Tips to Make Yourself Visible

[GrumpyGregry]

[QUOTE 5056593, member: 9609"]after experimenting with a few ideas I also thing a solid block of colour is more visible, below are two images my dash cam picked up as I set off, they were different days so slightly different light but the distance and camera are the same - for me one stands out much better than the other
View attachment 384814 [/QUOTE]
I see no one as I'm updating facebook on my phone.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

[QUOTE 5056750, member: 9609"]do you have any evidence that it doesnt?

its a bit like the global warming deniers, virtually every scientist in the world says its happening but an occasional loon pops up and says it isnt. Same with health and safety, 99.9% say hi-viz and hi-reflective improves your chances of being seen, and I believe them.

If your going to go against the overwhelming weight of opinion of the experts then please show us your evidence.[/QUOTE]
What overwhelming weight of which experts?

Show me the 99.9% of experts stating that cyclists wearing hi-viz and reflectives can stack the odds in their favour by how they look.

Please. I'm happy to be educated.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

[QUOTE 5056913, member: 9609"]I would entirely agree road positioning is more important than hi-viz / hi-reflec, but I see no reason not to combine the two. I certainly don't think hi-viz is the only game in town by a long shot and I totally accept it is overused over relied on and used inappropriately. But it most certainly has its uses and benefits[/QUOTE]
Conflating the two in a thread entitled tips to make yourself visible is a bit tenuous.

 

[Ajax Bay]

I think it would be useful to restrict the discussion/argument in this thread to reflectives (worn or on the bike) and hi-viz clothing and the like. Although lighting and positioning are both interesting topics, they are diversions which makes focus difficult.
The wearing of hi-viz clothing might be widespread in industry and the services, and some sections of the cycling community, but the evidence of its effectiveness (in improving conspicuity) to reduce incidents seems weak. I, too, would be keen to read the evidence. Why are cars not encouraged to be painted yellow or orange or pink, or need reflective stripes down the side or in front, to make them easier to see? Why are lamp posts not painted a fancy colour with a reflective band highlight? Perhaps because neither would make a difference? Or would it?
I habitually wear an orange-backed gilet with a reflective stripe. It is a functional item of clothing which fits well and keeps me warm, and 'goes' with my various tops (semi-transparent front). My boots and shoes all have reflective material on their heels and my tights and leg warmers have reflective material front and rear.
As others have posted above, I ride on the basis that I can't predict the safe performance of drivers so treat them all, to a greater or lesser degree. as a possible threat. I also recognise that if I'm riding into a low sun, then so are drivers on the road I'm on and this increases the risk. I therefore take additional 'control' measures (positioning and demonstrable looking behind) and also design my routes to avoid heading towards the (low) sun where possible. None of this stops me enjoying my ride.
And btw I don't think it's useful to descend to pejoratives like 'loons' in discussion.

 

[Spinney]

To take just one point - lamp-posts and other street furniture are not so decorated because they are usually placed where drivers are not expected to go - i.e. on the pavement. Street furniture in the middle of the road is illuminated (e.g. the keep left bollards).

Cars - cars have lights that have to meet certain standards, and so should not need hi-viz colouring.

Having said that, in the low-sun situation an oncoming car with its headlights on could be less visible than one without its lights on (active optical camouflage, making the object closer to the colouring/illumination level of the background).

 

[smutchin]

It's a very strange situation when one considers the vast amount of hi viz worn in so many different industries and situations. One would imagine there there would be definitive piece of work to demonstrate the link between clothing colour and casualty rates as I can't imagine industry investing millions in clothing without evidence to support this.

I’ve highlighted the key word here. You don’t just have to show that hi-viz is effective, you have to show that hi-viz is effective FOR CYCLISTS. What works on eg a building site may not necessarily apply on the road.

 

[PaulSB]

I think it would be useful to restrict the discussion/argument in this thread to reflectives (worn or on the bike) and hi-viz clothing and the like. Although lighting and positioning are both interesting topics, they are diversions which makes focus difficult.

To counter this point in a thread titled "Tips to Make Yourself Visible" how can lighting be a diversion? I would suggest lighting is the best way to make oneself visible either day or night. I'd agree getting in to the specifics of lighting might not help but please lets not suggest lights are a diversion from or irrelevant to topic discussing being more visible.

 

[mjr]

[QUOTE 5057203, member: 9609"]getting yourself seen is the overwhelming advice given by virtually everybody involved in health and safety, in many work places it is the rule, it is even the advivce given in the highway code. If you feel they are all wrong please show me the evidence, you are the one railing against widespread and popular beliefs - it is up to you to provide the evidence that hi-viz / hi-reflec clothing has no benefits.[/QUOTE]
That's not the way it should work. The Space Lemon advocates should show evidence that their preferred clothes work before we micturate away lots of government safety and cycling budgets and cyclists' own money (not to mention legislative time, lobbying effort and bits of training courses) on something that doesn't work.

