CHICAGO | Aqua | 858 FT / 262 M | 87 FLOORS - Page 136

ethereal_reality · #**2701** Posted **Mar 7, 2008, 4:15 PM**

cbotnyse
thanks for the advice.
I'll post some of the old photos I have in the 'found photos' catagory
hopefully this weekend.

AQUA is going to be sublime. The 'glass illusion' that Steely Dan mentioned
is/was completely unexpected (to ME anyway). I wonder if Jeanne Gang (sp)
had this up her sleeve all along. Can you imagine if there was some slo-mo
undulating lighting effect to go along with it. (not enough to make the owners seasick obviously)

Manus in Chicago · #**2702** Posted **Mar 7, 2008, 4:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ethereal_reality

cbotnyse
thanks for the advice.
I'll post some of the old photos I have in the 'found photos' catagory
hopefully this weekend.

AQUA is going to be sublime. The 'glass illusion' that Steely Dan mentioned
is/was completely unexpected (to ME anyway). I wonder if Jeanne Gang (sp)
had this up her sleeve all along. Can you imagine if there was some slo-mo
undulating lighting effect to go along with it. (not enough to make the owners seasick obviously)

There is five different shades of glass in this window system to help give this "glass illusion" effect......Kudos to Jeanne Gang........

Saber925 · #**2703** Posted **Mar 7, 2008, 5:14 PM**

Jeanne Gang mentioned the use of a more reflective glass in the areas where there is no balcony. I believe that's why we see these reflections in this area. It certainly adds to the undulating water effect.

i_am_hydrogen · #**2704** Posted **Mar 7, 2008, 5:31 PM**

^Actually, that section of glass just appears to be more reflective because of the specular highlights cast onto it from a neighboring building. The illusion of movement is caused not by the glass itself--every pane is of the same size and reflectivity level--but by the subtle shadows cast from the undulations of the balconies above.

Saber925 · #**2705** Posted **Mar 7, 2008, 6:40 PM**

^ In terms of the reflectivity of the glass, Jeanne gang states herself that it will vary.
"We were very careful to select the glass for its performance as well as its color and and reflectivity. As the building goes up, you will start to notice there are different types of glass used, and a very subtle pattern will develop."
---from an interview on the Urban Observer. http://leebey.com/blog1/2008/03/aqua_rises.html

i_am_hydrogen · #**2706** Posted **Mar 7, 2008, 7:00 PM**

^That may be the case, but I personally am unable to discern any noticeable difference in the reflectivity of the glass. Color, yes. Reflectivity, no. So I'll stick to my original point that the appearance of movement is due largely to the shadows from the balconies. If you look carefully, you can clearly see how the various panes of glass are entirely visible where no balconies lie above, only to appear to be pinched down when the balconies reemerge.

honte · #**2707** Posted **Mar 7, 2008, 7:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by i_am_hydrogen

The illusion of movement is caused not by the glass itself--every pane is of the same size and reflectivity level--but by the subtle shadows cast from the undulations of the balconies above.

I haven't looked closely at this south facade, but if you look at EarlyBuyer's photos of the east facade, there are clearly different widths of glass, at what seemed to me to be a rather arbitrary pattern.

Unless my eyes are playing tricks on me, you can see it in your photo too. Look at the opaque panes: Some are very thin.

cactus22minus1 · #**2708** Posted **Mar 7, 2008, 8:04 PM**

It's a combination of all those factors: The shadows from the balconies, the differing widths(you can clearly see them in photos), and differing reflectivity. I think someone has already stated this, but with hydrogen's photo here you can truly start to see the brilliance of this work...

Alliance · #**2709** Posted **Mar 7, 2008, 9:29 PM**

First of all, the changes in glass size appear to be consistant. All the panes are the smae size except for the little wall pieces.

Secondly, I don't see any changes in color or reflectivity.

honte · #**2710** Posted **Mar 7, 2008, 9:44 PM**

^ Consistent from floor to floor? Yes. Consistent in a horizontal direction around the building, not so much.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JV_325i

Today:

Northwest · #**2711** Posted **Mar 7, 2008, 10:02 PM**

That is so awesome!! I love the illusion of curvature from the glass!!
Absolute genius!!

alsajano · #**2712** Posted **Mar 8, 2008, 3:04 PM**

Chapeau!! Miss Gang. A great idea.

An pleasant and aesthetic effect that also regulates the light intensity indoor.

Dalton · #**2713** Posted **Mar 8, 2008, 5:00 PM**

When this tower is finished, the Hyatt may be able to charge more for their back "city view" rooms than for the river views!

Down_Under_the_El · #**2714** Posted **Mar 8, 2008, 10:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saber925

In this picture if you look at the the 4th and 5th floors that have glass up, you can see a change in the widths of glass panels around the third big concrete pillar from the left.

It's very interesting that it is such a slight change (from 3 panels to 4 panels). I wonder what other shifts in glass we will be able to find.