All right road fans,
I would like to know: what states do you think have the best state highway shields? I, personally, really like the following ones:
- Any state that uses the state outline as a shield (examples: AL, AZ, AR, GA, LA, MO, OH, SD)
- The sunflower of Kansas
- The "keystone" of Pennsylvania
- That diamond with a bulge on top that New York uses, whatever that's supposed to be
- The red circle that New Mexico uses - I think it looks nice.
- I really like Minnesota's - those blue signs with a gold strip bearing the state's name on the top.
- I also think Colorado's signs are really neat.
What state highway shields do you think are the best - and which ones might you believe could stand to be a little better? I'd love to hear your thoughts!
I like Arkansas's and the inverted triangle with round corners that Tennessee uses (or used).
Texas's just kinda sucks. It needs to either swap the state shield with the FM shield or make a new state shield that looks similar to the tolled state highways shields. Those look really clean.
We've had polls on this before, I'm sure of it.
MN wins.
WI loses. Rectangle over triangle?
Be more creative!
Michigan's M shields and the California miner spade are pretty iconic too.
Most boring: all circle shielD states, MA, ME, MT, TX.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on August 02, 2020, 10:27:59 PM
Michigan's M shields and the California miner spade are pretty iconic too.
Most boring: all circle shielD states, MA, ME, MT, TX.
IL and IN
FL and VT are really good.
Add CT and RI to that boring list.
I'm a fan of the new blue shields that SC is gradually phasing in.
I love the Colorado shield. It really pops on a sign: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7798194,-105.1381217,3a,38.4y,258.49h,104.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSAsMvNPLYiOZqbUAl6AM8A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Maybe homerism here but I also love Wisconsin. Simple yet unique. The only bad part is that it doesn't have any real connection to the state or its history.
Other favorites: Minnesota, Kansas, Washington, and Arizona (I think the AZ outline better fits a shield than others).
The circle should be only used in maps. Looking at you, DE, IA, KY, NJ, MS and WV (VA exempted as I don't count secondary routes, which I consider county roads).
Mine might be Arizona because I am a sucker for state outlined shields and I also like how it is just a close approximation.
Basically I love shields that:
1. Use the state outline
2. Are colored (Even if the numerals are black, if the directional panel and arrow are on a field other than white (or even blue), I love it)
Basically, I like anything that uses the state outline or something else iconic to the state. The Kansas sunflower, Pennsylvania keystone, Utah beehive, New Hampshire's Old Man of the Mountain, and similar.
Not necessarily a fan of odd shapes (New York, Virginia, Wisconsin, Oregon, Hawaii, Michigan, North Carolina, etc.)
Definitely not a fan of generic circles or squares/rectangles, but I'll make an exception for variations on a theme such as Tennessee and South Carolina, which incorporate the state's outline.
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on August 03, 2020, 08:19:50 AM
The circle should be only used in maps. Looking at you, DE, IA, KY, NJ, MS and WV (VA exempted as I don't count secondary routes, which I consider county roads).
WV's circle routes, although technically state secondary routes, are considered to be county routes.
Quote from: SSOWorld on August 02, 2020, 10:24:00 PM
WI loses. Rectangle over triangle?
Be more creative!
Well, it's ahead of all the states with simple squares and circles. They also get a free pass for being the first to actually sign their highways (excluding milestones).
Kansas's sawblade--I mean--sunflower shield is one of the few things I actually like about this state.
Quote from: KCRoadFan on August 02, 2020, 10:00:04 PM
- The red circle that New Mexico uses - I think it looks nice.
The red stylized zia symbol (modified from what's on the state flag) unfortunately suffers from a lot of sun fading. Often you end up with a boring circle, or often NMDOT just starts off with a boring circle or oval and doesn't bother with the zia.
Quote from: KCRoadFan on August 02, 2020, 10:00:04 PM
- I really like Minnesota's - those blue signs with a gold strip bearing the state's name on the top.
Not different enough from Interstate markers, viewed in haste from a distance. (Like Wisconsin's is too close to US route markers.) Colorado does colorful markers better.
It should not surprise you (look at my avatar) that I think Alaska's Big Dipper route marker is one of the best.
Quote from: formulanone on August 03, 2020, 09:39:31 AM
Quote from: SSOWorld on August 02, 2020, 10:24:00 PM
WI loses. Rectangle over triangle?
Be more creative!
Well, it's ahead of all the states with simple squares and circles. They also get a free pass for being the first to actually sign their highways (excluding milestones).
My criticism of the WI shield isn't the creativity, it's the way WisDOT carries it out. Apparently, at some point a couple decades ago, someone decided to de-empathize the overall square over a triangle design and to reshape the shield as basically a square with slight protrusions above and below where the triangle used to be more obvious. Especially true of BGS' on freeways, where you have to squint to tell the difference between the WI shield and the ugly square that states like IL, IN, WV, CT, MA, etc. use (I hate those even worse than circles, btw).
Some of the county highway departments still use an older version of the shield that shows "a bit more ankle" so to speak - Kenosha County still has the "WIS" in them".
All that said, Wisconsin's shields are still better than most of it's neighbors. Minnesota's shields are really cool in their pure design, but the primary state shield has two big flaws: the golden part fades like crazy on shields and looks lousy over time. And, the top ribbon with the state outline and name (which looks awesome in pure form) is hard to discern, leaving a shield that looks a bit like a decapitated interstate from afar.
In general, color shields that use insufficiently robust paint tend to fare poorly over time. New Mexico's Zia, looks great for about a year or two - eventually fading into a shield that looks like New Jersey's but with smaller font numerals.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on August 03, 2020, 07:39:46 AM
I'm a fan of the new blue shields that SC is gradually phasing in.
They are nice. I am not usually a fan of using a square shield and adding a do-dah here or there to try to make it iconic - but SC does pull it off with their new shields. They look great on BGS' too.
For the plain b&w, I like the MI diamonds. Ok, I'm probably prejudiced. But that's what I think.
I will agree that some of the shields with colors are more iconic. But the ones with state outlines, I can generally take'm or leave'm. Especially since they often suffer in execution, so the state gets stretched or squished.
On the whole, I have to admit that I do not like the state outline shape shields, especially when the shape of the state gets contorted into something a bit too far from the actual geographic outline of the state. This is all but inevitable with 3-digit routes, but even the 2d shape of Alabama is just wrong.
I'm also ambivalent to the square and circle shields. Sure, they're plain, but I don't think of that as something to hate.
So, with that in mind, here's how I've evaluated all of them:
Good
California
Hawaii
Kansas
New Mexico
New York
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Okay
Alaska
Connecticut
Delaware
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Montana
New Jersey
North Carolina
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Utah
Vermont
West Virginia
Bad
Alabama
Arizona
Arkansas
Colorado
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Louisiana
Missouri
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
South Dakota
Tennessee
Washington
Quote from: CoreySamson on August 02, 2020, 10:04:09 PM
Texas's just kinda sucks. It needs to either swap the state shield with the FM shield or make a new state shield that looks similar to the tolled state highways shields. Those look really clean.
I keep seeing people on the forum suggest this, but I am strongly opposed to the idea. Why would you want a shield for a secondary highway to be
more legible while driving than a shield for a primary highway?
Quote from: formulanone on August 03, 2020, 09:39:31 AM
Quote from: SSOWorld on August 02, 2020, 10:24:00 PM
WI loses. Rectangle over triangle?
Be more creative!
Well, it's ahead of all the states with simple squares and circles. They also get a free pass for being the first to actually sign their highways (excluding milestones).
It's all but indistinguishable from a US Route shield, therefore it's automatically a loser shield in my opinion.
I wish TX would snap out of the boring-square funk they are in. The only thing they've done lately is make the border bolder. Still boring. IDK what TxDOT and friends would consider long-term, but I feel something could be done. I just did this on my phone just now:
(https://i.ibb.co/KLmyK1V/20200803-120618.jpg)
Yeah I know, but I'm not by my computer. Either way, TX can do better than the boring squares.
