PDA

View Full Version : NYC Skyline pano from far away!


Jularc
Dec 24, 2006, 2:27 PM
:slob: Wow this has to be the best NYC skyline pano I have seen from far away! It doesn't get much denser than that.


http://www.pbase.com/image/72046994/original.jpg

(I wish the pano photo was bigger though :cool:)

pj3000
Dec 24, 2006, 3:42 PM
Very nice. It is amazing to look at, especially considering that downtown isn't even pictured!

spyguy
Dec 24, 2006, 3:48 PM
Wow :worship:

BroncoCSU05
Dec 24, 2006, 5:19 PM
is manhattan a beast or what?

Ninjatune
Dec 24, 2006, 5:46 PM
good word..

Wooster
Dec 24, 2006, 6:14 PM
manhattan is so far ahead of any other place in NA, it isn't even funny.

UrbanImpact
Dec 24, 2006, 6:18 PM
That's hot :banana:

SunMonTueWedThuFriSa
Dec 24, 2006, 9:34 PM
Where was this pic taken from?

Arriviste
Dec 24, 2006, 9:35 PM
Dang, that is unreal.
Bow down HK to the real grand daddy.

Joey D
Dec 24, 2006, 11:53 PM
WOW!!!!!

I would love to have a balcony/deck facing that.

Is that from the fringes of Nassau County/ Hempsteadish?

excel
Dec 25, 2006, 4:41 AM
breathtaking.

kznyc2k
Dec 25, 2006, 5:48 AM
Midtown's best side is DEFINITELY when viewed from the east. And the picture was taken from somewhere in Jamaica, near the train station. That white building in the sort-of foreground under the ESB is a structure in St. John's Cemetary, and the trees in the near foreground are those in Forest Park. That puts the shot at taken from about 9 miles out of the urban jungle.


EDIT: here's the white foreground building:
http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/8176/fgfgfvk6.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Wheelingman04
Dec 25, 2006, 5:20 PM
The photo blew me away.

Jularc
Dec 25, 2006, 6:07 PM
Here is an old pic of Downtown and Midtown. As you can see Midtown plus Upper Manahttan tends to dominate the NYC skyline.

http://steelflame.zoto.com/img/original/81a9c13725b2c21168d03f043035d22a-.jpg

Also notice all the 'newer' towers (if you can!) in Midtown after looking at the old pic and the 'recent' pic...

http://www.pbase.com/image/72046994/original.jpg

Jonas
Dec 25, 2006, 6:28 PM
Dang, that is unreal.
Bow down HK to the real grand daddy.

Seems like the picture was taken from a very far distance with powerful tele lenses what creates a rather impressive optical illusion relating to the optically distorted size of the main object (skyscrapers) and objects in the foreground. We have never seen HK skyline from such a far distance which, I'm sure, would look no less impressive (perhaps even more impressive ;)). NYC has got a great skyline nonetheless :)

Patrick
Dec 25, 2006, 6:50 PM
Here is an old pic of Downtown and Midtown. As you can see Midtown plus Upper Manahttan tends to dominate the NYC skyline.

http://steelflame.zoto.com/img/original/81a9c13725b2c21168d03f043035d22a-.jpg


Wow. Midtown may have a denser skyline, but Downtown sure did have the better skyline!

Just Imagine
http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/7300/picee3.jpg

Lecom
Dec 25, 2006, 7:02 PM
:slob: :slob: :slob:, all I can say.

OfCourse
Dec 25, 2006, 8:09 PM
OMG...wow! That's hot! :whip:

shappy
Dec 25, 2006, 8:27 PM
NYC is a modern masterpiece.

skymetalscraper
Dec 25, 2006, 9:44 PM
Towering Awesome !

Jularc
Dec 25, 2006, 10:50 PM
http://www.pbase.com/image/72046994/original.jpg


So many buildings in Midtown plus Upper Manhattan that you wonder if there is any more room for more towers in there. Except well, destroying other buildings...

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/photopost/data/500/2404ar1.jpg

oreoman85
Dec 26, 2006, 1:31 AM
theres room for alot more, alot.

The first pano is a real skyLine, and to think it starts way downtown.

zerokarma
Dec 26, 2006, 4:41 AM
Wish they were bigger, still cool though.

xzmattzx
Dec 26, 2006, 5:26 AM
Amazing picture! :worship:

kznyc2k
Dec 26, 2006, 5:34 AM
http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/7300/picee3.jpg

In the words of Ralph Wiggum, "that's unpossible!"

