NEW YORK | 200 Greenwich - 2 WTC | 1,226 FT | 55 FLOORS - Page 90

NYguy · #**1781** Posted **Jun 29, 2011, 10:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onn

There's a rumor from someone on Wired New York that Larry's trying to put tower on the fast track and is in dicussions with a major tennant.

That's always been the case, but a tenant is what will make it happen.

The Grand Architect · #**1782** Posted **Jun 30, 2011, 8:52 PM**

The angle in my newest render really brings out the beauty of the diamonds.

ChargerFan · #**1783** Posted **Jul 1, 2011, 12:25 AM**

Renders look great. I know I can't do anything nearly that accurate so good job.

GarCastle · #**1784** Posted **Jul 1, 2011, 12:38 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy

That's always been the case, but a tenant is what will make it happen.

It's not like Larry is getting any younger. I'm sure he is motivated to see this all done before he is, well, done.

Loqy Lion · #**1785** Posted **Jul 1, 2011, 12:42 AM**

His render looks fine, but WTC2 is too short. Almost every render shows it too short. The pinnacle of the top diamond is 1,350 feet.

The Grand Architect · #**1786** Posted **Jul 1, 2011, 12:46 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loqy Lion

His render looks fine, but WTC2 is too short. Almost every render shows it too short. The pinnacle of the top diamond is 1,350 feet.

I am well aware of the height. I believe the angle shown in the render makes it appear too short. I even measured the model when modeling -1349

NYguy · #**1787** Posted **Jul 1, 2011, 5:02 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarCastle

It's not like Larry is getting any younger. I'm sure he is motivated to see this all done before he is, well, done.

True enough. Also, I don't recall if his latest deal with the Port Authority enabled him to stop paying rent, but there's always that. Anyway, a project of this magnitude will take its toll on anyone, young or old. When it's all said and done, one of these plazas around the towers should be renamed for Silverstein. He has been the single, hardest driving force to getting these towers built, even when he was the only one who thought it a good idea. He may have many critics, even on this board, but if he wasn't involved, its possible we could be looking at a much smaller rebuilding, or none at all, so here's to him...

MadGnome · #**1788** Posted **Jul 1, 2011, 11:49 AM**

If there's anybody on the planet who understand that Charlie Foxtrot of a mess that's Larry's lease, PA's ownership, insurance preceeds to the leasor instead of the owner, leasor partially paying for the buildings he's leasing, the lease for an entirely different complex applying to this one, WTC1 being cut out of the deal....etc., it sure the hell ain't me.

JDRCRASH · #**1789** Posted **Jul 1, 2011, 12:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Grand Architect

I am well aware of the height. I believe the angle shown in the render makes it appear too short. I even measured the model when modeling -1349

Terrain elevation maybe?

Loqy Lion · #**1790** Posted **Jul 1, 2011, 1:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy

True enough. Also, I don't recall if his latest deal with the Port Authority enabled him to stop paying rent, but there's always that. Anyway, a project of this magnitude will take its toll on anyone, young or old. When it's all said and done, one of these plazas around the towers should be renamed for Silverstein. He has been the single, hardest driving force to getting these towers built, even when he was the only one who thought it a good idea. He may have many critics, even on this board, but if he wasn't involved, its possible we could be looking at a much smaller rebuilding, or none at all, so here's to him...

I just can't wait until 99 Church starts rising. Hopefully with 2 and 3.

Traynor · #**1791** Posted **Jul 1, 2011, 6:55 PM**

Not to discredit your calculations TGA, but something does seem amiss. Considering 2WTC has its pinnacle only a few feet below the parapet of 1WTC one would think it would appear taller in your render.

Finding the vanishing point on your render shows a line from the West top corner running through 2WTC's airspace, gives an idea of roughly how high 2 should appear in that render, even with projection distortion and perspective taken into account. The yellow circle represents a range of what one would think is where 2 WTC should top out.

(Image courtesy The Grand Architect in this thread above)

STR · #**1792** Posted **Jul 1, 2011, 7:30 PM**

Goddammit, if the man says the model readout is 1,349 feet, then it's 1,349 feet. Anything you think you see is a trick of the virtual lens. He has the actual model, you don't. He's the expert on it, not you. Case in point, I can mess with the perspective enough to make 2WTC look shorter than 3WTC.

I know a few of you like pissing on people's parades so much you stake out a window seat every Thanksgiving so you can stick it to Macy's, but know your limits.

sw5710 · #**1793** Posted **Jul 1, 2011, 8:54 PM**

No one knows more then those with the model, Blueprints and those calling the shots on location. Zen had blueprints. were those up to date at the time?

Traynor · #**1794** Posted **Jul 1, 2011, 8:56 PM**

Chill out you egomaniac and quit the the swearing at other forumers. You don't know what I am an expert on, nor do you even know what TGA is an expert on. You rail at forumers for making assumptions yet you just did about my expertise as well as his.

You don't know anything about anyone on here so don't speak like an authority on who we are or what we know.

STR · #**1795** Posted **Jul 1, 2011, 8:57 PM**

^So...picked out your seat for November yet?

Quote:

Originally Posted by sw5710

Zen had blueprints. were those up to date at the time?

He only had a copy of 1WTC and the sublevels. He had nothing on the other towers.

sw5710 · #**1796** Posted **Jul 1, 2011, 9:04 PM**

I thought he had the upper floors to. Thanks. Also does anyone know 1 WTC lobby Elevation above sea level?

sw5710 · #**1797** Posted **Jul 1, 2011, 9:15 PM**

Correction. The Elevations for 1 and 2 WTC lobbys above sea level.

NYguy · #**1798** Posted **Jul 1, 2011, 9:54 PM**

Folks, keep the discussion civil so that multiple posts won't have to be deleted.

CGII · #**1799** Posted **Jul 1, 2011, 10:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Traynor

Not to discredit your calculations TGA, but something does seem amiss. Considering 2WTC has its pinnacle only a few feet below the parapet of 1WTC one would think it would appear taller in your render.

Finding the vanishing point on your render shows a line from the West top corner running through 2WTC's airspace, gives an idea of roughly how high 2 should appear in that render, even with projection distortion and perspective taken into account. The yellow circle represents a range of what one would think is where 2 WTC should top out.

(Image courtesy The Grand Architect in this thread above)

You improperly calculated perspective by using edges that aren't coincident with 2 WTC. Even if his 2 WTC model was the exact same height as 1 WTC it would never intersect the line you circled because the highest point of #2 does not lie along that axis.

Also your vanishing point is incorrect.

GarCastle · #**1800** Posted **Jul 2, 2011, 8:32 PM**

Personally I would like to thank all the folks for taking the time to make renders. I know I don't have the time to try to figure it all out. The renders and photos help me subdue my impatience. I really don't care how uber anal accurate they are and I doubt most of the viewers here do either - but I could be wrong and I do not care if I am wrong.

And if anyone could post a helpful reminder about how to entirely block certain individuals, I would appreciate it. Some folks here fail to contribute anything to this board but negative BS and even my time is valuable and should not be wasted even seeing their posts.

Cheers,
G.