They should just go with the elegant shield they already use for toll highways.
(https://i.imgur.com/yDwUW55.png)
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on August 03, 2020, 12:54:31 PM
On the whole, I have to admit that I do not like the state outline shape shields, especially when the shape of the state gets contorted into something a bit too far from the actual geographic outline of the state. This is all but inevitable with 3-digit routes, but even the 2d shape of Alabama is just wrong.
I'm also ambivalent to the square and circle shields. Sure, they're plain, but I don't think of that as something to hate.
So, with that in mind, here's how I've evaluated all of them:
Good
[...]
Okay
[...]
Bad
[...]
Oklahoma
No, no, no. Oklahoma is OK.
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 03, 2020, 01:31:35 PM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on August 03, 2020, 12:54:31 PM
On the whole, I have to admit that I do not like the state outline shape shields, especially when the shape of the state gets contorted into something a bit too far from the actual geographic outline of the state. This is all but inevitable with 3-digit routes, but even the 2d shape of Alabama is just wrong.
I'm also ambivalent to the square and circle shields. Sure, they're plain, but I don't think of that as something to hate.
So, with that in mind, here's how I've evaluated all of them:
Good
[...]
Okay
[...]
Bad
[...]
Oklahoma
No, no, no. Oklahoma is OK.
Oklahoma is OK - in fact, it's better than just OK. However, that meat cleaver badge really sucks. I know this won't be popular here, but I liked the plain circle much better than this unimaginative, off-centered, OCD triggering mess.
Quote from: StogieGuy7 on August 03, 2020, 01:51:05 PM
I know this won't be popular here, but I liked the plain circle much better than this unimaginative, off-centered, OCD triggering mess.
I agree. I looks like someone's first draft of an idea.
After you see it every day and get used to it, it actually works better than you'd think it would (the outline being so much thinner than the digits helps with that). It's certainly unique, though I don't think it's anywhere near as aesthetically pleasing as the CA or K shields.
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 03, 2020, 02:08:25 PM
After you see it every day and get used to it, it actually works better than you'd think it would (the outline being so much thinner than the digits helps with that).
Yes, I have no issue with legibility. Unlike Idaho's failure of a state-shaped route shield.
I also favor the Kansas route shield. It manages to keep digit size fairly large, while still being obviously Kansas-related and also easily distinguished from other shield types–the latter two points being true even without the use of the state name.
Let's see, what states have shields that keep digit size fairly large, whose design is obviously related to that state, are easily distinguished from other shield types, and pull all of that off without the need for the state name?
AL – Halfway decent, but state outline attempt is rather grotesque.
AR – Similar to Alabama, but the state outline works better.
FL – Digits are too small, design looks half-finished.
GA – Similar to Arkansas.
KS – Definitely.
MO – Similar to Arkansas and Georgia.
NH – Pretty good, but too much like a plain square to be obviously New Hampshire.
NY – Good in theory, it's not obvious what the shape is supposed to represent.
OH – Similar to all the other decent state outline states.
OK – Barely better than Florida.
PA – Very good, especially considering it's just black and white.
SD – Not terrible, but black digits with green outline looks weird to me.
UT – Digits way too small.
WA – See Utah.
Quote from: kphoger on August 03, 2020, 02:26:48 PM
NH – Pretty good, but too much like a plain square to be obviously New Hampshire.
NH doesn't have a good shield for three-digit routes. Too narrow digits.
Quote from: Ben114 on August 03, 2020, 02:32:17 PM
Quote from: kphoger on August 03, 2020, 02:26:48 PM
NH – Pretty good, but too much like a plain square to be obviously New Hampshire.
NH doesn't have a good shield for three-digit routes. Too narrow digits.
True, good point.
Quote from: kphoger on August 03, 2020, 01:30:56 PM
They should just go with the elegant shield they already use for toll highways.
(https://i.imgur.com/yDwUW55.png)
That actually looks nice, but they would have to do a statewide resigning project. I take one look at that shield and automatically associate it with a toll road.
Another thing about the Texas toll shield, sometimes its white numerals on a blue field and other times its blue numerals on a white field. Both are seen on a single route so it's not this route gets blue and the other gets white. Its just sloppy and inconsistent, and another reason for me to get all mad and demand SH-130 be removed in favor of I-435
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on August 03, 2020, 02:38:07 PM
Another thing about the Texas toll shield, sometimes its white numerals on a blue field and other times its blue numerals on a white field. Both are seen on a single route so it's not this route gets blue and the other gets white. Its just sloppy and inconsistent, and another reason for me to get all mad and demand SH-130 be removed in favor of I-435
Maybe you'll like this better, then.
(https://i.imgur.com/g0K0GjB.png)
Quote from: kphoger on August 03, 2020, 02:48:54 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on August 03, 2020, 02:38:07 PM
Another thing about the Texas toll shield, sometimes its white numerals on a blue field and other times its blue numerals on a white field. Both are seen on a single route so it's not this route gets blue and the other gets white. Its just sloppy and inconsistent, and another reason for me to get all mad and demand SH-130 be removed in favor of I-435
Maybe you'll like this better, then.
(https://i.imgur.com/g0K0GjB.png)
Much better
Quote from: SSOWorld on August 02, 2020, 10:24:00 PM
WI loses. Rectangle over triangle?
Be more creative!
More creative than the boring squares, diamonds and circles of some states.
Quote from: kphoger on August 03, 2020, 01:30:56 PM
They should just go with the elegant shield they already use for toll highways.
(https://i.imgur.com/yDwUW55.png)
100 % AGREE! At least the FM Roads are nice.
My personal preference is the use of the state outline, the name or abbreviation, unique design and color. The more combinations, the better. Odd shapes are ok. Squares, Triangles, Circles and Diamonds are boring.
Love:
AK, AZ, CA, CO, KS, MN, NM, WY
Like:
AL, AR, FL, GA, ID (OLD), LA, MO, NE, NV, ND (NEW & OLD), PA, SC, SD, TN, TX (TOLL & FM ROADS), UT,
Ok:
HI, ID (NEW), MI, NH, NC, NY, OH, OK, VT, WA, WI
Dislike:
IL, IN, MD, MT, OR, RI, TX (STANDARD), VA
Hate (None of my criteria met):
CT, DE, IA, KY, ME, MA, NJ, WV
Michigan.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200803/3d044cf7ff28b775a2adcb65b396cbd3.jpg)
Quote from: kphoger on August 03, 2020, 02:26:48 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 03, 2020, 02:08:25 PM
After you see it every day and get used to it, it actually works better than you'd think it would (the outline being so much thinner than the digits helps with that).
Yes, I have no issue with legibility. Unlike Idaho's failure of a state-shaped route shield.
I also favor the Kansas route shield. It manages to keep digit size fairly large, while still being obviously Kansas-related and also easily distinguished from other shield types–the latter two points being true even without the use of the state name.
Let's see, what states have shields that keep digit size fairly large, whose design is obviously related to that state, are easily distinguished from other shield types, and pull all of that off without the need for the state name?
AL – Halfway decent, but state outline attempt is rather grotesque.
[...]
I know it's probably omitted because it includes the state name (though it's not really integral to the shield design), but I prefer to think this list simply refuses to dignify AZ as even being an attempt at a state outline.
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on August 03, 2020, 12:54:31 PM
Bad
Missouri
Your opinion is wrong.
My favorite is probably the old ND one with the Indian guy before they put the boring state shape one. CA, UT, and anything remotely triangular are also up there. Non-square state shapes (even MO) will always win out over regular squares and circles, even if the state in question is LA or ID.
Surprised that Nebraska and the MT secondary shield haven't specifically been mentioned yet.
