Outdoor Signs: The role of signage in urban development

Large-format print integration proved less popular, scoring 3.62 out of five, with only
25 per cent complementing the community and 25 per cent important to the quality of the community. Finally, pylon signs scored 3.69 out of five, with 44 per cent complementing the community and 33 per cent important to the quality of the community. Tall pylons scored better than low pylons.

town_LincolnCenter

Digital signs were studied along a key retail corridor in New York, N.Y.

Three lighting approaches—internal, external and channel letter—were also analyzed. Internally illuminated channel letters received the highest score at 4.56, but this acceptance was downtown-centric; in the suburbs, there was no significant difference in attitudes toward internal versus external illumination.

It was clear from the study that a great deal of weight is placed on integrated design concepts that combine signs, graphics and architecture. This trend has also led to more urban signs incorporating traditionally architectural materials like stone and wood, as well as the use of architecture-dependent applications like awnings, screens and window graphics.

At the same time, signs that suffered problems with regard to legibility, clutter and/or clarity were given outsized negative weight in the survey, even when efforts were made to integrate them into architecture. In other words, legible, informational signs outweigh all other influences.

Finally, downtown signs played the most major role within their landscape, with positive attitudes toward them surpassing even those expressed toward traditional buildings. Compared to the suburbs, there was a downtown focus on the most flamboyant, exciting designs, with a broad mix of materials and displays, from projected signs to banners.

Digital signs
Digital signage has become part of nearly all urban and suburban environments. A convergence of lower-priced technology, more open codes coupled with greater public acceptance has seen the medium expand to universities, health-care facilities, restaurants and other locations. Retailers, in particular, have advanced the use of digital signs as a foundation for promoting their products.

One of the goals of the New York survey was to develop a set of ‘metrics’ appropriate to the characteristics of digital signs. There has been surprisingly little research with regard to digital signage as an asset in support of urban landscapes. Again, most research so far has been proprietary and/or promoted by the industry itself. As a result, few ‘best practices’ have been developed for design.

The signs selected for the Signage Foundation survey were integrated into buildings and streetscapes, rather than installed for stand-alone messaging. Specifically, three strategic approaches were analyzed:

  1. Architecturally integrated—Digital signage integrated into a building’s architecture.
  2. Information systems—Messaging systems providing important community information.
  3. Pylon signs—Digital signs incorporated into pylon signs.
town_Chicago_Theatre_blend

The research included a trolley tour of Chicago’s landmark signs.

Information systems scored the highest at 3.99 out of five, while the other two approaches tied at 3.31 each. Overall, 77 per cent complemented the community and 35 per cent were considered important to the quality of the community.

There were also three media approaches in terms of video content:

  1. Scrolling information—Signs with simple scrolling or changing information, facilitated by rolling, flashing or fading transitions.
  2. Scrolling/animated graphics—Signs that combine scrolling information on-screen with graphics and simple animation.
  3. Full media—Signs with fully developed media content, including animation integrated into the entire presentation.

The basic scrolling information signs scored 2.76 out of five, topped by scrolling/animated graphics at 3.65 and full media at 3.57.

In the New York study, it was clear participants had grown accustomed to digital signs in their environment, but also took a highly critical view of them, with immediate negative reactions to any issues in legibility, quality or messaging. Compared to static signs, the standards rose substantially, with significant variability between low and high scores. In other words, the public responds highly positively to good digital signage and highly negatively to bad digital signage.

The most positive responses were to signs that provided important information in addition to advertising. Full media signs with a clear flow of content earned the highest scores.

Digital signs integrated into larger fixtures or landmark signs also drew a positive response, particularly in the context of well-designed complementary sign packages. With design playing such a crucial role in the success of digital signage, the top-scoring examples tended to focus on providing clear, legible content on screens integrated into architecture.

Leave a Comment

Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *