Look Like Your Enemy: Create signs that confuse, astound and parody!

 by slambert
Featured
man-confused.jpg
In this instructable you will learn Design Camouflage. In past projects I have appropriated and refined various techniques to mimic government or corporate signage. Using the methods outlined in the following steps will allow you to temporarily borrow the legitimacy of a company or organization, while delivering a different message.

Like in my previous instructables, I'll be using past work as an example - a work from 2005, The Emma Goldman Institute for Anarchist Studies. In this case, the campus was in the midst of an expansion and state construction projects require signs describing the construction project and budget. The Emma Goldman Institute sign created dialogue about the priorities the school places on research and funding and had the local papers explaining the basics of anarchism for their readers at the same time.

I have also used this method on other projects like changing street signs, creating bogus products like this Soap Box, and even the signs in Ronald's Crisis.

For more inspiration see:
The Billboard Liberation Front's handy manual
California Department of Corrections
 
Remove these adsRemove these ads by Signing Up

Step 1: Supplies

You'll need the following.

Hardware:
- tape measure
- digital camera
- printer
- appropriate substrate to print on such as:
- paper
- adhesive vinyl
- tyvek

Software:
- image editing software like GIMP or some proprietary alternative
- vector editing software like inkscape or proprietary alternative
- a healthy sized font library is helpful, but not necessary.

Resources:
-http://www.osalt.com/ provides links to open source alternatives to proprietary software
1-40 of 143Next »
ilpug says: Dec 26, 2010. 9:22 PM
awesome. i like it, although i wouldnt use so much technical stufff
HisDivineShadow says: Aug 28, 2010. 8:44 PM
But wouldn't such an institution be illegal? I would think that if people wish to be anarchist thety should get together BUILD an island that floats, send it out into the ocean and be anarchist there....
HisDivineShadow in reply to HisDivineShadowAug 28, 2010. 8:46 PM
just got the joke lol!
DoItOrDie says: May 9, 2010. 3:48 PM
Ah yes, everyone is equal, just some are more equal than others.  Is that it?  Your right to so-called civil disobidence is "more equal" than other's right to reach their destination in a timely manner.  Typical inflated ego.  Just because no one was killed or injured in no way excuses your actions.  You have no idea how many people were misrouted and may have even lost money or business because of your vandalism.  What plans were ruined or delayed because of you and your silly, worthless political statement.  I have no problem with the sign presented here, but the street signs were way over the line.  Remember, just because something may be legal does not make it moral or right.  Just because yiou have the right to stand on your soapbox and drone on about your pet peve, does not mean you have the right to force others to have to listen.  That's exactely what those street signs did.  Forced others into participating in your childish game.
krawczuk in reply to DoItOrDieMay 12, 2010. 11:13 PM
get a life you wanker.. i reckon thats a excellent idea, and very funny..

like to see what civil disobediance you do , you toss pot
rattyrain in reply to DoItOrDieMay 12, 2010. 9:24 PM
And I'm sure you could say the same thing about any quasi-distracting billboard.  You probably have ADD.




Yeah, you should get that checked.
manskybook in reply to DoItOrDieMay 9, 2010. 9:22 PM
 That's a curious and wrongheaded overreaction. If you'd like to focus on stopping something truly damaging, please try to reverse something like the folks who send me letters with their company name (something like Government Processing Center) offering to get me the abstract for my deed, or to update my assessment for my house, or any of a number of things that I could do for free or for much cheaper than the fee they offer, with warnings that it must be done NOW. That's harmful. You are beset with your own inflated ego if you think a clever joke is "vandalism", even if for a street sign. It would be VERY hard to make a case that ANYONE was caused significant harm, or even lost money. Please. Go to your conservative cave and sulk, but we will not have your ilk thrashing about with claims of upside-down logic here.
caarntedd in reply to manskybookMay 16, 2010. 5:50 PM
I drive a fire engine for a living. I would hate to get lost driving to an emergency because a street sign was changed. If your lucky, it won't be you or someone you know that needs help.
I've been known to pull tricks like this myself, but you need to pick your target carefully.
slambert (author) in reply to caarnteddMay 16, 2010. 6:11 PM
did you watch the video? that's why we included the street name in the change. Also, most fireman in San Francisco can identify a major street like Bush without a sign. But point taken - be smart people.
caarntedd in reply to slambertMay 16, 2010. 8:49 PM
Thanks.
DoItOrDie in reply to manskybookMay 10, 2010. 5:14 PM
Typical liberal maneuver.  Inject a total non-sequitur while ignoring the point.  Whether anyone was caused significant harm or not is not the main issue.  Infringing on the rights of others is.

