The Clearview thread

[Pink Jazz]

Highway Gothic on highway signs, clearview on street signs. So it depends where.

Plus, it depends on the state and city too.  As far as I know some states are stricter and do not allow Clearview to be used on the local level, plus the adoption in states that do allow local use is generally not statewide.  Cities here in the Phoenix area that I know are using it currently are Phoenix, Chandler, and possibly Queen Creek.

[Roadsguy]

PennDOT still had at least one project with FHWA signs still in the pipeline (a repave of US 322 in Lebanon County with new distance signs), though they definitely use Clearview currently, with the US 222/322 DDI project near Ephrata recently being posted on ECMS with Clearview signage.

[PHLBOS]

While driving along I-95 in northern MD two weeks ago, I noticed that some of the new signs from the latest sign replacement contract are now erected.  Such use Clearview, but only for the control cities (per the IA).  In some instances, these new signs are actually replacing older signs that were all-Clearview except for the route shield numerals. 

Not 100% sure if these new Clearview signs was the result of MD reinstating the use of Clearview or if the design plans for such predated the now-temporary suspension for the Clearview font.

[1995hoo]

While driving along I-95 in northern MD two weeks ago, I noticed that some of the new signs from the latest sign replacement contract are now erected.  Such use Clearview, but only for the control cities (per the IA).  In some instances, these new signs are actually replacing older signs that were all-Clearview except for the route shield numerals. 

Not 100% sure if these new Clearview signs was the result of MD reinstating the use of Clearview or if the design plans for such predated the now-temporary suspension for the Clearview font.

The new signs going up on I-395 in Virginia all use Gothic, presumably because the HO/T lane project was approved during the period when the FHWA tried to ban Clearview. I'm pretty sure, based on a document I found online, that after Clearview was re-authorized, VDOT made it the standard again, so I wonder how soon it might be when they want to replace the signs. They were pretty aggressive about replacing signs with Clearview versions last time around, after all.

[PHLBOS]

The new signs going up on I-395 in Virginia all use Gothic, presumably because the HO/T lane project was approved during the period when the FHWA tried to ban Clearview. I'm pretty sure, based on a document I found online, that after Clearview was re-authorized, VDOT made it the standard again, so I wonder how soon it might be when they want to replace the signs. They were pretty aggressive about replacing signs with Clearview versions last time around, after all.

IIRC, when the IA was temporarily revoked, Clearview signs that were already erected were allowed to remain throughout their service life (barring damage, message revisions, etc.).  One would assume that similar would be the case for the recent Highway Gothic signs that were erected. 

I believe that VDOT now only uses the Clearview font per the IA.  Prior installs used the font beyond the IA parameters.

[1995hoo]

The new signs going up on I-395 in Virginia all use Gothic, presumably because the HO/T lane project was approved during the period when the FHWA tried to ban Clearview. I'm pretty sure, based on a document I found online, that after Clearview was re-authorized, VDOT made it the standard again, so I wonder how soon it might be when they want to replace the signs. They were pretty aggressive about replacing signs with Clearview versions last time around, after all.

IIRC, when the IA was temporarily revoked, Clearview signs that were already erected were allowed to remain throughout their service life (barring damage, message revisions, etc.).  One would assume that similar would be the case for the recent Highway Gothic signs that were erected. 

I believe that VDOT now only uses the Clearview font per the IA.  Prior installs used the font beyond the IA parameters.

Regarding your second paragraph, I believe that is correct based on the document I saw–very clear guidance as to when it could and could not be used and it complied with what the FHWA wants. Some of the prior installations complied too, but many didn't (and of course some of them showed up on the FHWA's site as examples of incorrect use).

Regarding your first paragraph, of course the signs would be allowed to remain, it's just a question of whether they'll be aggressive in replacing them like they were last time around. A lot of the signs on I-395's general-purpose lanes that were replaced with Clearview signs weren't particularly old and it appeared they were replaced solely for the sake of putting up Clearview versions, and that's what makes me wonder if the same might happen in a couple of years. From a practical taxpayer/toll-payer standpoint I feel like that would be a waste of money, but from a driver's standpoint I find Clearview to be substantially easier to read at a distance than Gothic (recognizing, of course, that I don't really need to read any of the signs on I-395 other than the toll rates and any signs advising of road or lane closures!).

