Highway shield "photoshoots"

[TheHighwayMan3561]

I've spent some time over the last year or so experimenting with the background and scenes alongside and behind route shields, to sort of blend the shield into the story the route is trying to tell, such as the scenes, the weather, etc.

Here are a few of them; let me know what you think.

[froggie]

Far better than photographing just the highway shield or sign.  Gives context.  It's been my modus operandi for years.

[jbnati27]

Very cool. Enjoyed the pics! Thanks!

[Alex]

Love the photos Pat!

[noelbotevera]

I'd say you could try using some different angles (that MN 61 shield for example), because sometimes it misleads the age of the sign (which, considering photos here, seems to be a compromise (between a scenery photoshoot and the sign itself)). Is the MN 61 shield really that old? I can't tell, because of the shade. Other than that, pitch perfect.

[AsphaltPlanet]

I prefer sign photos that show the road behind the sign as well.  Particularly if there is an interesting feature or an intersection behind the signage.

Thanks for the photos.

[Super Mateo]

I really like the variety of weather conditions you managed to capture.  Nice pictures.  I prefer these over closeups of the sign.  The sign itself tells very little of the story.  The scenery gives the sign meaning.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

I don't consider these as good, but here are a few more I've tried.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

I'd say you could try using some different angles (that MN 61 shield for example), because sometimes it misleads the age of the sign (which, considering photos here, seems to be a compromise (between a scenery photoshoot and the sign itself)). Is the MN 61 shield really that old? I can't tell, because of the shade. Other than that, pitch perfect.

That entire assembly is fresh out of the box as of fall 2015. It's an entirely new placement as there was nothing there at this location before then.

Thanks for the positive feedback guys, I appreciate it

[froggie]

For a lot of them, I think you're too close to the sign.  Back up a bit.

[jwolfer]

I like the road behind.. I took this 2 weeks ago


They were taken while driving in car. I like the junction spelled out. The other SR 2 pic was stopped and on foot

[TheHighwayMan3561]

Nice work, Wolf! 

[Quillz]

Some good ones already on the Shield Gallery...

[TravelingBethelite]

A couple from my collection:

GEDC1032 by CTRoads, on Flickr

GEDC1068 by CTRoads, on Flickr

CT 53 by CTRoads, on Flickr

Title I Dunno by CTRoads, on Flickr

[KEVIN_224]

Dale Mabry Boulevard, Tampa, September 13, 2009:



Same road, a day later:


Downtown Tampa, September 14, 2009, in Channelside section:


Heading back to Tampa International Airport (TPA), September 15, 2009:

[TheHighwayMan3561]

Here are some from last week's trip through Wisconsin.

[froggie]

Initial reaction:  #1 is eh.  #3 would have been better from further back so you can see more of the intersection.  #2 and #4 are okay, though #4 looks cleaner.  I'm guessing there was a bit of blowing snow that was causing some blur in #2.

[renegade]

Initial reaction:  #1 is eh.  #3 would have been better from further back so you can see more of the intersection.  #2 and #4 are okay, though #4 looks cleaner.  I'm guessing there was a bit of blowing snow that was causing some blur in #2.

Don't mind him ... I think they're cool pictures.  Thanks for going out in the cold to take them, and for posting them.

[Pete from Boston]

For me, context is central to any of my interest in roads (why is more important than what, in other words) so I appreciate what you're trying to do.

You have the same problem in some cases that we all have from time to time–backlighting, which is hard to remedy with a direct flash on retroreflective sheeting–but the pictures are really nice overall.

My approach to photographing most things that I take for "documentary" reasons has always been, when possible, a detailed close-up, and a broader establishing shot for context.

[wanderer2575]

My approach is pretty similar to yours.  With assemblies, I like to position the signpost 1/3 from the left or right border rather than centering it in the frame, unless I'm taking a photo of a sine salad.  I think off-center makes the photo more interesting.  I try to show some of the road alongside, but I'm overall more interested in the sign than the road so I actually get a little closer to the sign in my photos than you did.  I also prefer to show the road with no traffic, but the world often conspires against me on that one.

[Pete from Boston]

I like some traffic.  People and cars help give the photo period context over time.

[froggie]

With assemblies, I like to position the signpost 1/3 from the left or right border rather than centering it in the frame,

The "Rule of Thirds" at work (which you'll hear about in any photography class you may take).

[paulthemapguy]

With assemblies, I like to position the signpost 1/3 from the left or right border rather than centering it in the frame,

The "Rule of Thirds" at work (which you'll hear about in any photography class you may take).

What if the sign occupies the middle 1/3 of the frame?  That's about the amount of space I give when photographing signs ^_^

[froggie]

More effect and more context if it's off to the side.  You'll generally lose whatever else is to the sides or behind the sign if it's in the center third.

[paulthemapguy]

More effect and more context if it's off to the side.  You'll generally lose whatever else is to the sides or behind the sign if it's in the center third.

Well, yeah.  I'm starting to like that idea better too.  But in the pictures I've taken with the subject in the center, usually I let the sign take up about 1/3 the width of the frame.

Just got back from a drive west to Omaha.  To try and break the monotony of the drive through Iowa, I stopped to take some sign photos, inspired by the methods discussed in this thread.  How does this look?