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on August 03, 2020, 07:11:07 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 03, 2020, 07:02:12 PM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on August 03, 2020, 12:54:31 PM
Bad
Missouri
Your opinion is wrong.
Well, that settles that.
By definition, opinions cannot be wrong.
Also: Bad Missouri: is this the name of a German spa town? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_spa_towns_in_Germany#B)
Hawaii and California are my favorites because they use spade shaped shields.
Note Hawaii state routes are called the drop shields
Quote from: 1 on August 03, 2020, 07:13:47 PM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on August 03, 2020, 07:11:07 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on August 03, 2020, 07:02:12 PM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on August 03, 2020, 12:54:31 PM
Bad
Missouri
Your opinion is wrong.
Well, that settles that.
By definition, opinions cannot be wrong.
Also: Bad Missouri: is this the name of a German spa town? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_spa_towns_in_Germany#B)
Well CtrlAltDel's feeling about MO shields is Bad Kategorisierung.
Quote from: Ben114 on August 02, 2020, 10:55:57 PM
FL and VT are really good.
Add CT and RI to that boring list.
For some reason, RI's instill a hatred within me. They're awful to my eyes -- worst out of the 50.
Maybe it's because they have a wide-open blank and six different fonts to be able to spell out "RHODE ISLAND" and they still just go with "R.I."?
Quote from: bing101 on August 03, 2020, 07:15:35 PM
Hawaii and California are my favorites because they use spade shaped shields.
Note Hawaii state routes are called the drop shields
When they were invented during World War II, for the temporary wartime route numbering system on Oahu (because farmboys stationed there from Nebraska just couldn't deal with unnumbered roads signed with hard-to-pronounce Hawaiian names), they were officially described as "teardrop" markers.
Kind of truth in advertising. Hawaiian tourist brochures usually don't highlight how much it rains there, especially on the windward (eastern, at that latitude) shores.
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 03, 2020, 11:29:35 PM
Maybe it's because they have a wide-open blank and six different fonts to be able to spell out "RHODE ISLAND" and they still just go with "R.I."?
Why abbreviate it as "Rhode Island"?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.corcohighways.org%2Fri2.png&hash=e3ab00328c23468f117ccb313e7e36f16b1ba401)
Much better.
Went state-by-state with my opinions. YMMV here.
Alabama
+: State outline w/ full-height numbers
-: Outline doesn't look that much like the state, wide variant of shield can get crowded.
Grade: B
Alaska
+: Iconography, state name, legible
-: None (unless they start adding 3ds)
Grade: A
Arizona
+: State name and outline, full-height numbers
-: Not a fan of wide variant
Grade: A-
Arkansas
+: State outline, scales well to 3ds
-: Use of series B even on 2-digit routes
Grade: A-
California
+: State name, design simplicity, color, cutout
-: None
Grade: A
Colorado
+: Color, state iconography, no wide variant
-: Numbers are a bit small and top half is sorta busy for my tastes
Grade: A-
Connecticut
+: Heavy outlines look better
-: Generic square, use of series B on 3ds
Grade: C+
Delaware
+/-: Circle shield
Grade: C-
District of Columbia
+: Outline, abbreviation, weird aspect ratio
-: Not sure how well this design would work on other routes, numbers somewhat small
Grade: A-
Florida
+: State outline, scales well to 3 or even 4 digits
-: Numbers are fairly small, I wonder how the gulf coast feels about getting cut out of the shield
Grade: A-
Georgia
+: State outline, scales fairly well to 3 digits
-: None
Grade: A
Hawaii
+: Unique shape, can fit 4 digits without wide variant
-: Numbers can get pretty tiny
Grade: B
Idaho (2020 redesign)
+: State outline
-: Zero outline, removal of state name, no outline, so numbers are pushed right up against the edge of the shield, looks bad in positive contrast
Grade: D-
Illinois
+: State name; numbers in scale with rest of design, giving room for state name to breathe; use of series D throughout
-: Generic square
Grade: B-
Indiana
+: State name
-: Generic square, numbers are too big and crowd rest of design, especially on routes 200+, state name too small
Grade: C-
Iowa
+: Used to use only the normal circle shield, which is my preference (even if numbers were squeezed in). Now use the elongated one for 3ds, which is still better than the oval.
-: Generic circle shield.
Grade: C
Kansas
+: State iconography, use of color
-: Some contrast issues with the numbers, wide shield looks bad
Grade: B
Kentucky
+: Uses elongated version of circle shield
-: Generic circle shield
Grade: C
Louisiana
+: State outline and abbreviation
-: Preferred white-on-green version, numbers are very small, use of series B even on 2d routes.
Grade: B+
Maine
+/-: Generic square / rectangle.
Grade: C
Maryland
+: State name, like the use of bar to divide up the space while keeping the numbers fairly large
-: A bit generic, could use some padding on the state name
Grade: B+
Massachusetts
+/-: Generic square / rectangle.
Grade: C
Michigan
+: Unique shape, 'M' logo
-: Logo crowds shield, numbers are small, prefer rounded edges of NC's version, wide variant looks bad
Grade: B-
Minnesota
+: Good use of color; state name and outline that don't take over design, good wide variant
-: Can be a bit too similar to interstate numbers
Grade: A-
Mississippi
+: None
-: Generic circle shield, uses oval
Grade: C-
Missouri
+: State outline, good-looking wide variant
-: Numbers need more space to breathe
Grade: A-
Montana
+: State name, heavy outline to give contrast
-: Generic square/rectangle.
Grade: B-
Nebraska
+: Unique shape, state name
-: Wagon design is too detailed and not really legible, state name should be taller, corners should be rounded a bit
Grade: B
Nevada
+: State name and outline, no wide variant, cute compact design
-: Teeny tiny numbers, even on 2ds, too much black space.
Grade: B-
New Hampshire
+: State iconography
-: Design element is probably too subtle for a shield (and no longer exists, anyway), needs a wide variant
Grade: B-
New Jersey
+: None
-: Generic circle shield, uses oval
Grade: C-
New Mexico
+: Attempt at color and iconography
-: Zia symbol crowds the shield and doesn't physically age well, numbers are fairly small
Grade: B-
New York
+: Unique shape, state iconography (I guess)
-: Prefer the wider variant, could use some more outline on the sides
Grade: B+
North Carolina
+: Unique shape, clean design
-: Tiny numbers, kinda generic
Grade: B+
North Dakota
+: State outline and name, can hold 4 digits
-: The projection used for the outline makes everything look trapezoidal and weird, design feels somewhat crowded and numbers could use more space. Plus, the state outline isn't really recognizable enough to work anyway.
Grade: C
Ohio
+: State outline with unique shape, good looking wide variant
-: None
Grade: A
Oklahoma
+: State outline, good wide variant
-: Overlap is kind of annoying to template on Inkscape, use of series B on 3ds
Grade: A-
Oregon
+: Unique shape, clean design
-: Generic, wide variant looks weird and bloated
Grade: B-
Pennsylvania
+: Unique state iconography, recognizable shape
-: Numbers should be a wee bit smaller and pulled downwards a touch.
Grade: A
Rhode Island
+: State abbreviation
-: Generic rectangle, why can't they write the name out?
Grade: C
South Carolina
+: State name, outline, and iconography, plus color
-: None
Grade A
South Dakota
+: State outline, use of color, can fit 4 digits
-: Projection of state outline causes weirdness, should get rid of the normal variant and only use the wide one.
Grade: A-
Tennessee
+: State name and outline, custom font
-: None
Grade: A
Texas
+: Heavy outline, state name, uses series D consistently
-: Generic square, numbers are sort of small
Grade: B
Utah
+: Unique shape and iconography, like the white outline around the beehive, wide variant looks good
-: Difficult to squeeze all of the numbers in there, so they're pretty small.
Grade: A-
Vermont
+: State name, use of color, good wide variant
-: Not sure the sliced circle design totally works for me, maybe an elongated circle would look better.
