Calgary Construction XXVI

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by Calgarian

That one still uses easy trim I believe, it just matches the panels so it doesn't stick out like a sore thumb.

The matching trim is really what makes or breaks it. Is there another kind of trim that matches that is better?

I swear the city should force builders to match the trim. It's absolutely an eyesore otherwise.

[Calgarian]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

The matching trim is really what makes or breaks it. Is there another kind of trim that matches that is better?

I swear the city should force builders to match the trim. It's absolutely an eyesore otherwise.

Hardi trim looks good, but it doesn't give the very subtle look that easy trim does.

[Suburgatory]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

Yes that easy trim is what kills it. Every project that uses that looks horrible. The nasty colours also don't help.

Here's an example of how to do it successfully:

https://www.google.ca/maps/@51.0377655,-...B5K9wd1lw55uA3A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?dcr=0

Matching trim, no hideous colours and a mix of other materials.

It does look like an ok material when the colour choices are better and the trim colour matches the panel. I fear it won't weather well over time. Things are bound to shift and expand or contract. I bet in 15-20 years all of these buildings have panels misaligned with damaged or missing trims.

That neon building behind the Tim Horton's on 16th that used it (or some similar style product), brought it down to grade in the alley and it's all broken from I assume being driven into.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Suburgatory

That neon building behind the Tim Horton's on 16th that used it (or some similar style product), brought it down to grade in the alley and it's all broken from I assume being driven into.

On a tangent, that Tim's is either being demolished or getting an extreme refurbishment. Doesn't look like a very big lot for infill though.

[Calgarian]

Originally Posted by Suburgatory

It does look like an ok material when the colour choices are better and the trim colour matches the panel. I fear it won't weather well over time. Things are bound to shift and expand or contract. I bet in 15-20 years all of these buildings have panels misaligned with damaged or missing trims.

That neon building behind the Tim Horton's on 16th that used it (or some similar style product), brought it down to grade in the alley and it's all broken from I assume being driven into.

The trim won't move and neither will the panels. They are designed to allow a bit of deflection in the building, but nothing will look out of place unless it was improperly installed.

[ST1]

Yes I am very aware of the difference. It was just a typing mistake.

Originally Posted by O-tacular

I think you have that backwards. Optical zoom actually uses an extendible lense which lets you zoom in whereas digital zoom takes a picture and will digitally enlarge a section of it using the same dpi. That’s why it ends up looking grainy. iPhones and other smart phones use digital zoom.

Originally Posted by SteveP

Optical zoom is the actual lens zoom if I'm not mistaken, and digital zoom is what the iphone's and such try to do. If you look at the iphone you'll see it's a fixed lens and doesn't physically move in or out.

Originally Posted by suburbia

SteveP is correct. Optical zoom is far superior, whereas digital zoom is in effect cropping and enlarging smaller and smaller sections of a larger image (resulting in pixelation / low qual images). The other challenge with mobile phones and smaller point and click cameras is small lenses, so limited ability to pull in enough light in low-light conditions. They are "okay" when it is bright out.

I'll stop there as we are on a tangent, but with the large cumulative number of photos from Daemon on this thread, the relevance hopefully is understood. I had previously also suggested to Daemon to consider getting a real camera (as photography is clearly an interest to him).

[X_ting_on]

Originally Posted by ST1

Yes I am very aware of the difference. It was just a typing mistake.

Don’t you just live everyone telling the same thing over and over lol.

Remind me office space

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by suburbia

I agree that the project you highlighted is a much better example. We shouldn't categorically demonize this product, but certainly should be critical where it is used badly.

The applications for fibre cement is nearly limitless. This product looks cheap. James Hardie has some nicer product but, overall, their line is pretty bland compared to other manufacturers.

[Tobyoby]

Every time I see one of Daemon's updates it makes me lament the loss of Surrealplaces' updates.

Originally Posted by suburbia

SteveP is correct. Optical zoom is far superior, whereas digital zoom is in effect cropping and enlarging smaller and smaller sections of a larger image (resulting in pixelation / low qual images). The other challenge with mobile phones and smaller point and click cameras is small lenses, so limited ability to pull in enough light in low-light conditions. They are "okay" when it is bright out.

I'll stop there as we are on a tangent, but with the large cumulative number of photos from Daemon on this thread, the relevance hopefully is understood. I had previously also suggested to Daemon to consider getting a real camera (as photography is clearly an interest to him).

[Tobyoby]

It wasn't only a typo, you had the two types completely reversed. Everyone would think that you had your info wrong, and thus the comments.

Originally Posted by suburbia

SteveP is correct. Optical zoom is far superior, whereas digital zoom is in effect cropping and enlarging smaller and smaller sections of a larger image (resulting in pixelation / low qual images). The other challenge with mobile phones and smaller point and click cameras is small lenses, so limited ability to pull in enough light in low-light conditions. They are "okay" when it is bright out.

I'll stop there as we are on a tangent, but with the large cumulative number of photos from Daemon on this thread, the relevance hopefully is understood. I had previously also suggested to Daemon to consider getting a real camera (as photography is clearly an interest to him).

Originally Posted by ST1

Yes I am very aware of the difference. It was just a typing mistake.

[YYCguys]

Originally Posted by Suburgatory

That neon building behind the Tim Horton's on 16th that used it (or some similar style product), brought it down to grade in the alley and it's all broken from I assume being driven into.

I was in the area a few weeks ago for the first time and saw that hideous building! It’s so bad!

Originally Posted by milomilo

On a tangent, that Tim's is either being demolished or getting an extreme refurbishment. Doesn't look like a very big lot for infill though.

I was just there a few weeks ago and it was so busy in there! I would be surprised if it’s being demolished! Seems like the area residents/workers love having that coffee shop nearby!

[ST1]

It's hideous to some because beige and gray are the only colors most people in Calgary understand. In more progressive cities around the world that wouldn't be out of place at all..

Originally Posted by YYCguys

I was in the area a few weeks ago for the first time and saw that hideous building! It’s so bad!

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by ST1

It's hideous to some because beige and gray are the only colors most people in Calgary understand. In more progressive cities around the world that wouldn't be out of place at all..

That project is what it looks like when that hardie board material and lime green colour is actually well executed. The Seton condos I posted are what happens when you cheap out on materials and design. There’s very little margin for error when you choose a crazy colour like that.

[Deepstar]

Originally Posted by ST1

It's hideous to some because beige and gray are the only colors most people in Calgary understand. In more progressive cities around the world that wouldn't be out of place at all..

Totally agree. I find Calgarians aren’t enlightened yet when it comes to colour. We are getting there, but it takes time.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by YYCguys

I was just there a few weeks ago and it was so busy in there! I would be surprised if it’s being demolished! Seems like the area residents/workers love having that coffee shop nearby!

Let me double check, I may have the location wrong! Something is coming down round there though.

[YYCguys]

Originally Posted by ST1

It's hideous to some because beige and gray are the only colors most people in Calgary understand. In more progressive cities around the world that wouldn't be out of place at all..

Trust me, I am so anti-boring beige. I truly appreciate the use of color, but all lime green is a bit much I think.

[YYCguys]

Has the Northland Village Mall redevelopment stalled or do the owners still plan to go ahead? On CBC Eyeopener this morning, David Grey alluded that perhaps the plan is still on the table, but I can’t find any current information online about it (only 1-2 year old news).

[The Chemist]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

What are people's thoughts on this new hardie board siding that is cropping up everywhere in the city? It either looks decent or completely awful (worst being Torode's abortion in Inglewood). I haven't seen much in between. I'm very disappointed in this Cedarglen project even though I didn't have much faith to begin with. Renderings vs reality:

Personally I think it looks better in photos than it does in renders, and while I may be in the minority I actually like the colour too.

[Northern]

Originally Posted by Deepstar

Totally agree. I find Calgarians aren’t enlightened yet when it comes to colour. We are getting there, but it takes time.

We are enlightened, which is why we don’t like bright gaudy colours.

[topdog]

Originally Posted by Northern

We are enlightened, which is why we don’t like bright gaudy colours.

I beg to differ. My old hometown is full of colorful housing. It's what makes it a tourist attraction.

A few examples to help 'enlighten'