The sign I saw yesterday while returning from a trip out of town was one using Brush Script in all upper case letters, so I'll start with that one.

Any other flaws out there that drive you crazy?

Red,wrong letters with a fat black shadow that touches letter
Black wrong letters with a fat red shade that touches letters.

2. Slanted letters on an arch.

3.Computer distortions.....with "too much volume!!!!!"

4.This is my favorite...
I really hate a sign that ya cant read!!!!

Vertically oriented styles work better on a vertical format, and extended styles are far more at home in a horizontal format. Why fight against the obvious??

Another thing that also buggs me, is the use of all upper case letters when using a "swash style" alphabet. Have you ever seen for instance Bookman Bold Italic set in Capital letters, and the alternate Swash letters used??? UGLY and almost UNREADABLE. Swash style letters do have their place, and properly used, can impart some character or flair to the headings. When missused, they look amateurish and downright ugly.

[ September 25, 2001: Message edited by: Ken Henry ]

[ September 25, 2001: Message edited by: Ken Henry ]

Another thing that makes an amateurish layout is when there is a main message in the middle and four more small messages in each corner. Whether it's phone numbers, web addresses, pink hearts or green clovers, this ain't Lucky Charms! I get asked to do that all the time and I never give in. It's never a good idea. Never. I think customers get that in their heads from those cheezy raised ink business cards they all seem to have.

I had asked him to look at some photos of some of my work. He thought I used too many "headline" fonts-- as in more than one-- in some of my signs. He did not explain the difference between "headline" and "workhorse" fonts.

I assume the main difference might be that one is serif and the other is sans serif, with script somewhwere hanging out in the breeze. I'm asking for your thoughts on what these differences might be.

Somewhere in my collection of sign books, is one that has pictures mostly from England. Some of the signs are very heavy on copy, crowded lines, a variety of letter styles, and a lot of outlining, and shading, and yet these are considered to be examples of "good" signage.

Just because it is in a book doesn't make it right. Some of my work has appeared in books. Many times the people putting together books are journalists - they know little of sign design.

Just for my information...was I the one in Columbus that told you about headline fonts? As a part of my seminars I usually try to explain the difference between headline and text copy. Sorry if it was me and I failed in my presentation. I try not to argue with anyone, especially about layout.

Usually headline fonts or more decorative in nature, and some of the serif fonts may fall into this category, but not all. This class of letterstyle carry a lot of subliminal messages but can become hard to read if overused. They really draw attention and therefore can become confusing if the eye has to read a lot of copy using these complicated letter forms. Mostly they are reserved for the most important message on the sign.

On the other hand, text or body copy is usually sans serif and rather plain. By changing the weight of these a variety of images can be produced.

[ September 26, 2001: Message edited by: Jim & Chris hetzler ]

No, it wasn't you. The gentleman I referred to is someone I've never seen on this board. I don't question his abilities or talent, he is obviously succesful in the sign field, and well educated in same. I'd rather not mention his name, it is not needed.

I rummaged up the book I referred to earlier. It is titled Signwritten Art by A.J.Lewery, published by D.&C.Newton Abbot, London,UK. As it happens, the author is trained in the graphics field, theater design, coach painting, and sign writing. Just thought you'd all like to know.

I think it just goes to show that what is considered good at one time , is not good at another time. Current clip art might be one area to think about. An awful lot of what is out there is straight out of the 20s, 30s, and 40s, and a lot of it wasn't considered all that good at the time, never mind now.

I had a customer ask for a dark brown banner with black lettering. With tons of small copy.

I told them it would be very hard to read, and should consider using contrasting colors. I guess i should have said nothing because they never ordered it.

[ September 26, 2001: Message edited by: AZBrad ]

Using clip art to promote a business. If I ever use clip art,(I dont think I have), it would be dramaticly changed. Banners and coroplast do not count here.

[ September 28, 2001: Message edited by: ray hill ]

Ray, good sign design is based upon some basic principles. One is that the sign must be readable. Now, what may be considered great art is not always "readable" but it is considered art nonetheless (LE could speak with more authority on this than me). What we produce must be beneficial to our customers. If it is not readable, no matter how pretty it is, we have failed our client. With that in mind, there are certain guidlines (I hate the word "rules") that we must follow in order to make the sign effective. Within those guidlines there is a wide lattitude where "artistic expression" can be utilized.

Trends may come and go but good design should be good design for any age. Frank Lloyd Wright introduced a new trend in architecture, but he didn't violate basic principles of design, he only enhanced them.

In our craft we have some basics of design. Some are grouping like thoughts together(copy blocks), positive and negative space usage to direct attention, contrast in line weight and color for the same purpose, compulsive graphic relativity (Mike Stevens term), and various subliminal effects of font style and color. Any of these can be bent or possibly even broken and a successful layout can be produced, but if you ignore them all together you are doomed for failure.

back off subject...
"compulsive graphic relativity"

If it is necessary to have tall letters in a cramped horizontal space, there are plenty of good looking condensed typefaces that are intended to be used that way without distortion. To condense Helvetica to 30% is an atrocity committed over and over by cheapie shops who have no idea how to execute a design. As a matter of fact, many of their designs should be executed. Mike Jackson once so eloquently stated: “A computer allows someone to do a bad job perfectly.”

Maybe (RH) its not all black & white, but its close. There's a bunch of grey areas in between. And yes, there ARE rules of design which should be followed. It's true that not everyone sees things exactly the same (different varying degrees of visual perception); but don't toss out the rules.

What do you think about using all thin stroke / light weight black letters on a white bg? Or thick stroke white letters on a black bg? These two extremes are opposite of what they should be. Next time you design something, try rendering in (b&w) & greys (or grays if you prefer). Then convert greys to corresponding values for color rendition. But please don't use same line value for all.

Try it sometime. I'm not picking on any one person here. Just mentioning some stuff & possible solutions.

(On a side note - this idea of composing offline in notepad then pasting into message area works really well. Thanks for the tip Steve. Only wish I'd started using it sooner.)

Also I see alot of signs that by themselves are really good designs but without any forethought whatsoever to the place they eventully end up on a building,and or the side of the road,...thus ruining alot of good effort.

Finally one more thing,....I hate rectangles & squares with a passion,.....

[ September 29, 2001: Message edited by: timi NC ]