YUNEMUS
Dec 26, 2006, 5:45 AM
That's great

Arriviste
Dec 26, 2006, 5:54 AM
Seems like the picture was taken from a very far distance with powerful tele lenses what creates a rather impressive optical illusion relating to the optically distorted size of the main object (skyscrapers) and objects in the foreground. We have never seen HK skyline from such a far distance which, I'm sure, would look no less impressive (perhaps even more impressive ;)). NYC has got a great skyline nonetheless :)


Different strokes for different folks!
Photogenia definately did play a big role in this images success for sure, but it sure doesn't take away from it's impact.

LMich
Dec 26, 2006, 6:14 AM
Image effects aside, the combined effects of density, spread, size, and height are incomparable, still.

Arriviste
Dec 26, 2006, 6:25 AM
As far as I am concerned there is no rival as for diversity, and originality in a skyline.

LMich
Dec 26, 2006, 6:33 AM
Yeah, diversity and originality are debatable, though. As are style, substance, aesthetics, and a number of subjective factors. The combination of density, height, spacing/spread, and size, though, aren't debatable. Separately, or even combining one to three of the factors, you could make some arguments and form some solid facts for other cities surpassing or matching the NYC skyline, but combined there isn't anything that matches.

Arriviste
Dec 26, 2006, 6:38 AM
/\ That I can fully agree with. I was just stating my opinion. But yah, you're completely correct.

Ex-Ithacan
Dec 27, 2006, 4:01 PM
http://page.netfirms.com/jpg/1hotsht.jpg

i_am_hydrogen
Dec 27, 2006, 6:15 PM
Take that, Hong Kong.

starvinggryphon
Dec 29, 2006, 9:23 PM
No seriously, bow down HK! There's no comparison, regardless.

UncleRando
Dec 29, 2006, 9:39 PM
:tup: I'm at a loss for words right now....ABSOLUTELY INCREDIBLE!!!!!!!!! :tup:

pj3000
Dec 29, 2006, 10:57 PM
Seems like the picture was taken from a very far distance with powerful tele lenses what creates a rather impressive optical illusion relating to the optically distorted size of the main object (skyscrapers) and objects in the foreground.

You can talk all you want about "optically distorted size", but it simply is not valid here. Just take a ride on the BQE towards Greenpoint over the Kosciuszko Bridge and look off to your right... you'd probably think you were seeing an optical illusion due to the seemingly impossible view your eyes are perceiving. Really, if you're in NYC, take a cab, borrow/rent a car... it's worth it.

cmventura
Dec 29, 2006, 11:03 PM
I love New York City. I love Manhattan.

antinimby
Dec 30, 2006, 6:08 AM
Imagine what'll really be like if there weren't such restrictive zoning in NY.

Bergenser
Dec 30, 2006, 2:40 PM
Imagin the skyline with the new freedomtower! :tup:

UrbanImpact
Dec 31, 2006, 3:02 AM
The freedom tower is located downtown and downtown is not shown in that picture. It would be nice if someone could get a similar pano showing both skylines.

Xeelee
Dec 31, 2006, 8:18 AM
nice

Independence
Dec 31, 2006, 11:06 AM
The freedom tower is located downtown and downtown is not shown in that picture. It would be nice if someone could get a similar pano showing both skylines.


STR, where are you? :D

nygirl1
Dec 31, 2006, 7:36 PM
The freedom tower is located downtown and downtown is not shown in that picture. It would be nice if someone could get a similar pano showing both skylines.

This one is a couple years old but eitherway there has not been a dramatic change in the skyline of Lower Manhattan. ( Yet) Though the western edge will dramatically change this in the next coming years.

http://img133.exs.cx/img133/4240/panorama040078th.jpg

Only a small amount is cut off at the far right of this panorama, UrbanImpact.

You can talk all you want about "optically distorted size", but it simply is not valid here. Just take a ride on the BQE towards Greenpoint over the Kosciuszko Bridge and look off to your right... you'd probably think you were seeing an optical illusion due to the seemingly impossible view your eyes are perceiving. Really, if you're in NYC, take a cab, borrow/rent a car... it's worth it.


