Sign borders

[Quillz]

Okay, here's a pretty oddball one...

What kind of sign borders do you prefer? There are quite a few variants I can think of...

Double-bordered white signs

Seem to be the most common, and go back to the earliest signs, as far as I know. It's my understanding black cannot be used as an "outside" border color because it would be invisible at night, hence the double border (white outer border, black inner border). There seem to be many variations on the thickness. Most common is probably .5'' outer border and .5'' inner border, but sometimes the SHS calls for .375'' outer border and .625'' inner border.

California used to use a rather thick double border, roughly .5625'' outer border and .75'' inner border. I don't know if this is still being used on new signs anymore, but I believe all cutout US route shields in California still have these dimensions. Combined with the usage of Caltrans' D(M) for numeral legend, it gives the shields (and any old signs) a very "heavy" look that I think increases legibility.

Single-border colored signs

The other common variant, seems to be in place anytime a sign has a non-white background. Almost always has a thicker white border, usually anywhere from .75''-1'' thick, although some are thinner, around .5''.

Of course, I've seen many variations. Many of the street blades around here have a blue background, and have the double border setup, with a blue outer border and white inner border. But that's an old style, and the newer style street blades have the single, thicker white border.

---

Of course, every so often, I come across signs that lack borders altogether. The oldest button copy signs in California actually deliberately did not have a bottom border, the idea being that it wouldn't be seen up high on a sign gantry that had a walkway and lighting.

---

The variant I like best would the fairly standard white signs with .375/.625 borders. I think it's a nice compromise between aesthetics and legibility.

[oscar]

I really, really don't understand what you're talking about. For example, are you talking about borders around letters on a sign? (We were talking in another thread about a sign whose white letters had a single black border.) Or borders on the edge of a sign?

Spme illustrative photos, with closeups of the different border options, would really help here.

[MNHighwayMan]

I'm pretty sure he's talking about the borders on the edges of signs. A .5" border around lettering would look ridiculously horrible.

The MnDOT version of the Standard Signs Manual specifies, for the state highway marker, .63" borders for 24" shields and .75" borders for 36" shields. Also of note, the manual actually specifies that the color is gold, not yellow.

In practice (I just took a ruler to some of the signs in my collection, all of which are 24"), I find that it varies from anywhere from slightly under half an inch to three-quarters of an inch.

Now onto your actual question, the ones made to spec look the best (though that's probably from a combination of factors), but the ones with slightly thinner borders don't look too bad either.

[Quillz]

I really, really don't understand what you're talking about. For example, are you talking about borders around letters on a sign? (We were talking in another thread about a sign whose white letters had a single black border.) Or borders on the edge of a sign?

Spme illustrative photos, with closeups of the different border options, would really help here.

I'm referring to the actual borders of signs. Cutout shields would apply, too.

Here's the "thick borders" that California signs and shields often use:



Many older signs throughout the state have borders of that thickness, too. .5625'' outer white border, .75'' inner black border. I think this produces the best-looking sign borders aesthetically, but at small sizes, can make it harder to see the numeral legend within.