OK guys, opinions needed!

[ctsignguy]

Based upon some wild whim i had been kicking around for quite a while, i took it upon myself to take this classic CONN 15 photo and work it a little bit on Photoshop....



I showed the photoshopped examples to the guy in charge of the ConnDOT STate Sign Shop back in May and he liked what i had done...we discussed making prototypes and showing them to the Commissioners to see if they might go for a change from the Boring Square (trademarked by Dangermoose!) to something a bit more modern looking...and certainly a helluva lot different from Mass, Rhody and Maine!

Anyway, allow me to present my real life prototypes normally as well as under flash

Replica of the original 1970s design (engineering sheeting)



Prototype A



Prototype B



What design do you guys like best...and which do you think would be the best one for nighttime as well as day driving?

Results will be shared with the ConnDOT guys when i go back up in a few months...

PS to the Forum Editors....if this thread belongs elsewhere, feel free to move it...)

[Bickendan]

I'm liking prototype B.

[Revive 755]

I also like prototype B, but will take anything with the state shape over a plain square.

[xonhulu]

Make that 3 for prototype B, but I also like the black-and-white older style.

[Scott5114]

I like A the best.

The black and white might look better if the "CONN." were deleted and the state shape moved up a bit.

I feel you might have the most success if you try and market the black-and-white shield, as it would theoretically cost the same to create, whereas the blue versions would probably get objections of "blue ink costs more" (which is why LA is moving away from green-and-white shields).

Another thought... Connecticut looks kinda like Oklahoma upside down. Maybe a meat-cleaver-ish approach would look good?

[Mergingtraffic]

I live in CT also, where is the CT Sign shop?  And who would you talk to about getting signs?  My experience with CDOT has always been a plentiful one.  Always willing to explain things.

[ctsignguy]

I like A the best.

The black and white might look better if the "CONN." were deleted and the state shape moved up a bit.

I feel you might have the most success if you try and market the black-and-white shield, as it would theoretically cost the same to create, whereas the blue versions would probably get objections of "blue ink costs more" (which is why LA is moving away from green-and-white shields).

Another thought... Connecticut looks kinda like Oklahoma upside down. Maybe a meat-cleaver-ish approach would look good?

Ok, as far as the color choices....i picked blue as it is the State color....and other States use blue in their highway shields....Alabama and Georgia use blue for the APD highways and they seem to hold up pretty well....and Vermont seems to be pretty happy with their green shields..

i also think current reds dont hold up as well as blues or greens nowadays

and ConnDOT policy now seems to be "change the signs every 5-7 years" 

as to cost, i can see why LA dropped green....it could be a hassle to stock three different sets of tabs and arrows...and being a small state still trying to get back on their feet from Katrina, it would be less costly.  But for my shields, by going blue, in theory, they (CT) could use Interstate blue tabs and arrows 

now, i didnt have the $$ to do it, but i also kicked around the idea of an alternate 24x30 sign, aka Tennessee...no state name, but a larger Connecticut shape that could encompass 3-di routes with ease (all routes would be marked with these 24x30 signs even if they were 1-di routes)

but if they wanted to avoid the expense of color, simply bringing back the 1970s classic would do nicely to get away from the Boring Square[(tm) by agentsteele53]...

but we shall see...ConnDOT commissioners seem to have their own minds....they dont want high-intensity sheet on route markers (too bright!)

[ctsignguy]

I live in CT also, where is the CT Sign shop?  And who would you talk to about getting signs?  My experience with CDOT has always been a plentiful one.  Always willing to explain things.

Jeff's position is they dont give stuff away...he will chat up signs for hours and even show you old BGS plans from the 40s and 50s, but he cant give anything out....

[J N Winkler]

I'd go with prototype A, but in black instead of blue, just to avoid using transparent process inks.  I object to prototype B because it has black bordering blue and it is bad form to have two dark colors adjacent to each other.

[Chris]

I like prototype A, it's better legible.

[agentsteel53]

I prefer A, for the reasons JN Winkler articulated... the blue adjacent to black is not as successful as I had hoped. 

JN, what is the problem with transparent-process inks?  More expensive?  What about using sheeting instead of inks; is EG or prismatic blue more expensive than plain old non-reflective black?

and I would definitely keep the state name.  As far as the three-digit shields go, I'd say just use a narrower series font in a 24x24 shield, as CONN has always done.  But that is because I do not like stretched shields in general, and specifically not stretched state outlines. 

