s?)
• Introduction of a Ray-Ban logo on the left lens. (1990s?)

I still need quoteable sources and exact dates for all of these. If you happen come across any source of information, please let me know! Starman1984 (talk) 18:12, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Lead image

(moved from Roguegeek's talk page)

New Wayfarer

Wayfarer

Hi Roguegeek,

I strongly disagree with your choice of lead image for the Wayfarer article. First and foremost it doesn't show the actual subject of the article. The "New Wayfarer" model sure deserves it's mention and an image, but not at the top of the page. I think that position should be used for an image of an actual "Wayfarer" model, as it is a fashion classic and the reason the Wayfarer article exists in the first place.

Furthermore, the image quality of the picture you chose leaves a lot to be desired. On first glance it looks quite professional with its perfectly white background, but one can hardly make out any details. The whole front of the glasses appears as one solid black surface. The image in the "1990s decline and 2001 redesign" section is way better, even though the angle is odd.

The image of the 1980's sunglasses is not only representative of the 1980's. It's what Wayfarers looked like for decades. Moreover it shows off the subtleties of the design fairly well. In my opinion the encyclopedic value of the 80's "Wayfarer" image is far bigger than that of the "New Wayfarer" one.

Best regards

Starman1984 (talk) 15:16, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Hey Starman. I can see your point, but I'm gonna disagree here. I honestly don't see much of a difference between the classic and new Wayfarer glasses. I mean yeah, there are differences, but your typical reader (who Wikipedia is suppose to cater to and not the enthusiast) wouldn't know the difference. As far as the actual image quality goes between the two, it's minor and no where close to noticeable. What we have to ask ourselves is this. What is the more encyclopedic image? What shows the subject more clearly? When looked at it this way, my argument is for the white image because it 1) it displays more of the subject and 2) it displays only the subject.

So how do we solve this? Well, I suggest we take this conversation over to the article's talk page and see what other editors say about the issue. Let's build a consensus and however it goes, I'll be happy going in that direction. Thoughts? roguegeek (talk·cont) 16:37, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

alright. Let's move the discussion. Starman1984 (talk) 18:21, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Redid my photo. This new version should be more to your liking. Starman1984 (talk) 15:32, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Myths section

"The reason for this mistake stems from the fact that both Persol and Ray-Ban are owned by parent company Luxottica, and it is commonplace to see similar designs in both companies."

I read this and doubted the the truth behind it because Ray-Ban was not sold to Luxottica until 1999 according to the Ray-Ban article. Obviously, Breakfast at tiffany's came out before that. Can someone clarify? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.35.50.189 (talk) 01:52, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm removing the Persol reference. There's no source for this piece of information. Maybe somebody is trying to create a new myth. Hepburn's frames were supposedly made by Oliver Goldsmith, but I couldn't find a decent quoteable source for that yet... Starman1984 (talk) 18:14, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Name dropping

Large portions of this article are just name dropping. I think it's getting out of control. Everybody's trying to add his favorite Wayfarer-wearer to the list. To keep this article useful, I suggest we separate the name dropping from the more relevant pieces of information by creating a new section. Starman1984 (talk) 18:19, 2 April 2011 (UTC)