Old standard typefaces

[afiler]

I'm trying to get an idea of what typefaces were standardized by states/provinces/etc that differ from the current FHWA-approved fonts (so I suppose technically that would include Series A too). If anyone has pointers to digital versions of any of these fonts, I'd appreciate it. I see the AARoads shield generator has the 1926 MUTCD font and 1942 Oregon font built in (is there a .ttf of these available?).

I'd especially like to find the British Columbia font, but I've never seen that digitized, nor have I seen the whole font specified in print form. I'd digitize it if someone could point me to a nice scan of all the glyphs (or even point me to a book in a Vancouver library that I could drive up and scan).

I see these numeral-only fonts are included in the shield generator (did full fonts of these exist?): 1950 Federal, 1928 California US, 1934 California, 1949 California, 1946 Maryland, 1961 Maryland, 1924 Oklahoma, 1949 Texas

1926 MUTCD:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/afiler/3645179644/

Maine:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/iccdude/4120497831/

Massachusetts(???):
(bottom sign)

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3521.msg107555#msg107555
Is this the same font as Maine's? The M looks similar.

Montana:

http://www.alpsroads.net/roads/mt/misc/

British Columbia:


https://www.aaroads.com/blog/2010/05/25/alaska-highway-vi/

Seattle:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/lukobe/3689041036/
I've photographed nearly all of the letters of the Seattle alphabet. I think I'm missing Z in the capitals, and a few lower case letters.

Washington State (numerals only?):

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3528.msg81874#msg81874

Michigan:

www.aaroads.com/shields/show.php?image=MI19690231

1942 Oregon/Clay County, North Dakota (Current):

http://www.flickr.com/photos/afiler/6734804643/
(Please correct me if I'm wrong about this font being the same as the "1942 Oregon" in the AARoads shield generator.)

Maryland:




I'm not sure if these are different weights of the same typeface or what.
http://www.alpsroads.net/roads/md/us_40/c.html

Texas:

www.aaroads.com/shields/show.php?image=TX19380001
Texas numerals:

[Scott5114]

In case you weren't aware, the Massachusetts sign was made by Jake and ehm, somehow found itself installed there.

[Alps]

In MD, the 295 is a one-off. Also, Baltimore has a unique font:


Massachusetts:



Rhode Island:

[Ian]

New York:


Pennsylvania (the left sign has the custom PennDOT numerals while the right sign has the standard FHWA fonts):

[Quillz]

If anyone needs Series A, lemme know. I can send you the copy I have.

[Eth]

More Maryland:

[Alps]

If anyone needs Series A, lemme know. I can send you the copy I have.

I have the "T2000DOT" fonts, whatever set that came out of. It would be awesome if someone could or had added onto that or another FHWA font clone with Series A and D Modified, not to mention the original block fonts.

[Quillz]

If anyone needs Series A, lemme know. I can send you the copy I have.

I have the "T2000DOT" fonts, whatever set that came out of. It would be awesome if someone could or had added onto that or another FHWA font clone with Series A and D Modified, not to mention the original block fonts.

That's from the Virginia DoT. I have the PIXhighways2002 set, which includes B-F, as well as Saa, based on some older standards, but it does include Series A. However, I don't have D Modified at all, as it's never been included with any standard set. Seems to be a creation of Caltrans and some other departments.

[wytout]

Pennsylvania (the left sign has the custom PennDOT numerals while the right sign has the standard FHWA fonts):

The sign on the left looks like Series C, and the one on the right looks like series D

[Kacie Jane]

The sign on the left looks like Series C, and the one on the right looks like series D

If you look at the 2, there's a definite difference between the sign on the left and the standard FHWA font.  The bottom has more of a "hump" to it, rather than a smooth decline to the bottom left.

[afiler]

Here are some more nabbed from the Best of Road Signs thread. It's starting to seem like there were some alternate fonts (or at least letterforms) used by many states. I've noticed the same low-crossbar A pop up in a few places. I also wonder is whether some of these (like the Delaware "4" seen below and the Montana "2") were just modifications of the FHWA fonts to make hand-painting easier. I'll admit I don't know a lot about how roads signs were hand painted, though Seattle still has a number of obviously hand-painted signs made by both the the city and the state.

