I do like the Overground lines' colour strip at the top of signs double lines. Eliz Line & Thameslink should be depicted the same way. Also having the orange Overground roundel on as much of the wayfinding signage as possible, like in the example(s) you've shown, would go a long way to cementing the Orange Overground mode on these newly renamed lines. Overall, frustrating wayfinding inconsistencies from TfL, given their usually stellar track record. Seems to have starting deviating during the, ahem, Johnson administration, with the no longer relevant but completely sucking up Elizabeth line name, calling it a 'line' in the name, the Boris Dangleway &c.
I can’t get behind the double lines on signage because it’s just not meant to be a representation of the line as used on the map - it’s a colour accent, and they’re trying to retrospectively redefine it as a line, or perhaps mistakenly believe it was one all along.
The worst part of this is it means that people aren’t really ever exposed to the new line colours in any substantial colour block. I don’t know if that makes a difference as to people actually building a colour association (I still don’t know them other than Weaver line’s dirty purple/brown) but it probably doesn’t help.
If you’re going to do six new colours, do the colours!
There is a limit to how many different colours the eye can quickly distinguish on a single map, 16-20 from studies. Paris RATP and London TfL realise they are at or nearing this limit. I appreciate that you know a lot about colour theory.
I do like the double lines on signage as they are exactly how they appear to passengers on the Tube Map. Despite not being designed as such. Anything that provides quicker line identification is good I believe, as long as it doesn’t confuse something else.
Absolutely they are maxed out in terms of colours and probably already were before these new lines were added. They’ve somewhat backed themselves into a corner, though. There must’ve been some better way of doing it which was either resisted in favour of the way it’s always been done or perhaps not even explored. The tube map design language just doesn’t work with this many variations.
I’m not sure elevating each LO line to the importance of a tube line was really necessary either, especially when you have 3 station lines like the “Liberty line” in the mix. We could’ve had “The London Overground Weaver line has severe delays…” which could be instantly dismissed by anyone not using the Overground, and instead LO just got skipped over altogether.
And don’t mistake me having a fancy Pantone book for knowing a lot about colour theory! I did have a whole section in an early draft about how it wasn’t possible to pick 20 easily distinguishable colours let alone remember them, but it got dropped.
Do I recall that it was in this era that TfL disbanded its dedicated wayfinding/signage department? I seem to remember the various errors on the Northern Line extension signage (long since corrected now) being put down to that change, and the signs being prepared by a general project team and not by signage specialists.
I do like the Overground lines' colour strip at the top of signs double lines. Eliz Line & Thameslink should be depicted the same way. Also having the orange Overground roundel on as much of the wayfinding signage as possible, like in the example(s) you've shown, would go a long way to cementing the Orange Overground mode on these newly renamed lines. Overall, frustrating wayfinding inconsistencies from TfL, given their usually stellar track record. Seems to have starting deviating during the, ahem, Johnson administration, with the no longer relevant but completely sucking up Elizabeth line name, calling it a 'line' in the name, the Boris Dangleway &c.
I can’t get behind the double lines on signage because it’s just not meant to be a representation of the line as used on the map - it’s a colour accent, and they’re trying to retrospectively redefine it as a line, or perhaps mistakenly believe it was one all along.
The worst part of this is it means that people aren’t really ever exposed to the new line colours in any substantial colour block. I don’t know if that makes a difference as to people actually building a colour association (I still don’t know them other than Weaver line’s dirty purple/brown) but it probably doesn’t help.
If you’re going to do six new colours, do the colours!
There is a limit to how many different colours the eye can quickly distinguish on a single map, 16-20 from studies. Paris RATP and London TfL realise they are at or nearing this limit. I appreciate that you know a lot about colour theory.
I do like the double lines on signage as they are exactly how they appear to passengers on the Tube Map. Despite not being designed as such. Anything that provides quicker line identification is good I believe, as long as it doesn’t confuse something else.
Absolutely they are maxed out in terms of colours and probably already were before these new lines were added. They’ve somewhat backed themselves into a corner, though. There must’ve been some better way of doing it which was either resisted in favour of the way it’s always been done or perhaps not even explored. The tube map design language just doesn’t work with this many variations.
I’m not sure elevating each LO line to the importance of a tube line was really necessary either, especially when you have 3 station lines like the “Liberty line” in the mix. We could’ve had “The London Overground Weaver line has severe delays…” which could be instantly dismissed by anyone not using the Overground, and instead LO just got skipped over altogether.
And don’t mistake me having a fancy Pantone book for knowing a lot about colour theory! I did have a whole section in an early draft about how it wasn’t possible to pick 20 easily distinguishable colours let alone remember them, but it got dropped.
Do I recall that it was in this era that TfL disbanded its dedicated wayfinding/signage department? I seem to remember the various errors on the Northern Line extension signage (long since corrected now) being put down to that change, and the signs being prepared by a general project team and not by signage specialists.
I have mixed views on the names, but I totally agree it would have made more sense to split the Weaver Line into two identities.