daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Forums > Skyscrapers

Skyscrapers General news, discussion and announcement forum about skyscrapers, including the Skyscraper Living forum



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old January 18th, 2008, 02:45 AM   #41
Astralis
Out of time
 
Astralis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: ATW
Posts: 11,932
Likes (Received): 26

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unionstation13 View Post
I prefer structures that will not become eyesores in a decade and tell a story.
Conservative? Just because it isn't %80 glass? I would prefer to see a city of fine victorian architecture then a city of glass, thats why I find Hong Kong rather ugly.
Yeah it's conservative bc it's old or let me put it this way, it's not modern . Everyone is intititled to have his own opinion and I don't like the old architecture which includes art deco style among all other traditional styles. I like modern, futuristic skysrapers and therefore HK has the best skyline in the world . In 10 years time it would be Dubai . But Manhattan has the best skyline in Norh America and one of the best in the world bc of the ammount and density of skyscrapers and certainly not bc of their great architectual design since most of them look like a lego set . There are some exceptions though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unionstation13 View Post
I prefer structures that will not become eyesores in a decade and tell a story.
Who ever said modern buildings would become eyesores in a decade . BTW if it comes unusable or ugly or sth, you can always renovate it or tear it down and build a new more modern one in there .
Astralis no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old January 18th, 2008, 04:16 AM   #42
Unionstation13
Registered User
 
Unionstation13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Indianapolis/Lafayette
Posts: 3,439
Likes (Received): 37

0_o
modern architecture almost always becomes an eyesore to the majority after a few years. Only a few people consider modern architecture to be timeless. Or we can tear it down and replace it with something classic and timeless so we don't have to waste money tearing down eyesores. NYC's skyline is famous for its amount of classic highrises. 0_o
__________________
Peter- "Geesh, Meg is in there taking a nap under water!".
Unionstation13 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 18th, 2008, 01:01 PM   #43
Astralis
Out of time
 
Astralis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: ATW
Posts: 11,932
Likes (Received): 26

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unionstation13 View Post
0_o
modern architecture almost always becomes an eyesore to the majority after a few years. Only a few people consider modern architecture to be timeless. Or we can tear it down and replace it with something classic and timeless so we don't have to waste money tearing down eyesores. NYC's skyline is famous for its amount of classic highrises. 0_o
Sorry but I disagree. You can't tell me that for example Bank of China in HK or Petronas Towers in KL or Jim Mao Tower in Shanghai, Gherkin in London etc. will soon become eyesores . And it's just like it is - as time changes buildings must be changed as well. These buildings (traditional ones) are not timeless, in general nothing is timeless. Everything sooner or later becomes old - it's just how you perceive it . Typical example of that is skyline in Manhattan - many buildings are too old and are reflecting past, not the future how it is supposed to be . Somehow some ppl still find it beautiful which is ok but it will never erase the fact that many skyscrapers there are too old and reflection of the past .
Astralis no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 18th, 2008, 01:44 PM   #44
_00_deathscar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 5,047
Likes (Received): 217

It's not the fašade (glass or othewrise) that determines whether buildings will become eyesores in years, but the overall design and architecture of the building - such as the ones Astralis listed; buildings like those are timeless - the fašade only plays a part.
_00_deathscar no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 18th, 2008, 07:13 PM   #45
Unionstation13
Registered User
 
Unionstation13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Indianapolis/Lafayette
Posts: 3,439
Likes (Received): 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by Astralis View Post
Sorry but I disagree. You can't tell me that for example Bank of China in HK or Petronas Towers in KL or Jim Mao Tower in Shanghai, Gherkin in London etc. will soon become eyesores . And it's just like it is - as time changes buildings must be changed as well. These buildings (traditional ones) are not timeless, in general nothing is timeless. Everything sooner or later becomes old - it's just how you perceive it . Typical example of that is skyline in Manhattan - many buildings are too old and are reflecting past, not the future how it is supposed to be . Somehow some ppl still find it beautiful which is ok but it will never erase the fact that many skyscrapers there are too old and reflection of the past .
We will have to see. The old highrises in NYC are not too old, a structure can never be TOO old. The old highrises in NYC reflect on the city's past and history, its culture and progression. Are you saying they should replace them? Historic preservation is very important in most North American cities and the idea of simply replacing something because its too old or not hip or modern is frowned upon, especially when the structure is of historic value. It also reflects the past that we were built on, wouldn't tearing them down simply be us insulting our very foundation that makes us what we are today and if we tear it down what history will we have to look back on? You can't say history isn't important unless your crazy as it is vital to progression as we learn from the past.
__________________
Peter- "Geesh, Meg is in there taking a nap under water!".
Unionstation13 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 18th, 2008, 07:57 PM   #46
Astralis
Out of time
 
Astralis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: ATW
Posts: 11,932
Likes (Received): 26

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unionstation13 View Post
We will have to see. The old highrises in NYC are not too old, a structure can never be TOO old. The old highrises in NYC reflect on the city's past and history, its culture and progression. Are you saying they should replace them? Historic preservation is very important in most North American cities and the idea of simply replacing something because its too old or not hip or modern is frowned upon, especially when the structure is of historic value. It also reflects the past that we were built on, wouldn't tearing them down simply be us insulting our very foundation that makes us what we are today and if we tear it down what history will we have to look back on? You can't say history isn't important unless your crazy as it is vital to progression as we learn from the past.
This what you call "culture" and all, I am not buying it - I simply don't care for it. You mentioned history, I am not past oriented but future oriented and therefore I don't really bother with sth that I don't have any use of. And building CAN be too old - if it doesn't reflect at least present (if not future) time it is old and if it reflects some distant past it is too old - classic, traditional, conservative, whatever you want to call it. Maybe you would disagree with me on this one but it all depends how you look at it. And another thing - noone said you should tear it down, just that it can never be as beautiful as modern ones. If the structure isn't rotten or sth why tear it down then . You could tear it down only if you had enough money and adequate technology to build new modern ones instead. As far as I know we haven't developed that kind of technology which would allow us to do it (I mean to redevelop the whole Manhattan) in a few years time or less but as our technology progresses it would become a normal thing in some distant future . Moreover, now it's too expensive to do it and any demolishing and buliding new ones instead would be wasting money.
Astralis no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 18th, 2008, 09:12 PM   #47
Unionstation13
Registered User
 
Unionstation13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Indianapolis/Lafayette
Posts: 3,439
Likes (Received): 37

Even if it was real, I highly doubt people in NYC would allow the structures to be demolished. 0_o I will not argue with you any further on this issue as you seem to be very much "future this" "down with the past!" sort of thing, but in real life that is rather backward isn't it? Since the past is what created today, why should we reject it? Most North Americans take pride in these structures that make them what they are today. Just because it doesn't reflect the present or the future, does not mean that it is too old. Most of the time older structures are sturdier than new structures(but not with massive highrises). A lot of cities don't have a mass historic architecture to look back on, such cities like Hong Kong, Tokyo, and Dubai so I could understand why historic preservation isn't really something that known in places like that, but here where many people live, work, and play in older structures and wish to keep the fine details and the history in the walls of the buildings. Now this doesn't mean that everything should be preserved, but we should take much in being sure to tear down structures of little importance vs structures of high importance. This is as far as I wish to go with you as you seem very much against preservation of what has created us.
__________________
Peter- "Geesh, Meg is in there taking a nap under water!".
Unionstation13 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 18th, 2008, 11:04 PM   #48
Astralis
Out of time
 
Astralis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: ATW
Posts: 11,932
Likes (Received): 26

Well I am like this - if sth is doing well why change it but if you have sth better to change it with then go ahead. I also think that nothing is that good so that it can't be better. If you think that these old buildings are better than modern ones then it would mean that we haven't done any progress in that field which is certainly not the case . Anyway, my future oriented thinking can't be backward since these two words (future and backward) are in pure contradiction .
Astralis no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 25th, 2010, 06:58 PM   #49
Dapperheid Tower
Totally not dead
 
Dapperheid Tower's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Reading
Posts: 698
Likes (Received): 45

Older building are better in detail. Modern structure are better in technology

I guess it all depends on what a person like about building. What I like in building is alot of art details on them, so Im more towards the art deco style.
Dapperheid Tower no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2011, 06:38 AM   #50
new york wtc!!!
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 13
Likes (Received): 3

thw chrysler is a copy of the empire state building boooo :boo:
wtc and esb wins
new york wtc!!! no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2011, 06:44 AM   #51
new york wtc!!!
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 13
Likes (Received): 3

the wtc and esb are the best and chrysler is boxy!!!!!!!!!
new york wtc!!! no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2011, 09:11 AM   #52
red_eagle_1982
frustrated architect
 
red_eagle_1982's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Manila
Posts: 428
Likes (Received): 53

Chrysler is my favorite skyscraper in the world. Naturally, I like it better than the Twins and Empire State.
red_eagle_1982 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2011, 09:17 AM   #53
red_eagle_1982
frustrated architect
 
red_eagle_1982's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Manila
Posts: 428
Likes (Received): 53

Quote:
Originally Posted by new york wtc!!! View Post
thw chrysler is a copy of the empire state building boooo :boo:
wtc and esb wins
Umm, how can the Chrysler have copied ESB? Chrysler began construction in 1928, while ESB began construction a year later.
red_eagle_1982 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2011, 01:14 PM   #54
Kanto
Roof height crusader
 
Kanto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: S-4, Papoose Lake
Posts: 5,925
Likes (Received): 3546

WTC is the clear winner for me :master Only the Willis Tower is more beutiful than the Twins. Empire is beautiful but by far not as beautiful as the Twins. Chrysler on the other hand is ugly
__________________
The Outbreak: A free browser online strategy game. Build up your town and compete with other towns economicaly and militarily.
http://www.the-outbreak.com/
Kanto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 17th, 2011, 12:45 AM   #55
WTCNewYork
Registered User
 
WTCNewYork's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 505
Likes (Received): 18

I haven't met many people that think the Chrysler building is ugly. Maybe some that don't particularly LIKE it, but not really any that HATE it. Oh well, its your opinion. Anyways, I think I prefer the WTC just a tad more than the ESB.
WTCNewYork no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 17th, 2011, 03:40 AM   #56
isdmd10
Registered User
 
isdmd10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: New York
Posts: 132
Likes (Received): 4

The Chrysler Building is a monument to elegance and its crown perfectly displays the gorgeous art deco style. I like the ESB after this because it's always an imposing and recognizable structure from whichever angle you're looking at it from. WTC, on the other hand, is a monument to the architectural dark age that existed in the 60s and 70s. However I guess that we should just be glad they weren't brown.
isdmd10 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 24th, 2011, 12:36 PM   #57
599GTB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 96
Likes (Received): 44

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanto View Post
WTC is the clear winner for me :master Only the Willis Tower is more beutiful than the Twins. Empire is beautiful but by far not as beautiful as the Twins. Chrysler on the other hand is ugly
you have such obscure tastes.
599GTB no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 24th, 2011, 04:08 PM   #58
Mike____
(╯░□░)╯︵ ┻━┻
 
Mike____'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Tervuren/Brussels
Posts: 4,944
Likes (Received): 1038

Quote:
Originally Posted by new york wtc!!! View Post
the wtc and esb are the best and chrysler is boxy!!!!!!!!!
I hope its sarcastic
__________________
Belgium



Mike____ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 24th, 2011, 04:42 PM   #59
Rizzato
Blue Collar
 
Rizzato's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Boston
Posts: 899
Likes (Received): 49

The older the better. That is why NYC is such a great skyline, because you are in the midst of tall buildings like Woolworth and GE, supertalls like ESB, Chrysler that still look great, and were created 80 years ago, without current technology to help them achieve beauty
__________________
B O S T O N
Rizzato no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 25th, 2011, 01:48 PM   #60
isaidso
the new republic
 
isaidso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The United Provinces of America
Posts: 29,654
Likes (Received): 10806

Chrysler Building is the sexiest.
Empire State is the most powerful.

WTC was great, but these 2 older buildings are the 2 best skyscrapers ever built.
__________________
World's 1st Baseball Game: June 4th, 1838, Beachville, Ontario, Canada
North America's Oldest Pro Football Teams: Toronto Argonauts (1873) and Hamilton Tiger Cats (1869)

I started my first photo thread documenting a recent trip to Halifax, Nova Scotia. Have a peek: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=724898
isaidso no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 04:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu