The Clearview thread

[Bobby5280]

I'm not seeing your point. I don't get paid in advance for my engineering projects; surgeons don't get paid in advance of an appendectomy. One would think they would jump at the chance at contract work, as for the most part, it's a guaranteed paycheck.

When you do an enginnering project you expect to get paid a specific amount of money for that work. Designing type on an independent basis doesn't work that way. Designing typefaces on a freelance basis is no different in principal from a rock band recording a music CD and self-distributing copies of it. If the music isn't good enough it won't sell many copies. The band makes little if any money. The same thing goes on in the type design field. An independent typeface designer only gets paid when people actually buy his fonts. If only a few people buy his fonts he won't make much money.

Working for a big company like Adobe can deliver a steady paycheck. But the pay will be only so good. Some of the best typeface designers can do better working independently. Sometimes it's in their best interest to do so.

Tobias Frere-Jones designed dozens of great typeface families working with Font Bureau in the 1990's and later at HTF. He designed popular typefaces like Interstate and Gotham. He had an acrimonious falling out with Jonathan Hoefler at HTF. Frere-Jones thought he was a 50/50 partner in the type foundry, but it turned out Hoefler was pocketing most of the money made by the firm and regarded Frere-Jones as just a mere employee. Frere-Jones filed a $20 million law suit against Hoefler and started his own independent firm.

If any sort of typeface designed for roadways were to become public-domain (and therefore licence-free), wouldn't the work on the typeface have to be paid up-front? Perhaps the design team given permanent positions within the FHWA (if they so chose)?

Typeface designs can be commissioned where the designer is guaranteed a certain level of pay for the project. For example Tobias Frere-Jones first developed the Gotham type family for GQ in 2000. But the contract was drawn up so the Hoefler & Frere-Jones foundry would retain the copyright to Gotham and be able to sell it commercially. GQ would have had to pay more to get a complete buy-out on the rights to that type family.

Some typeface designers will create typefaces that are fully open source or licensed free for personal use to attract attention and recognition for their work. It can make it easier for them to sell other type families they design on a commercial basis.

Re-designing a type family like Series Gothic and making the results fully open source would require the typeface designer to be given a good paying contract for the work. It wouldn't be worth it otherwise. The type designer couldn't develop a proper update of Series Gothic for free just for the sake of name recognition. That's because if the updated typeface was put through all sorts of rigorous legibility tests chances are 100% lots of revisions to the letters would be involved. It's one thing to design a free typeface where you, the designer, get to call all the shots and declare when the work is finished. If you're literally working on the typeface for years, making all sorts of little changes and improvements to it suggested by other people, you're going to want get paid for all that extra pain in the ass work.

You have posted variants of this several times, but I have never been able to pin you down on why exactly the FHWA fonts need all of those glyphs. One could argue that French and Spanish diacritics are necessary, but it's hard to see how anything else would be a good use of funds, particularly since the US doesn't share a land border with any country that uses Cyrillic or Greek script. Additionally, most of the Unicode spec that lacks coverage is things like advanced mathematical symbols, obscure currency symbols, and emoji, all of which make sense for a general-purpose typeface to include, but have no traffic-control value.

First of all, I don't agree with the US highway sign rules that forbid the use of punctuation marks and diacritics. There are people, places and things in the US that use diacritic marks (like accents) in their names. Just about all those marks work properly in a 1990's era TrueType or Postscript Type 1 font. If those same diacritic marks have to be supported in something like a small caps character range, or alternate characters (like different versions of a lowercase "a") then OpenType is required.

I have seen plenty of mileage signs on highways use fractions. The basic ½, ¼ and ¾ marks are supported in the old DOS character set. Yet those characters are missing from some of the "Highway Gothic" fonts in use. Most modern OpenType fonts will support the basic ½, ¼ and ¾ fraction characters and include a complete super-script and sub-script set of numerals so any fraction can be created.

Native small capital character sets are now a necessity since cardinal directions on signs must be expressed in all caps, but with a larger first letter. The current, fake method used on road signs stinks. We already discussed this particular OpenType style font feature previously.

While I'm definitely a fan of ligatures in general use typefaces, ligatures don't make sense on highway signs due to the wider letter spacing. For those not familiar with typographical ligatures, a ligature combines two or three characters into a single glyph (combos like "fi", "fl", "ffl", etc).

My suggestion about Greek and Cyrillic character ranges is to make the typeface marketable to more countries. It's pretty common these days for new OpenType fonts to support those alphabets. Even a decent number of open source fonts manage to do so.

Interestingly, current court precedent is that while typefaces are copyrightable as works of software, and their names are subject to trademark protection, glyphs are not protected at all, because they aren't original enough (the courts find that an "A" is just an "A" no matter how you draw it, and you can't copyright an "A"). This is why you can find shoddy copies of typefaces like Optima that have been renamed to things like "Oklahoma" or "Optimum".

The key thing to remember is the glyphs themselves are not protected. But computer software and data IS protected by copyright. If someone wants to make a counterfeit copy of Helvetica, Highway Gothic or whatever he will have to re-draw those characters from scratch. It is very much illegal for someone to take a finished computer file of a typeface, change its name and re-sell it. Back in the 1990's Adobe sued the hell out of Southern Software and won because the company literally took a bunch of its font files, changed their names and re-sold them in their "Key Fonts" CD software packages.

I have a pretty huge collection of typefaces. Some of that collection features the same typefaces but from different foundries. Several different versions of the Futura type family are available. Adobe markets the cut of Futura made by Linotype. Bitstream made a version of Futura that was bundled with CorelDRAW for the longest time. URW has its own version of Futura. Tilde has a version of it. Paratype sells Futura PT. Neufville Digital sells Futura ND and Futura Next. Monotype sells Futura Maxi. Elsner+Flake and Scangraphic Digital have their own versions of Futura. None of these Futura-named typefaces are interchangeable with each other. If you type out a line of copy in Futura BT Book and set it over the same lettering the same size set in Futura Std Book the letters will not line up perfectly. There's lots and lots of subtle differences. The same situation exists for all the clones of Helvetica (like Nimbus Sans, CG Triumvirate, etc) and plenty of other typefaces with long time popularity. Even the variants of Highway Gothic don't line up perfectly with each other.

That can create some really annoying situations in sign work. If a bad hail storm breaks some channel letter faces on a store front sign it's no big deal if we built the sign and have the original vector-based art files. If we have to re-create it from someone else's work the issue of typeface flavor can be an issue. Is that a Linotype Futura "G" or is that a Bitstream Futura "G"? Make the wrong choice and that new trim-capped acrylic replacement letter won't fit! And then God forbid if the original sign designer squeezed or stretched the lettering at all. In those cases you just have to create a paper pattern and hand-cut the replacement letter. Ugh.

[DaBigE]

I imagine if FHWA were to decide to update the FHWA fonts, it would go something like this:
1. The FHWA would release a Request for Proposals (RFP) detailing the issue, the stated objectives of the project, and a desired timeframe/budget for completion.
2. Contractors would respond to the RFP with detailed proposals giving an overview of what they'd do; qualification details for their firm and any subcontractor(s) as well as staff working on the project, including resumes and summaries of prior related work; and a detailed proposed schedule and budget.
3. The FHWA would review the proposals, potentially interview firms, and decide who to award the contract to.
4. The contractor would work on the project, billing the FHWA as the work progresses.
5. A final product would be delivered to the FHWA and the contract would be closed out.

This is exactly how I pictured it playing out.

I'm not seeing your point. I don't get paid in advance for my engineering projects; surgeons don't get paid in advance of an appendectomy. One would think they would jump at the chance at contract work, as for the most part, it's a guaranteed paycheck.

When you do an enginnering project you expect to get paid a specific amount of money for that work. Designing type on an independent basis doesn't work that way. Designing typefaces on a freelance basis is no different in principal from a rock band recording a music CD and self-distributing copies of it. If the music isn't good enough it won't sell many copies. The band makes little if any money. The same thing goes on in the type design field. An independent typeface designer only gets paid when people actually buy his fonts. If only a few people buy his fonts he won't make much money.

Working for a big company like Adobe can deliver a steady paycheck. But the pay will be only so good. Some of the best typeface designers can do better working independently. Sometimes it's in their best interest to do so.

Tobias Frere-Jones designed dozens of great typeface families working with Font Bureau in the 1990's and later at HTF. He designed popular typefaces like Interstate and Gotham. He had an acrimonious falling out with Jonathan Hoefler at HTF. Frere-Jones thought he was a 50/50 partner in the type foundry, but it turned out Hoefler was pocketing most of the money made by the firm and regarded Frere-Jones as just a mere employee. Frere-Jones filed a $20 million law suit against Hoefler and started his own independent firm.

You're still not getting it. See the post I quoted from vdeane. If a typeface designer wants work in FHWA/engineering world, you play by our rules. Don't like the work? Don't submit an RFP. Sorry to be harsh, but with the type of project we're talking about here, whether you freelance or not doesn't matter. "Freelance engineers" (how new consulting firms get started) know and accept this. Where the best engineers work is no different than your typeface designer statement -- some work for DOTs, others work for consulting firms, and others still work completely on their own.

[Bobby5280]

You're still not getting it. See the post I quoted from vdeane. If a typeface designer wants work in FHWA/engineering world, you play by our rules. Don't like the work? Don't submit an RFP. Sorry to be harsh, but with the type of project we're talking about here, whether you freelance or not doesn't matter. "Freelance engineers" (how new consulting firms get started) know and accept this. Where the best engineers work is no different than your typeface designer statement -- some work for DOTs, others work for consulting firms, and others still work completely on their own.

That work process list vdeane posted still involves the typeface designer getting paid. If a professional typeface designer is asked to submit a proposal to do something like re-build and expand Series Gothic he'll provide examples of his work and the price and other terms he wants. The client can negotiate those terms with the designer. If they reach an agreement a contract is signed. Actual work on the typeface does not start until then. The designer sure as hell isn't going to produce a finished typeface for a government agency and only hope to get paid on the back end, especially if he is literally spending years working on the project.

If the client tries to push the designer around, offering only so much money and adding insults like "play by our rules" cuz we're doing you a favor to let you work in our industry he can always tell the client to go piss up a rope and find some other sucker to do the work. Not all typeface designers are equal. A select few are very talented and great at what they do. Plenty of others aren't as good. The great ones are going to command a higher price.

[kalvado]

You're still not getting it. See the post I quoted from vdeane. If a typeface designer wants work in FHWA/engineering world, you play by our rules. Don't like the work? Don't submit an RFP. Sorry to be harsh, but with the type of project we're talking about here, whether you freelance or not doesn't matter. "Freelance engineers" (how new consulting firms get started) know and accept this. Where the best engineers work is no different than your typeface designer statement -- some work for DOTs, others work for consulting firms, and others still work completely on their own.

That work process list vdeane posted still involves the typeface designer getting paid. If a professional typeface designer is asked to submit a proposal to do something like re-build and expand Series Gothic he'll provide examples of his work and the price and other terms he wants. The client can negotiate those terms with the designer. If they reach an agreement a contract is signed. Actual work on the typeface does not start until then. The designer sure as hell isn't going to produce a finished typeface for a government agency and only hope to get paid on the back end, especially if he is literally spending years working on the project.

If the client tries to push the designer around, offering only so much money and adding insults like "play by our rules" cuz we're doing you a favor to let you work in our industry he can always tell the client to go piss up a rope and find some other sucker to do the work. Not all typeface designers are equal. A select few are very talented and great at what they do. Plenty of others aren't as good. The great ones are going to command a higher price.

Realistically, expecting getting paid for the work is more than reasonable, nobody arguing with that.
For me, this is about a pay per job/per hour vs pay per use forever. We accept toll roads as a necessary evil, but not more than that.
As for client trying to negotiate the price down (and contractor trying to negotiate it up), that is not unique for design world.

[DaBigE]

You're still not getting it. See the post I quoted from vdeane. If a typeface designer wants work in FHWA/engineering world, you play by our rules. Don't like the work? Don't submit an RFP. Sorry to be harsh, but with the type of project we're talking about here, whether you freelance or not doesn't matter. "Freelance engineers" (how new consulting firms get started) know and accept this. Where the best engineers work is no different than your typeface designer statement -- some work for DOTs, others work for consulting firms, and others still work completely on their own.

That work process list vdeane posted still involves the typeface designer getting paid. If a professional typeface designer is asked to submit a proposal to do something like re-build and expand Series Gothic he'll provide examples of his work and the price and other terms he wants. The client can negotiate those terms with the designer. If they reach an agreement a contract is signed. Actual work on the typeface does not start until then. The designer sure as hell isn't going to produce a finished typeface for a government agency and only hope to get paid on the back end, especially if he is literally spending years working on the project.

If the client tries to push the designer around, offering only so much money and adding insults like "play by our rules" cuz we're doing you a favor to let you work in our industry he can always tell the client to go piss up a rope and find some other sucker to do the work. Not all typeface designers are equal. A select few are very talented and great at what they do. Plenty of others aren't as good. The great ones are going to command a higher price.

Again...you're missing/ignoring our point. NO ONE has ever suggested the work get done for free. It's contract work. The typeface designer gets PAID ONCE, for development of the font for the customer/project (FHWA) and that's it. Requiring sign designers, engineering firms, state DOTs, municipalities, sign fabricators pay separately for every PC installation AFTER the typeface has already made back their initial cost of development for a product that should be in the public domain, is the issue at-hand. We're in the world of public infrastructure, not the music industry. No one is required to buy/download a song. Sign fonts are required by everyone in the business.

If you don't like the terms of the contract, don't submit a proposal; work for someone else whose rules/pricing scheme you do like. If the client changes the terms ("push around" as you put it) during the project, that's what amendments are for, where you dictate more money is required. No one's working for free.

[J N Winkler]

I don't think FHWA is going to commission a type designer to develop a replacement for the FHWA alphabet series in this or any near decade, although there is certainly precedent internationally for highway agencies paying type designers to develop typefaces for traffic sign use.  Here is why I think so:

*  The people who run highway departments have little patience for the baggage that comes with dealing with the type design community.  First, type designers are insanely jealous of each other.  When Jock Kinneir designed the Transport typefaces for the UK Ministry of Transport back in the late 1950's/early 1960's, David Kindersley--another type designer--launched a very public campaign to have his capitals-only, Roman-looking serifed typeface used on motorway signs.  He did not succeed, but not before side-by-side comparisons showed that Kindersley performed fairly similarly to Transport Medium, which was an embarrassment to civil servants who preferred a contemporary look for motorway signs.  Kindersley is in fact used extensively for street name signs, which in the UK (unlike the US) are not considered traffic signs.  After the Kindersley mess, Kinneir had difficulty letting go of his own design, and wrote to the Ministry heavily criticizing letter layouts on motorway signs he observed in the field.  He initially tried to have every single motorway sign sent to him (or to designers working under his supervision) for layout.  Letter tiling was the compromise that was eventually worked out.  Ministry files from the period (which are available for inspection at the UK National Archives in Kew, west London) are full of complaints about Kinneir's prima-donna behavior.

*  The stylized fact is that a well-articulated typeface will have legibility performance very similar to another well-articulated typeface.  This was seen in the UK with Transport versus Kindersley, and has been seen in the US with Clearview versus the FHWA series.  Similarity of performance means that testing shows differences that are incremental at best (~10% in the case of Clearview 5-W versus Series E Modified) and often change sign according to testing conditions (choice of glyphs, sheeting combinations, etc.).  Especially when there is a considerable corpus of existing signing, this tends to align the economic incentives in favor of retaining the existing typeface and designing around its known performance characteristics.

