HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Completed Project Threads Archive


    53W53 in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • New York Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location
New York Projects & Construction Forum

 

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #3521  
Old Posted May 2, 2018, 10:20 PM
rgarri4's Avatar
rgarri4 rgarri4 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,022
That early rendering although sexy, is exactly that. An "early" rendering. A super under developed concept shot.

People are talking about glass location, I don't even think that rendering has glass in it yet! You can see strait into the buildings ...um ...coffered ceilings? Yeah, comparing the final outcome to an early rendering is not a good idea. What's getting built is exactly what that rendering would look like if the rendering was actually detailed out and finished.
__________________
Renderings, Animations, VR
Youtube
     
     
  #3522  
Old Posted May 2, 2018, 10:46 PM
O-tacular's Avatar
O-tacular O-tacular is offline
Fake News
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 23,423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris22 View Post
For those of you being defensive of the beams, it's not like this criticism is unfounded when renderings like this were posted years ago in this thread and would have informed my expectations of this building:




You can see the difference between the diagonal beams being in front of/on top of the window grid vs being level with or "under" the window grid like in this photo:



^^^On the right hand side you can't even see the diagonal beams because they are flush with the glass. Had they been protruding, they would be visible and dramatic from all angles.



And yes, in my opinion one is "far" more striking than the other.
I can why you're let down based on that rendering. Could part of it be the glass is super clear in it and not in real life?
     
     
  #3523  
Old Posted May 2, 2018, 11:50 PM
TechTalkGuy's Avatar
TechTalkGuy TechTalkGuy is offline
Mr. Technology
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,008
Oh well, you can’t please everyone.
     
     
  #3524  
Old Posted May 3, 2018, 12:14 AM
Kris22 Kris22 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by O-tacular View Post
I can why you're let down based on that rendering. Could part of it be the glass is super clear in it and not in real life?
I was using that rendering to show how the irregular beams were clearly protruding out from horizontal grid and were also continuous and uninterrupted lengths, whereas in the final product they are flush and have the appearance of going behind the floor grid.

The clear glass probably does exaggerate the effect tho.

Anyway I just needed to get that out because I remember when this project was revealed I was absolutely taken aback and sure it would be my favourite skyscraper ever, but unfortunately it didn't quite make it to that level for me. Still a beauty tho.

Cheers.
     
     
  #3525  
Old Posted May 3, 2018, 1:09 AM
TechTalkGuy's Avatar
TechTalkGuy TechTalkGuy is offline
Mr. Technology
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,008
The protruding beams work for me.
     
     
  #3526  
Old Posted May 3, 2018, 3:55 AM
citybooster citybooster is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 420
It would have been no doubt about it top level magnificent with the clear glass... heck, would have been best at the original 1,250 ft over the chopped down 1,050...but it's still one of the most creative, best in the modern era. I can see though with the beams how the rendering makes a more powerful impact, helped by the clear glass it represents.
     
     
  #3527  
Old Posted May 3, 2018, 4:40 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris22 View Post
You can see the difference between the diagonal beams being in front of/on top of the window grid vs being level with or "under" the window grid like in this photo:

And yes, in my opinion one is "far" more striking than the other.
I"m sorry, but no. You seem to think that the bracing is what makes this tower stand out. And if you believe that, then you believe that putting that bracing on any of the surrounding towers would make them great. And if you believe that, then your credibility on this issue is lost and you should go back into hiding. Again, this building wasn't made great by the bracing. It is the form of this tower which makes it stand out as the great piece of art that it is. Don't come at me about this building because of the bracing. You can tell me that you don't like pointy buildings. You can tell me that it should have been taller. But don't come at me with the ridiculous "bracing" angle, or any other such nonsense.



https://www.instagram.com/p/Bg6ojKxD...by=dilarasaban






https://www.instagram.com/p/BhlPOt8h...y=thefarmparis





https://www.instagram.com/p/BiTGfMwB...oklynarchitect
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #3528  
Old Posted May 3, 2018, 7:35 AM
Hemeroscopium Hemeroscopium is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: BIG SUR
Posts: 86
Well,no way to argue with NYguy!..
He makes me think of a mother who refuses to look into the eyes of her one-eyed child.
The truth is that this building is half of a failure.
The exposed beams were supposed to be steel all the way to the top originally.
After,it was supposed to be only the bottom of the building.
In the end, they were built of concrete.(cost?,technical issues?). You can tell me that you like it as it is. But don't come at me with the ridiculous: "this building wasn't made great by the bracing. It is the form of this tower which makes it stand out as the great piece of art that it is."
THE PROTRUDING BRACING WAS AN ESSENTIAL PART OF THE DESIGN.
Could you predend NYGUY that the Hancock Tower in Chicago would be the masterpiece everybody knows if the beams were not protruding??
According to the original renderings,it felt like the tower was a living organism that contracted and stretched to the sky,like a bodybuilder who would contract his muscles, revealing his veins and is energy!
It was like the tower was in motion,while now it looks like(especiallly on the sides)a former Elite Agency model who ruined her potential by gaining weight!....SAD!!!!
The overall form of TV is magnificent but the cladding/fake steel beams are an obvious failure.
At the end,we could have a piece of art but no masterpiece.
I am done with it!..

Last edited by Hemeroscopium; May 3, 2018 at 8:18 AM.
     
     
  #3529  
Old Posted May 3, 2018, 8:30 AM
TechTalkGuy's Avatar
TechTalkGuy TechTalkGuy is offline
Mr. Technology
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,008
My opinion: I like it.
Face the facts: designs change, get over it.
Everyone voiced their valid opinions of the WTC redesign.
Good enough I suppose.
     
     
  #3530  
Old Posted May 3, 2018, 11:20 AM
Prezrezc Prezrezc is offline
A.F.K.A. JayPro
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: South Huntington, Long Island, New York
Posts: 851
The "bracing" (which it technically isn't save artistically) is part of what makes this tower an "icon" (I loathe the overuse of that word in this context, but whatever) for untold years to come....Or how about a literal work of art, especially as the landmark tower for MOMA?

Indeed, it is all in the form, as has been pithily--and IMO accurately--suggested. But it's precisely the Van Halenesque angles and the tri-color apex that exist to make that form come alive. What I like especially appreciate is how the plain black tones of the fenestration remain comparatively subdued so as to let everything else do its intended aesthetic whamma-jamma.

IOW, Nouvel could've gone with a more "shiny" skin, but to what end? And to somehow "three-dimensionalize" (WTF??) the "bracing" would have IMO made me ask the same rhetorical question.

The only quibble I have is with the original height given the original dimensions. Instead of a scrawnier, more visually anorexic form, IMO we could've had the something that has the towers present contours, but on a more Nordstrom-like scale....

....If that makes sense.

Last edited by Prezrezc; May 3, 2018 at 11:31 AM.
     
     
  #3531  
Old Posted May 3, 2018, 11:23 PM
homebucket homebucket is online now
你的媽媽
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Bay
Posts: 8,722
This is what Kris22 is talking about.

Bracing protruding out from the glass rather than flush. Not saying 181 Fremont is better than 53W53 (for those who are extra sensitive on this subject), but just providing a present day example of bracing and texture adding to the appearance of a skyscraper. 53W53 is my favorite supertall currently u/c, but there is absolutely no doubt, that it would be further elevated with an added detail of the protruding bracing as in the renderings.





     
     
  #3532  
Old Posted May 3, 2018, 11:30 PM
Patrick's Avatar
Patrick Patrick is offline
Desert Dweller
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 4,611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris22 View Post
And NYguy, I said clearly in one of my posts that I believe there are TWO defining features to this building: the shape and the bracing. You believe there is only one: the shape. In that case they should have just done away with the diagonal bracing altogether and just had a sleek, sharp building, like that model you posted.

Like Hemeroscopium said, the bracing in its original proposed form had an organic appearance like veins that seems to grow and stretch upwards, making the building look alive and giving it a sense of vitality...

I think the reason we are disagreeing so strongly is that we are both responding to this building like a work of art/sculpture, and as we know art brings out many different interpretations in people. For me, the irregular, 3 dimensional bracing was an important part in evoking certain feelings about this building...it felt organic, skeletal.

The way you are speaking as if you are the single authority on interpreting a work of art is totally ignorant and frankly quite rude. Would you walk into an art gallery and tell people their interpretation of a work is wrong? When interpreting art, ALL aspects of the piece work together to evoke a feeling, from the overall shape, the materials, textures, finishing details, lighting, etc. It's a package deal.

The irony here is that you call this building a work of art yet you are disrespectful of any artistic interpretations of it other than your own.

Telling me to go back into hiding and questioning my credibility? Ya okay.
Beautifully said! Your critiques of the building are completely valid and I too expected the "bracing" to protrude as well. In the end, I'm just happy this building passed all the hurdles and was built than not at all!
     
