Hi Viz

[mickle]

Hear hear!

 

[Cuchilo]

Another Dutch cyclist....hard to spot, but she's the one in black.....

This has just made me think . Although most street lights etc are now grey around my area of London they are black . Are they painted that way to give drivers comedy moments when people walk into them ?
I notice the face of the lights and the low level parts of the poles have black on them . Whats the reason for that ?

 

[Dogtrousers]

Found this:

http://knightstemplarmtc.com/reviews/iconmilspechivizvest/

A Hi Vis vest that......

"Somewhere in/on the jacket I have sown in a St Christopher Medallion"

I wonder what, if anything, will germinate?

 

[Accy cyclist]

Give over, have you noticed how careful drivers are around you whilst head to toe in your HiViz clown outfit? Drivers not looking will still not be looking no matter what you are wearing in my experience.

Yes but the ones who are looking need a little help sometimes! Ok the ones who will not see, we have to pray they don't do us harm,but the ones who wish us no harm have a harder job seeing mr or mrs dressed in black on a dimly lit road on a dark night than they would if we shone up with reflectives like a beacon!
Bright cycle clothing isn't always "clown outfit" stuff just as all dark clothing isn't either! I bet you wouldn't turn this little number down if offered to you?!http://www.prendas.co.uk/details.asp?imgID=8029

 

[Tim Hall]

Sorry, can i just clarify, are we talking about fluorescents or reflectives?

IME "Hi Viz" is usually a fluorescent waistcoat/jacket with reflective bits.

 

[ComedyPilot]

^^^ Wot @Adrian said sums it up.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

He omitted sexual partner from his fiddling list.

A more common cause of loss of control than you might think....

 

[Dogtrousers]

Yebbut, while Adrian speaks good sense - is the problem he outlines sufficient reason for an individual to spurn hi-vis, which may potentially give them some small advantage, in order to kick against the spread of the hi-vis wearing meme and thus potentially make some small contribution to the greater good? A kind of tragedy of the commons thingy.

The problem comes when these memes spread from the individual to the corporate. It's fine, dandy and harmless for Fred Bloggs to decide that a high vis vest with gurt big reflectives can't do him any harm, may do some good so he'll wear it. That's his business and his alone. On the other hand it's un-fine, un-dandy and un-harmless for an organisation with some power to decree that all cyclists should follow Fred's example at all times and those who don't should be in some way censured. That becomes everyone's business.

It's the helmet debate all over again, but the arguments are easier to see because they are orange with reflective stripes.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Sorry I must be thick, but when I shine my torch down my garden path at night and the beam falls on next doors pale tabby he is much more readily visible than when the beam lights up the black cat from a few doors away . I am not consciously looking for either of them. Why is this?

If you can't see the black cat how do you know it is there?

No. Wait. Hang on a mo'.

Oh. I see. You can see the black cat by torchlight. You have no difficulty identifying that the black cat is there. In the dark. With a torch. Without consciously looking for it. How very excellent.

Thank you for making my point for me.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Yebbut, while Adrian speaks good sense - is the problem he outlines sufficient reason for an individual to spurn hi-vis, which may potentially give them some small advantage, in order to kick against the spread of the hi-vis wearing meme and thus potentially make some small contribution to the greater good? A kind of tragedy of the commons thingy.

The problem comes when these memes spread from the individual to the corporate. It's fine, dandy and harmless for Fred Bloggs to decide that a high vis vest with gurt big reflectives can't do him any harm, may do some good so he'll wear it. That's his business and his alone. On the other hand it's un-fine, un-dandy and un-harmless for an organisation with some power to decree that all cyclists should follow Fred's example at all times and those who don't should be in some way censored. That becomes everyone's business.

It's the helmet debate all over again, but the arguments are easier to see because they are orange with reflective stripes.

On behalf of the St Christopher party I have to interject.

Our party would argue wearing a St Christopher medal may potentially give the wearer some small advantage.

Why is there not a vocal group of nobber-drivers a la CP's work colleague protesting the lack of St Christophers?