Virginia:

Massachusetts:

Here's the distinctive "4" I've seen before:

An obviously hand-painted sign from Ohio:

Maine again:

Michigan:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ftballfan/5694449819/

More from Baltimore:

Not sure if this is a standard font or a one-off:

Not a statewide standard font, but I swear I've seen this one in parks before:

[Quillz]

Pennsylvania (the left sign has the custom PennDOT numerals while the right sign has the standard FHWA fonts):

The sign on the left looks like Series C, and the one on the right looks like series D

The one on the left looks custom to the contractor. The one on the right looks like compressed Series D.

[hbelkins]

The one on the left is the standard PennDOT font.

[agentsteel53]

the 67 on that Illy/US cutout is definitely a one-off.

[Scott5114]

I'm pretty certain the reason all of these custom fonts exist is that in the period between when the block fonts were discontinued and, say, the 1980s or so, there was no real way to effectively "communicate" what the standard fonts were supposed to look like. There was a specification, yes, but to use that spec you would have to copy it into whatever system your DOT used to make your sign. You didn't see this as often with the block font because there were standard dies you could get a copy of, and after the 80s there were standard font files you could use on the computer, but in between? Nothing, really.

[J N Winkler]

I'm pretty certain the reason all of these custom fonts exist is that in the period between when the block fonts were discontinued and, say, the 1980s or so, there was no real way to effectively "communicate" what the standard fonts were supposed to look like. There was a specification, yes, but to use that spec you would have to copy it into whatever system your DOT used to make your sign. You didn't see this as often with the block font because there were standard dies you could get a copy of, and after the 80s there were standard font files you could use on the computer, but in between? Nothing, really.

I am not sure this accounts for the prevalence of state-standard typefaces.  Before the 1977 edition of Standard Alphabets, which showed solid letters against grids and was clearly intended for optical tracing, there was a 1945 (reissued 1952?) edition with dimensioned outline drawings of the letters.  This could be and was used to create templates for dies (useful for making button copy frames and for cutting letters out of sheeting) as well as drawing stencil sets.  (Before the advent of computer-generated pattern-accurate sign drawings in the late 1960's--MnDOT started using a Fortran program to draw freeway guide sign legend around this time--the most common way to produce a pattern-accurate sign design sheet was to use stencils to draw each individual letter.)

So, no, I don't really think custom fonts were a result of highway departments not being able to get hands on dimensioned drawings of the letters--in fact the availability of such drawings was better before 1977 than after.  I think the reason has more to do with lag in standardization.  Before traffic signs were nationally standardized, many states had their own traffic manuals and their own typefaces (not necessarily the same from sign to sign).  The unrounded BPR alphabets (introduced in 1927 with the AASHO signing manual) were never rolled out on every single sign, because the glyphs were designed for easy stamping and were not really appropriate for painted wood, baked porcelain enamel, etc.--all of which were in use in various states at the time.  Many states would have hung onto their existing lettering where it looked reasonably similar to the BPR series, rather than adopting the BPR series directly.  Indeed the 1935 MUTCD tried to accommodate variations in substrate type by introducing rounded letters (not the same as the post-1945 FHWA alphabet series) which could be used on signs which were not die-stamped.  The FHWA alphabet series were developed during World War II and drafts (noticeably different from the modern series) were tried on actual signs, notably on the Pentagon road system.

Put simply, by 1950 there was a hodgepodge of standard typefaces for traffic signs--the old unrounded BPR alphabets, the new rounded FHWA alphabet series, rounded letters from the 1935 MUTCD, various interim drafts of the last-listed, plus custom typefaces developed by state highway departments and traffic equipment manufacturers.  In the absence of a fiat from BPR (later FHWA) mandating that only the FHWA alphabet series be shown on signs, many of these custom typefaces would have remained in use on the basis that they were reasonably similar to the FHWA series in appearance and legibility.

A complicating factor is that it took until 1940 for T.W. Forbes to do the fundamental sign legibility research which gave rise to our modern guide sign design rules, and in the absence of these findings, it would have been difficult to frame an argument that sign typefaces should be uniform nationwide.

[agentsteel53]

I'm pretty certain the reason all of these custom fonts exist is that in the period between when the block fonts were discontinued and, say, the 1980s or so, there was no real way to effectively "communicate" what the standard fonts were supposed to look like. There was a specification, yes, but to use that spec you would have to copy it into whatever system your DOT used to make your sign. You didn't see this as often with the block font because there were standard dies you could get a copy of, and after the 80s there were standard font files you could use on the computer, but in between? Nothing, really.

a very interesting observation!

to elaborate some on the use of old block fonts: there were not as many 'standard' dies as you imagine, but the description of the fonts itself was significantly simpler, so they could be detailed quickly.  it is the small subtle details, like - for example - where the horizontal middle stroke of a letter "S" occurs, which indeed varies quite a bit from block-font implementation to block-font implementation.  

this is very useful in recognizing the manufacturer of, say, a US route marker.  I can fairly quickly tell an SG Adams from a Westmanco from a Gopher from a G & G from a National Colortype based on a few subtle variations in the font sets they used.  look at this Arizona photo, for example:



in a spectacular example of the "lowest bidder" principle, we have four signs made to four different standards.  The 60 is a Westmanco (about as standard as they come, so useful as a "zero" reference), the 70 is a G&G (slightly rounder "US", narrower spacing between numerals), and the 80 and 89 are two SG Adams variants, recognizable by the non-beveled letter "Z".  the 89 has the 1926 collar die (shield shape), while the 80 has one introduced possibly as late as 1932.  Beveled letter "Z" is standard block font, non-beveled as seen on SG Adams is not: also note the rounder letter "R" on the 89, and don't ask me about the upside down "6" being used as a "9", as that is something SG Adams did very infrequently, in stark contrast to G&G who are effectively 50/50 in their use of a proper "9" vs. an upside-down "6".  The 80 has a higher pair of mounting holes than the 89, and the 60 has somewhat bolder black, implying dies made with a somewhat thicker stroke.  Oh, and the 70 has Series D squeezed in there, while the letter "O" in Series C is rounder on the 60 and the 89 than on the 80......

(and you wonder why I have a headache sometimes......)

[agentsteel53]

indeed, as JN Winkler pointed out, states had had rounded fonts and custom typefaces well before 1945, when the standard FHWA set was published, and 1948 when it was made a part of the MUTCD.



here is an example of the Massachusetts round fonts we all know and love ... in use by 1930!  note the block fonts on the embossed shields (smaller radius of rounding than usual, a Massachusetts quirk).

[agentsteel53]

However, I don't have D Modified at all, as it's never been included with any standard set. Seems to be a creation of Caltrans and some other departments.

I don't have a "real" DM - or AM, BM, CM, FM - I always use the corresponding thin-stroke font and increase the stroke thickness by 2.5% of the glyph's nominal height.  for a 10" glyph, I set the stroke thickness to .25", for example.

by nominal I mean that certain round glyphs are actually larger than the nominal size - spelling out the string "SE" for example would result in a 10" letter E, and a letter S which is, if I recall correctly, 10.22 inches.  the "S" extends above and below the bounds of the E because that is how the human eye perceives them to be the same height.

[Rick1962]

The old Baltimore font looks like a typical signpainter's font used back when signs were hand-lettered.

Enid, Oklahoma used hand-lettered signs into the 1980s, which used a very similar font.

[bugo]

Does anybody have a picture of the Oklahoma "prison font" that was used a few years ago?  There are a few of them left but I don't think I have any pictures.

[agentsteel53]

you mean this? 



that's just Series EM compressed to series C width.  easily made up on the computer if needed.

[KillerTux]

Maryland 1921 above and new 1926 font below

[Quillz]

Isn't it more effort to take something like E(M) and compress it downward, rathe than just use Series C in the first place?

[Central Avenue]

Isn't it more effort to take something like E(M) and compress it downward, rathe than just use Series C in the first place?

Probably not by much. If you're laying out a sign on a computer and you set text or numbers in too wide a font, just compressing it to fit is probably as easy as a click and drag.

Not that I'm defending it--on the contrary, I hate stretched or condensed type--but I can see why it's so common.