SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//index.php)
-   Canada (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//forumdisplay.php?f=18)
-   -   Great Canadian Skyline Thread II (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//showthread.php?t=222250)

dreambrother808 Apr 20, 2016 1:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lio45 (Post 7413739)
And yet the SSP Albertans find me anti-conservative as I'm not a big fan of extracting and burning fossil fuels for energy.

I guess I'm a centrist, all things considered... ;)

In your opinion, congratulations!

WhipperSnapper Apr 20, 2016 1:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreambrother808 (Post 7413706)
What people are missing with regard to the skyline rating is that each was chosen based upon distinction, not comparative features. For example, the drama of the Parisian skyline is the Eiffel Tower, as almost a standalone sculpture. Vancouver is modern glass towers against a rugged mountain backdrop. Rio is exotic, unparalleled, natural features. Each city on that list excels at their own specific category. That's why there is no Chicago, because it is surpassed by New York, in its category. No reason to be pissy about something that is so obvious, folks. Vancouver is standout on a worldwide scale. Toronto and other Canadian skylines are standout on a national level based upon those categories. Trust me, talk to pretty much any tourist in Vancouver and they will validate that sense of awe and appreciation of that which is exceptional on a worldwide level. I'm sorry but Vancouver has some tail-feathers to shake. If y'all can't take it, it's your own problem.

Give me a break. It is just a list someone at conde nast produced. It doesn't make them an expert at skylines of distinction or are not open to criticism. The list is all over the place. Seriously, Dubai over a Great Lake city like Chicago? How many hilly/mountainous backdrops does one list need? San Francisco over Sydney? Paris over Toronto? Sorry, I don't think romance and one of the world's most famous landmarks overtakes a city with an actual skyline that also includes a well known tower.

mistercorporate Apr 20, 2016 2:00 AM

https://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/55267549.jpg

lio45 Apr 20, 2016 2:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreambrother808 (Post 7413756)
That pic is pure Hyperbole 101.

I've only been to Paris once, admittedly.

As for this "perception", your understanding is autistically literal.

It's already been noted that the criteria was not purely "a bunch of skyscrapers" but rather the overall effect, natural features included.

Paris doesn't belong on a "world's best skylines list" at all.

Paris without the Eiffel Tower would still very much be Paris. That tower doesn't make or break the city. It has grown to become a symbol of Paris by itself so it's probably why that listmaker chose to lend so much architectural importance to it (the power of that metal structure's reputation as a cliché is so extreme that the city of Paris, Texas has its own stupid imitation Eiffel Tower with a cowboy hat on top of it -- did you know that? The place is also the second biggest Paris in the world, slotting right after the one that's the capital of France, and somewhere before the one in Ontario.)

Edit: I just found out online that Paris, Tennessee also has its Eiffel Tower: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris,_Tennessee

Though it seems that Paris, Ontario, does not (yet?).

dreambrother808 Apr 20, 2016 2:00 AM

Categories. Such as romance. Toronto wins no such categories. Period. It will always have a comparative better.

rousseau Apr 20, 2016 2:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beedok (Post 7413696)
Shanghai has every reason to be on a top ten. Any top ten without Shanghai would be suspicious to me, unless you're working on a metric that ignores both height and quantity.

It's a stupid list, but the criteria are beauty and iconic vistas. Perhaps if you looked at the link (and, on this forum, ever had a clue what you were talking about) you would have known that.

Shanghai's skyline is not beautiful or iconic. It's more a scifi fantasy with components of awkward weirdness surrounded by a bleak, dystopian sea of cement high-rises.

Vancouver is impressive-looking because of the mountains, but the skyline itself is alright-looking from some angles and really ugly from others. It's obvious to anyone with even a modicum of interest in skylines and/or architecture who isn't from Vancouver that it doesn't belong on a list of beautiful, iconic skylines (but of course this is a controversial thing to say because it hurts people's feelings and most people on this site are amateur chamber of commerce boosters with no interest in reality).

Paris is an eccentric choice for a list like this. It's really the Eiffel Tower itself that is beautiful and iconic, not the skyline per se, as La Defense itself looks more like Atlanta or Kansas City plopped down into the City of Lights. Then again, it was one of the first structures in a modern European city to, ahem, tower over everything at such a great height, so maybe it's not such a bad choice.

Still, though, thumbs down on a stupid trolling list slapped together by some silver spoon-fed idiot spending her early twenties in Manhattan working an unpaid internship thanks to Daddy's cash and connections.

niwell Apr 20, 2016 2:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreambrother808 (Post 7413757)
Way to omit all of the natural features and pic the worst possible angle.:notacrook:

Well yeah, but that's the actual skyline. It's actually quite difficult to get a good view of the skyline with the natural features well proportioned. From most vantage points it's completely overwhelmed by Lionshead and/or Table Mountain. Not to mention that 80% of the city's population lives on the other side of those.

dreambrother808 Apr 20, 2016 2:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mistercorporate (Post 7413768)

Vancouver pride on this forum is met with derision. Period.

lio45 Apr 20, 2016 2:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreambrother808 (Post 7413759)
In your opinion, congratulations!

If I'm too conservative for some and not conservative enough for others, what other possible conclusion could you reach?

dreambrother808 Apr 20, 2016 2:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rousseau (Post 7413775)
Shanghai's skyline is not beautiful or iconic. It's more a scifi fantasy with components of awkward weirdness surrounded by a bleak, dystopian sea of cement high-rises.

To me, that is the category, scifi realness. That is its beauty and why it is on the list. All lists are subjective, but not all are inherently nonsensical.

rousseau Apr 20, 2016 2:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreambrother808 (Post 7413787)
To me, that is the category, scifi realness. That is its beauty and why it is on the list. All lists are subjective, but not all are inherently nonsensical.

Look, a top ten list of global skylines with Budapest, Vancouver and Capetown on it is beyond ridiculous, that's obvious, but the criteria were beauty and how iconic they were.

It's nowhere clear that the list compiler intended to choose skylines representing various categories. This was the product of a slap-dash internet search on a Monday morning prior to coffee done to look busy and, as people say in these soulless times, to "produce content." The writer is clearly aware of this site and others like it, and is certainly well pleased at how successful her trolling was.

lio45 Apr 20, 2016 2:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rousseau (Post 7413775)
Paris is an eccentric choice for a list like this. It's really the Eiffel Tower itself that is beautiful and iconic, not the skyline per se, as La Defense itself looks more like Atlanta or Kansas City plopped down into the City of Lights. Then again, it was one of the first structures in a modern European city to, ahem, tower over everything at such a great height, so maybe it's not such a bad choice.

If it's all about the Eiffel Tower then I would clearly give Giza (or Cairo) the nod over Paris in the category for winning a skyline medal single-handedly on the back of a tall manmade structure. At least theirs is a true built wonder of the world, and wasn't originally built to be disposable, nor disliked by the residents initially.

http://media.gettyimages.com/photos/...re-id157957606

dreambrother808 Apr 20, 2016 2:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rousseau (Post 7413802)
Look, a top ten list of global skylines with Budapest, Vancouver and Capetown on it is beyond ridiculous, that's obvious, but the criteria were beauty and how iconic they were.

It's nowhere clear that the list compiler intended to choose skylines representing various categories. This was the product of a slap-dash internet search on a Monday morning prior to coffee done to look busy and, as people say in these soulless times, to "produce content." The writer is clearly aware of this site and others like it, and is certainly well pleased at how successful her trolling was.

Iconic = unique = category

Beauty, well I don't see a city on the list that doesn't fit that profile.

Anything which remotely puts Vancouver on a level above other cities in this forum is met with typical derision. It's the norm, but nonetheless we are still presented with these points of view which place it on that level. Subjective, yes, but clearly not peculiar or unfounded.