I will happily consider the wearing of hi-viz (flouro + reflectives) tabards when the British Standards for such garments for cyclists includes printing the words

Drivers!
Slow the fark down!
&
Move the fark over!​

in large scotchlite letters on the back.

Arguments based on an unproven potentiality are fraught with danger. I am potentially safer if I walk the streets of the Lundhun in a stab proof vest. But surely the problem is the knife carriers not their victims?

 

[youngoldbloke]

If you can't see the black cat how do you know it is there?

No. Wait. Hang on a mo'.

Oh. I see. You can see the black cat by torchlight. You have no difficulty identifying that the black cat is there. In the dark. With a torch. Without consciously looking for it. How very excellent.

Thank you for making my point for me.

You know exactly what I mean. I am not promoting the wearing of hi viz clothing, and certainly do not favour compulsory wearing of it. I use dipped headlights on a car in poor light conditions so that I might be more easily seen seen, I use lights on a bike in poor light conditions so that I might be more easily seen. I wear light coloured clothing on the road in poor light conditions for the same reason. You can do as you wish - I really don't care .... I'm out.

 

[Dogtrousers]

On behalf of the St Christopher party I have to interject.

Our party would argue wearing a St Christopher medal may potentially give the wearer some small advantage.

Why is there not a vocal group of nobber-drivers a la CP's work colleague protesting the lack of St Christophers.

I will happily consider the wearing of hi-viz (flouro + reflectives) tabards when the British Standards for such garments for cyclists includes printing the words

Drivers!
Slow the f*** down!
&
Move the f*** over!​

in large scotchlite letters on the back.

Arguments based on an unproven potentiality are fraught with danger. I am potentially safer if I walk the streets of the Lundhun in a stab proof vest. But surely the problem is the knife carriers not their victims?

And, as an individual, you are entirely free to wear a stab vest in London if you so wish. I don't see how that would be "fraught with danger". I don't see any danger at all. Nor do I see it as incompatible with recognising the problem of kife carriers. Nor do I see any danger accruing to the individual from the wearing of St Christopher medals, should they so wish.

The danger would come, as I said, if and when the meme is transferred from the individual to the corporate - and some organisation or other decrees that everyone should wear a St Christopher, and those who do not should be censured. Then it becomes everyone's business.

In fact, it's not at all clear to me what, if any, point you are making. Indeed, it's not clear if you are disagreeing with me at all. But as I said, this looks to me as being like the helmet debate all over again, and it seems that this is the way such debates go.

I believe that it's now traditional for me to angrily demand that you back up your assertions with reference to peer reveiwed research, so here goes: Would the drivers be able to read your Scotchlite letters? Can you cite a study on the readability of sweary scotchlite messages on cycling apparel?

 

[GrumpyGregry]

You know exactly what I mean. I am not promoting the wearing of hi viz clothing, and certainly do not favour compulsory wearing of it. I use dipped headlights on a car in poor light conditions so that I might be more easily seen seen, I use lights on a bike in poor light conditions so that I might be more easily seen. I wear light coloured clothing on the road in poor light conditions for the same reason. You can do as you wish - I really don't care .... I'm out.

Yes. I know exactly what you mean. Cyclists, like cats, are not actually invisible and have no need of hi-viz.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

And, as an individual, you are entirely free to wear a stab vest in London if you so wish. I don't see how that would be "fraught with danger". I don't see any danger at all. Nor do I see it as incompatible with recognising the problem of kife carriers. Nor do I see any danger accruing to the individual from the wearing of St Christopher medals, should they so wish.

Arguments based on an unproven potentiality are fraught with danger. I am potentially safer if I walk the streets of the Lundhun in a stab proof vest. But surely the problem is the knife carriers not their victims?

Arguments not actions DT.

 

[Markymark]

Yes. I know exactly what you mean. Cyclists, like cats, are not actually invisible and have no need of hi-viz.

Not from cars with lights, but what about other road users who don't have torches (pedestrains, other cyclists, horse riders, etc)?