Grade: B
Virginia
+: Unique shape, good wide variant
-: Semi-generic, not much to discuss
Grade: B
Washington
+: State iconography, unique shape
-: Using a person's head looks weird, and numbers have to be crammed in in order to fit well.
Grade: B
West Virginia
+: Heavy outlines, clean rounded eges
-: Generic square/rectangle
Grade: C+
Wisconsin
+: Unique shape, recognizable design (sort of)
-: could use some more black space around the middle, needs a wide variant
Grade: B+
Wyoming
+: Use of colors, state name and iconography
-: State name could be a little smaller, numbers could be bigger
Grade: A-
I would say that my favorite is Ohio or South Carolina and my least favorite is Idaho's new design.
In my opinion, the three best are the states I've lived longest in: Colorado, Kansas, and Minnesota. The other two states that I've lived in, Florida and Washington, aren't bad. Colorado and Minnesota also happen to have some of the best license plates.
Chris
One of the few things I liked about living in Nebraska was its state highway shield. It is a trapezoid with a wagon at the bottom. Not sure how they could improve on that. I also like Minnesota's shield because of the blue and gold combo. The one negative is that old signs look old and wore out.
The worst, at least among states I've been in, is Indiana. It looks like they ripped off Illinois, which is a boring design, and gave it big numbers, which makes the whole thing ugly.
Quote from: Thing 342 on August 04, 2020, 01:09:04 AM
Kansas
+: State iconography, use of color
-: Some contrast issues with the numbers, wide shield looks bad
Grade: B
The wide shield is just a fat sunflower. :P
Quote from: corco on August 04, 2020, 12:35:22 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 03, 2020, 11:29:35 PM
Maybe it's because they have a wide-open blank and six different fonts to be able to spell out "RHODE ISLAND" and they still just go with "R.I."?
Why abbreviate it as "Rhode Island"?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.corcohighways.org%2Fri2.png&hash=e3ab00328c23468f117ccb313e7e36f16b1ba401)
Much better.
I believe they dropped the plantation part of their name recently. I think it was because of it being associated with slavery.
Quote from: Thing 342 on August 04, 2020, 01:09:04 AM
Minnesota
+: Good use of color; state name and outline that don't take over design, good wide variant
-: Can be a bit too similar to interstate numbers
This.
I would absolutely LOVE the Minnesota route marker, if only it didn't look so similar to the Interstate shield. As it is, it's too difficult to tell them apart for me to give it a thumbs-up.
Quote from: Rothman on August 04, 2020, 07:55:52 AM
Quote from: corco on August 04, 2020, 12:35:22 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 03, 2020, 11:29:35 PM
Maybe it's because they have a wide-open blank and six different fonts to be able to spell out "RHODE ISLAND" and they still just go with "R.I."?
Why abbreviate it as "Rhode Island"?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.corcohighways.org%2Fri2.png&hash=e3ab00328c23468f117ccb313e7e36f16b1ba401)
Much better.
I believe they dropped the plantation part of their name recently. I think it was because of it being associated with slavery.
False - the governor signed an executive order removing the "Providence Plantations" part from official communications but a ballot referendum in November will decide if the name is formally/legally changed. Last time they tried this in 2010 it failed with 78% voting to keep the longer name.
Quote from: corco on August 04, 2020, 12:35:22 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 03, 2020, 11:29:35 PM
Maybe it's because they have a wide-open blank and six different fonts to be able to spell out "RHODE ISLAND" and they still just go with "R.I."?
Why abbreviate it as "Rhode Island"?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.corcohighways.org%2Fri2.png&hash=e3ab00328c23468f117ccb313e7e36f16b1ba401)
Much better.
Actually, Little Rhody is dropping the "...and Providence Plantations" part of the official state name because "plantation" is a racist term.
I kid you not...
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/rhode-island-drops-plantation-state-documents-symbols-n1231866
Quote from: Thing 342 on August 04, 2020, 01:09:04 AM
Idaho (2020 redesign)
+: State outline
-: Zero outline, removal of state name, no outline, so numbers are pushed right up against the edge of the shield, looks bad in positive contrast
Grade: D-
I've looked and looked on Google (and Google Maps) and haven't been able to find a rendering of this new redesign. Doesn't sound good though.
And, why fix what isn't broken? Their long-standing design, while not the very best, was unique and pretty good (with the contrast).
Quote from: hbelkins on August 04, 2020, 11:46:04 AM
Actually, Little Rhody is dropping the "...and Providence Plantations" part of the official state name because "plantation" is a racist term.
I kid you not...
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/rhode-island-drops-plantation-state-documents-symbols-n1231866
Because some people who think they know everything, actually don't know shit. This is a fine example: the word "plantation" means a large plot of land - usually associated with agriculture, but not necessarily. It does not mean "slavery," as not all 'plantations' had slaves. It depended on what crops those "plantations" (or farms) were involved with. So, if we go by this sort of logic, then we should all stop wearing cotton clothing because the cultivation of cotton was extremely labor intensive and thus the owners had slaves to do that labor. Roger Williams' Providence Plantations had NOTHING to do with slavery, cotton or any other such thing.
But none of that matters, because virtue signaling is prioritized above all else by SJW's like the Governor of RI. And the average 22 year old college graduate is so poorly educated that they probably do think that anything named 'plantation' must have had slaves.
Quote from: StogieGuy7 on August 04, 2020, 12:29:03 PM
I've looked and looked on Google (and Google Maps) and haven't been able to find a rendering of this new redesign.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/38/ID-19.svg/200px-ID-19.svg.png) (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b2/Idaho_19.svg/200px-Idaho_19.svg.png)
Quote from: StogieGuy7 on August 04, 2020, 12:29:03 PM
And, why fix what isn't broken? Their long-standing design, while not the very best, was unique and pretty good (with the contrast).
But it
is broken. Compare the digit sizes on the shields below:
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5e/Maine_3.svg/240px-Maine_3.svg.png) (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fc/ID-3.svg/240px-ID-3.svg.png) (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/04/Circle_sign_3.svg/240px-Circle_sign_3.svg.png)
Quote from: StogieGuy7 on August 04, 2020, 12:37:56 PM
And the average 22 year old college graduate is so poorly educated that they probably do think that anything named 'plantation' must have had slaves.
Ding ding ding! People jump to conclusions without having researched the history in question.
Thanks kphoger!
That new shield seems lost, it's just lacking to me. While the ID shields always had relatively small font numerals, it balanced pretty well between black and white. Without the border and state name, and with the colors inverted, the design looks like crap. Why do this? Who's bright idea was it to f**k up a perfectly fine design?
Quote from: StogieGuy7 on August 04, 2020, 12:37:56 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on August 04, 2020, 11:46:04 AM
Actually, Little Rhody is dropping the "...and Providence Plantations" part of the official state name because "plantation" is a racist term.
I kid you not...
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/rhode-island-drops-plantation-state-documents-symbols-n1231866
Because some people who think they know everything, actually don't know shit. This is a fine example: the word "plantation" means a large plot of land - usually associated with agriculture, but not necessarily. It does not mean "slavery," as not all 'plantations' had slaves. It depended on what crops those "plantations" (or farms) were involved with. So, if we go by this sort of logic, then we should all stop wearing cotton clothing because the cultivation of cotton was extremely labor intensive and thus the owners had slaves to do that labor. Roger Williams' Providence Plantations had NOTHING to do with slavery, cotton or any other such thing.
But none of that matters, because virtue signaling is prioritized above all else by SJW's like the Governor of RI. And the average 22 year old college graduate is so poorly educated that they probably do think that anything named 'plantation' must have had slaves.
Is there any real functional reason to keep an entire
half of the state name that nobody actually uses, especially when there is little agriculture in the Providence area anymore? It's literally three words with no meaning that say nothing.
Hell, the full official name is longer than the state is. Connecticut is probably pushing for this because they're afraid the name will spill over the border and end up in their territory.
