NEW YORK | 200 Greenwich - 2 WTC | 1,226 FT | 55 FLOORS - Page 177

artspook · #**3521** Posted **Jun 19, 2015, 1:53 AM**

sorry meh_cd . . . misunderstanding post 3507 . . .
by "impossible angle" I thought you meant "totally Awesome-looking' angle" . . .
as in "this building is so SICK !" (great) . . .
But you meant that one & two WTC couldn't both be seen from that exact spot . . .
an illustration accuracy comment . . .
I'm not sure if you could or couldn't see both from there -
But it is a long bridge with many different vantage points along the way . . .
From at least some angles you'd be able see both though . . .
I over-reacted 'cause this building just triggers me . . .
The aforementioned word "monstrosity" seems appropriately referenced.

prageethSL · #**3522** Posted **Jun 19, 2015, 8:30 AM**

drumz0rz · #**3523** Posted **Jun 19, 2015, 2:01 PM**

Who is making these renders? 3 WTC has the raised parapet with no spires, but 1 WTC still shows those 3 vertical lines on the top which never happened.

meh_cd · #**3524** Posted **Jun 19, 2015, 2:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by artspook

sorry meh_cd . . . misunderstanding post 3507 . . .
by "impossible angle" I thought you meant "totally Awesome-looking' angle" . . .
as in "this building is so SICK !" (great) . . .
But you meant that one & two WTC couldn't both be seen from that exact spot . . .
an illustration accuracy comment . . .
I'm not sure if you could or couldn't see both from there -
But it is a long bridge with many different vantage points along the way . . .
From at least some angles you'd be able see both though . . .
I over-reacted 'cause this building just triggers me . . .
The aforementioned word "monstrosity" seems appropriately referenced.

Yes, I just meant that Tower 2 appears to be rising out of the wrong spot in the Brooklyn Bridge render.

JR Ewing · #**3525** Posted **Jun 19, 2015, 3:47 PM**

Stunning!

Kurtz · #**3526** Posted **Jun 19, 2015, 4:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR Ewing

Stunning!

Agree and it is even sumptuous

JR Ewing · #**3527** Posted **Jun 19, 2015, 5:48 PM**

This is the Age of Ramses, Mr. Kurtz!

PS: I couldn't resist the Heart of Darkness allusion!

Michagain · #**3528** Posted **Jun 19, 2015, 8:52 PM**

I think the shock and unfamiliarity with this structure, and the loss of its predecessor proposal really irked a lot of folks and will continue until built and seen in-person.

Some renderings are better than others, and the most unflattering view (north face) is shown in the most unflattering render (low-height shot looking up, stretched perspective).

When all is built (knock on particle board), we'll just mostly only see the top half of the building, where it's a little narrower, as well as the base (when nearby).

I was losing interest in Foster's diamonds. Although pretty, the building as a whole as not as unique (as this new design), and didn't project the sense of power and purposeful attitude the new structure suggests to me.

The new structure suggests to me a step in a changing downtown, new architecture, new industry. From some angles the building ties the WTC together. From other angles the building breaks up the "complex" into a neighborhood of mixed shapes.

The new 2 WTC has a kind-of mullet-thing going on, "business in the front, party in the back."

Yeah, yeah, you laugh at the mullet. But, let me tell you, some of the most awesome people in the world wore mullets: physicists (Feynman), artists (Ozzy Osborne), actors (Christopher Walken), presidents (James Polk), economists (Rick Nelson), and local cable tv personalities (Garth Algar).

Generally, we don't like mullets. That's correct. They look silly. But some mullets have achieved respect, and even greatness. Perhaps this building can be that type of mullet.

CoolCzech · #**3529** Posted **Jun 20, 2015, 12:19 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR Ewing

Stunning!

It reallly will be. Even this render is very rough, not showing the detail of the building and probably the not terribly accurate about the tower's proportions. In every fine detailed render I've seen, this tower looks awesome.

The Hanging Gardens of New York!

It's as if Libeskind's original vision of gardens in the sky will come true, and be awesome.

JR Ewing · #**3530** Posted **Jun 20, 2015, 2:18 AM**

Good point, CoolCzech.

This is the Age of Nebuchadnezzar!!

Busy Bee · #**3531** Posted **Jun 20, 2015, 3:55 AM**

This is getting a little too biblical.

NYguy · #**3532** Posted **Jun 20, 2015, 5:30 AM**

I still haven't seen why some people feel the old version is the superior design. I get that they like the slanted/diamond top (itself hardly unique). But other than that, I don't see why they are convinced it is a far superior design...

So here it is,

The slanted roof was a unique feature for New York, more so than Citigroup maybe, but hardly groundbreaking. If we're going to start playing the lookalike game, don't fool yourselves...

_

http://wcs4.blogspot.com/2011_01_01_archive.html

aquablue · #**3533** Posted **Jun 20, 2015, 6:55 AM**

It's alright. That's about it. I'm not in love with it because it appears too clunky from the North. I prefer more streamlined towers. The glass of the Foster looks far nicer and so is the sleek tower look more appropriate for the site.

Foosh · #**3534** Posted **Jun 20, 2015, 7:06 AM**

[QUOTE=NYguy;7069262]I still haven't seen why some people feel the old version is the superior design. I get that they like the slanted/diamond top (itself hardly unique). But other than that, I don't see why they are convinced it is a far superior design...

So here it is,

The slanted roof was a unique feature for New York, more so than Citigroup maybe, but hardly groundbreaking. If we're going to start playing the lookalike game, don't fool yourselves...

I was unsure about BIG's building at first but the more I looked at it and understood the concept I have fallen for it... having said that, I too believe the foster design is superior due to the fact that the wedge of light (the diamonds) were designed so that at a specific part of the day the light will not be obscured by any building and will penetrate the the WTC with sunlight shining down on the memorial pools. That in itself makes this building iconic with the tragedy of 911 the diamonds/slice/wedge representation, however you want to call it is a major symbolic respect to the site and all the lives lost.

JR Ewing · #**3535** Posted **Jun 20, 2015, 12:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris08876

Credit:

1) http://wtc.com/about/buildings/2-world-trade-center
2) http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2015/06/09...de_center_towers_new_design_revealed.php

Age of Ramses!

Kurtz · #**3536** Posted **Jun 20, 2015, 12:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoolCzech

It reallly will be. Even this render is very rough, not showing the detail of the building and probably the not terribly accurate about the tower's proportions. In every fine detailed render I've seen, this tower looks awesome.

The Hanging Gardens of New York!

It's as if Libeskind's original vision of gardens in the sky will come true, and be awesome.

Full agree, for sample half of tip of the roof would be semitrasparent- no reflecting and in this rendering we don't see

Kurtz · #**3537** Posted **Jun 20, 2015, 1:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR Ewing

Good point, CoolCzech.

This is the Age of Nebuchadnezzar!!

this is the age of Trajan

JR Ewing · #**3538** Posted **Jun 20, 2015, 1:02 PM**

chris08876 · #**3539** Posted **Jun 20, 2015, 1:30 PM**

I'm learning so much history.

I'm a STEM guy so I'm not an expert in history, but sure enough, the skills are being developed. This tower most associated with Nebuchadnezzar.

On the tower, looking forward to better renderings. I feel these don't really show it off as well. More detail, higher resolution.

JR Ewing · #**3540** Posted **Jun 20, 2015, 4:40 PM**

You're the man, Chris.

Let's just be glad that Enrigue from SSP is not on this forum