Hi-Vis OR Lights

[4F]

...and here's the shot with nothing other than ambient light. Neither of us has lights switched on and pointing towards each other.

If it wasn't for his hi viz jacket I would never have spotted him

 

[subaqua]

solid and flashing front and rear ( ta for that idea Gaz) and a hi viz ruck sack cover. was gutted that i needed them earlier this week in the day as it was so dull.

 

[subaqua]

I am shining a headlight at that jacket in the picture with mboy shining the bright white light back at me. That first picture is designed to show how highviz (or rather the reflective portion) is mostly invisible behind a decent light.

That light would never be mistaken for general light pollution. It's often mistaken for a motorcycle, which can be slightly embarassing as a driver waits at a t-junction for ages when I'm approaching slowly uphill.


Here's one with only the high-vis jacket, and my shining the bright headlight towards it. It's decently visible now, but this is the best possible viewing of a high-vis jacket.

that just looks like a lit bollard in the distance. the best one is the bright light pointing at you , you know its a "vehicle"

 

[Holdsworth]

Exactly what light is used in those photos, I want one whatever it is!

 

[BentMikey]

Holdsworth, it's an Exposure MaXx-D. Not their most powerful light any longer mind.

Davefb, the lights weren't ridculously different in real life, as it was a damp and misty winter evening. We all know that cameras change how an image looks, but I'd say that's a fair representation of what was actually there on the night.

LOL @ 4F!
It's a point, it stands out a bit against the dark foliage. Consider a cyclist though, who would be on the road we hope, where that colour would blend in perfectly against the orange-coloured tarmac due to the street lighting.

 

[davefb]

Holdsworth, it's an Exposure MaXx-D. Not their most powerful light any longer mind.

Davefb, the lights weren't ridculously different in real life, as it was a damp and misty winter evening. We all know that cameras change how an image looks, but I'd say that's a fair representation of what was actually there on the night.

LOL @ 4F!
It's a point, it stands out a bit against the dark foliage. Consider a cyclist though, who would be on the road we hope, where that colour would blend in perfectly against the orange-coloured tarmac due to the street lighting.

its the keep left signs that show the effect up mostly... and the difference between the image with the headlight where you can see the blue signs but the one with just the hivis, its just a big glow...


just saying, when unlit the "just hi vis" would be even more 'invisible'

when driving, you tend to be seeing brake lights or headlights all the time, and eyes dont do 'overbright'/'glow' as well as cameras.

 

[GrasB]

its the keep left signs that show the effect up mostly... and the difference between the image with the headlight where you can see the blue signs but the one with just the hivis, its just a big glow...


just saying, when unlit the "just hi vis" would be even more 'invisible'

when driving, you tend to be seeing brake lights or headlights all the time, and eyes dont do 'overbright'/'glow' as well as cameras.

Might be worth doing the same thing with a manually set exposure consistent across all of the photos.

 

[BentMikey]

its the keep left signs that show the effect up mostly... and the difference between the image with the headlight where you can see the blue signs but the one with just the hivis, its just a big glow...


just saying, when unlit the "just hi vis" would be even more 'invisible'

when driving, you tend to be seeing brake lights or headlights all the time, and eyes dont do 'overbright'/'glow' as well as cameras.

I'm not sure what you're saying? I find eyes can usually see more than cameras when it comes to the end ranges of dark and light. Anyway, it's immaterial - the points made by the pictures are the same as seen by myself in real life:

There's no reflection from the reflectives on the highviz from ambient street lighting, or from the car at the side road.
The yellow flou gets washed out and is the same colour as the road surface under sodium street lighting.
There's a decent retro-return from the reflectives on the vest with light aimed from my eyes towards the vest.
A good light completely hides the reflectives. I imagine a cheap and weak light won't do so, but I didn't test this.

I'm not going to bother arguing detail or splitting hairs on this further. I'd say that despite minor differences, the pictures show reasonably accurately what I observed in real life.

 

[marinyork]

Might be worth doing the same thing with a manually set exposure consistent across all of the photos.

It's hard to simulate properly as often the edges of windscreens distort things a bit vs being a cyclist. Generally it's an interesting exercise. Ultimately I would say it is subjective. I would say the cyclist is visible with just the hi-viz on in the directly lit and lit one, just I'd give it a score of something like 5, 10 and 70 respectively.

 

[davefb]

I'm not sure what you're saying? I find eyes can usually see more than cameras when it comes to the end ranges of dark and light. Anyway, it's immaterial - the points made by the pictures are the same as seen by myself in real life:

There's no reflection from the reflectives on the highviz from ambient street lighting, or from the car at the side road.
The yellow flou gets washed out and is the same colour as the road surface under sodium street lighting.
There's a decent retro-return from the reflectives on the vest with light aimed from my eyes towards the vest.
A good light completely hides the reflectives. I imagine a cheap and weak light won't do so, but I didn't test this.

I'm not going to bother arguing detail or splitting hairs on this further. I'd say that despite minor differences, the pictures show reasonably accurately what I observed in real life.

sorry, just saying whilst the pictures show lights are needed, I'd say it's actually worse than what the pictures are showing because the last photo is overexposed..

eyes can't overexpose so if they were adjusted for seeing the lights , that unlit hiviz would be very invisible..

but yeah, splitting at hairs

 

[summerdays]

I think the best of reflectives is when it is moving ... so an ankle snap band rotating in a pedalling motion does catch the eye of a motorist or those narrow 3m spoke reflectives when seen side on.

 

[jonny jeez]

I think the best of reflectives is when it is moving ... so an ankle snap band rotating in a pedalling motion does catch the eye of a motorist or those narrow 3m spoke reflectives when seen side on.

Now you mention this, I agree.

Thinking about it, the one thing that I instantly recognise as a cyclist in the dark is a reflective leg band moving up and down. Its someting that no other vehicle/traveller replicates. perhaps they should make small flares (the lights not the trousers) for the back of pedals, where the reflectors sit... the rotating movement would really make them stand out and they wouldn't be as "trendy" as the wheel flares.

 

[tyred]

I think the best of reflectives is when it is moving ... so an ankle snap band rotating in a pedalling motion does catch the eye of a motorist or those narrow 3m spoke reflectives when seen side on.

I agree and it is exactly why I have often felt like buying a set of these for research purposes. I should think they should make any (upright) cyclist visible.

 

[Davidc]

I agree and it is exactly why I have often felt like buying a set of these for research purposes. I should think they should make any (upright) cyclist visible.

Agree with both about the up-down motion.

I use trouser clips with yellow reflective surfaces or a slap-wrap for the same job.

Not sure the colours on the pedal light are legal but who cares? problem is that the pedal itself wouldn't meet my needs.

 

[Rhythm Thief]

I won't comment too much on urban areas but as a rural dweller who often drives/walks/cycles on pitch black roads, there is no doubt in my mind that hi-vis jacket makes people a lot more visible than they would otherwise be. But I consider it just more than that. It gives the person a shape as a human being. Something like the rear mudguard reflector on a bike caught in the car headlights can be very bright in the right set of circumstances, even if it's a fair distance away, but apart from telling you that there is something there, it gives little information as to what. It could be many things. A lot of people around here put red reflectors on the pillars at the end of their driveways. But if the cyclist is wearing a jacket with reflective strips, it instantly tells the driver that there is a person on the road.

This is spot on. Hi vis (by which I mean a fluoro tabard with reflective strips, like road workers wear) is excellent for defining a person in the road ahead. Single lights - even very good, very bright ones - can easily be misinterpreted. Hi vis on its own is no good.