Sign Industry: Tulsa's Billboards Too Bright

[Red Arrow]

Third, the Tulsa measurement proposal - if indeed it does not specify the billboard display during the measurement - is absurd and technically incompetent."

No big surprise here.  Jenks isn't any better.  Every time I drive past the Sonic on Main, I wish I could go inside and turn the sign switch to the "OFF POSITION".

[PonderInc]

Third, the Tulsa measurement proposal - if indeed it does not specify the billboard display during the measurement - is absurd and technically incompetent."

More info, please.  What does "if it does not specify the billboard display during the measurement" mean?

I absolutely believe our billboards are too bright.  They are also too close together.

I recently drove east on I-44 and I-244 at night, which convinced me that the spacing between billboards is MUCH too short.  (1,200 feet between billboards on the same side of the highway.)  This basically equals 2 billboards every quarter mile (one on each side of the highway), which is 2 every 10 seconds if you're going about 70.  Since the digital displays change every 8 seconds, it's like passing 4 billboards every 10 seconds (b/c you look up to see what just changed).  

This was especially apparent when I drove through a construction zone at night.  I was trying to focus on detour signs, barrels, exit signs, merging traffic...but the brightest thing on the road were all the digital billboards.  And even though I was TRYING to ignore them, they kept causing me to look up.  Their brightness made it significantly harder to see the critical signs and roadway hazards that were NOT lit up like Vegas.  (Try to focus on something in dim light with a flashlight shining in your eyes.)  Our digital billboards are so bright, they're visible from over a mile away, which makes them even more intrusive and annoying.

Digital billboards are not safe.  And the more we allow in Tulsa, the more we're going to realize this.

We need to double or triple the distance between signs; eliminate the language that allows signs on both sides of the road to be calculated independently from each other; require images to remain static for at least twice as long (16 seconds instead of 8...better yet, one minute per image); and re-evaluate the brightness that's allowed.

Billboard companies are parasites in the public right of way.  They couldn't exist without the billions of tax dollars that we invest in our highways.  (Imagine a billboard in the middle of a roadless wilderness.  No advertisers would pay for it.)  In addition, they saturate our roads with signs...thus reducing the effectiveness of all business signs (hard to get your message through when there's so much clutter nobody notices it).  

Billboards aren't good for business.  Beautiful, desirable cities, with a good quality of life, are good for business.  The only ones who are getting rich from this garbage are the billboard companies.  In Tulsa, that pretty much means Lamar.  Glad we can make some billboard big-wigs in Louisiana rich.  They sure ain't doin' much for us.

[patric]

More info, please.  What does "if it does not specify the billboard display during the measurement" mean?

To measure the maximum brightness of a billboard you would want an all-white display at 100% intensity.
The way it stands now in Tulsa is IF the city were to ever measure the brightness of a digital billboard, the display could just as easily be 18% gray or anything other than the brightest it's capable of being, making the measurement (and the ordinance) worthless.  Lamar could just dial in whatever passes the test... IF we ever tested.

The gentleman's criticism has some weight, given his pedigree:
http://resodance.com/mdi/dk_vita.html

[TheTed]

There's a new electronic billboard on that pedestrian bridge between the Convention Center and the Doubletree downtown. It looks like it's set to remain on one image for long periods, but it sure is bright, especially with the lack of functioning streetlights in that area.

[patric]

Other parts of the world are taking a serious look at excessive LED Billboard brightness, as well:

For reference, Tulsa's ordinance allows 6,500 Candella per square meter (nits) in daytime, 500 at night, exceeding both national and international standards:

EPA considers reducing LED light intensities
TAIPEI, Taiwan -- Most commercial-use LED lights in Taiwan's metropolises have exceeded the international standard for luminous intensity and may cause damage to the eye, found a survey conducted by the Cabinet-level Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) recently.

The agency is studying plans to restrict the excessive commercial LED lights that may pose as health and transport safety hazards.

The EPA conducted the poll in its latest effort to combat “light pollution,” with the survey targeting some of Taiwan's biggest metropolises including Taipei, Taichung, Tainan and Kaohsiung.

The survey found the average luminous intensity for 22 moving LED lights it polled was 1,500 Candela per square meter (cd/m2), about 1.5 times higher than the international standard of 1,000.

One of the moving LED lights it polled even had luminous intensity of 3,904.5 , or 3.9 times the international standard.

The survey also found on average, moving LED lights had average luminous intensity of 1,480.6 cd/m2, or three times the 475.5 for still LED lights and 7.5 times that for projected LED lights.

“This may cause all kinds of problems for people,” said Hsieh Yen-ju, director general of EPA's Department for Air Quality Protection and Noise Control. “Fast-changing images, flashing images and sudden changes in the contrast of images tend to detract drivers, making them more prone to accidents.”

Hsiao Hung-ching, electric and electronic engineering professor of National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, echoed Hsieh's remarks, saying lights with 1,500 cd/m2 are too bright, adding lights flashing every six to ten seconds will cause dizziness and damage to the eye.

Taiwan tends to ignore light pollution, Hsieh said, adding the EPA will hold inter-ministerial meetings to figure out whether to set a maximum for luminous intensity for commercial LED lights, and whether to force companies or storefronts based in residential areas to turn off their LED signs during night.
http://www.chinapost.com.tw/taiwan/national/national-news/2010/02/18/245008/EPA-considers.htm

[OurTulsa]

Yo!  And I heard the City's Planning Commission was considering reducing digital light intensity from 6,500 nits to 5,000 during daylight and from 500 to 300 during night hours.  Guess that doesn't make you warm and fuzzy.

[patric]

Yo!  And I heard the City's Planning Commission was considering reducing digital light intensity from 6,500 nits to 5,000 during daylight and from 500 to 300 during night hours.  Guess that doesn't make you warm and fuzzy.

That is not on a current TMAPC agenda, but if it ever were to be, it would be more in line with the original proposal in place before the billboard industry took some councilors on a junket to OKC in order to persuade them to loosen the regulations. 
Were you thinking of the thread "TMAPC may soften rules for LED Billboards, signs" at http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=14863.0  ?

[joiei]

What is going to happen when all of our new led billboards start taking on this new feature? 

From The Associated Press:

    MOORESVILLE, N.C. — It's not just the picture of beef on a new billboard in North Carolina that tries to catch drivers' attention, it's the aroma coming from the sign.


    The billboard on N.C. 150 in central North Carolina emits the smell of black pepper and charcoal to promote a new line of beef available at the Bloom grocery chain. Bloom is part of the Salisbury, N.C.-based Food Lion chain.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/03/steak-scented-billboard-p_n_599202.html

[patric]

7 Most Dangerous Things To Do In Your Car
 
As you might already know, cars aren't exactly the safest way to get around. Based on miles traveled, taking the car is many times more dangerous than taking a train and several times more dangerous than an airplane or bus. Yet we still take the car, right? For convenience—and driving enjoyment, in some cases—it's unbeatable. And considering safety, there's a lot you can do to help minimize your chances of being in an accident. It's estimated, from federal data, that about 20 percent of all crashes are directly caused by some sort of distraction; that distraction can take a wide range of forms—mostly from things we're not supposed to be doing behind the wheel like eating, texting, or even putting on makeup. And if you have several somewhat distracted drivers together? That's a recipe for disaster. Keep your eyes on the road, both hands on the wheel. Here are seven things that you could do to make your time in the car even more dangerous:   

Read billboards.
This one seems relatively innocuous, but billboards can be a potentially deadly distraction. Highway signs are designed to be rapidly readable, with the same size letters, same font, and reflective material that will remain readable but not too overwhelmingly bright at night. That can't be said about billboards. Most dangerous, it's suspected by some safety experts—counter to what the ad industry insists, of course—are newer dynamic digital billboard arrays that show full-motion video—essentially attention-grabbing commercials. Some have the sort of bright, rapid movement that might be fine for younger drivers but can dazzle older, slower-reacting eyes in the dark. This one's controversial, but the best advice is keep your eyes on the road.
http://www.thecarconnection.com/marty-blog/1052246_7-most-dangerous-things-to-do-in-your-car

[nathanm]

This one's controversial, but the best advice is keep your eyes on the road.

..and your hands upon the wheel.

[custosnox]

..and your hands upon the wheel.

but there are other things I want my hands to be doing while driving...

[patric]

A follow-up to the original article in this thread, from an Illinois group:

http://www.illinoislighting.org/billboards.html

Current production models of LED displays can achieve surface brightness of over 28,000 nits; this is intensely bright in the daylight, especially on overcast days. (As a comparison, the bright blue daytime sky ranges from around 5,000 to 7,000 nits in luminance.) We need to set limits for daytime sign luminance, too, and to be able to measure that performance.

The Lewin (brightness measuring) method requires manipulating the sign display, to take one reading with the sign on, and one with it off. This precludes the ability to independently measure sign luminance for code enforcement, because the sign operators will be chosing the luminance settings during the test. With a luminance meter, any sign can be checked for compliance at any time, without requiring the involvement of the sign owner/operator.