Incredible theory about the picture being distorted to make objects appear larger than they are. Trust me I come in contact with this view from around Queens Boulevard, and the Triboro every week this picture does no justice to what it looks like in reality.
Now the views from the WhiteStone of this certain view (Midtown looking west from Long Island) make you feel......... (.) <~~~ That big. One of the most mind blowing locations to view Midtown Manhattan.

Ya know thin "pencil towers" built on hills must make them look larger than they really are. - Just a thought.

architect1
Dec 31, 2006, 11:44 PM
Thats so cool. I only witch them twins where still there. always wanted to go see them and now i can't.

nygirl1
Jan 1, 2007, 12:49 AM
The Upper East Side really must escape one's mind and it really isn't hard to blame them since most shots people see on here don't include that view from the east. The midtown view from the Hudson River is far more popular. Many shots here do not include this area that is very much so connected to Midtown. The bulk of the skyline really doesn't end at 59th. It pretty much begins at Madison Square and runs well into the East 90's.


While it is not significantly beautiful or dynamic it is quite dense


http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/2344/50358273liberty18acustomgm6.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/paulpelletier/image/48393714/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/paulpelletier/image/48393715/original.jpg

Easily connected to the bulk of Midtown

http://www.geekroar.com/leopoldo/archives/ny_appview2.jpg

No there aren't any 800 and 900 ft. towers dominating up there but it really isn't too shabby


http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a189/cyberchris78/Q1.jpg

btw much of the area is cut off in that shot^^

Here is an aerial of the area:

http://img146.echo.cx/img146/3089/thumtopm3am.jpg

and the skyline from Madison Square on up into uptown and the east 90's even Spuyten-Duyville in the Bronx from what I think is Broad Channel in Queens? I guess trick photography is used in this one as well..

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v640/ahmed187/asdfg/P7010190-med.jpg

Hope that helps for some of you guys who never take the Upper East Side into consideration with the whole Skyline.

Hope you all have a very happy and healthy and SAFE New Year's Eve.. see ya in 07'

-Gia

Ex-Ithacan
Jan 1, 2007, 12:56 AM
Damn nyg1, those are amazing shots. Thanks for showin' off your city in such an impressive way. :)

UrbanImpact
Jan 2, 2007, 3:35 AM
Awesome pics everyone!!

-GR2NY-
Jan 2, 2007, 2:26 PM
Here are the 3 from my stockpile, I only took the first one. Credit to whomever took the others. I think u all have seen the third already.

http://home.comcast.net/~Travis.Wolfe/NYC_pano_1.jpg

http://home.comcast.net/~Travis.Wolfe/NYC_pano_2.jpg

http://home.comcast.net/~Travis.Wolfe/NYC_pano_3.jpg

phillyskyline
Jan 2, 2007, 4:29 PM
Awesome Pano!!!

-GR2NY-
Jan 2, 2007, 5:33 PM
Wheres the ones some dude took from about 1 mile south of the george washington bridge? Its a niiiiice zoom into midtown, and its real wide, all at night.

ammiel_23_7
Jan 3, 2007, 11:50 PM
HK is nothing next to my city... NYC!:D

JMininger
Jan 4, 2007, 1:39 AM
You can talk all you want about "optically distorted size", but it simply is not valid here. Just take a ride on the BQE towards Greenpoint over the Kosciuszko Bridge and look off to your right... you'd probably think you were seeing an optical illusion due to the seemingly impossible view your eyes are perceiving. Really, if you're in NYC, take a cab, borrow/rent a car... it's worth it.

Agreed absolutely. This is no optical illusion. My father-in-law lives in Queens and I have seen this view many times when visiting. You are absolutely right, you just cannot believe what you are seeing ... and I've been to all of the very largest US cities.

fleonzo
Jan 4, 2007, 1:47 AM
Just Amazing!!!

Jersey Mentality
Jan 4, 2007, 6:04 PM
HK is ok but NY is the only place in the world where you can find 1,000 ft art deco skyscrapers.

villelumiere
Jan 5, 2007, 10:31 AM
HK is nothing next to my city... NYC!:D


What a ridiculous thing to say. I do not mean to be disrespectful ammiel but that is ridiculous.

Jularcs pano pic is superb. The panorama is wonderful but it is essentially a middle rise pano. Look at how the ESB dominates. The Chrysler disappears because it is not really a 300 metre building and is reliant on its spire for its official height but the spire disappears at that level distance The Times building will help of course but I advise you to wait a few years until NYC actually has a handful of real skyscrapers - like the ones HK and CHI have - before blowing your trumpet.

antinimby
Jan 5, 2007, 10:44 AM
:previous: And why are you so upset at him?

Can't you see he was saying it in fun?

Are you that bothered by what he said?

villelumiere
Jan 5, 2007, 10:48 AM
:previous: And why are you so upset at him?

Can't you see he was saying it in fun?

Are you that bothered by what he said?

I'm not upset at HIM personally. I did point that out.

I am simply refuting the suggestion he made which is objectively ridiculous. Believe me I've made my share of them !!!!

Essentially my point is that midtowm lacks true height compared to CHI or HK nad this is a problem if it is being puffed as THE skyline. It has much going for it. I like it personally but in CHI or HK the ESB would not dominate as it does.

antinimby
Jan 5, 2007, 10:56 AM
Well then, that brings up the argument on whether height alone is the determining factor for the best skylines.

While Midtown may not have the most supertalls, it excels in the density department and that to some people makes it impressive.

I would agree with those people.

You've got to remember that New York could very easily had the supertalls that HK has now but they just did not see the need to show off like that.

villelumiere
Jan 5, 2007, 11:05 AM
Well then, that brings up the argument on whether height alone is the determining factor for the best skylines.

While Midtown may not have the most supertalls, it excels in the density department and that to some people makes it impressive.

I would agree with those people.

You've got to remember that New York could very easily had the supertalls that HK has now but they just did not see the need to show off like that.


I totally take the point about density and I don't for a moment deny NY is impressive but skyline per se is not about density but rather outline if you follow me. EG CHI looks better in skyline ( IMO ) but from abobve Manhattan is better than CHI. I don't know if you would agree but you see my point?

Perhaps HK is "showing off" perhaps it is responding to land shortage and economic boom but what you say of NY could be said of any major city. Paris, London, Tokyo - none of whom have supertalls - could have supertalls if it chose to "show off". Anyone can builld them provided the money is there. My point is that CHI and HK HAVE them. NY pre 2012 doesn't.

A42251
Jan 5, 2007, 6:42 PM
Would it be fair to criticise a deficancy of supertalls in Chicago or HK if terrorists destroyed Sears and JHC or 2IFC and the Bank of China? I didn't think so.

So some of y'all need to stop knocking NY for not having enough 1,000 footers.

Give NY about five or six years and it will completely blow away every other skyline there is, if it doesn't already.

-GR2NY-
Jan 5, 2007, 9:09 PM
Isn't this from above the far rockaways? I'm still learning, but I beleive it is.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v640/ahmed187/asdfg/P7010190-med.jpg

-GR2NY-
Jan 5, 2007, 9:25 PM
sorry for dp but heres a few more:


reaaaal skinny UPPER west side.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/86/246130924_dec21bd90d_b.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/2/3496011_1e3f75b354_b.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/39/75814693_10c9254e79_b.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/3/3486399_6f1c0ca09d_b.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/166/331586860_ccab700c00_o.jpg

villelumiere
Jan 5, 2007, 10:33 PM
Would it be fair to criticise a deficancy of supertalls in Chicago or HK if terrorists destroyed Sears and JHC or 2IFC and the Bank of China? I didn't think so.

So some of y'all need to stop knocking NY for not having enough 1,000 footers.

Give NY about five or six years and it will completely blow away every other skyline there is, if it doesn't already.


Your point about the WTC loss is absolutely correct.

however I am discussing the situation as is now and your last sentence could best be described as tendentious. Of course NY will look a lot better in 6 years time. The ESB won't stand out as the only real megascraper and the current development will make it more attractive but don't forget CHI and expecially HK are not exactly standing still either. Development is not restricted to manhattan.

Will NY look great? yes.
will it look better than now? Yes.
Will NY "blow away" HK in 2012 with the 2IFC and ICC facing each other and acting as an intro to a city with nine 300 metre plus towers? I frankly doubt it.