And just who is in charge of measuring what constitutes "significant harm," anyway?  You?
slambert (author) in reply to DoItOrDieMay 10, 2010. 8:31 PM
maybe you two can get each other's email addresses and work this out between yourselves?
DoItOrDie in reply to slambertMay 10, 2010. 11:36 PM
No need, I'm done.
micobanff in reply to DoItOrDieMay 9, 2010. 7:44 PM
It may be a silly and worthless political statement to you, but it's his right to exercise it!
DoItOrDie in reply to micobanffMay 10, 2010. 5:01 PM
Of course it is.  I said as much in my comment.  What is NOT his right, however, is to use public street signs as his personal playthings when exercising that right.  One person's rights end where another's begin.  Others had a right to use those signs for their intended purpose of finding their way.  His stunt infringed on their rights not to be encumbered by his capricious modifications.  Not that he cares.  Only his rights are important, after all.  And THAT is my point.
A good name in reply to DoItOrDieJun 16, 2010. 10:26 AM
And you have no rights. Rights are an idea created by people who question as to whether they have rights at all. You have only the "rights" that the current regime says you have. But let's go by the constitution; Where on the constitution, sir, does it say that you have a right to read road signs?
slambert (author) in reply to DoItOrDieMay 10, 2010. 8:32 PM
No, I care. You are right. You win.
slambert (author) in reply to DoItOrDieMay 9, 2010. 4:12 PM
ok, you shouldn't do that then.
Palomar Jack says: May 11, 2010. 1:43 PM
From your intro:

"Look Like Your Enemy: Create signs that confuse, astound and parody!" Fine, do it on your own property, not someone else's unless authorized. But you never said this from the start, you had to be prodded. Why?

" ...to mimic government or corporate signage...", "... temporarily borrow the legitimacy of a company or organization...", Why, because you know your message is not legitimate? What legitimate company or organization will authorize this?

"...used this method on other projects like changing street signs ...", From step #1 "...will not cause any inadvertent damage or confusion...", These two statements contradict each other. Just what do you think changing street signage would do? In the least, it would cause people to drive excessive distances using more fuel and polluting the environment. Not only that, people who remove these nuisances will throw them out, further adding to pollution. Now what, smart guy?

This from Instructables Terms of Use:

We have a "be nice" comment policy. Please be positive and constructive with your comments or risk being banned from our site.

I guess this doesn't include changing large signage like street signs and billboards and causing a distraction to drivers resulting in a collision and possible deaths. This is not covered in the 1st, because this is not "...peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances".

Seeing as how you don't have a problem hijacking other peoples messages, you should not mind if I do the same, palomarjack(dot)wordpress(dot)com . Stop by any time.

Palomar Jack

sheepguy42 in reply to Palomar JackMay 12, 2010. 6:54 PM
 As your quote from Instructable Terms of Use indicates, that's the "comment policy." So no, it does not cover changing street signs, as they exist in the real world and not the digital realm of Instructables' comments.
slambert (author) in reply to Palomar JackMay 11, 2010. 2:27 PM
Jack, read up some more. Permission was given in some cases. No car crashes or deaths were caused. This is not life or death - in more ways than one.
tmsmalley says: May 11, 2010. 4:29 PM

Didn't mean to offend, but after almost 30 years of dealing with the general public in my job, I've learned that of the tens of thousands of law abiding smart people you talk to, there are a few hundred doofuses that don't get it. I always put a disclaimer/reminder to them on my stuff that there are consequences for improper, unlawful use. Just a thought.

Thanks for the instructable. It was very entertaining and well documented!

slambert (author) in reply to tmsmalleyMay 11, 2010. 5:28 PM
I dunno... information available online can lead to willful, unaware people doing dumb things, disclaimer or not right? I figure talking about it in smart way does a better service than a disclaimer. And that way I'm not talking down to all you smart folks in the meantime.
donhaynes says: May 11, 2010. 10:20 AM
Slambert, never mind what these people with extra-tight undies have to say, this is an awesome instructable and very funny stuff.  This isn't going to effect anyone's drive time to get to work and certainly isn't going to cost the millionaires that put the signs up any money.  And if you're commenting on this just to proudly announce your conformism and happiness at not having freedom of speech, just go check out an instructable on sitting in a cubicle.  I've never seen such a bunch of whiners in my life.
quartarian says: May 11, 2010. 2:15 AM
I saw all the negative comments so I thought I'd be nice for someone to say well done. So, well done.

And remember, Chomsky, you, and I are all in good company.
slambert (author) in reply to quartarianMay 11, 2010. 9:09 AM
thank you
tmsmalley says: May 11, 2010. 4:35 AM
You forgot to add "be prepared to be arrested, charged and kicked out of school for vandalism."
slambert (author) in reply to tmsmalleyMay 11, 2010. 9:08 AM
no, that was intentionally left out. Making your own sign isn't necessarily vandalism or a crime. You can do it wrong and get arrested, sure. But, for example, I have never been arrested. The Emma Goldman sign in particular was installed with permission from the University. It took forever, but they gave me permission.