Nationally, Vancouver "loses" with regard to some metrics, but it also has distinctive aspects that set it apart. That's all. No apologies for showing some pride.

dreambrother808 Apr 20, 2016 2:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lio45 (Post 7413817)
If it's all about the Eiffel Tower then I would clearly give Giza (or Cairo) the nod over Paris in the category for winning a skyline medal single-handedly on the back of a tall manmade structure. At least theirs is a true built wonder of the world, and wasn't originally built to be disposable, nor disliked by the residents initially.

http://media.gettyimages.com/photos/...re-id157957606

Could you have picked a more deeply unflattering picture to disprove your point?

caltrane74 Apr 20, 2016 2:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreambrother808 (Post 7413706)
What people are missing with regard to the skyline rating is that each was chosen based upon distinction, not comparative features. For example, the drama of the Parisian skyline is the Eiffel Tower, as almost a standalone sculpture. Vancouver is modern glass towers against a rugged mountain backdrop. Rio is exotic, unparalleled, natural features. Each city on that list excels at their own specific category. That's why there is no Chicago, because it is surpassed by New York, in its category. No reason to be pissy about something that is so obvious, folks. Vancouver is standout on a worldwide scale. Toronto and other Canadian skylines are standout on a national level based upon those categories. Trust me, talk to pretty much any tourist in Vancouver and they will validate that sense of awe and appreciation of that which is exceptional on a worldwide level. I'm sorry but Vancouver has some tail-feathers to shake. If y'all can't take it, it's your own problem.

Hey dude take a look at these list, Vancouver is not here.



http://www.businessinsider.com/coole...-photos-2014-5

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/ga...city-skylines/

Vancouver made this list, last on the honorable mention list.



http://www.diserio.com/top15-skylines.html

dreambrother808 Apr 20, 2016 2:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by caltrane74 (Post 7413833)

Those are some beautiful skylines. Thanks for sharing.

lio45 Apr 20, 2016 3:09 AM

Many of them (in caltrane's links) have no business being on a skylines list either...

If a city can earn skyline points from non-skyline features, then I would start to consider Quebec City a contender for Canada's top skylines... (Inspired by the fact I saw Edinburgh on that list)

I would nominate it based on its urban fabric,

http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-ge...omes-Final.jpg

its nice natural setting,

http://c8.alamy.com/comp/AHDW5G/aeri...nce-AHDW5G.jpg
http://www.alloprof.qc.ca/ImagesDesF...021/8021i5.jpg

and its architecture (the core being on average older than any other city in the entire country)

http://media2.ledevoir.com/images_ga...8911/image.jpg


But that's not skylines; in terms of skyscrapers, I will admit the city's not particularly impressive.

FrAnKs Apr 20, 2016 3:16 AM

Les Édifices en hauteurs, c'est pas notre force, on laisse ça pour Montréal et je pense qu'elle le fait très bien.

lio45 Apr 20, 2016 3:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FrAnKs (Post 7413899)
Les Édifices en hauteurs, c'est pas notre force, on laisse ça pour Montréal et je pense qu'elle le fait très bien.

Aren't we supposed to get the biggest dick in Canada outside Toronto? (Not even sure if it's a go or not yet. I don't really care about such things.)

rousseau Apr 20, 2016 3:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreambrother808 (Post 7413822)
Beauty, well I don't see a city on the list that doesn't fit that profile.

While there's never any accounting for the wiles of subjectivity, I find it amazing that there wouldn't be some kind of consensus on a skyscraper geek site that the only cities on that list with beautiful skylines are New York, San Francisco and Hong Kong, while Dubai and Shanghai might be given a mention for their singular uniqueness.

That this might be controversial to someone in Vancouver would appear to be explained by the mentality represented in what you say here:

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreambrother808 (Post 7413822)
Anything which remotely puts Vancouver on a level above other cities in this forum is met with typical derision. It's the norm, but nonetheless we are still presented with these points of view which place it on that level. Subjective, yes, but clearly not peculiar or unfounded.

Erm, you've been presented by one list compiled by a mostly brain-free media intern working in content generation for the internet, and people who have a layperson's interest in skyscrapers and architecture have objected to it.


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:57 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.