[PHLBOS]

From a practical taxpayer/toll-payer standpoint I feel like that would be a waste of money, but from a driver's standpoint I find Clearview to be substantially easier to read at a distance than Gothic (recognizing, of course, that I don't really need to read any of the signs on I-395 other than the toll rates and any signs advising of road or lane closures!).

For mixed-case lettering on dark backgrounds per the IA; I agree when such is compared to the wider-stroked E-Modified.  OTOH, compared to Series E (be it standard or Enhanced (E letters w/E-Mod spacing)... such could be open for debate.  A follow-up to the earlier Texas A&M study, that triggered the temporary revocation of Clearview, on the Enhanced E font application should be in order IMHO

That said, I've seen several misapplications of the Clearview font on signs (many of the PA Turnpike's EMERGENCY STOPPING/PULL-OFF signs being one of them) that were actually harder to read from a distance than Highway Gothic (usually Series D).

[Bobby5280]

Misuse of type on highway signs is not exclusive to just one type family. That's the fault of the sign designer. Not the typeface.

One stupid error I still see from time to time (both in Clearview and Series Gothic) is the practice of setting a cap letter at a certain height but then scaling the lowercase characters down to 75% of their normal size. It's a misunderstanding of FHWA regulation verbiage about highway sign fonts (the x-height of lowercase characters has to be at least 75% the M-height of uppercase characters). Clearview, unaltered more than complies with that spec while Series Gothic almost complies. It is not necessary for a sign designer to select the lowercase characters of a message and shrink them out of their normal native proportions. Street name signs all over my town are afflicted with that idiocy. I think the city of Lawton has standardized this practice because it allows them to use the old, narrow street name blades meant for uppercase only type. Modern street name signs using mixed case lettering have to be taller to allow for the descenders of lowercase letters.

I've seen plenty of big green signs along Interstate highways in Oklahoma copying that lowercase sizing goof. I've seen them in Pennsylvania too.

Lots of highway signs have bad letter spacing. I swear here in Oklahoma ODOT must have their sign fabricators peeling and sticking letters onto big green signs one reflective cut vinyl letter at a time. The quality of vinyl they've been using lately is garbage too. They're using the high intensity prismatic sheeting on the backgrounds, but basic "engineer's grade" white reflective vinyl for the lettering and borders. The stuff doesn't last outdoors for more than a couple or so years before it starts cracking and peeling.

[vdeane]

Misuse of type on highway signs is not exclusive to just one type family. That's the fault of the sign designer. Not the typeface.

One stupid error I still see from time to time (both in Clearview and Series Gothic) is the practice of setting a cap letter at a certain height but then scaling the lowercase characters down to 75% of their normal size. It's a misunderstanding of FHWA regulation verbiage about highway sign fonts (the x-height of lowercase characters has to be at least 75% the M-height of uppercase characters). Clearview, unaltered more than complies with that spec while Series Gothic almost complies. It is not necessary for a sign designer to select the lowercase characters of a message and shrink them out of their normal native proportions. Street name signs all over my town are afflicted with that idiocy. I think the city of Lawton has standardized this practice because it allows them to use the old, narrow street name blades meant for uppercase only type. Modern street name signs using mixed case lettering have to be taller to allow for the descenders of lowercase letters.

I've seen plenty of big green signs along Interstate highways in Oklahoma copying that lowercase sizing goof. I've seen them in Pennsylvania too.

Lots of highway signs have bad letter spacing. I swear here in Oklahoma ODOT must have their sign fabricators peeling and sticking letters onto big green signs one reflective cut vinyl letter at a time. The quality of vinyl they've been using lately is garbage too. They're using the high intensity prismatic sheeting on the backgrounds, but basic "engineer's grade" white reflective vinyl for the lettering and borders. The stuff doesn't last outdoors for more than a couple or so years before it starts cracking and peeling.

It does seem like it happens more often and/or looks worse when it does on Clearview signs, though.

[PHLBOS]

Misuse of type on highway signs is not exclusive to just one type family. That's the fault of the sign designer. Not the typeface.

Yes and no. 

Yes in regards to misapplications or wrong font subtype selected (example: using Series B numerals on 3d-I-shields) being the fault of the sign designer and/or agency's own specs. 

No in the fact that the Clearview font was created for the purpose of addressing readability issues associated with the Series E-Modified Highway Gothic font, post-button-copy... particularly the halo-effect on the lower-case lettering.  The wider-stroked E-Modified font was designed to accommodate button reflectors (aka button-copy).  Modern reflectivity technology for sign lettering (except for those from the NYSTA) eliminated the need of providing button reflectors for said-lettering/numerals.  As a result, the demand for button-copy lettering/numerals for all FHWA fonts came to a halt & production was disontinued.  IIRC, the newest button-copy signs presently out in the field date back to the early/mid-90s.

Several agencies on their own, started using the thinner-stroked Series E font for missed-case applications (control-city listings) on their signs instead to reduce the halo-effect associated with the E-Modified lower-case letters.

[Bobby5280]

It does seem like it happens more often and/or looks worse when it does on Clearview signs, though.

Reflective vinyl lettering is going to age at the same rate regardless if it is set in Series Gothic or Clearview. The only way the deterioration process would speed up at all is if the lettering was set in delicate thin strokes, like a fancy wedding script or something. But no one does that on highway signs.

No in the fact that the Clearview font was created for the purpose of addressing readability issues associated with the Series E-Modified Highway Gothic font, post-button-copy... particularly the halo-effect on the lower-case lettering.  The wider-stroked E-Modified font was designed to accommodate button reflectors (aka button-copy).  Modern reflectivity technology for sign lettering (except for those from the NYSTA) eliminated the need of providing button reflectors for said-lettering/numerals.  As a result, the demand for button-copy lettering/numerals for all FHWA fonts came to a halt & production was disontinued.  IIRC, the newest button-copy signs presently out in the field date back to the early/mid-90s.

I'm aware of that history. Yet is has nothing to do with goofball design errors currently made on highway signs. Or even errors that occurred in the past.

A hack "designer" can artificially squeeze any highway sign font in the computer to force it to fit a given space. No typeface is magically immune that garbage. Any font can be badly kerned. Letters can be applied to a sign panel crooked, regardless of what typeface was used. No typeface is immune to poor composition. I've seen plenty of old button copy Series Gothic signs that looked horribly atrocious -hello California!

[PHLBOS]

Yet is has nothing to do with goofball design errors currently made on highway signs. Or even errors that occurred in the past.

I don't believe that anybody, myself included was saying that all goofball designs errors are the result of a font itself.

A hack "designer" can artificially squeeze any highway sign font in the computer to force it to fit a given space. No typeface is magically immune that garbage. Any font can be badly kerned. Letters can be applied to a sign panel crooked, regardless of what typeface was used. No typeface is immune to poor composition. I've seen plenty of old button copy Series Gothic signs that looked horribly atrocious.

I've seen some poor sign layouts dating back to the 70s as well.

The above is one reason why design/engineering firms are supposed to be required to conduct Quality Assurance checks on all of their design plans and specifications (aka construction documents) prior to such going to procurement for bidding.

As far as the hack designer manipulating SignCAD or equivalent is concerned; most sign plans not only include a graphic of the panel but also detailed spacing dimensions for each line, letter, numeral, route shield etc.  The listed dimensions take precedence over the graphic especially if the latter appears not to scale.  The criteria for said-dimensions are to be set per agency/DOT standards.  Additionally, many agencies will go one step further and state what font width type should be used and for which application.

Even if the standards are properly outlined in the construction documents; fabrication errors can still be made even after the submitted shop drawings are reviewed & approved.  The resident engineer on site is supposed to identify any irregularities of the signs panels/messages prior to such being erected.

That said, & such has been described all over this thread, is that the Clearview font was implemented via the IA to address one particular readability issue for one particular case scenario.  Such was never intended to be applied across-the-board for every signing situation; which was what many agencies & designers wound up initially doing & doing rather badly in some instances... especially during the IA's early years.  Adding insult to injury IMHO, and such wasn't flagged in the IA guidelines, was many agencies using or allowing the use of taller/larger text on top of utilizing the new font.   The whole purpose of using the Clearview font for control city lettering in the first place was so that one did not have to increase the letter heights to make the text more readable.  Such made for some unnecessarily-gargantuan-sized sign panels that dwarfed the route shield(s) in many instances.

Needless to say, there was definitely a learning curve of sorts in terms of using the Clearview font (such have different widths just like Highway Gothic).  Many agencies, PennDOT & PTC being two of them, eventually got the hang of properly using & applying the font and the signs didn't look as amateurish as their earlier installations.

That said & IMHO, Clearview for mixed-case lettering on dark backgrounds per the IA are more readable form a distance than Series E-Modified.  However, all-caps & numerals in Highway Gothic (regardless of which Series) are still more readable than their Clearview counterparts (in similar width series).

[DaBigE]

The above is one reason why design/engineering firms are supposed to be required to conduct Quality Assurance checks on all of their design plans and specifications (aka construction documents) prior to such going to procurement for bidding.

Even if the standards are properly outlined in the construction documents; fabrication errors can still be made even after the submitted shop drawings are reviewed & approved.  The resident engineer on site is supposed to identify any irregularities of the signs panels/messages prior to such being erected.

The latter is where I most frequently see things go wrong. The plans are correct, but the fabricator screws up the installation. And, unfortunately, more often than not, signs don't take a high priority by the site engineer.

Last year, I had a project where both divided highway warning signs were wrong. One was installed upside-down, the other was backwards (European, if you will). In the second case, that missed QA by the sign shop, the installer, and the site engineer. Sadly, it took weeks for it to get corrected. Both were shown correctly on the project plans.

[vdeane]

It does seem like it happens more often and/or looks worse when it does on Clearview signs, though.

Reflective vinyl lettering is going to age at the same rate regardless if it is set in Series Gothic or Clearview. The only way the deterioration process would speed up at all is if the lettering was set in delicate thin strokes, like a fancy wedding script or something. But no one does that on highway signs.

I wasn't talking about reflective vinyl lettering, and neither were you, at least for most of your post.  Clearview seems to be misused more often than the FHWA fonts and looks worse when it doesn't than an equivalent misuse of the FHWA fonts.  That's why the Thruway Clearview signs are so atrocious (some are so bad I want to throw up) while their modern FHWA signs look fine, despite being otherwise identical (down to non-reflective lettering that the Thruway stubbornly still uses).

[Bobby5280]

As far as the hack designer manipulating SignCAD or equivalent is concerned; most sign plans not only include a graphic of the panel but also detailed spacing dimensions for each line, letter, numeral, route shield etc.  The listed dimensions take precedence over the graphic especially if the latter appears not to scale.  The criteria for said-dimensions are to be set per agency/DOT standards.  Additionally, many agencies will go one step further and state what font width type should be used and for which application.

That is what is supposed to happen. But it's clear to me the practice is not being followed in all cases. I'd like to see the plan sheets for some of the badly composed big screen signs here in Oklahoma. Like this one for instance:
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2870007,-97.5998419,3a,75y,187.44h,91.56t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soXtHiwKsuF-CIW4sYsBVCw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656.

The "TURNPIKE" lettering is artificially stretched out of normal proportions. The spacing of "H.E. Bailey Turnpike" is awful: there are giant gaps between the words, yet the lettering runs right up next to the edge of the panel. That is piss poor use of negative space. The down arrows aren't even placed properly. Obviously that "composition" was just slapped together, like so many other signs from ODOT. If there is a plan sheet for that sign that has every letter position called out just like the sign was fabricated then I would be amazed.

It's certainly possible for sign fabricators to disregard the dimension numbers on a sign sketch and merely "eyeball" the placement of lettering and other elements on a sign panel. The thing is the numbers on the sketch actually help speed up the vinyl application process. There's no guessing or extra measuring involved. Listing the numerical position of each individual letter is overkill, IMHO. Normally vinyl lettering is cut in a vinyl plotter in whole lines of copy and applied to the sign face in that manner. I've seen some sign panels in Oklahoma where the lettering looks like it was applied one letter at a time (which is freaking stupid). There's one sign here in Lawton on I-44 that has words with letters of different sizes. Check out the over-sized "l" in Great Plains or the huge "r" in "Auditorium." Some of the letters are leaning slightly, which makes for a comically wacky look:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.6289186,-98.3873363,3a,75y,196.04h,89.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGlv5rfXc8okKNAEzyW_VYw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[Scott5114]

Those gross TURNPIKE banners have been replaced by less grotesque ones in all-caps Clearview, fortunately.

J.N. Winkler theorized that ODOT intentionally allows crappy signs to go through, in order to keep costs down for smaller signmaking businesses by avoiding making them redo work. If so, that's quite the sop to the private sector.