Quote from: StogieGuy7 on August 04, 2020, 12:47:59 PM
Thanks kphoger!
That new shield seems lost, it's just lacking to me. While the ID shields always had relatively small font numerals, it balanced pretty well between black and white. Without the border and state name, and with the colors inverted, the design looks like crap. Why do this? Who's bright idea was it to f**k up a perfectly fine design?
Here are a couple pictures in the field - for reference. Not as bad as on Wikipedia but still quite terrible. The reason for the change from my understanding was to have one shield that can be used on both guide signs and on standalone mounts. It does seem like they could have just gone to the old guide sign shield (http://www.corcohighways.org/highways/id/84/84busnampato69/1b.jpg) for standalone usage though...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.corcohighways.org%2Fhighways%2Fid%2F52%2F72to95%2F9new.jpg&hash=412cae55102e484092a2d563597cae20d558a55e)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.corcohighways.org%2Fhighways%2Fid%2F55%2F84nampato78%2F0.jpg&hash=c87ccb4e1028671c7fdb1bbe617ff9798a09c7d9)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.corcohighways.org%2Fhighways%2Fid%2F84%2F20to84mountainhome%2F5new2.jpg&hash=8b0216e681e55ab8bfbe8c0881b53fa1a9ff124c)
They did seem to test some new designs that you can see as you drive around before coming to this - see this on SH-55 (http://www.corcohighways.org/highways/id/55/84nampato78/2c.jpg) and this on SH-24 (http://www.corcohighways.org/highways/id/24/93to25/13new.jpg). Either of these would probably have been a better compromise.
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 04, 2020, 12:56:01 PM
Quote from: StogieGuy7 on August 04, 2020, 12:37:56 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on August 04, 2020, 11:46:04 AM
Actually, Little Rhody is dropping the "...and Providence Plantations" part of the official state name because "plantation" is a racist term.
I kid you not...
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/rhode-island-drops-plantation-state-documents-symbols-n1231866
Because some people who think they know everything, actually don't know shit. This is a fine example: the word "plantation" means a large plot of land - usually associated with agriculture, but not necessarily. It does not mean "slavery," as not all 'plantations' had slaves. It depended on what crops those "plantations" (or farms) were involved with. So, if we go by this sort of logic, then we should all stop wearing cotton clothing because the cultivation of cotton was extremely labor intensive and thus the owners had slaves to do that labor. Roger Williams' Providence Plantations had NOTHING to do with slavery, cotton or any other such thing.
But none of that matters, because virtue signaling is prioritized above all else by SJW's like the Governor of RI. And the average 22 year old college graduate is so poorly educated that they probably do think that anything named 'plantation' must have had slaves.
Is there any real functional reason to keep an entire half of the state name that nobody actually uses, especially when there is little agriculture in the Providence area anymore? It's literally three words with no meaning that say nothing.
It's just the official name of the colony, which later became the state. It has historical significance in that way and it literally defines the state. Rhode Island, as we know, is not an island. But "Rhode Island" is a real island, on which are Newport and other towns are located. The Providence Plantations covered the area north and west of Narragansett Bay and define much of what are now Providence, Kent and Washington Counties. Rhode Island is the shortened name of the state, but refers only to what is now part of Newport County. Yes, they should have named the state something different to begin with, but people were different back then.
I propose that they name it "Ri", pronounced like the bread, so that they will have a name that can actually fit inside the state on maps.
Quote from: corco on August 04, 2020, 12:58:07 PM
Quote from: StogieGuy7 on August 04, 2020, 12:47:59 PM
Thanks kphoger!
That new shield seems lost, it's just lacking to me. While the ID shields always had relatively small font numerals, it balanced pretty well between black and white. Without the border and state name, and with the colors inverted, the design looks like crap. Why do this? Who's bright idea was it to f**k up a perfectly fine design?
Here are a couple pictures in the field - for reference. Not as bad as on Wikipedia but still quite terrible. The reason for the change from my understanding was to have one shield that can be used on both guide signs and on standalone mounts. It does seem like they could have just gone to the old guide sign shield (http://www.corcohighways.org/highways/id/84/84busnampato69/1b.jpg) for standalone usage though...
I totally agree with you. That guide sign shield, while not great, would still be better than the new one. Even keeping the border would have helped. Keeping the state name would have helped. Right now, it just looks like an odd collection of shapes before you focus on it. Pretty bad and deserving of the aforementioned grade of D-.
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 04, 2020, 01:05:56 PM
I propose that they name it "Ri", pronounced like the bread, so that they will have a name that can actually fit inside the state on maps.
Honestly, at first blush, naming it "Rhode Island" when it's not an island at all seems pretty silly. But when you eventually learn the full name you see how that happened. Like many things, it may not make sense to us but it made perfect sense to the old timers who did it and I guess I can see why - from their perspective. Later use and misuses of the name led us to where we are now.
If Gina wants to change the name, then honestly she should just start over from scratch. And she might as well tear down Roger Williams' statue too because he's spinning in his grave.
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 04, 2020, 12:56:01 PM
Hell, the full official name is longer than the state is. Connecticut is probably pushing for this because they're afraid the name will spill over the border and end up in their territory.
Thank you for the laugh!
Quote from: kphoger on August 03, 2020, 01:30:56 PM
They should just go with the elegant shield they already use for toll highways.
(https://i.imgur.com/yDwUW55.png)
YESSSS! They should totally use this!
Quote from: kphoger on August 04, 2020, 12:43:11 PM
But it is broken. Compare the digit sizes on the shields below:
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5e/Maine_3.svg/240px-Maine_3.svg.png) (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fc/ID-3.svg/240px-ID-3.svg.png) (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/04/Circle_sign_3.svg/240px-Circle_sign_3.svg.png)
Not necessarily any smaller than the digits in the North Carolina and Michigan diamonds, the Utah beehive, the Tennessee triangle, or the Colorado flag.
Quote from: hbelkins on August 04, 2020, 04:50:37 PM
Not necessarily any smaller than the digits in the North Carolina and Michigan diamonds, the Utah beehive, the Tennessee triangle, or the Colorado flag.
Colorado, Utah, and Michigan all have shorter digits than Idaho.
North Carolina is approximately the same, though with a heavier stroke and better width.
Tennessee triangles knock Idaho out of the park when it comes to digit height, though.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/33/Colorado_3.svg/200px-Colorado_3.svg.png) (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/Utah_8.svg/200px-Utah_8.svg.png) (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/74/M-3.svg/200px-M-3.svg.png)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e7/Idaho_3.svg/200px-Idaho_3.svg.png) (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a2/NC_3.svg/200px-NC_3.svg.png)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ea/Secondary_Tennessee_2.svg/200px-Secondary_Tennessee_2.svg.png)
Shorter doesn’t mean a whole lot when you’re using a narrower font series, though. I’d take series D over slightly taller series C any day.
The other thing that makes Idaho’s new shield so bad is the number is pushed way up in the corner. It was at least somewhat centered in the older versions.
Quote from: stridentweasel on August 04, 2020, 07:38:29 AM
Quote from: Thing 342 on August 04, 2020, 01:09:04 AM
Kansas
+: State iconography, use of color
-: Some contrast issues with the numbers, wide shield looks bad
Grade: B
The wide shield is just a fat sunflower. :P
I like the oval sunflower. It looks funny.
Generally, I like state outlines, but Georgia and Missouri both have a problem that Alabama, Arkansas and Ohio don't (at least to my knowledge): They use multiple outlines that have distinct differences, and they're usually uglier.
A Georgia route marker should look like this (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cb/Georgia_17.svg/1024px-Georgia_17.svg.png). A Missouri route marker should look like this (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/79/MO-5.svg/1024px-MO-5.svg.png). Even minor differences (aside from widening) make them look worse.