It's also much more difficult to prove definitively that something doesn't work. That's why snake oil sells so well.

 

[Spinney]

Mod note: can we just agree to be polite from this point on? Rather than going back to look at who said what, or continuing to use perjorative terms like 'Space Lemon' in place of Hi-vis? And 'wasting' would do perfectly well to describe spending money when there is no demonstrated benefit for cyclists.

 

[Colin_P]

Pedal reflectors in my opinion are the single most "ooooo..... that's a bike" thing you can have on your bike in the dark.

Hi-vis, meh, it is everywhere, on everything and therefore no longer effective as drivers don't expect it to be moving, you are probably safer dressed like a Ninja.

 

[mjr]

To take just one point - lamp-posts and other street furniture are not so decorated because they are usually placed where drivers are not expected to go - i.e. on the pavement. Street furniture in the middle of the road is illuminated (e.g. the keep left bollards).

Not universally, or at least not by anything else than the street lights, especially when there aren't pavements. I even know streets with black lampposts in the middle of the road with no kerbs or anything around them, replaced ten or fifteen years ago like for like. Not without their critics, of course, but it's a conservation area and so on, so they've survived the hi vis zealots so far.

Cars - cars have lights that have to meet certain standards, and so should not need hi-viz colouring.

Bikes - bikes have lights that have to meet certain standards, and so should not need hi vis colouring.

Same reservation about low sun, though.

 

[mjr]

Mod note: can we just agree to be polite from this point on? Rather than going back to look at who said what, or continuing to use perjorative terms like 'Space Lemon' in place of Hi-vis? And 'wasting' would do perfectly well to describe spending money when there is no demonstrated benefit for cyclists.

Eta: Wasting doesn't convey the competitive aspect of this spending IMO. Promoting hi vis has elements of asserting power, controlling what people do, making them do things for their own good, despite the lack of evidence, plus denying or reducing the money available to do other things preferred by other people.

Most of what people advocate is not strictly hi vis (fluorescent main colour with two hoops and two vertical over the shoulder bars, as seen on @Donger's jacket on page 1, plus a specific pattern of hoops and bars on the sleeves and trousers) and the term ninja has been thrown at people who don't wear it. Can I ask mods to be even handed and also clamp down on the widespread insults of cycling in plain clothes?

 

[BoldonLad]

Since colour would appear to make little, or no, difference to an object's visibility, why does nature (and the armed forces etc) put so much effort into camouflage?

 

[PaulSB]

I’ve highlighted the key word here. You don’t just have to show that hi-viz is effective, you have to show that hi-viz is effective FOR CYCLISTS. What works on eg a building site may not necessarily apply on the road.

Before I continue I should make it clear I no longer wear hi viz. During my winter commutes I did. I don't wear hi viz today because my riding is always in daylight, my kit is very bright and I carry lights. My main point in the thread was I think solid colour shirts are the most visible and my experience, no data to prove this, is red is the most visible.

I disagree with the view one needs to prove hi viz is effective for cyclists. There may or may not be statistical data to prove hi viz is effective. The huge amount used in industry would suggest there is a benefit. The only evidence I can offer to support this is in my 40+ years of working I never encountered a company which spent money for the sake of it. For me this is sufficient to indicate there is a benefit in most areas and as every road worker wears hi viz I feel it's believed to be useful in this particular one. Yes, clearly cyclists are a moving target and road workers are not.

Surely this is ultimately down to personal choice and there is no need to prove the point? If a rider feels more visible and so safer wearing hi viz I would argue that cyclist will be more confident and with confidence, or lack of nervousness, he/she may become more assertive in taking positions, avoiding the gutter etc.

Possibly in low sun conditions some colours are more difficult to discern than others but there is evidence to prove as light conditions vary in many different situations no one colour can be proven to be better or worse. Sadly we are not chameleons.

https://www.ncbi.nim.nih.gov/m/pubmed/22062342

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0018720811427033

 

[Spinney]

Most of what people advocate is not strictly hi vis (fluorescent main colour with two hoops and two vertical over the shoulder bars, as seen on @Donger's jacket on page 1, plus a specific pattern of hoops and bars on the sleeves and trousers) and the term ninja has been thrown at people who don't wear it. Can I ask mods to be even handed and also clamp down on the widespread insults of cycling in plain clothes?

I wasn't clamping down, just requesting that from this point on people try not to denigrate others or their clothing/whatever by their choise of language. That is all.