the reflections are extremely distorted! i agree with the ones who say that this glass is just awful!

i get that it's trying to be different and all, but please come up with something of good quality and looks good.

I think you need to look up the meaning of the word cheap. You are mistakenly using it as a synonym for cheesy, gauche, gaudy, tacky, tasteless and garish. In your first example you are contradicting yourself by saying excessive wealth is cheap, when perhaps you mean it is tacky. And in your second you did it again by saying real gold would be cheap when I`m sure you mean gauche. Cheap is a description of how inexpensive an object is, or it can also mean a lower quality of materials, neither of which gold (at US $1200 an ounce) is.

Gold is a highly valued metal but anything taken to excess can be gaudy. There is no need in trying to insult me by subtly implying that where I live we have a distorted and inferior viewpoint of quality of materials. Gold is valued the world over and is also considered tacky the world over when it is used to cover a bathtub or doorknob. Those values are universal and are considered nouveau-riche and gauche no matter where you live.

Apparently, I am inferring from what you are saying, is that in Russia the nouveau-riche class of entrepreneurs have ruined the beauty and desirability of real gold.

I for one am going to reserve judgement for once the project is a little further along the way. I bet it will look pretty snazzy.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dicti...1&t=1283519056

Window is an object from the same category as bathtub.

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=316909&page=85

By igor:

http://s58.radikal.ru/i159/1009/0d/314ddccb4b1b.jpg

http://citytowers.ru/viewtopic.php?pid=74594#p74594

By alex61:

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/4602/...a0_dc5067f4_XL

Traynor's right . You can't say that gold is both a sign of "cheapness" and excessive wealth . In fact , in the English vernacular nobody would consider gold "cheap" in any context . The colour , over-use as a motif , and excessive focus may make something tacky or gaudy but it doesn't make it cheap . I'm afraid you've misunderstood the definition of cheap here and , consequently , are using it erroneously .

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showth...316909&page=86

By ivan.potapoff:

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/5105/..._af549dd4_orig

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/5203/..._767a3b8a_orig

I will reserve my opinion for when this tower has a bit more cladding, but at this point, I am concerned that this is going to look kind of tacky when completed. I like this kind of glass, but this is a very large building with a relatively flat curtain-wall (not much texture), leaving it to look very plain and quite 90's. The end-on angle of this building is going to be sick, but the flat side is going to be far too boring for a building of this scale and prominence. That being said, I quite like the RBC building in Toronto, but I think it's the shape of the tower more than the colour of the glass.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/47/13...5469edccf8.jpg
by Rick Bogacz on Flickr http://farm1.static.flickr.com/47/13...5469edccf8.jpg

Oh no...
 

MCT's cladding is awful, not up-to-date at all. It will make this building look very 80's and will stick out like a saw thumb! I think the designers should have gone for light blue glass, and to break the 'flat' sides up, scattered the window frames in a more random pattern to give it a more contemporary appearance. All in all I like this building, it's just a shame it looks like it should have been built 25 years ago. Also sorry for repeating the 'cladding' point made so many times previously but every time I see MCR on Moscow's diagram page I always feel strongly about the, in-your-face gold. :/

I don't think they could ruin the desirability of real gold, but I don't think I'll take my English lessons from you either. Cheap is a synonym for gaudy and cheesy. Inexpensive is a better word to use for things that cost a little and it doesn't carry the negative baggage that cheap does.

Back on topic. I really loved the renderings and diagrams of this building. It's too bad that it may look lousy from a glass-reflection standpoint. I still have reasonable hopes. It's hard to make an opinion based on a couple of layers of glass.

11.11.10

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/5501/..._f9b8899b_orig
Evrasia 99911

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/5901/...317dbb7_XL.jpg
http://fotki.yandex.ru/users/parktow...1/view/240127/

13/11/10
http://i032.radikal.ru/1011/a4/39e9d2f1aa22.jpg
igor

i love the glazing on this one

пробное сообщение
 

[IMG]http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/4601/..._3d259739_orig[/IMG]http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/4605/..._74eb5655_origпробное сообщение
http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/5301/..._498024d3_orig
http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/4806/...d_86015de_orig
http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/5000/..._25aaf795_orig

all these photos of Ivan Potapov

This building in some ways makes up for the loss of the Russia Tower.

This building is going to look so 80s! I for one can't wait.

Thats some crazy glass

That'll be very reflective glass on a sunny day.

It'll certainly stand out, and it's a nice change from the blue glass that we see everywhere.

The white portions will be a pain to keep clean, though.