Exhibit Signs?

chrisbarela

chrisbarela

Well-Known Member
There's always a fine balance between too much information that few guests read vs. just the basics (size, habitat, food, range). What type of information do you like to see in exhibit signs? And what examples do you know of where you have been very impressed?
 
 
For labels I like common name, scientific name, distribution map, status in the wild if threatened, some basic information about habitat and biology, and a picture (photo or good drawing) if there is likely to be any confusion. As a minimum.

:p

Hix
 
DavidBrown said:
This sign from the Chester Zoo about Grevy's zebra is pretty cool (photo by Mr. Weasel):
http://www.zoochat.com/42/interesting-grevys-zebra-sign-16-02-a-235144/
Click to expand...

It is a good sign - but worth pointing out it's not the 'main', identifying label, which does (thankfully) have the scientific name on it.


For me: Common name (in multiple languages ideally), Scientific name, Conservation Status, Distribution map and a few quick facts about diet, interesting lifestyle points etc - basically the most interesting facts that can be found for the species.

Too much info risks overload, but signs with just bullet point data are no use to anyone (is the gestation period of an animal intersting or useful in most cases? Not really).

And a sign with no scientific name might be excusable for a lion, tiger or elephant - but labelling a turtle, weaver, cichlid or stick insect without one is rendering the sign well-nigh meaningless in my view.
 
chrisbarela said:
And what examples do you know of where you have been very impressed?
Click to expand...

The large artistic signboards at Howletts/Port Lymne are very effective. They are visual depictions of the animal(s) in the wild which somehow preclude the need for much written information, though some is supplied also. There are bound to be some examples in the Gallery.
 
I like poster style signs which show a few action photos of the animal too with information and a few facts about that animal mentioned.

Common Name
Scientific Name
Range (current and previous)
Habitat
Diet
Status in the Wild
Threats to its existence

I think that is enough to get the message across but not be a bore to the majority of zoo visitors.
 
As a minimum, I agree with Pootle's expectations, though I like size and weight of an animal as well. I have seen people's eyes widen when they find out how much a bison weighs (of course in the rare case that somebody actually reads the signage.:p)
I feel that some "fun facts" are also neat, such as subspecies, habits, hunting techniques, how they raise offspring, etc.
Beardsley's signage is pretty good, and I base most of my expectations off that. Near the bottom is an example of Beardsley's signage.
DavidBrown- That Chester Zoo zebra sign is really neat. I've never seen something like that.
Naples Zoo also has sign that I quite enjoy; http://www.zoochat.com/586/accurate-sign-287549/
 

Attachments

  • May 2012 113.JPG
    May 2012 113.JPG
    5 MB · Views: 25
I agree with what most of you guys are saying. I like it when signs include large pictures to grab visitor's attention, plus all of the details everyone else was talking about. One thing that bothers me is when no signs are included for smaller species (some people actually do care :D:D:D:D).
I like the Toronto Zoo's new signage in the African Rainforest Pavilion and Tundra Trek, but in some of the older areas the signs just include a small illustration, common name, and scientific name. I really don't like the older signs and I hope that they get replaced soon.

And I love that Naples Zoo sign. Every zoo should have one!!!!
 
This is my signage plan for the new Living Planet Aquarium - I am using digital signs for species ID - every animal will have at least the minimum of size, food, location, latin name and photo. These will be presented as words as well as illustrations - "SIZE" will have silhouettes of a 6 foot tall human and the animal so you can easily see the comparison. Smaller animals will have a close up of the human's head and hand with the animal. Each digital sign will feature several animals since it is easy to rotate through with it's photo shuffle feature. Larger tanks with more than 10 species will have touch screens.
Featured animals (the big popular animals will also get a large 18" x 36" back lit printed sign that features an illustration of the animal and focus on a "How does it work?". I didn't want to do any old "interesting facts" - I want to talk about recent research about the animal.
Nearly every sign will have some interactive feature - I want all 5 senses to get a work out at the aquarium. Models of animals and animal features, games, activities...
But the sign that I am most excited about working on is something that I have never seen in any zoo or aquarium - I am making an interactive sign that will explain what those funny Latin names mean! And on certain signs throughout the aquarium you will be able to see the english translation of the latin name or the story behind it.
 
Can't beat the classic signs, there's just something about them that fills me with nostalgia and I'm happy they're still in use:
 

Attachments

  • Port Lincoln parakeet sign.JPG
    Port Lincoln parakeet sign.JPG
    4.2 MB · Views: 28
  • Blue-and-yellow macaw sign.JPG
    Blue-and-yellow macaw sign.JPG
    5 MB · Views: 15
I prefer multiple signs with simple statements and powerful graphics - The Singapore and Bronx zoo has some excellent examples. Nothing beats a painting!
 
All I need is the type of signage Javan Rhino posted but my favorites are if you combine BeardsleyZooFan's and Pootle's.

Why we're at it, let's say our least favorite types of zoo signs. I hate those electronic ones that display one species for like 30 seconds and then moves to a new species, especially if the exhibit has many animals inside. Another type of signage I hate is when the zoo lists information on signs for animals that aren't in the exhibit or at the zoo. When I went to Maritime over the summer of 2011, their Sand Tiger Shark exhibit had signs for about 10-15 other shark species (the Sand Tigers weren't displayed on the main signs by the way) on it and I got completely confused. Some of the ones I remember are Lemon Sharks (which they do have now), Great Whites, and Bulls.
 
In planning lots of interactives with signs I would keep in mind that the animals always prove to be the attraction. If the animal is active, no one pays attention to the interactives (in fact, visitors rarely read the signs), if the animal is not active or even visible no one stays around long enough to play with the interactives. Aquarium signage may be the toughest to get right. I was recently talking to an aquarium curator who talked about all the effort they had put into new touchscreen displays...only to observe later that the public spent no time at them. Once I saw the displays and how they were located it was clear why they failed.

But more to your question: I found the signage at Sedgwick County Zoo (especially at the tiger exhibit and the penguin exhibit) especially compelling. They have a terrific artist whose pen and watercolor(?) style illustrations are very attractive and lead you to want to read about the animals.
 
Last edited:
I personally believe that a sign should be in a poster type way that most have you already stated. There should be a very realistic painting, not a photo. For some reason a painting attracts me more to the sign than a photo would. If I'm already there to see the animal than I don't need to see a photo of the animal I'm already looking at. I would much rather look at a piece of art. Also there should be other signs around the exhibit that showcase other attributes of the animal.

No exhibit should have one sign that is either very basic or very cluttered. It should be nice and simple for the poster form, as most quest will only look at the pictures. Then there should be a larger graphic sign with the threats of this species and or the specific attributes particular to this animal. Skulls and bones are very good for this, as well as plastic replicas. A "How can I help?" sign would also be a nice touch to the exhibit. So all together around 3/4 signs for each exhibit. This would only apply for animals that need this amount and or given the space issues.
 
For me, signs have to include:
-Common name
-Scientific name
-Geographic range
-Conservation status
-Pictorial depiction (painting over a photo).

Depending on the size of the exhibit, multiple signs can be very useful. These could talk about the animal's anatomy, behaviour, evolution, and threats to its survival. One thing I would like zoos to provide more information on is the history of that animal in that zoo, e.g. have they bred succesfully, notable individuals, etc. Signage describing other historical features can be interesting too, Vienna Zoo is dotted with signs detailing buildings/enclosures/gardens history (http://www.zoochat.com/107/rhino-koala-house-historical-signage-300189/). How the zoo is contributing to the conservation of a species is also valuable, as is how I can help.

Other displays, such as replicas or actual skulls, bones, skin, fur, feathers, eggs, nests, hand/foot prints, or animals themselves can also be very interesting and informative (http://www.zoochat.com/40/anatomically-correct-statue-270285/; http://www.zoochat.com/556/jun-2012-indian-rhinoceros-interactive-sign-282319/). Animal calls can also be effective. Photographic displays showing threats, especially poaching, can be hard-hitting and effective; Singapore Zoo used this to great effect at its Tiger exhibit, while attempting to dispell the myths around tiger-based medicine (http://www.zoochat.com/40/singapore-zoo-2008-educational-displays-front-133181/).

Interactive features, such as questions on flaps, with the answers underneath are effective at engaing visitors, given our general curiosity. Auckland Zoo used to have a display showing how a lion's claws retract, when you turned a small handle.