Mr Roboto
Jan 5, 2007, 11:12 PM
NYC is crazy. Skyline-wise, density-wise, whatever. I forgot how tall and dense the upper east side is alone. Good find.

nygirl1
Jan 6, 2007, 12:34 AM
To say that HK is nothing to NY is controversial, but to blame NY for not having any real skyscrapers ( which villelumeir did) compared to CHI or HK is ludacris and I resent it. Maybe I am taking it out of context but due to the high volume of Hong Kong humping I am always a bit skeptical.
Ny, HK, and Chi are not standing still at all. All three will look better in 6 years time. HK will have ICC and Ifc somewhat facing eachother creating a fabulous gateway to the Victoria Harbour, Kowloon will have a skyline worthy of complimenting HKIsland, and I am sure HK Island will spot a few new fabulous additions. Chi will have 2 new giants to go along with its 3 big boys, several significant towers will line the river, grant park, and the lake. NY will have a cluster of 1000 footers, a bulkier west side, BOA, bulkier brooklyn, bulkier JC, bulkier queens. Hk will look wonderful with it's twin skylines, and Ny will look terrific with a skyline on each side of Manhattan develop.
Just a little tid-bit to the Hong Kong Humpers and Humped.... The first skyscraper was built in Chicago, and the first supertall ( over 1000 feet) was built in Ny and nowhere else until 30 some years later.... in Chicago. That right there is something Hong Kong will never be able to touch, ever. So what? If your enthusiasm is limited to the visual you get , then your enthusiam may be a bit dumbed down. There is so much more to take into account than how it looks but whatever floats your boat. That was not directed at anyone in particular either, just a general statement.

Eitherway In my opinion chi and ny will always blow Hk away. Theres just so much more substance, diversity, history, integrity to the other two that is my opinion and it will never change. Thanks.

Jularc
Jan 6, 2007, 1:29 AM
Plus I want to add that the costs ($$$) of building any tower (and for that matter a supertall) are much much higher in NYC than either in Honk Kong or Chicago. So you can also blame the availability of lots of cash to built too big.

Plus add 'too many NIMBY's' to the mix.

nygirl1
Jan 10, 2007, 6:52 PM
Wheres the ones some dude took from about 1 mile south of the george washington bridge? Its a niiiiice zoom into midtown, and its real wide, all at night.


U mean this one by RFC from over @ SSC.Com?

http://www.pbase.com/rfcd100/image/70715951/original.jpg

Jersey Mentality
Jan 10, 2007, 7:25 PM
Plus I want to add that the costs ($$$) of building any tower (and for that matter a supertall) are much much higher in NYC than either in Honk Kong or Chicago. So you can also blame the availability of lots of cash to built too big.

Plus add 'too many NIMBY's' to the mix.

Speaking of this how does construction traffic get to Manhattan, is it shipped. I know its not allowed in the Holland Tunnel (no trucks). I believe Ive seen constrcution trucks enter through the Batttey Tunnel. To get construction material to and through the island is a logistic in itself.

Ex-Ithacan
Jan 10, 2007, 7:46 PM
^^ That pic........WOW

RandySavage
Jan 10, 2007, 8:07 PM
^^^ That photo puts to rest the "world's greatest skyline" debate.

NYCLuver
Jan 11, 2007, 9:47 AM
That Last pano is just amazing. :D

villelumiere
Jan 11, 2007, 12:08 PM
To say that HK is nothing to NY is controversial, but to blame NY for not having any real skyscrapers ( which villelumeir did) compared to CHI or HK is ludacris and I resent it. Maybe I am taking it out of context but due to the high volume of Hong Kong humping I am always a bit skeptical.
Ny, HK, and Chi are not standing still at all. All three will look better in 6 years time. HK will have ICC and Ifc somewhat facing eachother creating a fabulous gateway to the Victoria Harbour, Kowloon will have a skyline worthy of complimenting HKIsland, and I am sure HK Island will spot a few new fabulous additions. Chi will have 2 new giants to go along with its 3 big boys, several significant towers will line the river, grant park, and the lake. NY will have a cluster of 1000 footers, a bulkier west side, BOA, bulkier brooklyn, bulkier JC, bulkier queens. Hk will look wonderful with it's twin skylines, and Ny will look terrific with a skyline on each side of Manhattan develop.
Just a little tid-bit to the Hong Kong Humpers and Humped.... The first skyscraper was built in Chicago, and the first supertall ( over 1000 feet) was built in Ny and nowhere else until 30 some years later.... in Chicago. That right there is something Hong Kong will never be able to touch, ever. So what? If your enthusiasm is limited to the visual you get , then your enthusiam may be a bit dumbed down. There is so much more to take into account than how it looks but whatever floats your boat. That was not directed at anyone in particular either, just a general statement.

