uh oh!

James Burke

Being a grandpa is more fun than working
Whutta mess!

Perhaps he was looking for some built-in obsolescence...kinda like billboards. At the end of 30 to 60 days, they really begin to look ratty....just about the time when the contract expires.

Sticky Signs

New Member
Why the hell would they print on clear? In fact, hardly looks like printing would be the way to go for such simple signs. Oh well, better them than me.


New Member
Looks like the panels are reflective (?)... probably used clear so the light would still reflect... but like RJ said.. why MacTac?


Certified Enneadecagon Designer
The company who made the signs is a pretty good sign company, the website is worth checking out. The design company is also pretty good, they are worth checking out too.

I would like to get my mits on the bid documents, the RFQ and the construction documents. I tried looking for the bid docs as they are usually posted online. All I found was an old pdf with bad callouts asking for engineer grade, these signs require retroreflective.

The sign package is way more than directional signs, they also have some large size monument structures and directories. I think the 250k held back from the sign company is only the portion the sign company is being blamed for.

You have to bid as they are designed, if you do not build to the specs for any reason, you have to request changes prior to bidding is done so everyone bids on the same thing. The client technically can not ask for a major specification change either as that can come under scrutiny from competitive companies.

I'm thinking a bad spec got into the bid documents, someone in the middle changed it due to costs, or a sub contractor cheaped out. After reading the clients idea that the designer and sign company knew more is a cop out. On jobs like this I have volumes of emails printed out in folders and also respond to phone calls with a return email summarizing the discussion to make sure it's documented because of crap like this.

All the city signs I have done are screen printed with 3M Translucent inks (yep, on panels that big) or their cut film since the whole panel is required to be reflective, those panels I have seen for this job are a bit too opaque.

Joe Diaz

Why the hell would they print on clear? In fact, hardly looks like printing would be the way to go for such simple signs. Oh well, better them than me.

Like someone else pointed out, that is reflective... actually that is high intensity reflective. They want the reflective to shine through. We did our wayfinding signs here in town and did the same thing, but with better products apparently (or we remembered to take the protective film off of the sign blanks :Big Laugh) Those signs are about 3 years old now, and they are doing just fine. We need to replace them but not because the sign is falling apart, but because all of them are getting new information on them.

But I agree with you, why on such a simple sign? In our case the design called for a print (multiple colors, a few gradients), in there case it looks like it was just a flat color. Now if you are making signs with high intensity for the interstate, in our neck of the woods, there are specific requirements. One of them specifically states that the graphics not be printed on clear. My guess is that has more to do with the longevity of the ink then the material.

Mactac or not, You rarely see vinyl peeling off on it's own like that a week after being installed. (not even Avery) It is coming off so clean, the only thing I've ever seen do that is the protective film you get on your sign blanks. But then again I wasn't there and I'm basing my opinion off of a few photos and a press release.
Last edited:


You know it kind of looks like someone forgot to remove the protective film on the substrate.

The available evidence would indicate that to be be the case. The black on the backside of the peeling image as well as just how it is peeling [in a rather un-vinyl like manner] would seem to confirm this.