was it something I said?

Tim, every time I've made a large sign, it hasn't made that much difference because of the techniques of large poster printing. If you got close to a sign that was 8x4 you'd see how big the pixels are so they look correct at a distance. This is my take on it, Dan

TIM --

It has been my experience that it doesnt really matter. If you have, say a text face, something like Warnock Pro, for example, that face comes with to 'versions' if you will. One, is a text version; the other is for display (or basically larger sizes). Either will work, but the later is designed for larger purposes, and asually has more defined serifs, and such.

In the arena of a gothic face, something of the sans family, I would say it doesnt really matter.
The only thing you might come across in a face like this is 'ink traps', and if the face is designed such, they might look quite funny at very large sizes.

In regards to Dan's comments, I would think something this size would probably be cut from vinyl, then applied to the substrate (unless it is digitally printed of course), so in this case you dont have the 'pixels' to deal with.

More info on your output process might better define an answer.

Hope this helps.

Hildebrant.

Contrary to Kyle's comments, don't be fooled into thinking that a display cut of a design will function correctly as a signage typeface. It has been my experience that the exact opposite is true. If both a text and display cut exist in a design you are considering, you will most likely get a better performance from the text cut.

The finely wrought details that Kyle refers to act as a hinderance to readability and legibility.

That said it all depends on the signage you are creating. What are the visual thresholds you expect it to function at?
What materials are being used to construct the sign? Retro-reflective, backlight, etc.