Vancouver Convention Centre Expansion Project | Completed - Page 29

LeftCoaster · #**561** Posted **Jan 29, 2009, 6:24 PM**

I would really like to know if the auto show is moving to the new CC, anyone heard anything regarding that?

jlousa · #**562** Posted **Jan 29, 2009, 7:28 PM**

No, as far as I know not a single show will be moving into the convention centre that is at BC Place. BC Place is still signifactly larger then both convention centres combined, plus it's a fraction of the cost.

LeftCoaster · #**563** Posted **Jan 29, 2009, 9:00 PM**

Bah! I was afraid of that.

The car show would have such a better feel if it was in the new CC, oh well.

Vancity · #**564** Posted **Jan 29, 2009, 10:52 PM**

^ I agree..well, at least BC Place is getting a face lift, so maybe it'll feel much better with the conventions under the new renovated BC Place

TwoFace · #**565** Posted **Feb 4, 2009, 6:00 PM**

Anyone know if these are vertical light strips?

Delirium · #**566** Posted **Feb 4, 2009, 11:00 PM**

lamp posts. they have some installed along the east promenade.
looks good.

Vancity · #**567** Posted **Feb 4, 2009, 11:12 PM**

I'm really getting excited about how the Convention Centre's going to look when it opens. Especially at night, how's the lighting effects going to turn out? Can't wait. Btw, when is it scheduled to open?

raggedy13 · #**568** Posted **Feb 12, 2009, 3:34 AM**

After walking by the convention centre for the first time in quite awhile I noticed they've started installing those angular white things.

The good news is they look a lot better than I expected and I don't think they'll end up being white at all. I quite like the looks of them (sorry for the poor quality of my phone pics):

It appears they have a row of spotlights at the top

And the best part of all... new lighting features! This one is on the other side between the expansion and Canada Place. I'm assuming the other two will have similar lighting:

And a look inside:

I took a few more pics but my phone died so I didn't get a chance to load the rest. They're basically just more of the same so I'm not sure if I will end up posting them or not anyways.

raggedy13 · #**569** Posted **Feb 12, 2009, 3:49 AM**

I decided to load my other pics on afterall. In the first one you can see all 3 of these angular structures. In reality the light looks a lot more blue than in these shots.

osirisboy · #**570** Posted **Feb 12, 2009, 3:50 AM**

I was there today and the lights really look cool. unfortuntly I think they will be painted white. some of them already have been, the samller ones in the background in the 3rd picture.

thanks for the pics!

Whalleyboy · #**571** Posted **Feb 12, 2009, 4:14 AM**

thats stupid neon lights being shown would have been way cooler
could add some colour to them all and make the place look even cooler

TwoFace · #**572** Posted **Feb 12, 2009, 4:15 AM**

It’s really starting to take shape now, should be opening in a couple of months I think.
Its sheer size is amazing, you can easily see the $Billion spent

jlousa · #**573** Posted **Feb 12, 2009, 4:22 AM**

The lights aren't neon they are leds, and they change colour, they will be wraped in white teflon like the current convention centre and will appear to glow due to the light inside. I kind of like the way they look without the wrap but apparently they can't leave them like that due to people would climb them.

raggedy13 · #**574** Posted **Feb 12, 2009, 4:36 AM**

^Too bad, I like the way they look. But if we're lucky they might look equally good with the teflon.

red-paladin · #**575** Posted **Feb 12, 2009, 4:38 AM**

I work in the shaw tower, and there is a patio on the west side of the 9th floor. I will try to bring a digital camera to take some pictures looking down on the convention centre.

metroXpress · #**576** Posted **Feb 12, 2009, 4:51 AM**

^^ Can't wait to see your pic.

Raggedy 13..thanks for your update!

giallo · #**577** Posted **Feb 12, 2009, 6:20 AM**

Great update. Thanks, Raggedy.

deasine · #**578** Posted **Feb 12, 2009, 6:48 AM**

Great photos Raggedy. Love the update (remember what we were talking about last night? looks like we forgot about it already.

)

raggedy13 · #**579** Posted **Feb 12, 2009, 7:09 AM**

^Had no idea what the source of that rendering was...

... and based on this announcement post of Mark's I figured I was technically in the clear:

Quote:

Originally Posted by M II A II R II K

When posting others' photographs throughout the forum, it is every forumer's duty to properly credit the photographer and source. Improperly credited photo postings will be deleted by the moderation staff.

Proper crediting format for each found photograph: directly above or below the photo, list the photographer's name, the name of the source, and give a link to the page upon which the photo is found.

If the photographer's name is not available, name the website where the photo was found and link to the page of the site where the photograph is found.

Merely citing Google, Flickr, Wikipedia or some other host or search engine is *not* sufficient for your photo post to qualify. If you don't have the required information about a photograph, then don't post it.

I thought I was taking advantage of a possible loophole. To my chagrin I saw that your post of the rule says "images" instead of just "photographs". I'm terrible, I know.

So... mr.x2, I guess you better find the source of that rendering and properly cite it in the next 24 hours or it's gone!

deasine · #**580** Posted **Feb 12, 2009, 7:13 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by raggedy13

^Had no idea what the source of that rendering was...

So... mr.x2, you better find the source of that rendering and properly cite it or it's gone!

LMAO yes mr.x2. Better find the source!

Don't forget ur own photos XD I mean you have to credit yourself right?