Quote:
Originally Posted by JScott
This rooftop sign has been a puzzlement to me since I first saw it. Was it electrified and illuminated? I'd think it almost had to be, because in broad daylight, with its see-through letters, the sign would be barely readable (below). And yet it was clearly a very fancy (and probably quite pricey) piece of metalwork, so why would a business spend good money to make a sign for its store that is difficult for people to see? Obviously it wouldn't – the sign must have stood out in some way, but the only way it could would be if it were illuminated at night.
And what's that apparatus at the top? It looks like a canvas shade on a roller. It's affixed in such a way that it would cover the sign from the front, which makes even less sense, as when let down, that would make the sign flat-out impossible to read. What the hey is going on with this thing?
USC Digital Library, " Intersection of Spring Street and First Street looking south, ca.1900-1904" (detail).
But, if it was an electric sign, what was the source of illumination? It couldn't be neon – in the aughts, that type of lighting hadn't been introduced to this country yet. Anyway, there aren't any glass tubes to be seen. It doesn't even have any light bulbs, like the sign on the cornice of the store next door in the second photo, or on Hamburger's rooftop sign in the background. Not even sockets for lights.
The sign does appear to be electrified, though. See the power line coming in from lower left, connecting to the insulator on the roof line, then appearing to connect to the metal frame of the sign? There also appears to be another smaller insulator on the frame a couple of feet above the connection point. And the rest of the wires connecting to various parts of the sign. A few of those seem to be for structural support, but others appear to have no other function than to connect one part of the metal sign to another (presumably to conduct current).
|
Finding some other photos of the sign,
preferably from a later date, might provide answers.
This is purely a "lay" guess. Could it be that the sign was unfinished, and either in the process of construction or deconstruction? A cursory search regarding "Crandall Aylsworth" provides limited "illumination" on the subject and makes me wonder if the sign wasn't very short lived - which might have something to do with the state of the sign, as pictured.
I see what appears to be the framework of a sign that could be finished in many different ways. This might even include the eventual installation of incandescent lights, or a bright coating to reflect projected light. It would make sense to do most of the small construction, including lighting attachments, at ground level, but I could conjure several scenarios where this might not be the case. The lack of any visible scaffolding weakens my conclusion, but there could be numerous explanations for this too.
The "apparatus" seems to be a rolled up tarp that could serve several purposes, including a temporary windbreak for contractors, or a means of limiting where parts and tools might drop, or even a temporary advertising banner.
For some strange reason I am drawn to the Elk's signage. I don't know that it was designed for night illumination, anymore than the "Crandall" sign. It was plainly visible in daylight but I think reflected/projected lighting was likely an afterthought, considering its growing popularity at the turn of the century. With the Crandall sign, if painted white or silver, it would have been indirectly lit by all of neighboring self-illuminated signs.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5007/...67ca1d28_o.jpg http://skyscraperpage.com/forum/show...70279&page=119