I highly despise ISO signs. There have been tests conducted with both and the normal signs always do better. They cut through the smoke with the lettering, compared to a white blob in a Smokey room. I can see the argument that red means stop or danger, but Americans are accustomed to the traditional. I feel like more people would be lost in a fire, emergency and die.
You can have your own opinion, but this is mine. No hate to anyone btw.
The solution is to have a cutout of the running man similar to the arrows on normal exit signs. Will this ever be implemented? Probably not, it’s likely too expensive. That’s an interesting weakness that I wouldn’t have thought about. There should be a better way to make exit signs understandable for all than the existing iso sign.
You know, I never thought about that actually: good point. Still no reason both couldn’t be used together for the best of both worlds though.
Yeah. Green does have its advantages though: in addition to being perceived as meaning “safety”, it’s also likely unique in color from all the other lights in a typical building & thus should stand out & be locatable easier, along with being more visible in darkness according to Wikipedia, so maybe green should be the standard color in the US.
More like arrows alongside both the ISO exit symbol & the word “EXIT” for the best chances of both visibility & understanding (& to just have the best of both worlds together as I said).
I remember Canada tried to do this same transition as well however when there were interviews on what people think of the difference between the EXIT lettering and the ISO sign. Most people had no idea on what the running man through door even means and thought it was quite unusual. And yes it would be hard to see the sign in bad conditions as well especially if evacuation is nessessary.
Hence why it’d be best if everyone used the ISO symbol plus the word “EXIT” together: gives everyone the best chance of knowing what’s an exit & where it is.
Agreed big time absolutely agreed
Howdy folks, please see attached.
Please note that I am not legal counsel and cannot provide formal legal advice under any circumstances. No attorney-client relationship is created as a result of reading this fact check.
ExitSignFactCheck.pdf (269.1 KB)
As with many aspects of fire and life safety codes, the problem with changing something would be lack of recognition towards that new thing. You would need to make a great effort to educate the public about the new sign if you were to change it.
It could go two ways with the ISO + Exit
It could either go two ways
Denver Code/MBTA Option:
White Pictograph and “EXIT” Lettering on Green background
(For those who don’t know Denver Code, it was a old code where exit signs were required White Lettering on Green Backgrounds
Standard Option:
Basically Inverted version of the Denver Code/MBTA Version. So Green Lettering on a White or even Black Background (depending on housing color)
Maybe we will see some Red but thats a bit of a stretch.
Wouldn’t really be a problem if the ISO symbol was used alongside the existing “EXIT” lettering (which as I’ve said several times before just makes sense as it’s the best of both worlds).
I say this: better yet green lettering & green symbol on a white background/sign, so that both “parts” would be the same color (sure the ISO exit symbol is usually white on a green background but it probably wouldn’t be any less effective inverted). Maybe black would be a better color for the background though since that would help the green portions stand out more & thus be more/better visible.
That’s some interesting research, but if ISO signs were to be added to the code, I think that ISO signs strictly stay in areas where international travelers are. Most Americans have no idea what ISO signs mean, so if all signs were changed, many people would be confused in an emergency. In my opinion, ISO is a no-go. I very much dislike them.
Hence why I say that ISO + “EXIT” is the ideal solution for several reasons: having both means the sign should be familiar to anyone familiar with either kind of existing sign (which combined is basically everyone on the entire planet), & it gives them the best possible chances of understanding the sign, including what it is, what it’s telling them, & where the nearest exit is.
Yea. I’m personally not a big fan of red exit signs. My brain thinks red=stop, and I’m sure I’m not the only one.
Yeah that’s what European code-makers think too considering red is only used for fire or prohibition-related ISO signage, & of course all exit signs in the continent are green too. According to Wikipedia’s article on exit signs green can also be seen better in a dark room, so therefore I’d say it is indeed the best color for them (especially since green is arguably a friendlier color as well as one that’s easier on the eyes than red, especially in the dark).
There’s a video made by @FireAlarmDude5967 where he compares the iso and standard sign in a smoky room, and the regular one could be seen more clearly, the iso one just looks hazy. So, that may not necessarily be true. An easy solution would be to use green lights and have it work like a traditional exit sign but look like an iso sign
Exactly: in fact I outlined a solution above: normal exit sign design (for North America at least) with either white or black plastic (black would likely help the green stand out more) & both the word “EXIT” & the ISO exit symbol in green on the front (or on both sides in the case of ceiling-mounted signs): sure the ISO exit symbol is usually white on green, but I don’t think reversing the color would probably make that much of a difference (in fact as you said that may be what solves the visibility problem, which is caused by the entire sign lighting up rather than just the symbol).
Professional experiments have tested this and got similar results as well, although I would need to look into the phenomena in more detail to see whether placing more signs would be better. Is “clearly” implying that “EXIT” can be seen more legibly? If so, would a green light be enough of a sign to look for?