Single color is good. Matching typeface of the class letters to the numbers
is well nigh impossible and largely unnecessary.
Wonder what they'd do with mine? I designed the numeral "4" on my car
myself -- it is not any recognizable typeface but being a strong block
character it fits the rules. I copied the "dp" (using a lowercase -- it is
the same letter one right side up the other upside down) from a "dp" Charlie
Clark had on his then-D Production Corvair -- his roadrace class. When I
roadrace, I mask the stem of the "d" and hang a new tail from it to turn it
into "gp". Both are drawn using a ruler and various sizes of circle
templates. Then my vinyl-cutter scans them and makes them from vinyl. But
they would probably be perceived as different fonts -- the corners of the
numeral are rounded, the corners of the class letters are square, and of
such differences are fonts distinguished even though both would be
considered sans-serif block characters.
However, the proposed rule replaces only the 3rd and 4th sentences of the
old rule (which says: "Class letters should be smaller. Both must be of
uniform color and in contrast to the color of the car."). New language is:
"Class letters must be between 25% and 50% of the number size and located
adjacent to the numbers. All numbers and letters must be of the same single
color and typeface, and in contrast to the background color. Contrast may
also be obtained using a second color for a border or field, sized at least
25% of the number stroke."
Okay, let's look at that. 25-50%. My foot-high number would require class
letters 3-6 inches. My 5" letters match that easily. Minimum height is 8" so
minimum letter size is 2". That's pretty damn tiny! Most would do bigger.
But they don't want 8" class letters beside an 8" number either, as then it
becomes confused with the number. Good rule. Not all that different from the
old, but better defined.
"Same single color" First of all, that means one color only (see below).
Usually not a problem. Same -- they want the letters and numbers to be the
same color. surprising how often those differ, and again it makes it harder
to discern what is class letters from whatever other lettering there may be
on the car. Same color helps there. Good rule.
As for same typeface, as a practical matter I really doubt someone is going
to raise an issue (or could even tell) if the number was Arial and the class
letters were Abadi. Both are sans-serif block faces, and close enough (Abadi
is a bit narrower) to make no difference. What they don't want is numbers in
Oriental and class letters in Old English. Again, they want to be able to
discern the vehicle identification as distinct from sponsor logos, etc. But
in the main, the minimum stroke requirement should satisfy this area. Font
really does not matter as long as the font meets the stroke requirement
(most serif fonts and many stylistic ones don't).
There is also cleverness in the final sentence of the proposal -- permitting
a contrasting border "at least 25%" of the number stroke. If I did that with
my 2" numbers, my border would have to be at least a half-inch. With a
minimum 1.25" stroke, the border would at minimum have to be 5/16".
Pinstripe borders do not get it done. Good rule.
However...
> As a side note, I know of several competitors (all in the military) who
> run red, white, and blue numbers on Black cars. None of them are
> difficult to see, each color
> would be acceptable individually on the car.
Actually, no. Both red and the patriotic blue (which is a dark blue) would
be very difficult to see on black cars. We tell people all the time, red on
black is NOT contrast (nor black on red). Both are chromatically dark
colors. Some shades of blue -- baby blue, sky blue, day-glo blue, etc. --
work on black but not the deep blue as seen in the union of the American
flag. Put that on a car and try to discern it 100 feet away as it goes by at
50 mph at an oblique angle and it is well nigh impossible. You wanna be
patriotic? Put a flag sticker on the car, but don't cut the flag up to make
a number out of it!
As for patriotic r-w-b numbers, what you see at speed is some funny white
marks. Actually, ANY multicolor number is a bad deal because trying to see
it in a microsecond at speed you see the most prominent color and that one
color alone does not conform to shapes the mind registers as numerals.
It looks great sitting parked in the paddock, but that is not when it NEEDS
to be seen. It looks lousy at speed on course which is precisely when it
DOES need to be seen clearly.
In sum -- I agree with Craig (to a degree) on the typeface issue, but I
agree with the SEB on the color issue. Actually, if the current rule (3.7)
was enforced at tech, it would probably be adequate. It requires a minimum
8" numeral with 1.25-inch stroke. That means 1.25 inches all the way around,
not some thingy that thins out to a quarter-inch in some parts and fattens
to 2" in others (a zero can look like an 11). Mine is 12" high with a
constant 2" stroke. My class letters are 5" high with a constant 1" stroke.
The current rule also requires numerals "of uniform color" which right there
says multicolor numerals are not legal.
Numbers and class letters are for identification. They are NOT there for
artistic expression. Which does not mean you cannot be artistic about them
(I like to think I was), just that you must meet the rulebook limitations
when doing so.
--Rocky Entriken
----- Original Message -----
From: "Craig & Cynthia Naylor" <magazine@pacbell.net>
To: <autox@autox.team.net>
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2003 12:54 PM
Subject: Vehicle Identification Proposal
> I haven't seen any postings regarding this subject yet, and was a little
> surprised so I thought I would post the letter I sent to the SEB.
>
> seb@scca.com
> I understand the need to make changes to the rules regarding vehicle
> identification. I never understood why the rules were changed between
> 1998 & 1999. Prior to
> 1999 we had min & max. height requirements on number & letter sizes,
> and they fit your current proposal. My concern is over the "single
> color & type face".
>
> I might be wrong about the cars that the SEB is trying to bring about
> changes in, but please note the cars pictured on the 1998, 1999, 2000,
> 2001, 2002 Rule Books. Are
> these the cars that need changed? Every one of these cars would not
> meet the new rules. Every one of them has a different typeface letter
> than their number. As they
> are all black and white pictures, I don't know if they would meet your
> color requirements. I would bet that if you look at the cars in each of
> your local regions 80+
> percent of them would have different number & letter typefaces. I think
> it would be sad to loose a trophy at a National tour, Pro Solo,
> Nationals because someone
> protested you that your numbers were a different typeface than your
> letters. As pansy as a protest as that might be, (I personally
> wouldn't do it, but we all have meet
> someone who would) if its not protestable it should not be a rule!
>
> As a side note, I know of several competitors (all in the military) who
> run red, white, and blue numbers on Black cars. None of them are
> difficult to see, each color
> would be acceptable individually on the car. I think it would be sad if
> this patriotism would be sacrificed under these rules.
>
> As a member who usually works in our local region timing trailer, I
> agree that many cars have identification that is difficult to read, and
> a rule change of some type is
> needed. The biggest help would be enforcement of the existing rules
> regarding contrast. The second most difficult thing to read is some of
> the crazy italicized
> typefaces that make letters difficult to make out. This change does not
> address that. So in summation, I agree that a change needs to take
> place, I don't think the
> current proposal is the change that is needed. A revisit to the 1998
> rules might be more what is sought after.
>
> --
> Cynthia & Craig Naylor
> Naylor & Naylor
> ph/fax 858-679-3754
> E-mail - Magazine@pacbell.net
/// unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net or try
/// http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
/// Partial archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|