CHICAGO | Aqua | 858 FT / 262 M | 87 FLOORS

[JV_325i]

^I have seen an effect like the one you are referring to in a variety of renderings for buildings. I was about to agree with Shawn and note the same thing -- that this building's curves get more pronounced towards the top, but then I was also going to remark that were this the case the profile of the building when viewed from afar would make the building look a little top-heavy. Now I definitely think that the view presented in that rendering is a result of the computer rendering itself -- not of the actual building design.

[Alliance]

it won't look top heavy from far away. As your distnace increases, the horizontal planes will fall more in line with the horizion. From a distance, Aqua will look pretty much like a box, as evidenced by many photos already.

[wrab]

Originally Posted by cactus22minus1

That's debatable. It's possible it could get more dynamic up there. However anyone with a photography or 3d modeling/CAD background will probably know what I'm referring to when speak of projections. The method used in that render(often used in architecture) is done in a way to eliminate vertical perspective- in other words, even though the 'picture' is taken from the ground, the building lines are not angled to a natural perspective- the vertical plane is kept at 90 degrees. This type of projection, along with others, has inaccuracies and distortions. In this case, the higher you go, the more distorted it becomes. Those upper floors/balconies are actually 'stretched' and they will never look like this to the human eye.

Indeed - but the balconies do take on more form once the tower rises above the hotel floors, at the level where the residential condos begin. My informal floor count says that we're on about floor 19 now?

[Dr. Taco]

Originally Posted by cactus22minus1

That's debatable. It's possible it could get more dynamic up there. However anyone with a photography or 3d modeling/CAD background will probably know what I'm referring to when speak of projections. The method used in that render(often used in architecture) is done in a way to eliminate vertical perspective- in other words, even though the 'picture' is taken from the ground, the building lines are not angled to a natural perspective- the vertical plane is kept at 90 degrees. This type of projection, along with others, has inaccuracies and distortions. In this case, the higher you go, the more distorted it becomes. Those upper floors/balconies are actually 'stretched' and they will never look like this to the human eye.

so, is it kind of sort of similar to how greenland is as big as africa on a rectangular world map?

[cactus22minus1]

jstush04, yes that is exactly what I'm talking about.

[EarlyBuyer]

Photo's taken 3/16/08 by EarlyBuyer

[EarlyBuyer]

Photo's taken 3/16/08 by EarlyBuyer

[EarlyBuyer]

Photo's taken 3/16/08 by EarlyBuyer

[EarlyBuyer]

Photo's taken 3/16/08 by EarlyBuyer

[ardecila]

I was waiting for you to come back with a photo update, but this is mind-blowing.

I didn't see any pictures of what's going on over in the corner next to Swissotel, though. Is the "Swissotel expansion" part underway as well? The finished plan includes a little one-way drive encircling the firehouse, 333 East Wacker, and Swissotel - so the concrete needs to get up to this level.

[EarlyBuyer]

Thanks for the compliment ardecila.

The Swissotel expansion continues to move along well, I'll be sure to include more of that in my next update. Overall, I'm impressed/a bit surprised with how swiftly a project of this scale is moving along. It's a very photogenic site.

[JV_325i]

^Awesome update EarlyBuyer

Originally Posted by Alliance

it won't look top heavy from far away. As your distnace increases, the horizontal planes will fall more in line with the horizion. From a distance, Aqua will look pretty much like a box, as evidenced by many photos already.

It won't look top-heavy at all in real life. As explained in my post, the rendering makes the building look top-heavy because of the effect described by cactus22minus1, and even were the building to turn out as it looks in the rendering -- with the balconies extending further the further towards the top they are -- it would still look top-heavy from afar as the balconies would still form a visual outline except from the furthest of distances.

[Dallas]

Wow, great photos. I am starting to like this building more and more.

[SolarWind]

March 14, 2008

[aaron38]

Great shots all around. I was kicking myself for not getting over to Aqua today, but you guys got it covered nicely.

[photoLith]

When I look at this building I cant help but think of the 60's for some reason, I love it though.

[NBear927]

Beautiful shots everyone! Thanks for posting them up.

This is definitely one of my favorite projects in Chicago, and I usually try to visit it every chance I get. I just wish it was in an area that's not between so many large buildings (especially when the BCBS expansion is complete) so everyone will get to see and enjoy this building when it's complete.

Then again, from certain angles at Millennium Park, the building is visible, so I'll cross my fingers that this gets to be a unique tourist attraction.

[CGII]

Holy poop BCBS is MASSIVE. It's going to positevely dominate Aqua when both are finished, even though it's shorter.

[Rizzo]

This tower is looking more awesome every time I check. Definitely a fave

[museumparktom]

I agree Hayward. This is on my top 5 list of the boom. CS, Aqua, Trump, Spertus, & OMP. Aqua looks like it's at floor 23. So just a bit over 1/4 done. I can't imagine how this one will look when it gets past 60 and is above 340 and BCBS.