I'm respecting my readers by working with the assumption they have a level of intelligence and common sense. Because I think that's a nice, respectable place to start from.
quakefiend says: May 10, 2010. 11:14 AM
Simpler, yes, but unsustainable.  A constitutional republic has been proven to be the longest lasting, stable form of government (and giving the people, across the income spectrum, the most freedom).
slambert (author) in reply to quakefiendMay 10, 2010. 12:30 PM
Ok, you are right. I will change.
quakefiend in reply to slambertMay 10, 2010. 1:20 PM
Not trying to get you to change, just throwing my 2 cents out there!
slambert (author) in reply to quakefiendMay 10, 2010. 3:37 PM
Here's my 2 cents:
one cent: I still disagree with your politics.
another cent: hashing out political philosophies in the comments on an instructables post = waste of energy.

dman762000 says: May 9, 2010. 9:46 AM
 I have to ask this as I work for the crap company mentioned. Why did you choose to take a "donation" from Securitas Inc. They're so cheap they don't even donate to charities much less to educational funds. Is that supposed to be part of the joke? Pretty funny stuff though, good job on the instructable too.
slambert (author) in reply to dman762000May 10, 2010. 11:18 AM
Ah funny, you are the first person to ever ask about that.  Securitas bought out the Pinkerton company. I guess you could argue that the Pinkertons were the Blackwater of their day. They were hired for union busting and killed striking workers in union battles, some claim they were responsible for the bomb related to the Haymarket Riots. Anyway, I thought this would be a nice way for them to begin to absolve themselves of past crimes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinkerton_Detective_Agency

Mexicoman says: Oct 18, 2007. 3:03 PM
Good instructable for beginners as well as those familiar with the applications and printing. I was once a signpainter and the techniques are valid and useful.

What I wonder about however is the usefulness or need for the deception. Perhaps I can see it in some political way, but otherwise what's it accomplish? Fun perhaps, but modifying street signs can put you in jail for a long time. I recall a case where a young man altered a street sign in a similar manner and a motorist and three pedestrians were killed when all paused to look at the altered sign. The motorist, who was distracted, ran over the pedestrians who were also distracted and didn't see the oncoming car. The young man was convicted of manslaughter and handed a twenty year sentence. Now how much fun is it?

Please do be careful with your fun and try to place yourself in the position of the other person--say, the owner of the sign who just paid a sign painter $2,000 for something expected to last six months. When you take up three of those months, you owe a thousand dollars to someone. It can be called vandalism.

Please, tell me how this is so much different than graffiti?
Adlab in reply to MexicomanMay 10, 2010. 3:46 AM
But isn't it the case though that corporate advertising (which appears alongside pretty much all major roads and many residential roads) also seeks attention and can cause accidents like the one you described? This could also be said to be true for public events, eye-catching architecture or beautiful scenery.
Kiteman in reply to MexicomanSep 7, 2008. 6:16 AM
I know I'm replying to an ancient post but...

This isn't graffiti, vandalism or even hiding anything.

Slambert made a whole new sign, in the same style as an existing sign and then positioned the sign in a public place where it would generate comment.

The nearest thing to "damage" that occurred will have been a slight yellowing of the few inches of grass covered by the frame.

And any motorists distracted by this sign will already be in trouble for driving through a pedestrian campus...
Mexicoman in reply to KitemanSep 7, 2008. 8:00 AM
The sign I am referring to that is dangerous and vandalism is the street sign where the name is changed and the new sign placed over the existing sign so one cannot tell it is altered. I did not re-read the instructable, but I recall seeing earlier pictures of that. I'm sure instructables would have removed the photos of that altered street sign now by suggestion of their lawyers. The large sign. . . I thought the original was removed and the altered sign substituted in it's place. This would stop the owner of the sign from receiving full value for his investment. That is illegal and may be either vandalism or theft. Pardon me if I used the incorrect term as you see it. If he puts the altered sign on his own property, there probably would be no problem. I recall an arrest that took place when someone altered a Mc Donalds sign by placing one over it. This is an actual crime.
slambert (author) in reply to MexicomanSep 7, 2008. 10:00 AM
re; the street sign - if we're talking about the same thing, no dangerous situations came about as a result of their placement. No arrests were made. You call it vandalism. I call it civil disobedience, and part of a great tradition. re: the large sign, the Emma Goldman sign. No signs were removed. It was placed officially as an art work by the university. re: the mcdonald's arrest - I've never heard anything about that. do you have a link? This instructable assumes the reader has some common sense and can make their own moral decisions.
Kiteman in reply to slambertSep 7, 2008. 10:47 AM
Oh, I watched the YouTube video of that after Mexicoman's posts reminded me to - how long did the changes last?
1-40 of 143Next »
Pro

Get More Out of Instructables

Already have an Account?

close

PDF Downloads
As a Pro member, you will gain access to download any Instructable in the PDF format. You also have the ability to customize your PDF download.

Upgrade to Pro today!