As for that "comically wacky" look, how about this sign that graces one of the most-used exits to Oklahoma City's biggest tourism district? https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4663616,-97.5000656,3a,20.2y,338.18h,101.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDdAOErz-N-QSvrKX9Zn7lw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[J N Winkler]

J.N. Winkler theorized that ODOT intentionally allows crappy signs to go through, in order to keep costs down for smaller signmaking businesses by avoiding making them redo work. If so, that's quite the sop to the private sector.

This is what I was told years ago by Randy Hersh.  He didn't cite a source, but I suspect he was probably told that directly by a signing engineer at Oklahoma DOT.  He tried to establish contacts in person with engineers responsible for guide signing at the various state DOTs--e.g. Richard Moeur at Arizona DOT (since left to work for a consulting firm), Mike Weiss at Minnesota DOT (passed away in 2011), Arlen Tappan at Kansas DOT (long retired, now dead, I think).

Just at the level of letting plans--leaving the actual installed signs out of consideration--there is a lot of variability with Oklahoma DOT according to who compiles the sign designs.  Among consultants, TEC probably produces the cleanest signing plans.

Oklahoma is a GuidSIGN state, and a typical GuidSIGN sign panel detail includes a table of letter and object lefts below the sign sketch.  SignCAD also has the ability to show letter and object lefts but generally does so in the sketch itself rather than a separate table, with each letter and object having the corresponding measurement written diagonally above in small type.  However, SignCAD drawings with these notations are very much in the minority.  Minnesota DOT is the only agency I know of that uses them routinely.

[odditude]

"comically wacky"

it reminds me of a ransom note.

[Roadsguy]

"comically wacky"

it reminds me of a ransom note.

Reminds me of that old annoying SpongeBob meme:

sHeRIDaN AVe

[Bobby5280]

Those gross TURNPIKE banners have been replaced by less grotesque ones in all-caps Clearview, fortunately.

Not all of them. That one I referenced in Google Maps at the North end of the H.E. Bailey Turnpike is still there. On recent drives between Lawton and Joplin as well as Lawton to the Tulsa area I swear I saw a couple others with the abnormally, artificially stretched type.

J.N. Winkler theorized that ODOT intentionally allows crappy signs to go through, in order to keep costs down for smaller signmaking businesses by avoiding making them redo work. If so, that's quite the sop to the private sector.

If that's the case they need to sub-contract to a better sign company. One with some graphic designers equipped with actual human eye sight. Stevie Wonder could design better signs than that.

As for that "comically wacky" look, how about this sign that graces one of the most-used exits to Oklahoma City's biggest tourism district? https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4663616,-97.5000656,3a,20.2y,338.18h,101.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDdAOErz-N-QSvrKX9Zn7lw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Holy shit, that's bad! Oh my God. That is one hell of a Frankenstein lettering job, composed with a grab bag of letters of different sizes. It's almost a miracle they kept the lettering within the same type family. I wouldn't put it past ODOT to make some signs with letters mixed in both Clearview and Series Gothic. That might go farther for creating a ransom note visual.

It all but looks like they made the sign like that on purpose as a virtual F.U. to somebody. I don't know. Maybe a supervisor somewhere. But they're taking their anger out on the poor motorists having to see that garbage.

[Scott5114]

"comically wacky"

it reminds me of a ransom note.

Reminds me of that old annoying SpongeBob meme:

sHeRIDaN AVe

Let's go downtown

[jakeroot]

Bored...

[tolbs17]

I've seen an article say that clearview reduced the crashes compared to highway gothic by like i think 40% or something. So is it true that Highway Gothic is really better?

[MNHighwayMan]

I've seen an article say that clearview reduced the crashes compared to highway gothic by like i think 40% or something. So is it true that Highway Gothic is really better?

Dude, just read the thread.

[tolbs17]

I think one of the reasons many agencies "mis-applied" the use of Clearview was because of the rule adopted last decade forbidding the use of all caps legends in many applications -like street name signs for instance. Clearview was designed from the outset with a complete basic character set. Most weights have "highway gothic" never had lowercase characters. Not every agency updated to "Series 2000" fonts, which included lowercase characters in more of the fonts. They were stuck with all caps versions. This figures in with municipalities adopting Clearview for their street name signs. Anyway, I think the design of lowercase characters in these Series 2000 fonts were not well done. I have several different flavors of "highway gothic" in my own collection; they all have much tighter default spacing than Clearview.

This probably answers my question. Thanks. I hate reading long threads by the way.