     
  #3533  
Old Posted May 4, 2018, 2:45 AM
TechTalkGuy's Avatar
TechTalkGuy TechTalkGuy is offline
Mr. Technology
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,008
Protruding or not, 53W53 looks great so far.
     
     
  #3534  
Old Posted May 4, 2018, 8:25 PM
Zerton's Avatar
Zerton Zerton is offline
Ω
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by homebucket View Post
This is what Kris22 is talking about.

Bracing protruding out from the glass rather than flush. Not saying 181 Fremont is better than 53W53 (for those who are extra sensitive on this subject), but just providing a present day example of bracing and texture adding to the appearance of a skyscraper. 53W53 is my favorite supertall currently u/c, but there is absolutely no doubt, that it would be further elevated with an added detail of the protruding bracing as in the renderings.
If you're going to use a visual example go with the originator!



Hancock Center, Chicago ftw
__________________
If all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed, if all records told the same tale, then the lie passed into history and became truth. -Orwell
     
     
  #3535  
Old Posted May 4, 2018, 9:38 PM
TechTalkGuy's Avatar
TechTalkGuy TechTalkGuy is offline
Mr. Technology
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,008
Lots of respect for Chicago’s Hancock Center.
But NY copies no one.
Now, Philadelphia has copied several NY designs (successfully).

I will admit that I really admire the cross bracing of the Hancock Center.
I highly doubt any city could copy 53W53!!
     
     
  #3536  
Old Posted May 4, 2018, 10:57 PM
jsbrook jsbrook is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Bala Cynwyd
Posts: 3,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
I"m sorry, but no. You seem to think that the bracing is what makes this tower stand out. And if you believe that, then you believe that putting that bracing on any of the surrounding towers would make them great. And if you believe that, then your credibility on this issue is lost and you should go back into hiding. Again, this building wasn't made great by the bracing. It is the form of this tower which makes it stand out as the great piece of art that it is. Don't come at me about this building because of the bracing. You can tell me that you don't like pointy buildings. You can tell me that it should have been taller. But don't come at me with the ridiculous "bracing" angle, or any other such nonsense.
No, each of these propositions do not logically follow from the other. And, yes, I think the tower looks more striking with the bracing as originally rendered. No, not every tower needs them, and they certainly would not make every tower great. But they enhanced this one. Having said that, this tower remains stunning. This and 111 W 57th are most certainly my two favorite towers under construction (and possibly in existence).
     
     
  #3537  
Old Posted May 4, 2018, 11:17 PM
TechTalkGuy's Avatar
TechTalkGuy TechTalkGuy is offline
Mr. Technology
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,008
The bracing on 53W53 make it stunning!
The lack of bracing on the original design of 3 WTC make it just another boring tower.

Seriously, I have an opinion & no one will diminish my spirit.
     
     
  #3538  
Old Posted May 5, 2018, 12:11 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is online now
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 45,696
Nice little video. Informative on the history of Verre and specs about it.

53W53: Manhattan's Modern Masterpiece | The B1M

Video Link
     
     
  #3539  
Old Posted May 7, 2018, 5:33 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
People, if you can't handle your criticisms being criticized, then don't post them.




Quote:
Originally Posted by jsbrook View Post
No, each of these propositions do not logically follow from the other. And, yes, I think the tower looks more striking with the bracing as originally rendered. No, not every tower needs them, and they certainly would not make every tower great. But they enhanced this one.
I don't think so. It could go either way. It can also be argued that they were a distraction.

Again, this is 53w53...










Quote:
Originally Posted by homebucket View Post
This is what Kris22 is talking about.

Bracing protruding out from the glass rather than flush. Not saying 181 Fremont is better than 53W53 (for those who are extra sensitive on this subject), but just providing a present day example of bracing and texture adding to the appearance of a skyscraper. 53W53 is my favorite supertall currently u/c, but there is absolutely no doubt, that it would be further elevated with an added detail of the protruding bracing as in the renderings.


I'm glad you posted that. Does this building compare with 53w53 as it currently stands? Obviously not. Case closed, and thank you.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #3540  
Old Posted May 7, 2018, 6:04 PM
TechTalkGuy's Avatar
TechTalkGuy TechTalkGuy is offline
Mr. Technology
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,008
No comparison.
53W53 is unmatched!
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
 

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Completed Project Threads Archive
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:21 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.