Building and monument's lighting design in your city

[WhipperSnapper]

C'mon. Let's not make a huge deal of this. Dundas Square is in Toronto. There's only one reason to have brought it up. A Torontonian criticized a lighting scheme in Montreal and, for some, those be fighting words.

[Rico Rommheim]

I love Montreal's lighting schemes. They really are therapeutic. And it is well on its way to becoming the Quartier des Spectacles' brand. Lighting the bridge is a logical thing to do. A bridge with that history and scale must be visible at night.

[OutOfTowner]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

C'mon. Let's not make a huge deal of this. Dundas Square is in Toronto. There's only one reason to have brought it up. A Torontonian criticized a lighting scheme in Montreal and, for some, those be fighting words.

Settle down Beavis, my Toronto friends deny any association with that abortion of a private/public thingy. It sucks.

[OutOfTowner]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Oh hell no! You can't end this off with a "but.."

I want to hear the whole logic behind your ridiculously pathetic, defensive comparison.

But.. you know?

[OutOfTowner]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Oh hell no! You can't end this off with a "but.."

I want to hear the whole logic behind your ridiculously pathetic, defensive comparison.

Originally Posted by lio45

I'm not a big fan of lighting... in some cases it works (churches, port clock tower, etc.) but for buildings and bridges, it can easily look tacky.

You have to experience lighting in the context of its surroundings. Still photographs of interactive displays are rather.. snippant?

Throw in hyperactive Instagram extreme colour and HDR abuse..

But you know, internet pictures..

[OutOfTowner]

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew

Dundas Square is not a lighting fixture. Use a better comparison next time. I like the lighting on that Church btw.

Well we're not sure what Dundas Square is- other than a tacky piece of shit, but I think that Place des Festivals/Quartier des Spectacles is the vastly superior counerpart to that sad little mall extension.

If you have any comparisons of your own.. by all means..

[Acajack]

Personally, I don't dislike Yonge-Dundas. My kids actually think it's pretty cool. "It's like a mini Times Square!"

Predictably, the Quartier des spectacles does win points in my book for a fairly original concept (at least for North America anyway), even if at this point it still feels a bit like an unfinished work of art.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by OutOfTowner

Settle down Beavis, my Toronto friends deny any association with that abortion of a private/public thingy. It sucks.

call me names .. check
continue berating Dundas Square ... check
no explanation whatsoever what Dundas Square in Toronto has anything to do with the tacky lighting scheme in Montreal ... check

I stand by my point. a pathetic defensive reaction

[WhipperSnapper]

Check my history. I find most programmed LED installation tacky. LED is just too bright and focused and then they add colour changes in the mix.

Dundas Square is what it is. It's inherently tacky as a tribute to mass consumerism. Comparing it to an arts and culture district is absolutely ridiculous. Stop taking everything so personal.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by OutOfTowner

You have to experience lighting in the context of its surroundings. Still photographs of interactive displays are rather.. snippant?

Throw in hyperactive Instagram extreme colour and HDR abuse..

But you know, internet pictures..

I'd respectfully disagree, I have seen enough lighted bridges and buildings to be able to form an opinion on any new case just by pictures.

Nice bridges don't need that, IMO. It's tacky. There's a reason the Golden Gate or Tower Bridge don't get turned into flashing versions of the Gay Pride flag.

[begratto]

Originally Posted by lio45

I'd respectfully disagree, I have seen enough lighted bridges and buildings to be able to form an opinion on any new case just by pictures.

Nice bridges don't need that, IMO. It's tacky. There's a reason the Golden Gate or Tower Bridge don't get turned into flashing versions of the Gay Pride flag.

Well the Golden Gate Bridge does have a lighting scheme.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by begratto

Well the Golden Gate Bridge does have a lighting scheme.

In my defense, that wasn't there last time I drove on it... but point taken.

I'm not sure I like it, but it still doesn't seem anywhere near as tacky as what's proposed for the Jacques-Cartier.

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by lio45

I'd respectfully disagree, I have seen enough lighted bridges and buildings to be able to form an opinion on any new case just by pictures.

Nice bridges don't need that, IMO. It's tacky. There's a reason the Golden Gate or Tower Bridge don't get turned into flashing versions of the Gay Pride flag.

The tower bridge will be lit, like every single bridges on the Tame river. So I guess we'll have to look somewhere else to find a "reason" not to lit our own bridges.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/11/a...iver.html?_r=0

It's perfectly OK to find lighting scheme tacky if you want to. It will become tiresome, though, if you repeat the same comment every time someone post a new picture of a building or structure lit up.

I'm obviously into the camp of those who like lighting scheme. Especially in town like Montreal where it becomes dark in winter at 4 in the afternoon. I say the more light, the better.

[lio45]

I find it tacky, that's all. I might have to agree with WhipperSnapper, you guys are a bit defensive. But now that it's a fellow Québécois finding it tacky, you can't point to Toronto anymore...

Hmm, I don't want to sound like a homer, but I'll point out that both the old Quebec bridge and the Laviolette bridge are exempt of these multicolored flashing displays... so if you want to "attack" me, you'll have to find something else to criticize

IMO this looks fine as is, and turning it into a flashing blinking rainbow would be a downgrade:

[Acajack]

After growing up in Anglo-Canada, possibly the most anti-tackiness conscious place in the entire world, I've come to think that a bit of tackiness is often necessary in order for truly original and cutting-edge stuff to emerge. There is a certain type of creative freedom that comes with tackinesss.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Acajack

After growing up in Anglo-Canada, possibly the most anti-tackiness conscious place in the entire world, I've come to think that a bit of tackiness is often necessary in order for truly original and cutting-edge stuff to emerge. There is a certain type of creative freedom that comes with tackinesss.

I don't disagree. I didn't even say "don't do it", I just said *I* currently tended to lean on the "don't like it" side.

And I just noticed Martin's later edit -- had that been part of your post my reply would've probably been a bit different

The only reason I reiterated my opinion was that OutOfTowner pointed out "it's only pictures and it's only testing, wait for the final product" (a valid comment) so I replied that I felt I had already seen enough lighting first hand (Sherbrooke among others loves to light stuff... and it's often tacky) to be able to have a good idea based on the pics.

[lio45]

P.S. For architecture, I'm REALLY on the conservative side, but of course I am aware that if people a mere few generations ago had been like me, then we wouldn't have any of that nice Victorian/Edwardian architecture I find appealing a century later... so obviously, my way is flawed, and if everybody preferred old, no one would ever try anything new.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Personally, I don't dislike Yonge-Dundas. My kids actually think it's pretty cool. "It's like a mini Times Square!"

Predictably, the Quartier des spectacles does win points in my book for a fairly original concept (at least for North America anyway), even if at this point it still feels a bit like an unfinished work of art.

I don't know about that. The theory/concept (clustering arts around a public interface) has been pretty popular across North America for the past 20 years.

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by lio45

I find it tacky, that's all. I might have to agree with WhipperSnapper, you guys are a bit defensive. But now that it's a fellow Québécois finding it tacky, you can't point to Toronto anymore...

Hmm, I don't want to sound like a homer, but I'll point out that both the old Quebec bridge and the Laviolette bridge are exempt of these multicolored flashing displays... so if you want to "attack" me, you'll have to find something else to criticize

IMO this looks fine as is, and turning it into a flashing blinking rainbow would be a downgrade:

I did not "attack" you, I merely pointed out that your exemple of the Tower bridge is not a good one. Also, I never mentionned Toronto anywhere in this thread in a deffensive way. i know better.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

I don't know about that. The theory/concept (clustering arts around a public interface) has been pretty popular across North America for the past 20 years.

I was really talking about the lighting concept in the Quartier. Not really the fact that it's just an Entertainment District with a French name, which I agree is old hat. (And actually long overdue for a city like Montreal.)