To have the state name on one size and no state name on the other would be a source of confusion to the Motoring Public of Average Intelligence ("hey Elmer, why's this one say CONN and this one doesn't?  Is one not a state route?")

So I'd say just go with the 24x24 size, and, if needed, put in a narrower font.

[mightyace]

I love "A" that blue and white looks just gorgeous IMHO.

And, to me, it is more legible than "B".

[Bickendan]

I disagree. I find B to be more legible as the white numerals have the illusion of having a sharper contrast against the blue state, whereas the blue numerals of A -- and the blue portion of the shield surrounding the state outline -- have a feeling of 'bleeding' into the white. That makes the state name in A the sharpest portion of the sign, and it isn't the focus, the route number is.

B follows the format that the Interstate shields, the California and Minnesota shields use: Colored background, white numeric font. Perhaps a concern is that with a blue state and a white number, there can be some confusion that it's an Interstate shield (as has happened with the Minnesota shields), but that will quickly pass. Obviously, going with B to join the bandwagon isn't the reason to use that option, but it also means that the design works. The black casing in B works, but it's a little too thick, too obtrusive. If that were scaled back, it'd be more effective.

[J N Winkler]

JN, what is the problem with transparent-process inks?  More expensive?  What about using sheeting instead of inks; is EG or prismatic blue more expensive than plain old non-reflective black?

All process inks, except for opaque black, fade under the sun.  This is perhaps not a big problem for Connecticut given its latitude and climate, but in Arizona this led ADOT to kill off the colored Loop shields.  It is certainly possible to cut the colored elements out of retroreflective sheeting, which will not fade, but this adds to the cost and complexity of the fabricating process.

Minnesota does use a multi-colored shield design and I think they do use process inks for it, but they can get away with it because of their latitude and their extremely aggressive sign replacement program.  Colorado . . . yuck.  Unfaded Colorado SR shields are extremely rare.  I actually like the new South Carolina SR marker, but I have to question its practicality unless they are actually using sheeting for the blue elements.

[njroadhorse]

I like Prototype B a lot, it really makes the number and the state outline pop, and gives it some distinction over RI and MA.  Prototype A looks too much like those ARC signs on US Highway 72.

[agentsteel53]

thanks for the clarification about the process inks.  I do not know much about them, as the vast majority of my highway sign replica designs are old non-reflective styles, and the occasional reflective one is served well through the vinyl-cut process, for which my company charges less than to screen-print. 

[ctsignguy]

wow, looks like so far the vote is 5-5....

while i personally do like the contrast of the black outline along the blue State on Prototype B (especially under flash), i also think it might not be feasible for mass production as it does add an extra step that State bean-counters may not see as necessary...and i am not sure if a non-outlined blue shield would have the same impact at night or in bad weather.

My personal take is A is the cooler sign, but B is the better choice for bad weather and night driving

[74/171FAN]

I like Prototype A because I like how the numbers are colored along with everything else except for the part.  I'm fine with blue being the color but wouldn't mind of different portions of the routes in different counties couldn't have different colors.

[Bickendan]

wow, looks like so far the vote is 5-5....

while i personally do like the contrast of the black outline along the blue State on Prototype B (especially under flash), i also think it might not be feasible for mass production as it does add an extra step that State bean-counters may not see as necessary...

"Here's to the pencil pushers... may they all get lead poisoning."

[US71]

I'm leaning towards A

[Duke87]

A is better, just make sure the blue is sufficiently dark so it doesn't appear too washed out when headlights shine on it.

[agentsteel53]

My personal take is A is the cooler sign, but B is the better choice for bad weather and night driving

I think A is just as good for night driving.  The state outline is not for identification purposes; it is an aesthetic touch... since the number is dark against a light background, it is as good as it gets for the purpose of identifying the route.

well, the real determiners are the CT highway department.  Let us know what they say!

[agentsteel53]

A is better, just make sure the blue is sufficiently dark so it doesn't appear too washed out when headlights shine on it.

I do not know if that is a possibility.  The standard shade of reflective blue is ... that.

[ctsignguy]

well, the real determiners are the CT highway department.  Let us know what they say!

Aye, aye, mon capitan! I shall die trying!

Seriously, i plan on contacting Jeff late this week and seeing what is happening...and if necessary, shipping the shields to him to show his overseers...seeing the real thing might make more impression than photos would!

[Duke87]

On a related note, check out what's still kicking on High Ridge Road just south of the Parkway in Stamford: