| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/03/2005 01:06:35 AM · #1 |
I just want to offer a couple of observations to voters in the Billboard challenge.
1. Not all billboards are designed to be viewed by automobile drivers. Many are designed with pedestrians in mind. Some are even designed to be viewed by people that are not even moving at all.
2. Billboards that are designed for automobile drivers are not always designed to be viewed at 65mph. There are lots of billboards on Hollywood Blvd., but if you insist on viewing them at 65mph you will soon find yourself in jail.
|
|
|
|
03/03/2005 01:07:42 AM · #2 |
Excellent point...also...
3. Some billboards are intended to be viewed at stoplights....so they are designed with a longer time in mind.
|
|
|
|
03/03/2005 01:19:47 AM · #3 |
Originally posted by micknewton:
I just want to offer a couple of observations to voters in the Billboard challenge.
...
2. Billboards that are designed for automobile drivers are not always designed to be viewed at 65mph. There are lots of billboards on Hollywood Blvd., but if you insist on viewing them at 65mph you will soon find yourself in jail. |
On the other hand, for example, taking 101 to or from the airport in San Francisco. View the billboards at 65 - risk death, because you should be paying attention to your driving.
View the billboards at less than 65 - risk same, unless there's an accident or it's rush hour. Then, by all means, view them at your leisure. You'll have plenty of it. |
|
|
|
03/03/2005 02:01:31 AM · #4 |
Originally posted by sfalice:
On the other hand, for example, taking 101 to or from the airport in San Francisco. View the billboards at 65 - risk death, because you should be paying attention to your driving.
View the billboards at less than 65 - risk same, unless there's an accident or it's rush hour. Then, by all means, view them at your leisure. You'll have plenty of it. |
Good point. I wonder how many people have been killed because some idiot was gawking at a billboard when they should have been watching the road.
I ignore most billboards, especially when I'm driving. Who needs to see another Toyota ad? Hell, I'm driving a brand new one already!!! And, I didn't buy it because I saw it on a billboard somewhere.
I used to like seeing some of the billboards around places like Hollywood, Santa Monica, LA, etc. Some of them were pretty cool. But when I was driving at 65mph (or faster) I wasn't looking at billboards.
|
|
|
|
03/03/2005 02:06:13 AM · #5 |
Good point. I wonder how many people have been killed because some idiot was gawking at a billboard when they should have been watching the road.
Probably one less then has been killed by some fool with a Coke in one hand and a cell phone glued to their ear!
Message edited by author 2005-03-03 02:07:36.
|
|
|
|
03/03/2005 08:29:37 AM · #6 |
I agree, and:
4. Some billboards are designed to be seen again and again as a commuter passes by them every day of the week on their way to work taking another quick glance (so they don't rear-end the guy in front of them) to discover a little something more each time they pass it by. (Otherwise why would so many of them put the time and temp displays on them?) |
|
|
|
03/03/2005 08:40:12 AM · #7 |
Not to be contrary, but here in Chicagoland, proper billboard viewing speed is 85mph, LOL. They're all designed to be viewed for 50 microseconds. ;-)
|
|
|
|
03/03/2005 09:56:13 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Not to be contrary, but here in Chicagoland, proper billboard viewing speed is 85mph |
Very true. If you view them at 65 mph here, the school busses will rear end you! |
|
|
|
03/03/2005 10:19:45 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by realdealphoto:
Good point. I wonder how many people have been killed because some idiot was gawking at a billboard when they should have been watching the road.
Probably one less then has been killed by some fool with a Coke in one hand and a cell phone glued to their ear! |
No kidding! A while ago my wife and I witnessed a 'cell phone idiot' incident on the way home from a shopping trip. We were driving approximately 55mph down a straight section of two-lane country road, with a steep hill on our left, and a steep drop-off on our right. We watched as a car coming in the opposite direction suddenly began to swerve violently left and right several times. The car kept swerving as it got closer to us, so I began slowing down. Just before the car reached us it made a hard right turn and drove right up the hill! Its momentum actually carried it up and along the steep embankment for several feet, and then it rolled over onto its roof as it came down, and finally came to a stop at the side of the road. I stopped our car, and then ran over to see if I could help. There was only one man in the upside down car, and he didn’t appear to be seriously injured. So I helped him get out of the car. When he was out I asked him what happened. He said that he had been trying to reach his cell phone. It had slipped from his hand as he was talking to his wife and fallen onto the floor on the passenger side.
|
|
|
|
03/03/2005 10:33:43 AM · #10 |
| Cell phone accidents aren't limited to drivers. |
|
|
|
03/03/2005 10:55:35 AM · #11 |
Have a look at Tail Light Ads.
When you're stuck in traffic and the truck in front of you is traveling less than 5mph you aren't going to view the ad on the back of the truck at 85mph. And, you'll probably be seeing it for quite a while too.
|
|
|
|
03/03/2005 07:09:11 PM · #12 |
After re-reading the challenge description I have to admit that it does specify highway billboards.
|
|
|
|
03/03/2005 07:17:30 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by micknewton:
After re-reading the challenge description I have to admit that it does specify highway billboards. |
It's all a bit pedantic (and US biased) then isn't it? I thought a highway translated as a road not a motorway specifically. Even then - it's a bit narrow. Billboards are everywhere - including railway stations where passengers have many minutes to look at them.
The wording does state "...might grace a highway billboard..." - which leaves it quite suggestive in my opinion. It's bad enough that the challenge didn't allow text (integral and fundamental to almost every ad) let alone restrict the voters mindset to purely motorway advertising. |
|
|
|
03/03/2005 08:19:22 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by Imagineer:
Originally posted by micknewton:
After re-reading the challenge description I have to admit that it does specify highway billboards. |
It's all a bit pedantic (and US biased) then isn't it? I thought a highway translated as a road not a motorway specifically. Even then - it's a bit narrow. Billboards are everywhere - including railway stations where passengers have many minutes to look at them.
The wording does state "...might grace a highway billboard..." - which leaves it quite suggestive in my opinion. It's bad enough that the challenge didn't allow text (integral and fundamental to almost every ad) let alone restrict the voters mindset to purely motorway advertising. |
i understand completely where jon's coming from, and even though i have made comments to the effect of how an image would come across at high rate of speed, i am evaluating the images in terms of how i perceive their overall effectiveness as a billboard image.
i'll be the first to admit i am weighing my votes based on the 'speed read' factor, but, if the image graphically conveys the message effectively and efficiently, i am marking it up. if the composition is geared towards billboard usage, i am marking it up.
on the other hand, as mentioned in a previous thread, if it has text, i'm taking off a point for every letter. and if the size is out of the recommended 640x320, i'm deducting a point for every pixel the image is out of bounds. ;-) |
|
|
|
03/03/2005 08:44:39 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by skiprow:
...and if the size is out of the recommended 640x320, i'm deducting a point for every pixel the image is out of bounds. ;-) |
4 points down for mine--but I'm sure you were starting with a 10 for my brilliant "savoir faire"! =-) |
|
|
|
03/03/2005 08:48:51 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by KaDi:
Originally posted by skiprow:
...and if the size is out of the recommended 640x320, i'm deducting a point for every pixel the image is out of bounds. ;-) |
4 points down for mine--but I'm sure you were starting with a 10 for my brilliant "savoir faire"! =-) |
Exactly! I just feel bad for the guy with the 640x359 ;-)
Message edited by author 2005-03-03 20:49:24. |
|
|
|
03/03/2005 09:01:07 PM · #17 |
You know what I think is nuts? Let me tell you...
Driving into or out of Toronto on the Gardiner Expressway with billboards that are actually large televisions!!! They are huge 10-15 second commercials intended for drivers going 120 km/h on a section of road that is hairy enough without the video entertainment!
|
|
|
|
03/03/2005 09:05:04 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
You know what I think is nuts? Let me tell you...
Driving into or out of Toronto on the Gardiner Expressway with billboards that are actually large televisions!!! They are huge 10-15 second commercials intended for drivers going 120 km/h on a section of road that is hairy enough without the video entertainment! |
LOL, and they call cell phones distractions!
|
|
|
|
03/04/2005 12:00:49 AM · #19 |
| I am a 65 mph commentor. There is a method to my madness. Billboards (spelled a d v e r t i s e m e n t) are everywhere. You can not go to a public bathroom anymore without seeing an ad somewhere. We (at least in USA and I assume to some extent in MOST other places) are basically imune to them anymore. Do you actually look at magazine ads? Do you actually watch comercials on the tube? Probably not. If you do, you're not the true norm anymore. So how do ads (spelled b i l l b o a r d s) work if they are effective? They make you look. You are not EXPECTED to study them for long periods to figure out the message. They are designed to simply and efficiently either grab your attention or subconscience. They can not do that with subtlety normally. They do that with POP. No POP, waste of advertising dollars. No POP, lower score in the DPC challenge... |
|
|
|
03/04/2005 01:26:02 AM · #20 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
You know what I think is nuts? Let me tell you...
Driving into or out of Toronto on the Gardiner Expressway with billboards that are actually large televisions!!! They are huge 10-15 second commercials intended for drivers going 120 km/h on a section of road that is hairy enough without the video entertainment! |
Ya mean you can actually see those things with all the smog you have in Toronto......... Wonders will never cease... hehehehehee
PS: If you drive at only 120km/h on that road, you are taking a very big risk of being rear ended my friend.... except for of course your "rush hour", where the word rush equates with "very slow and stopped"...
Ray |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/23/2024 03:45:04 AM EDT.