MOTION & DISTRACTION
 
Digital signs have the ability to display anything which a television or computer monitor can, including "moving images". It is obvious that a Panavision movie playing along side a highway would constitute a grossly unsafe distraction hazard for vehicle operators. The Outdoor Advertising Association of America has accepted that concept, and in its Code of Industry Practice now states that full-sized billboards should not feature animation, flashing lights, scrolling, or full-motion video. This self-imposed code of conduct is laudable, but is missing (at least) two key points.

First, they limit their suggestion to not use moving images to full-sized billboards only. It is fine with them if "street-sized" signs along the roadways in our busy towns and cities feature any sort of animation or television-like video. Apparently, they believe that roadway accidents caused by distraction only occur on highways.

Second, when one image changes to another on a sign within a person's field of view, the viewer's visual system perceives that change as motion, even though the two images themselves were "static." (This is how motion pictures operate; they present the viewer a series of static images, and the mind "sees" motion.) If there is one sign ahead of us, and it turns into another, what we perceive is a flash, and/or movement. So, paradoxically, the billboard companies say they won't operate flashing or moving billboards, but they cannot avoid those effects if they change the displayed images while we are watching. They also display ads which continue on multiple "frames," encouraging the viewer to stare at the sign for a prolonged time to see the next installment.

[Red Arrow]

A follow-up to the original article in this thread, from an Illinois group:

http://www.illinoislighting.org/billboards.html

Current production models of LED displays can achieve surface brightness of over 28,000 nits; this is intensely bright in the daylight, especially on overcast days. (As a comparison, the bright blue daytime sky ranges from around 5,000 to 7,000 nits in luminance.) We need to set limits for daytime sign luminance, too, and to be able to measure that performance.

The Lewin (brightness measuring) method requires manipulating the sign display, to take one reading with the sign on, and one with it off. This precludes the ability to independently measure sign luminance for code enforcement, because the sign operators will be chosing the luminance settings during the test. With a luminance meter, any sign can be checked for compliance at any time, without requiring the involvement of the sign owner/operator.

MOTION & DISTRACTION
 
Digital signs have the ability to display anything which a television or computer monitor can, including "moving images". It is obvious that a Panavision movie playing along side a highway would constitute a grossly unsafe distraction hazard for vehicle operators. The Outdoor Advertising Association of America has accepted that concept, and in its Code of Industry Practice now states that full-sized billboards should not feature animation, flashing lights, scrolling, or full-motion video. This self-imposed code of conduct is laudable, but is missing (at least) two key points.

First, they limit their suggestion to not use moving images to full-sized billboards only. It is fine with them if "street-sized" signs along the roadways in our busy towns and cities feature any sort of animation or television-like video. Apparently, they believe that roadway accidents caused by distraction only occur on highways.

Second, when one image changes to another on a sign within a person's field of view, the viewer's visual system perceives that change as motion, even though the two images themselves were "static." (This is how motion pictures operate; they present the viewer a series of static images, and the mind "sees" motion.) If there is one sign ahead of us, and it turns into another, what we perceive is a flash, and/or movement. So, paradoxically, the billboard companies say they won't operate flashing or moving billboards, but they cannot avoid those effects if they change the displayed images while we are watching. They also display ads which continue on multiple "frames," encouraging the viewer to stare at the sign for a prolonged time to see the next installment.

Burma Shave

[dsjeffries]

Has anyone noticed how incredibly bright the new electronic billboard is at The Wisdom Center at 15th & Delaware? I first noticed it driving west down 15th at Harvard but from that distance, it just looked like a police car or fire truck had its lights going. I slowed down as I approached the hill and was shocked to see this sign. It's WAY too bright (brighter than most billboards I've seen except for the sign at River Spirit Casino), and I believe it violates the part of the ordinance that limits how often images change. The images change very, very quickly and I believe it's a hazard.

Patric, isn't this close to your place? And does this fall into City Council District 4?

[Hoss]

Has anyone noticed how incredibly bright the new electronic billboard is at The Wisdom Center at 15th & Delaware? I first noticed it driving west down 15th at Harvard but from that distance, it just looked like a police car or fire truck had its lights going. I slowed down as I approached the hill and was shocked to see this sign. It's WAY too bright (brighter than most billboards I've seen except for the sign at River Spirit Casino), and I believe it violates the part of the ordinance that limits how often images change. The images change very, very quickly and I believe it's a hazard.

Patric, isn't this close to your place? And does this fall into City Council District 4?

Do marquees for event centers fall under this law?