Quote from: StogieGuy7 on August 04, 2020, 12:37:56 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on August 04, 2020, 11:46:04 AM
Actually, Little Rhody is dropping the "...and Providence Plantations" part of the official state name because "plantation" is a racist term.
I kid you not...
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/rhode-island-drops-plantation-state-documents-symbols-n1231866
Because some people who think they know everything, actually don't know shit. This is a fine example: the word "plantation" means a large plot of land - usually associated with agriculture, but not necessarily. It does not mean "slavery," as not all 'plantations' had slaves. It depended on what crops those "plantations" (or farms) were involved with. So, if we go by this sort of logic, then we should all stop wearing cotton clothing because the cultivation of cotton was extremely labor intensive and thus the owners had slaves to do that labor. Roger Williams' Providence Plantations had NOTHING to do with slavery, cotton or any other such thing.
But none of that matters, because virtue signaling is prioritized above all else by SJW's like the Governor of RI. And the average 22 year old college graduate is so poorly educated that they probably do think that anything named 'plantation' must have had slaves.
You are right about one thing here, and one thing only: that the settlement of Providence Plantations had no slaves, and wasn't what you think of as a typical plantation. "Plantations" here is a misnomer - from what I read, common usage of the word in the 17th century equated to "settlement" or "colony".
Perhaps not all plantations had slaves, but the fact that people are defending something that is still so closely associated with slavery isn't a good look. Slavery is a disgusting stain on American history - you would think people would jump at the chance to get rid of words, monuments, and other parts of the culture that have anything to do with it. You don't see people (people in their right mind, at least) holding out to preserve remnants of the Holocaust.
As far as the last sentence goes (which is extraordinarily ironic), what did a 22-year-old college graduate ever do to you?! The whole disdain for younger generations thing is ridiculous.
I had better contribute to the thread while I'm here. Colorado, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Vermont, New York are my favorites.
Quote from: csw on August 04, 2020, 06:48:26 PM
You are right about one thing here, and one thing only: that the settlement of Providence Plantations had no slaves, and wasn't what you think of as a typical plantation. "Plantations" here is a misnomer - from what I read, common usage of the word in the 17th century equated to "settlement" or "colony".
Perhaps not all plantations had slaves, but the fact that people are defending something that is still so closely associated with slavery isn't a good look.
But not plantations in northern states that never had slavery. Or Hawaiian plantations (lots of old ones, when sugar and pineapple were king), which likewise were slave-free. The association of northern and Hawaiian plantations with slavery is sloppy thinking at best. (But I'm not sure RI's governor was buying into that, rather than just giving lip service to the bogus association of RI's plantations with slavery.)
As far as the overlong state name ("smallest state with the longest name"), I had to use it a lot, back when I was working on a project with attorneys from the RI Attorney General's office. I couldn't just type out the state name when addressing letters to them, so I had to copy and paste instead.
Quote from: oscar on August 04, 2020, 07:05:06 PM
northern states that never had slavery
It's not really your main point, but in 1776, slavery was legal in all thirteen of the colonies/states. Abolition only really started to gain ground with the Revolutionary War.
Quote from: Gnutella on August 04, 2020, 06:36:02 PM
A Georgia route marker should look like this (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cb/Georgia_17.svg/1024px-Georgia_17.svg.png).
Absolutely agreed. Unfortunately it seems that we stopped using this particular shape sometime around the early 2000s. Of the various designs employed since, some of them use a more accurate state outline, but they are, IMO, less effective as a route marker.
I am glad that Idaho still retains Sad Nixon on their shield.
While it's a state outline, the other half of the Idaho sheild looks like a man with a weird nose looking down at the ground.
EDIT: I didn't see the post above mine before posting lol
Quote from: oscar on August 04, 2020, 07:05:06 PM
Quote from: csw on August 04, 2020, 06:48:26 PM
You are right about one thing here, and one thing only: that the settlement of Providence Plantations had no slaves, and wasn't what you think of as a typical plantation. "Plantations" here is a misnomer - from what I read, common usage of the word in the 17th century equated to "settlement" or "colony".
Perhaps not all plantations had slaves, but the fact that people are defending something that is still so closely associated with slavery isn't a good look.
But not plantations in northern states that never had slavery. Or Hawaiian plantations (lots of old ones, when sugar and pineapple were king), which likewise were slave-free. The association of northern and Hawaiian plantations with slavery is sloppy thinking at best. (But I'm not sure RI's governor was buying into that, rather than just giving lip service to the bogus association of RI's plantations with slavery.)
Of course the ones outside of the South didn't have slaves, I understand that. I hear the word "plantation", I think of Southern plantations, with slaves. If you say "plantation" to the average person, they're going to think of Southern plantations, with slaves. Similarly, "holocaust" is a normal dictionary word, but the average person sees or hears it and thinks about The Holocaust. All Rhode Island is trying to do is eliminate the
possibility of association with Southern plantations. Again, I think it's commendable that they want to get rid of any
possibility of association with slavery. (By the way, this is a great example of just how deeply ingrained slavery is in American culture.) Keeping around a few extra words that the general population doesn't even know about just for the sake of history isn't worth it. Besides, the longer name would still be preserved in history books anyways - that's what history books are for, right?
I will concede that Kansas has a fantastic shield, probably my favorite. I am a fan of their particular usage of thick numerals.
Missouri's design is a little smoothed-out and sloppy for my tastes. I have seen a more detailed and accurate rendering of the state outline from time to time, especially on construction signage. Even within standard signage, there is a vast range in the quality (and accuracy) of state outlines.
The one thing that once endeared me to Connecticut's signage has been its way out in the last few years. CTDOT used to cram three-digit route numbers into thin-bordered squares in elegant Series B. Recently, they've been ripping the older signs out (both in and out of construction zones) and replacing them with ugly thick-bordered rectangles in comparatively ugly Series E (or F, I'm not sure).
Quote from: csw on August 04, 2020, 09:17:39 PM
Quote from: oscar on August 04, 2020, 07:05:06 PM
Quote from: csw on August 04, 2020, 06:48:26 PM
You are right about one thing here, and one thing only: that the settlement of Providence Plantations had no slaves, and wasn't what you think of as a typical plantation. "Plantations" here is a misnomer - from what I read, common usage of the word in the 17th century equated to "settlement" or "colony".
Perhaps not all plantations had slaves, but the fact that people are defending something that is still so closely associated with slavery isn't a good look.
But not plantations in northern states that never had slavery. Or Hawaiian plantations (lots of old ones, when sugar and pineapple were king), which likewise were slave-free. The association of northern and Hawaiian plantations with slavery is sloppy thinking at best. (But I'm not sure RI's governor was buying into that, rather than just giving lip service to the bogus association of RI's plantations with slavery.)
Of course the ones outside of the South didn't have slaves, I understand that. I hear the word "plantation", I think of Southern plantations, with slaves. If you say "plantation" to the average person, they're going to think of Southern plantations, with slaves. Similarly, "holocaust" is a normal dictionary word, but the average person sees or hears it and thinks about The Holocaust. All Rhode Island is trying to do is eliminate the possibility of association with Southern plantations. Again, I think it's commendable that they want to get rid of any possibility of association with slavery. (By the way, this is a great example of just how deeply ingrained slavery is in American culture.) Keeping around a few extra words that the general population doesn't even know about just for the sake of history isn't worth it. Besides, the longer name would still be preserved in history books anyways - that's what history books are for, right?
I don't mean to derail this thread (which is a great subject). But I just think that we shouldn't pander to the poorly educated, nor should we tear down our shared history. And the "dropping" of "2 words" shows ignorance, political opportunism (pandering to the ignorant) and short-sightedness. Leaving it alone, simply because it
never had anything to do with slavery, would have been the best thing to do. Just my POV.
Quote from: StogieGuy7 on August 05, 2020, 01:01:15 PM
And the "dropping" of "2 words" shows ignorance
Most likely because they're dropping
three words, presumably.
Quote from: TravelingBethelite on August 05, 2020, 12:46:56 AM
I will concede that Kansas has a fantastic shield, probably my favorite. I am a fan of their particular usage of thick numerals.
Kansas uses bog-standard Series D on two-digit routes and C on three-digit. There's nothing particularly "thick" about them.
Maybe you're thinking of Nebraska and its penchant for using Series D Modified for no real reason?
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 04, 2020, 01:05:56 PM
I propose that they name it "Ri", pronounced like the bread, so that they will have a name that can actually fit inside the state on maps.
If that happened, then I want to move to Massachusetts immediately north of the state line to found a town called Pastrami.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;attach=1068;type=avatar)
This has been my avatar since right after I joined the board. I took the boring Texas square, made an outline of the Alamo with the border and added proper series numbers. I now think that the flag is a little overdone and can probably go away. But I hope TxDOT has a redesign contest with the Texas bicentennial coming up.
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 05, 2020, 01:40:39 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 04, 2020, 01:05:56 PM
I propose that they name it "Ri", pronounced like the bread, so that they will have a name that can actually fit inside the state on maps.
If that happened, then I want to move to Massachusetts immediately north of the state line to found a town called Pastrami.
Don't put it too close to Cape Cod, lest the Sandwich Police want a word with you about it.
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 05, 2020, 01:31:36 PM
Quote from: StogieGuy7 on August 05, 2020, 01:01:15 PM
And the "dropping" of "2 words" shows ignorance
Most likely because they're dropping three words, presumably.
Yeah, you got me - I forgot about the ever-offensive word "and".
All states with colorful interesting designs > All states with monochrome interesting designs > (colored sign with a state outline >) State outlines > state name in a box or boring monochrome shape > empty circles > empty squares.
i.e.
1. CO, MN, CA, KS, NM, VT
2. WA, OR, AK, ND, NE, UT, MI, NY, NH, PA, ID (ID is interesting to me because the number's outside the state)
(2.5. SD, plus WY & SC for having colors but otherwise boring designs)
3. OK, TN, GA, FL, AL, LA, AZ, NV, MO, AR
4. IL, IN, MT, RI, TX, MD (plus NC, VA, HI for being a boring single shape)
5. NJ, MS, KY, IA, DE
6. CT, WV, ME, MA
For me, it's the classic CA miner's spade! Although I agree that KS' sunflower is pretty freaking cool...
Quote from: Thing 342 on August 04, 2020, 01:09:04 AM
Idaho (2020 redesign)
+: State outline
-: Zero outline, removal of state name, no outline, so numbers are pushed right up against the edge of the shield, looks bad in positive contrast
Grade: D-
There was a redesign? What does old vs new look like?
Nvm, found it. Looks like crap.
CA, OR eagle shields (no longer used :(), OR modern shield, BC, MN, NM, ID
Quote from: Rothman on August 04, 2020, 08:48:59 PM
I am glad that Idaho still retains Sad Nixon on their shield.
I can't un-see that now. Or a sad caricature of Bob Hope.
Quote from: kphoger on August 04, 2020, 05:12:50 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on August 04, 2020, 04:50:37 PM
Not necessarily any smaller than the digits in the North Carolina and Michigan diamonds, the Utah beehive, the Tennessee triangle, or the Colorado flag.
Colorado, Utah, and Michigan all have shorter digits than Idaho.
North Carolina is approximately the same, though with a heavier stroke and better width.
Tennessee triangles knock Idaho out of the park when it comes to digit height, though.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ea/Secondary_Tennessee_2.svg/200px-Secondary_Tennessee_2.svg.png)
In practice, Tennessee triangle digits aren't nearly that big.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/546/31708256880_d6741dea23_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/QiX759)2016 Alabama Meet Trip Day 1 - 458 (https://flic.kr/p/QiX759) by H.B. Elkins (https://www.flickr.com/photos/hbelkins/), on Flickr
Shields that try to be too fancy are the worst, IMO, and states like Nevada (with pathetically small digits) are a no-go for me. I'd rather take the simple, straightforward square or circle. In particular, CT and WV have great shields with thick borders that look pretty nice.
Quote from: formulanone on August 06, 2020, 09:30:10 AM
Quote from: Rothman on August 04, 2020, 08:48:59 PM
I am glad that Idaho still retains Sad Nixon on their shield.
I can't un-see that now. Or a sad caricature of Bob Hope.
I always thought the Idaho-Montana border looked like Abraham Lincoln, which means Abraham Lincoln is always looking into Idaho.
Quote from: Henry on August 05, 2020, 07:33:25 PM
For me, it's the classic CA miner's spade! Although I agree that KS' sunflower is pretty freaking cool...
I have to agree. And the classic miner's spade looked awesome with the bear and the button copy route numbers! Never cared for the green spade as much because of the way it just blends into the BGS, which I've long found to be boring. On it's own, it looks good - but not even close to the prior series' that it replaced.
Which one is better or the two below?
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cd/OR_50_1948.svg/200px-OR_50_1948.svg.png) (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ad/California_30_1948.svg/200px-California_30_1948.svg.png)
Quote from: kphoger on August 07, 2020, 03:03:15 PM
Which one is better or the two below?
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cd/OR_50_1948.svg/200px-OR_50_1948.svg.png) (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ad/California_30_1948.svg/200px-California_30_1948.svg.png)
Both are awesome, Oregon may have an edge in this one. Of course, CA used button copy on the numerals so....extra credit.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on August 05, 2020, 01:59:58 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 05, 2020, 01:40:39 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 04, 2020, 01:05:56 PM
I propose that they name it "Ri", pronounced like the bread, so that they will have a name that can actually fit inside the state on maps.
If that happened, then I want to move to Massachusetts immediately north of the state line to found a town called Pastrami.
Don't put it too close to Cape Cod, lest the Sandwich Police want a word with you about it.
Not to mention all the towns in Massachusetts that end in "ham" (including Chatham and Eastham on the Cape).
Quote from: kphoger on August 07, 2020, 03:03:15 PM
Which one is better or the two below?
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cd/OR_50_1948.svg/200px-OR_50_1948.svg.png) (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ad/California_30_1948.svg/200px-California_30_1948.svg.png)
I'm really liking that Oregon one. I would just make the state name a little smaller so the numbers could be bigger.
Quote from: KCRoadFan on August 07, 2020, 05:20:26 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on August 05, 2020, 01:59:58 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 05, 2020, 01:40:39 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 04, 2020, 01:05:56 PM
I propose that they name it "Ri", pronounced like the bread, so that they will have a name that can actually fit inside the state on maps.
If that happened, then I want to move to Massachusetts immediately north of the state line to found a town called Pastrami.
Don't put it too close to Cape Cod, lest the Sandwich Police want a word with you about it.
Not to mention all the towns in Massachusetts that end in "ham" (including Chatham and Eastham on the Cape).
But if you Needham, you have to leave the Cape.
Quote from: formulanone on August 09, 2020, 01:00:40 PM
Quote from: KCRoadFan on August 07, 2020, 05:20:26 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on August 05, 2020, 01:59:58 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 05, 2020, 01:40:39 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 04, 2020, 01:05:56 PM
I propose that they name it "Ri", pronounced like the bread, so that they will have a name that can actually fit inside the state on maps.
If that happened, then I want to move to Massachusetts immediately north of the state line to found a town called Pastrami.
Don't put it too close to Cape Cod, lest the Sandwich Police want a word with you about it.
Not to mention all the towns in Massachusetts that end in "ham" (including Chatham and Eastham on the Cape).
But if you Needham, you have to leave the Cape.
Ideally, Needham would find a Gotham, but there isn't one in Massachusetts. Dedham (which is adjacent) has ham, but it's dead. Stoneham has petrified ham. Wenham has some, but when are they going to deliver it? Framingham keeps theirs on display in picture frames instead of distributing it. Then Needham realized – who eats live pigs? They can get it from Dedham without any problems, which also happens to be the closest option.
