Fun with signs
June 9th, 2008 Posted in Observations, SignageBack in the late 1950s and early 1960s, the Road Research Laboratory did a lot of work on road sign design - and specifically, on how to design signs that could be read easily and quickly when travelling at speed. Some of their work is described in the CBRD feature War to Worboys.
The fact that almost every country has its own unique approach to the design of lettering on road signs is testament to the fact that you could discuss this one until the proverbial cows come home. Here in the UK, graphic designer Jock Kinneir was set to work designing the lettering we now know as Transport. He followed the advice of the RRL and gave us mixed case lettering, with different weighting (i.e., different thicknesses of line) for light-on-dark and dark-on-light, a carefully chosen balance of white space, letter spacing and kerning, and a friendly appearance with a great deal of character.
But really it could have gone either way. In America, road sign lettering leaves much less blank space so that, for example, the ‘hook’ across the top of the lowercase ‘a’ is more liable to be blurred into the rest of the letter. Their characters are generally wider and chunkier when used at full width, but sign designers can choose from a range of character sets with taller, slimmer lettering to fit their message on to the sign if need be.
France went for all-capitals (the jury is still, in all truthfulness, out on whether uppercase or mixed-case lettering is more legible; if you ask me I think you need to judge each case on its merits, and it matters more how widely you space your letters and how well you design them). Germany adopted a pre-existing typeface designed for clarity on engineering drawings. And so on.
This started me wondering just how much the form of lettering influences the appearance and personality of our road signs, so I did a little experiment.
On the left is an advance direction sign for a primary route crossroads as it appears in the TSRGD (Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions, the UK road sign Bible). Perfectly normal, I think you’ll agree.
How does it change if you render the text in, say, the French Caracteres L1 or in the German DIN Mittelschrift? Well, it’s time to find out…
Here it is in Caracteres L1. It’s not quite correct for French road sign typography: I’m fairly sure, for one thing, that the spacing between letters is too tight, and since drawing the image up, I’m now aware that actually light-on-dark text should have been in Caracteres L2. But it’s close enough.
And it looks… strange. It’s still perfectly clear, but the simple act of rendering the text in chunky Gallic capitals makes it, somehow, a little less businesslike. I’m not sure exactly why.
Of course, Caracteres wasn’t designed for use this way, it was designed to have one word per individual sign panel, with masses of white space around it. The French are excessively bad at diagrammatic signs, and while before I thought that was the whole story, now I think maybe their lettering contributes to the overall poor effect of their map-type signs.
And here’s the same sign, now in DIN Mittelschrift. In comparison to chunky Transport and the borderline-obese Caracteres, the German lettering looks very thin, especially in black on white. It’s almost lost on all that empty sign.
But good heavens, doesn’t it look clean and clinical? The ’steam railway’ panel takes on a whole new air, like perhaps it is to be used instructively and not for enjoyment. The B1991 is a cold, harsh numerical reference. Dorfield might be a prison.
Okay, I’m getting carried away. But while the outline of the sign is clearly still British, the whole character of the sign has changed again.
So what have we learned? Not a great deal. I personally have learned how to edit pictures of road signs to use different typefaces. But this little experiment does prove something interesting: that graphic design is not everything. Yes, French signs could easily be distinguished from UK ones by the outline of the sign panel, the shape of the arrows, and so on. But the lettering really can be the clincher.

6 Responses to “Fun with signs”
By Guy Barry on Jun 10, 2008
Regarding the example of German lettering:
“But good heavens, doesn’t it look clean and clinical? The ’steam railway’ panel takes on a whole new air, like perhaps it is to be used instructively and not for enjoyment. The B1991 is a cold, harsh numerical reference. Dorfield might be a prison.”
I think this is bordering on the racist!
I have to admit that when I first glanced at the example of German lettering I couldn’t tell the difference from the British example. You must be a little more sensitized to font types than I am…
Anyway, what’s this got to do with roads?
Guy
By James Dowden on Jun 11, 2008
Well, the virtue of mixed-case that is well-demonstrated here is that it makes the place-names distinct from the other information on the sign.
This of course isn’t to say that it’s the only way of creating such a visual distinction. Here’s a mockup of your sign with the distinction carried by a condensed Garamond versus the LNER’s favourite sans-serif font:
http://james.dowden.googlepages.com/sign.png
Now where are those cows?
By Jonathan Winkler on Jun 15, 2008
Where’s a sample with Series E Modified? It has the distinction of having actually been used (in modified form) on test Anderson signs, unlike DIN-Schrift and the Lx series (which didn’t even exist in their current form in the 1950’s). Plus there’s always Australia, New Zealand, and pre-1994 South Africa . . .
By Richard Welsh on Jun 15, 2008
An interesting experiment! I think the British “Transport Alphabet” is definitely the friendliest, happiest of the three
The French one does look a bit strange, but yes you have got the letterspacing much tighter than on actual French signs. If that sign was in France it would be 1.5 times as wide! But in France they seem to favour vertical stacking of separate direction signs than our ‘map’ style ones, so they can afford to widely letterspace their characters (which I think helps if they’re all in caps). The one in DIN looks precise, accurate, organised and clinical… information for information’s sake, and like you say, just not as much fun.
It’s amazing what differences in flavour a typeface can bring!
By Gray on Jun 28, 2008
Very interesting but I’ve never quite seen a French sign looking as ugly as your example! Have you tried doing this in reverse - ie starting with a French or German sign and translating into English. It would be interesting to see whether the English version still looked better. Keep up the good work. Your site rocks!
By Yard Signs on Jul 23, 2008
Now I haven’t been to many places around the world, and where i have been street signs were last on my list to notice, but i think this whole concept is extremely interesting. Signs in America are so poorly designed, half the time you can’t even notice there is a sign there at all. To me, the first one was the most pleasing and easiest to understand/read. “It’s amazing what differences in flavour a typeface can bring.” Ain’t that the truth.