Video displays are OK, but have to be short enough to get a clear message across to a visitor who will probably be at the viewing port for less than a minute. Auckland Zoo has a film about the use of dogs in South Africa to protect Cheetahs, its rather long, but gets the message across regularly, so most people understand it. Videos showing off-display areas (dens, nests, etc) are a great to see more intimate behaviour (http://www.zoochat.com/244/hornbills-display-250870/), and signs next to a live video feed are almost certain to be read by people trying to ascertain what they are seeing. The bus to Helsinki Zoo features a video which describes the zoo's conservation work, which is a great way to educate "captive" visitors.

Electronic displays are prone to technical issues, whenever I have visited a zoo with these there have always been some "out of order". Ones that change so as to display multiple species are frustrating. More interactive, touch-screen signs are probably a good idea, as long as they don't detract from seeing the animal themselves.

Finally, signs that are not directly related to the displayed animal are also very interesting, such as tropical forest or wetland signs near animals from such habitats, or signs about termite mounds near an African savannah exhibit for example. One of the most compelling signs I have seen are those at Auckland Zoo's native exhibit, which list New Zealand species that have become extinct (http://www.zoochat.com/14/signage-te-wao-nui-auckland-zoo-237433/). An attempt by Phialdelphia Zoo to do they same thing seems to have missed the point entirely however (http://www.zoochat.com/837/graveyard-244434/).
 
zooboy28 said:
For me, signs have to include:
-Common name
-Scientific name
-Geographic range
-Conservation status
-Pictorial depiction (painting over a photo).

Depending on the size of the exhibit, multiple signs can be very useful. These could talk about the animal's anatomy, behaviour, evolution, and threats to its survival. One thing I would like zoos to provide more information on is the history of that animal in that zoo, e.g. have they bred succesfully, notable individuals, etc. Signage describing other historical features can be interesting too, Vienna Zoo is dotted with signs detailing buildings/enclosures/gardens history (http://www.zoochat.com/107/rhino-koala-house-historical-signage-300189/). How the zoo is contributing to the conservation of a species is also valuable, as is how I can help.

Other displays, such as replicas or actual skulls, bones, skin, fur, feathers, eggs, nests, hand/foot prints, or animals themselves can also be very interesting and informative (http://www.zoochat.com/40/anatomically-correct-statue-270285/; http://www.zoochat.com/556/jun-2012-indian-rhinoceros-interactive-sign-282319/). Animal calls can also be effective. Photographic displays showing threats, especially poaching, can be hard-hitting and effective; Singapore Zoo used this to great effect at its Tiger exhibit, while attempting to dispell the myths around tiger-based medicine (http://www.zoochat.com/40/singapore-zoo-2008-educational-displays-front-133181/).

Interactive features, such as questions on flaps, with the answers underneath are effective at engaing visitors, given our general curiosity. Auckland Zoo used to have a display showing how a lion's claws retract, when you turned a small handle.

Video displays are OK, but have to be short enough to get a clear message across to a visitor who will probably be at the viewing port for less than a minute. Auckland Zoo has a film about the use of dogs in South Africa to protect Cheetahs, its rather long, but gets the message across regularly, so most people understand it. Videos showing off-display areas (dens, nests, etc) are a great to see more intimate behaviour (http://www.zoochat.com/244/hornbills-display-250870/), and signs next to a live video feed are almost certain to be read by people trying to ascertain what they are seeing. The bus to Helsinki Zoo features a video which describes the zoo's conservation work, which is a great way to educate "captive" visitors.

Electronic displays are prone to technical issues, whenever I have visited a zoo with these there have always been some "out of order". Ones that change so as to display multiple species are frustrating. More interactive, touch-screen signs are probably a good idea, as long as they don't detract from seeing the animal themselves.

Finally, signs that are not directly related to the displayed animal are also very interesting, such as tropical forest or wetland signs near animals from such habitats, or signs about termite mounds near an African savannah exhibit for example. One of the most compelling signs I have seen are those at Auckland Zoo's native exhibit, which list New Zealand species that have become extinct (http://www.zoochat.com/14/signage-te-wao-nui-auckland-zoo-237433/). An attempt by Phialdelphia Zoo to do they same thing seems to have missed the point entirely however (http://www.zoochat.com/837/graveyard-244434/).
Click to expand...

You hit the nail right on the head!
 
These have all be outstanding suggestions and it verifies that I am on the right track!
Thanks to everyone!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top