Quote from: Road Hog on August 05, 2020, 01:57:01 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;attach=1068;type=avatar)
This has been my avatar since right after I joined the board. I took the boring Texas square, made an outline of the Alamo with the border and added proper series numbers. I now think that the flag is a little overdone and can probably go away. But I hope TxDOT has a redesign contest with the Texas bicentennial coming up.
I don't think Texas will ever do a redesign. The understated quality of the signs is very much part of the culture, especially in rural areas.
Besides, the distinction between SH signs and FM/RM signs is kind of perfect - state highways are to get you from here-to-there, while FMs are for if you want to see the "real Texas".
Quote from: jmacswimmer on August 05, 2020, 01:59:58 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 05, 2020, 01:40:39 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 04, 2020, 01:05:56 PM
I propose that they name it "Ri", pronounced like the bread, so that they will have a name that can actually fit inside the state on maps.
If that happened, then I want to move to Massachusetts immediately north of the state line to found a town called Pastrami.
Don't put it too close to Cape Cod, lest the Sandwich Police want a word with you about it.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200810/c8d5a8af486b7086fbf79dfa91947b83.jpg)
Quote from: 6a on August 10, 2020, 04:12:53 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200810/c8d5a8af486b7086fbf79dfa91947b83.jpg)
hehehe
My ex-girlfriend's stepfather used to work in conjunction with the Sandwich Police during the fair every year.
Quote from: kphoger on August 11, 2020, 01:41:47 PM
Quote from: 6a on August 10, 2020, 04:12:53 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200810/c8d5a8af486b7086fbf79dfa91947b83.jpg)
hehehe
My ex-girlfriend's stepfather used to work in conjunction with the Sandwich Police during the fair every year.
Did they arrest the Hamburglar?
Quote from: 6a on August 10, 2020, 04:12:53 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200810/c8d5a8af486b7086fbf79dfa91947b83.jpg)
There so many opinions on what makes a good or bad sandwich that this image alone could inspire a whole song parody.
Favorite: CO, MN, WY, KS, CA, SD, LA, NM, SC, VT
Next Tier: AK, DC, FL, OK, TN
Ambivalent: ID, NV, AZ, AR, MO, AL, GA, OH, MT, TX, IL, IN, WV, MD, CT, RI, MA, NH, ME
Least favorite: WA, OR, HI, UT, ND, NE, IA, WI, MI, KY, MS, NC, VA, PA, DE, NJ, NY
I used to feel that state outlines were a cop-out, taking the easy way out of design. But I have grown to like them grudgingly.
Quote from: Road Hog on August 16, 2020, 01:42:54 PM
I used to feel that state outlines were a cop-out, taking the easy way out of design.
Isn't the real cop-out/easy way out using the circle marker from the MUTCD?
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 16, 2020, 02:26:11 PM
Quote from: Road Hog on August 16, 2020, 01:42:54 PM
I used to feel that state outlines were a cop-out, taking the easy way out of design.
Isn't the real cop-out/easy way out using the circle marker from the MUTCD?
.......yes.
Quote from: plain on August 16, 2020, 10:32:06 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 16, 2020, 02:26:11 PM
Quote from: Road Hog on August 16, 2020, 01:42:54 PM
I used to feel that state outlines were a cop-out, taking the easy way out of design.
Isn't the real cop-out/easy way out using the circle marker from the MUTCD?
.......yes.
Plus, state outline shields don't always come out looking good - it takes effort to produce a good-looking design.
Quote from: US 89 on August 16, 2020, 11:40:04 PM
Quote from: plain on August 16, 2020, 10:32:06 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 16, 2020, 02:26:11 PM
Quote from: Road Hog on August 16, 2020, 01:42:54 PM
I used to feel that state outlines were a cop-out, taking the easy way out of design.
Isn't the real cop-out/easy way out using the circle marker from the MUTCD?
.......yes.
Plus, state outline shields don't always come out looking good - it takes effort to produce a good-looking design.
Yeah, some state outlines just don't work well for a route shield, while others do.
And I don't think it's fair to say that that using the agency-suggested route shield is a cop-out. Maybe a better question is this: Is it egotistical to use anything
but the circle marker from the MUTCD?
Quote from: kphoger on August 18, 2020, 02:21:35 PM
And I don't think it's fair to say that that using the agency-suggested route shield is a cop-out. Maybe a better question is this: Is it egotistical to use anything but the circle marker from the MUTCD?
No. The way the MUTCD is worded, it says first, as a standard, in bold print:
Quote
State Route signs shall be designed by the individual State highway agencies.
Then, as a guidance statement underneath that:
Quote
The shape [...] should be circular in the absence of any determination to the contrary by the individual State concerned.
Which very heavily implies that using a circular shield is choosing to not make a choice. Or, as we say in plain English, a cop-out.
With that in mind, then, only the top one of the three shields below is a cop-out. The other two are a design other than what exists in MUTCD Figure 2D-3 (M1-5). The wording that prescribes the dimensions for 3-digit Interstate and US Route shields is absent from the portion dealing with state route shields–unless you count the phrase "approximately the same size black numerals". While one could say that that phrase implies the need for a wider shield for 3-digit route numbers, such is not necessarily true because no specific typeface is prescribed for the numerals.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d2/Circle_sign_555.svg/240px-Circle_sign_555.svg.png)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0a/Ellipse_sign_555.svg/300px-Ellipse_sign_555.svg.png)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/67/Elongated_circle_555.svg/300px-Elongated_circle_555.svg.png)
As far as I'm aware, there is no longer any state using the MUTCD-provided shield (a circle) for 3-digit routes.
Delaware – Uses ovals for 3-digit routes, not a cop-out.
Iowa – Uses elongated circles for 3-digit routes, not a cop-out.
Kentucky – Uses elongated circles for 3-digit routes, not a cop-out.
Mississippi – Uses ovals for 3-digit routes, not a cop-out.
New Jersey – Uses ovals for 3-digit routes, not a cop-out.
Has anybody realized that New Mexico really uses the standard shield with the Zia superimposed on it?
Quote from: kphoger on August 19, 2020, 10:55:44 AM
Kentucky – Uses elongated circles for 3-digit routes, not a cop-out.
Kentucky actually uses a mix of circles, elongated circles, ovals, and some weird combination of oval and elongated circle. Some districts (4, 8, and 12) still use mostly circles for three-digit routes, although exceptions can be found here and there.
Until recently, 12 was using circles for four-digit routes. Unfortunately, they've started using the wider variant, which I hate. I grew up with circles for four-digit routes and was not happy when Kentucky started using the wide markers in the 1970s, about the time we switched to the "honeycomb" reflective sheeting.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on August 19, 2020, 10:58:59 AM
Has anybody realized that New Mexico really uses the standard shield with the Zia superimposed on it?
Yup. But it looks great.
Quote from: hobsini2 on August 19, 2020, 05:23:28 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on August 19, 2020, 10:58:59 AM
Has anybody realized that New Mexico really uses the standard shield with the Zia superimposed on it?
Yup. But it looks great.
Oh, I agree!
Quote from: TXtoNJ on August 10, 2020, 02:42:23 PM
Quote from: Road Hog on August 05, 2020, 01:57:01 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;attach=1068;type=avatar)
This has been my avatar since right after I joined the board. I took the boring Texas square, made an outline of the Alamo with the border and added proper series numbers. I now think that the flag is a little overdone and can probably go away. But I hope TxDOT has a redesign contest with the Texas bicentennial coming up.
I don't think Texas will ever do a redesign. The understated quality of the signs is very much part of the culture, especially in rural areas.
Besides, the distinction between SH signs and FM/RM signs is kind of perfect - state highways are to get you from here-to-there, while FMs are for if you want to see the "real Texas".
The FM signs are iconic for certain.