The Best of... Clearview?

[mcdonaat]

I know people here HATE Clearview with a passion, but in north Louisiana, the LaDOTD has actually done an outstanding job with it. The route markers on the signs are in FHWA Type D, and the words are in Clearview. I call them ClearHybrids, and they work pretty well. Posting a few pictures below:

^Clearview North with FHWA 167^

^Clearview cities, with 1/2 mile mark. Looks pretty accurate^

So the goal is to post photos where Clearview is used, and it looks pretty good. Also would like to know if there are any ClearHybrids out there!

[NE2]

That's how it's supposed to be done. http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/clearviewdesignfaqs/index.htm#q3

[mcdonaat]

That's how it's supposed to be done. http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/clearviewdesignfaqs/index.htm#q3

Tell that to the same fine folks who Clearviewed I-10/I-12 in Baton Rouge. The route shields, negative contrast... everything is Clearview. Even the speed advisory signs.

[PurdueBill]

It would be even better if Clearview users would follow the guidance that numerals and symbols should not be in Clearview.  The same FAQ shows examples of it being done right (exit tab and bottom line of sign in FHWA). 

The photo of the new sign on I-71 in Columbus that now has the bottom line greened out in another thread is an example of very small Clearview numerals (mainly in the fractions) not doing the job well--FHWA numerals would be preferable.

That's how it's supposed to be done. http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/clearviewdesignfaqs/index.htm#q3

Tell that to the same fine folks who Clearviewed I-10/I-12 in Baton Rouge. The route shields, negative contrast... everything is Clearview. Even the speed advisory signs.

The FHWA should make them redo the offending parts of the signs at their own expense.  The rules aren't that unclear or hard to follow.  Negative contrast Clearview, using it in route shields, etc. shows ignorance and laziness.

[agentsteel53]

I've always thought Texas did a pretty good job with their Clearview signs.  they're new and feature '70 spec shields, but otherwise they look good.

[J N Winkler]

I've always thought Texas did a pretty good job with their Clearview signs.  they're new and feature '70 spec shields, but otherwise they look good.

Who are you and what did you do with Jake?

[Ian]

Even though I really dislike this font, here are some well laid out Clearview signs...

[DTComposer]

That's how it's supposed to be done. http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/clearviewdesignfaqs/index.htm#q3

So in reading that document, am I to understand that the only time Clearview showed an improvement over the FHWA font was on mixed-case positive-contrast signs, and then the increase was 5%, and only for older drivers with failing vision, and then partly because of the use of retroreflective sheeting?

It says (again, if I'm reading correctly) that improvements over FHWA were not found with all-caps  or negative-contrast signs, and that narrower versions of Clearview haven't even been tested?

I wasn't a fan of Clearview before, and now it seems like we're needlessly creating a design issue (multiple fonts) that doesn't really provide a significant benefit.

I know I may be late to the party in realizing this, I just had never seen it spelled out before.

[1995hoo]

I think most of the new signs on the I-495 portion of the Beltway are well-done. Just about all the signs have been replaced within the past year as part of the reconstruction project. I don't particularly care for the new boxy-style gantries they're using, but the signs look good.

Two samples, both taken several months ago:

That's how it's supposed to be done. http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/clearviewdesignfaqs/index.htm#q3

Funny, I recognize several of the "Not Acceptable" signs shown at that link from encountering them in my day-to-day driving. 

[myosh_tino]

If there has to be a sign that can be classified as the "best of clearview", this one has my vote.  Clearview only for the control cities and FHWA font for everything else although I can't tell if "TOLL ROAD" is clearview or Series E.  The sign pictured in the original post does not qualify as "best of clearview" in my book because the "1/2 MILE" is in clearview and not Series E.

[Special K]

That's how it's supposed to be done. http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/clearviewdesignfaqs/index.htm#q3

So in reading that document, am I to understand that the only time Clearview showed an improvement over the FHWA font was on mixed-case positive-contrast signs, and then the increase was 5%, and only for older drivers with failing vision, and then partly because of the use of retroreflective sheeting?

It says (again, if I'm reading correctly) that improvements over FHWA were not found with all-caps  or negative-contrast signs, and that narrower versions of Clearview haven't even been tested?

I wasn't a fan of Clearview before, and now it seems like we're needlessly creating a design issue (multiple fonts) that doesn't really provide a significant benefit.

I know I may be late to the party in realizing this, I just had never seen it spelled out before.

Where do you see that 5% figure?  The interim approval letter I'm reading cites figures in the 11-16% range over a variety of scenarios.

[Road Hog]

The kerning (spacing of letters) makes a difference. The Ohio sign above is harder to read because the letters are too widely spaced.

[PurdueBill]

Where do you see that 5% figure?  The interim approval letter I'm reading cites figures in the 11-16% range over a variety of scenarios.

The 5% value seems to come from the FAQ page linked above:

4.  Q: Under what conditions can I expect to see a benefit from using Clearview?

A: The greatest improvement in legibility distance afforded by Clearview was realized by older drivers with poor vision (worse than 20/40 visual acuity) when mixed-case legends (those composed of an initial upper-case letter followed by lower-case letters) were viewed under vehicle headlamp illumination during nighttime conditions (an increase in legibility distance of approximately 5 percent for signs that are not otherwise illuminated). A like improvement was not demonstrated for other types of legends that use all upper-case lettering, such as action or distance messages or those found on standard signs.

If there has to be a sign that can be classified as the "best of clearview", this one has my vote.  Clearview only for the control cities and FHWA font for everything else although I can't tell if "TOLL ROAD" is clearview or Series E.  The sign pictured in the original post does not qualify as "best of clearview" in my book because the "1/2 MILE" is in clearview and not Series E.

TOLL ROAD looks Clearview, when it probably should be FHWA since it's all caps, but overall the sign looks pretty good.  I wish Ohio would do its Clearview like this if it insists on doing Clearview--FHWA lettering for all numerals and for distances.  I have the feeling that a lot of jurisdictions using Clearview figure that if they paid for the license, they need to use it as much as possible!

[PHLBOS]

Even though I really dislike this font, here are some well laid out Clearview signs...

Exit 202 tab: Illegal use of Clearview.

TOLL ROAD lettering: Illegal use of Clearview.

Acceptable use of Clearview.

[PurdueBill]

I'm conjecturing but I bet that somewhere in the PA specs it says that FHWA lettering should be used for numerals, for exit tab text, for action messages and distances--but the TOLL ROAD line doesn't fit into any of those categories and it slid by in Clearview.  I'm tempted to let it slide (just this once) though because PA seems to be making the effort to use FHWA lettering when appropriate, while most other places are using Clearview in all sorts of bad places (dark text on light background, inside shields, in exit tabs, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.) that PA at least seems to try to avoid.

Separate from the Clearview part but obvious in the comparison of the 3 pics is that the latest Ohio exit tabs appear very, very crowded--except the new LEFT exit tabs which are conversely ginormous.  (Surprisingly, "ginormous" passes spell-check in Firefox all on its own, while "Clearview" doesn't.)

[J N Winkler]

I'm conjecturing but I bet that somewhere in the PA specs it says that FHWA lettering should be used for numerals, for exit tab text, for action messages and distances--but the TOLL ROAD line doesn't fit into any of those categories and it slid by in Clearview.  I'm tempted to let it slide (just this once) though because PA seems to be making the effort to use FHWA lettering when appropriate, while most other places are using Clearview in all sorts of bad places (dark text on light background, inside shields, in exit tabs, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.) that PA at least seems to try to avoid.

If PennDOT regulates these choices of FHWA and Clearview through specifications, I am not aware of it.  Practice varies by district:  some use Clearview for all-uppercase legend while others don't.  I have even seen PennDOT signing plans which called for Clearview digits in route markers, but I think these may very well have been caught before the signs were fabricated since I can't think offhand of any examples of PennDOT guide-sign shields with Clearview.

[PurdueBill]

PTC seems to like Clearview, darn them:



Maybe PennDOT is just fortunate enough to have some people who know what they are doing in the right places. 

[1995hoo]

FWIW, the OP asked for examples of signs where Clearview looks good, not necessarily signs that comply with every nitpicky FHWA rule.

[PHLBOS]

PTC seems to like Clearview, darn them:

For a while, PTC went through (or is still going through) a Clearview Gone Wild phase where just about everything except route shields and Speed Limit/Ramp Exit Speed signs was done in Clearview; colors, all-caps be damned.  Sadly, the recently-erected BGS' that were erected for PA 72 (Exit 266) is all Clearview except the PA 72 shield.

Maybe PennDOT is just fortunate enough to have some people who know what they are doing in the right places. 

You spoke a tad too soon.  The recently-replaced BGS for Exit 16A (I-76 East/PA 23) off I-476 North features Clearview on the Exit tab as well as the control destinations.  I'm not 100% sure, but I will have to recheck to see if Clearview was also used on the cardinal (EAST) as well.  PennDOT's done that on some other BGS' as well.

[myosh_tino]

FWIW, the OP asked for examples of signs where Clearview looks good, not necessarily signs that comply with every nitpicky FHWA rule.

Then I will reiterate, the sign that has the Clearview fraction is *not* a "best of Clearview" because Clearview numerals are ugly!

[PurdueBill]

Maybe PennDOT is just fortunate enough to have some people who know what they are doing in the right places. 

You spoke a tad too soon.  The recently-replaced BGS for Exit 16A (I-76 East/PA 23) off I-476 North features Clearview on the Exit tab as well as the control destinations.  I'm not 100% sure, but I will have to recheck to see if Clearview was also used on the cardinal (EAST) as well.  PennDOT's done that on some other BGS' as well.

Yeah, that's why I said _some_, not "all". 

The PA Clearview examples above (not the Turnpike one) are appropriate for this thread in my opinion--it's tolerable to me and laid out well and not overused.

[national highway 1]

Even though I really dislike this font, here are some well laid out Clearview signs...

Exit 202 tab: Illegal use of Clearview.

However, I've seen Arizona use Clearview exit tabs on their signs as evidenced on this sign which is actually placed in California:

(credits to Bigmikelakers)
Are Clearview exit numbers approved?

[PurdueBill]

Are Clearview exit numbers approved?

The FHWA FAQ seems to suggest that they are not, since it says that numerals should be in the traditional lettering, but that is probably the most frequently violated rule if it is a rule....nearly every Clearview (except PennDOT, and even they sometimes do) user seems to use Clearview for everything on a BGS--exit numbers, all-caps action messages included.  Route numbers are the one exception where most states have gotten it right but there are some that seem to have not gotten the memo (Louisiana I-10 and I-12, many Michigan shields from early Clearview days, we are looking at you) for all their signage.

[Dr Frankenstein]

Most Clearview signs in Québec and Vermont look nice. But I might be biased in favour of that typeface.

[Scott5114]

If there has to be a sign that can be classified as the "best of clearview", this one has my vote.  Clearview only for the control cities and FHWA font for everything else although I can't tell if "TOLL ROAD" is clearview or Series E.  The sign pictured in the original post does not qualify as "best of clearview" in my book because the "1/2 MILE" is in clearview and not Series E.

I take issue with this one because of how large the destinations are in comparison to the shields and other text on the sign. It looks misproportioned. The Ohio example is more correct in that regard.