Eitherway In my opinion chi and ny will always blow Hk away. Theres just so much more substance, diversity, history, integrity to the other two that is my opinion and it will never change. Thanks.


I didn't "accuse" NY of anything. I simply stated the objectively demonstrable fact that compared to CHI and Hk it currently lacks real supertalls. Indeed in 2012 it will continue to lag behind those two in that area.

If regard for HK is "dumbed down" enthusiasm then so be it. The very same criticisms were thrown by Europeans at Chi and NY last century.

villelumiere
Jan 11, 2007, 12:09 PM
To say that HK is nothing to NY is controversial, but to blame NY for not having any real skyscrapers ( which villelumeir did) compared to CHI or HK is ludacris and I resent it. Maybe I am taking it out of context but due to the high volume of Hong Kong humping I am always a bit skeptical.
Ny, HK, and Chi are not standing still at all. All three will look better in 6 years time. HK will have ICC and Ifc somewhat facing eachother creating a fabulous gateway to the Victoria Harbour, Kowloon will have a skyline worthy of complimenting HKIsland, and I am sure HK Island will spot a few new fabulous additions. Chi will have 2 new giants to go along with its 3 big boys, several significant towers will line the river, grant park, and the lake. NY will have a cluster of 1000 footers, a bulkier west side, BOA, bulkier brooklyn, bulkier JC, bulkier queens. Hk will look wonderful with it's twin skylines, and Ny will look terrific with a skyline on each side of Manhattan develop.
Just a little tid-bit to the Hong Kong Humpers and Humped.... The first skyscraper was built in Chicago, and the first supertall ( over 1000 feet) was built in Ny and nowhere else until 30 some years later.... in Chicago. That right there is something Hong Kong will never be able to touch, ever. So what? If your enthusiasm is limited to the visual you get , then your enthusiam may be a bit dumbed down. There is so much more to take into account than how it looks but whatever floats your boat. That was not directed at anyone in particular either, just a general statement.

Eitherway In my opinion chi and ny will always blow Hk away. Theres just so much more substance, diversity, history, integrity to the other two that is my opinion and it will never change. Thanks.


I didn't "accuse" NY of anything. I simply stated the objectively demonstrable fact that compared to CHI and Hk it currently lacks real supertalls. Indeed in 2012 it will continue to lag behind those two in that area.

If regard for HK is "dumbed down" enthusiasm then so be it. The very same criticisms were thrown by Europeans at Chi and NY last century. As they in turn cede ground their defenders become reactionary in turn. Such is history.

olga
Jan 11, 2007, 1:35 PM
Lots of great pics here. The one GR2NY posted with the cemetary is so cool. :tup:

villelumiere
Jan 11, 2007, 2:11 PM
Plus I want to add that the costs ($$$) of building any tower (and for that matter a supertall) are much much higher in NYC than either in Honk Kong or Chicago. So you can also blame the availability of lots of cash to built too big.

Plus add 'too many NIMBY's' to the mix.

Whilst what you say is to an extent true it is also to an extent beside the point. There are cultural. political, municipal and economic factors at play everywhere. EG the fact that there will never be a 300 metre supertall on Boul St Michel is not due to lack of ability to put one there but rather a conjunction of extra architectural factors.

Whatever the reasons for its strenghts or weaknesses a skyline like any architectural effect is judged "as is" not as might be if circumstances were different. Saying NY lacks supertalls at the moment is not an accusation. It retains many if not all the other aspects to a great shyline but defensiveness and talk about history and economics does not render untrue what i've said.

Imposing supertalls are an undeniable aspect to a great syyline. Saying a city is relatively lacking in these and hence not a total package does not deny that the city may be and in NY's case is, a top scorer on every other measure which is why its Big 3 status is secure indefinitely.

i do not want to be seen as bashing NY. I simply point out a factor to weigh when claiming that it blows other places away which 30 years ago was true but which now and looking forward is patently untrue or at best partial and subjective.

oreoman85
Jan 12, 2007, 6:22 AM
Here are the 3 from my stockpile, I only took the first one. Credit to whomever took the others. I think u all have seen the third already.

http://home.comcast.net/~Travis.Wolfe/NYC_pano_1.jpg

http://home.comcast.net/~Travis.Wolfe/NYC_pano_2.jpg

http://home.comcast.net/~Travis.Wolfe/NYC_pano_3.jpg

wow, amazingness.

if anyone doesnt like that, then all i can say is fuck you i guess, hahaha

oreoman85
Jan 12, 2007, 6:28 AM
i see what the guys saying, i respect it. we could use some peaks in our midtown madness, and everyone knows that one.

ville you made a point that we all already know, and you kinda sorta dicked around with bashing to some.

supertalls in midtown woudl deifnitely be nice. NYC will get the badass feel back once the WTC is all done. anyone know what im talkin about? with the old WTC, everytime i went in it just gave me this real awesome feeling, and since theyve been gone its definitely lost some of it. it just completed the New Yorkness and i cant wait to get it back.

villelumiere
Jan 12, 2007, 4:42 PM
i see what the guys saying, i respect it. we could use some peaks in our midtown madness, and everyone knows that one.

ville you made a point that we all already know, and you kinda sorta dicked around with bashing to some.

supertalls in midtown woudl deifnitely be nice. NYC will get the badass feel back once the WTC is all done. anyone know what im talkin about? with the old WTC, everytime i went in it just gave me this real awesome feeling, and since theyve been gone its definitely lost some of it. it just completed the New Yorkness and i cant wait to get it back.

Thank you oreoman for recognising that what I am saying is simply true.

You say I "dicked around". I dispute that. You will find no inaccurate or aggressive criticism of NY in any post of mine. Much the opposite. Everyone, me included loves the Manhattan skyline but if assertions that it blows everywhere else away ( it most certainly does not ) are to be treated as dogmatic and unquestionable then where are we? Are in in confident old NYC or in a cordoned off UNESCO culture site that is beyond criticism?

History...density...variety... all 10 out of 10 as I and everyone recognises. Supertalls? nowhere near a 10.

Labtec
Jan 12, 2007, 6:38 PM
Very nice photos... to say HK cant compare to NYC imo is idiotic, also idiotic to consider NYC a lesser skyline because of the lack of 1000+ towers. But to each his own. :cheers:

Jularc
Jan 12, 2007, 7:09 PM
Thank you oreoman for recognising that what I am saying is simply true.

You say I "dicked around". I dispute that. You will find no inaccurate or aggressive criticism of NY in any post of mine. Much the opposite. Everyone, me included loves the Manhattan skyline but if assertions that it blows everywhere else away ( it most certainly does not ) are to be treated as dogmatic and unquestionable then where are we? Are in in confident old NYC or in a cordoned off UNESCO culture site that is beyond criticism?

History...density...variety... all 10 out of 10 as I and everyone recognises. Supertalls? nowhere near a 10.

I think that you are the only one in this thread that states that the Manhattan skyline doesn't blow you away.

That says alot. :rolleyes:

Jularc
Jan 12, 2007, 7:20 PM
Whilst what you say is to an extent true it is also to an extent beside the point. There are cultural. political, municipal and economic factors at play everywhere. EG the fact that there will never be a 300 metre supertall on Boul St Michel is not due to lack of ability to put one there but rather a conjunction of extra architectural factors.

I repeat NYC has all of those 'cultural. political, municipal and economic factors.' But it is way more than any other cities. I am pretty sure about that.

Developers sometimes don't come out with bigger plans just because it will just take forever for their projects to be aproved or disaproved. So many of them just built average height towers. Plus the availability of the lots where they can built 1,000 + footers is scarced.

The west side of manhattan has alot of land that developers can built such heights. Just recently they city and the state made it easier for that to happend. So it will happened in that restricted area.

-GR2NY-
Mar 23, 2007, 8:59 PM
U mean this one by RFC from over @ SSC.Com?

photo on page 3

YESSSSS THATS IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:tup: :banana:

Derek
Mar 23, 2007, 10:33 PM
http://www.pbase.com/rfcd100/image/70715951/original.jpg

my goodness :drooling:

JBinCalgary
Mar 24, 2007, 3:03 AM
those photos are amazing