[kalvado]

I don't think FHWA is going to commission a type designer to develop a replacement for the FHWA alphabet series in this or any near decade, although there is certainly precedent internationally for highway agencies paying type designers to develop typefaces for traffic sign use.  Here is why I think so:

But again, FHWA series are technically outdated, no question about that.
Updating the typeset to a modern standard, as opposed to development from scratch, can be seen as a fairly technical and non-controversial thing to do.

[J N Winkler]

But again, FHWA series are technically outdated, no question about that.

They are dated (uppercase glyphs for Series B-F dating from 1948, Series E Modified mixed-case from 1950).  But the real issue is opportunity for functional improvement, which for the reasons I outlined above, is almost certainly very limited.

Updating the typeset to a modern standard, as opposed to development from scratch, can be seen as a fairly technical and non-controversial thing to do.

Not now, not after the whole Clearview fracas.  That argument did indeed carry weight in the mid-1990's and that is how we got Clearview.  At this point FHWA is quite entitled to say "Fool me once . . ."

[kalvado]

But again, FHWA series are technically outdated, no question about that.

They are dated (uppercase glyphs for Series B-F dating from 1948, Series E Modified mixed-case from 1950).  But the real issue is opportunity for functional improvement, which for the reasons I outlined above, is almost certainly very limited.

Updating the typeset to a modern standard, as opposed to development from scratch, can be seen as a fairly technical and non-controversial thing to do.

Not now, not after the whole Clearview fracas.  That argument did indeed carry weight in the mid-1990's and that is how we got Clearview.  At this point FHWA is quite entitled to say "Fool me once . . ."

I am talking more about FHWA design issues from modern font perspective - small caps, diacritic marks and accents, fractions etc. Those are not ClearView scale job, this is a purely technical job: no improvements please, just make sure things are properly scaled and positioned.

[DaBigE]

But again, FHWA series are technically outdated, no question about that.

They are dated (uppercase glyphs for Series B-F dating from 1948, Series E Modified mixed-case from 1950).  But the real issue is opportunity for functional improvement, which for the reasons I outlined above, is almost certainly very limited.

Updating the typeset to a modern standard, as opposed to development from scratch, can be seen as a fairly technical and non-controversial thing to do.

Not now, not after the whole Clearview fracas.  That argument did indeed carry weight in the mid-1990's and that is how we got Clearview.  At this point FHWA is quite entitled to say "Fool me once . . ."

I am talking more about FHWA design issues from modern font perspective - small caps, diacritic marks and accents, fractions etc. Those are not ClearView scale job, this is a purely technical job: no improvements please, just make sure things are properly scaled and positioned.

Things they should have done when the 2000 edition of the FHWA Series was released.

[J N Winkler]

I am talking more about FHWA design issues from modern font perspective - small caps, diacritic marks and accents, fractions etc. Those are not ClearView scale job, this is a purely technical job: no improvements please, just make sure things are properly scaled and positioned.

Sorry--I see what you mean now.  Yes, it would be useful to have diacritics retrofitted.  I am less sure about small caps and fractions.  The "small caps" treatment is constructed in such a way that the size ratio of the larger initial letter to the other letters varies from one sign to another (the basis is presumably "next size up" rather than "uniform ratio").  Fractions on our signs are produced by constructing fraction rectangles and the sizing and construction procedure for these varies from state to state.  This is why you see guide sign design software using bodges like "55/64" to invoke state-specific fraction rectangle designs for common fractions like 1/4, 1/2, etc.

When you move away from "next size up," fraction rectangles, etc., there start to be ripple effects on the signing system as a whole.

Side observation:  one reason we don't have competent apostrophes on our signs is that they are a linguistic battlefield.  Apostrophes are necessary for certain placenames (not just "Martha's Vineyard," which is an officially codified exception, but arguably also "Parley's Canyon" etc.), but the USBGN hates them and fights hard not to accept them.

[Scott5114]

Fraction rectangles aren't necessarily incompatible with embedding fractions in fonts. I designed fractions using the WSDOT fraction rectangle specification and embedded them into my Trafikkalfabetet. (Norway, of course, specifies distances in meters rather than using fractional kilometer measures, and therefore doesn't have its own fraction specification.)

[Android]

Back in the early 2000s,  tying first into railroad typefaces, I bought some software to create computer fonts, and since the typefaces that BNSF was using at that time were non-standard, I went drew up the whole bloody things myself, both in the early "narrow" and the later "wide" versions.   Around 2005 they abandoned those older typefaces, but I'm still glad I drew them up, as it enabled me to learn much about typeface/computer font design.   Maybe not on a professional level, as my computer fonts were intended for... computer or printed-out use (duhh!) and not to be plastered on a BGS.   

Not long after this, I got drawn into Highway Gothic, again, because I work in the railroad industry, and then because First Union (Wells Fargo) Rail Leasing started using Series D on their rolling stock, there was a series of 1000 cars that had been re-lettered/numbered using Series D.    Once I realized just what typeface I was looking it there, I researched and decided I wanted all the HG variants as computer fonts.    I started with Series E, tried to draw it up myself based on the online FHWA specs, but after a bit, I found the old "Roadgeek" series, and merged them into the specifications I had set up.    But I went beyond that... I was aware of variations in HG, and worked to incorporate some of them as well.    OK, now, I'm no expert, just a hacker, and hell, one of the Series D variants I came up with was specifically intended for one music player application I run on my computer.    But it wasn't that hard to do, and all this talk of large amounts of dollars of unpaid labor, I'm not sure if I agree with. 

Okay, end of opinion. 

[DaBigE]

and all this talk of large amounts of dollars of unpaid labor, I'm not sure if I agree with. 

What talk? No one has suggested the work be done for free.

[kalvado]

and all this talk of large amounts of dollars of unpaid labor, I'm not sure if I agree with. 

What talk? No one has suggested the work be done for free.

there were estimates how much FHWA existing font refurbish would cost. for example

The ballpark estimate would start at around $50,000 to $100,000.

Cost wise, this is very roughly a month of work for a small team, or 2-4 months of a single person (once all overheads are included, not just paycheck). Which doesn't sound way out of proportion for the task, IMHO.

[DaBigE]

and all this talk of large amounts of dollars of unpaid labor, I'm not sure if I agree with. 

What talk? No one has suggested the work be done for free.

there were estimates how much FHWA existing font refurbish would cost. for example

That's asking for a cost, which last I checked, means something is not being done for free.

[Android]

Okay, maybe my choice of words in saying "unpaid labor" was wrong.   But simply modifying established glyphs is really easy.    The hard part is deciding what to modify them into.   I guess that is where the dollars funnel into. 

[Scott5114]

and all this talk of large amounts of dollars of unpaid labor, I'm not sure if I agree with. 

What talk? No one has suggested the work be done for free.

there were estimates how much FHWA existing font refurbish would cost. for example

The ballpark estimate would start at around $50,000 to $100,000.

Cost wise, this is very roughly a month of work for a small team, or 2-4 months of a single person (once all overheads are included, not just paycheck). Which doesn't sound way out of proportion for the task, IMHO.

I dunno, I'd peg the amount of time I spent to get my implementation of Trafikkalfabetet to working state to be about a month or so, solo. I would expect an experienced typographer with better tools to be able to do the job faster and better.

I was limiting myself to just the ASCII characters plus Ã... and Æ, however.

[Pink Jazz]

Looks like in Arizona, Glendale has not re-adopted Clearview (their use of Clearview was short-lived, possibly even experimental).  They just posted a photo of the sign of the new name of their section of Bethany Home Road near State Farm Stadium, Cardinals Way and it is in FHWA.

The only cities in the Phoenix area that I know that are using Clearview are Phoenix and Chandler, the former having never stopped using it.  I know Mesa, Gilbert, and Queen Creek have not re-adopted it even though they have used it before.  No idea about Scottsdale or Peoria.

[Roadwarriors79]

Looks like in Arizona, Glendale has not re-adopted Clearview (their use of Clearview was short-lived, possibly even experimental).  They just posted a photo of the sign of the new name of their section of Bethany Home Road near State Farm Stadium, Cardinals Way and it is in FHWA.

The only cities in the Phoenix area that I know that are using Clearview are Phoenix and Chandler, the former having never stopped using it.  I know Mesa, Gilbert, and Queen Creek have not re-adopted it even though they have used it before.  No idea about Scottsdale or Peoria.

In the west valley, El Mirage, Buckeye, Avondale, Surprise, and Tolleson all used some Clearview signage in the past.

Here's a link for the new "Cardinals Way" sign in Glendale:

http://ktar.com/story/2455508/glendale-unveils-street-named-after-arizona-cardinals/

[Pink Jazz]

Looks like in Arizona, Glendale has not re-adopted Clearview (their use of Clearview was short-lived, possibly even experimental).  They just posted a photo of the sign of the new name of their section of Bethany Home Road near State Farm Stadium, Cardinals Way and it is in FHWA.

The only cities in the Phoenix area that I know that are using Clearview are Phoenix and Chandler, the former having never stopped using it.  I know Mesa, Gilbert, and Queen Creek have not re-adopted it even though they have used it before.  No idea about Scottsdale or Peoria.

In the west valley, El Mirage, Buckeye, Avondale, Surprise, and Tolleson all used some Clearview signage in the past.

Here's a link for the new "Cardinals Way" sign in Glendale:

http://ktar.com/story/2455508/glendale-unveils-street-named-after-arizona-cardinals/

I wonder what is the current status of these cities on their usage of Clearview.  I rarely go to the West Valley, so I wouldn't know.

[PHLBOS]

Looks like in Arizona, Glendale has not re-adopted Clearview (their use of Clearview was short-lived, possibly even experimental).  They just posted a photo of the sign of the new name of their section of Bethany Home Road near State Farm Stadium, Cardinals Way and it is in FHWA.

The only cities in the Phoenix area that I know that are using Clearview are Phoenix and Chandler, the former having never stopped using it.  I know Mesa, Gilbert, and Queen Creek have not re-adopted it even though they have used it before.  No idea about Scottsdale or Peoria.

In the west valley, El Mirage, Buckeye, Avondale, Surprise, and Tolleson all used some Clearview signage in the past.

Here's a link for the new "Cardinals Way" sign in Glendale:

http://ktar.com/story/2455508/glendale-unveils-street-named-after-arizona-cardinals/

The font on that sign's not Clearview. Such looks to be Series B for the street-name text.

[Roadwarriors79]

Looks like in Arizona, Glendale has not re-adopted Clearview (their use of Clearview was short-lived, possibly even experimental).  They just posted a photo of the sign of the new name of their section of Bethany Home Road near State Farm Stadium, Cardinals Way and it is in FHWA.

The only cities in the Phoenix area that I know that are using Clearview are Phoenix and Chandler, the former having never stopped using it.  I know Mesa, Gilbert, and Queen Creek have not re-adopted it even though they have used it before.  No idea about Scottsdale or Peoria.

In the west valley, El Mirage, Buckeye, Avondale, Surprise, and Tolleson all used some Clearview signage in the past.

Here's a link for the new "Cardinals Way" sign in Glendale:

http://ktar.com/story/2455508/glendale-unveils-street-named-after-arizona-cardinals/

The font on that sign's not Clearview.  Such looks to be Series B for the street-name text.

I know that the font is not in Clearview. I figured people would want to see the "Cardinals Way" sign that Pink Jazz mentioned, but had no photo or link to.

As far as Clearview goes in the west valley of Phoenix, I know El Mirage isn't using it anymore on newer street signs. Same with Glendale. I don't know about most of the other cities, but their older Clearview signs are still out there. I imagine many can be seen on GSV.

[Pink Jazz]

I can't confirm 100%, but I think I might have seen some new street blades in Queen Creek using Clearview.  Meanwhile Mesa and Gilbert are still not using it.

[tolbs17]

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