Most Massive Skyline

[Jasonhouse]

Originally Posted by Zapatan

^So? It was true

Am I not allowed to correct an admin or something?

It's even funnier that you think you "corrected" him...

ps... the part where you're arguing with everyone who posts in this thread, trying to assert your viewpoint as the only valid one; yeah, that's called trolling. It's ruining the thread and is a great way to get banned here.

[Zapatan]

Everyone is arguing with everyone in this thread, that's what this thread is, a big argument.

What are you talking about dude? He said Shanghai had way more skyscrapers than any American City, I pointed out that Chicago and NY have more.

Me standing up for myself when you put me down is trolling? You need to relax a little. You seem to be singling me out from everyone else.

Seriously, if you want to ban me, go for it. It's a cool site and all but some people here are so rude and arrogant, it wouldn't be that much of a loss.

[vid]

It's a debate, not an argument. You said its not an argument on the previous page.

The definition of skyscraper is subjective. That's not an argument. Shanghai has the most massive skyline of any city on Earth. That's an opinion based on observation.

[uaarkson]

From Shera @ SSC:



Take a look at my sig if you want to see in motion how truly absurd Manhattan's skyline is.

[JManc]

is this topic even worth getting upset over? anyway, based on my personal opinion, it looks like shanghai is the winner. if not now, it will be. houston has more taco trucks though.

[Zapatan]

^I think Mexico City will take Houston on for number of Taco trucks

Anyways, yes let's get back to topic, Sorry for stirring things up. In my opinion I would say Hong Kong and New York are about tied for the most massive skylines, with Chicago, Shanghai and Dubai as runners up. Shenzen, Chongquing, Guangzhou, Bankok, Seoul, Tokyo and various other cities are all way up there too

[M.K.]

First of all, for some people here: it is not Sao Paolo, but please: São Paulo , of course if you don't want to write with '~' for english and keyboards speakers, then it is accepted that: Sao Paulo, although the pronunciation is totally wrong.

As someone that come from the city, i would say SP city does not have a skyline. It has a massive ocean of average buildings, but never a skyline in the skyscraper sense, because most of buildings are from 10-to 30 storeys in a so huge quantity that the average height dissolve in the quantity, not having deepest valleys and tallest pointers buildings. In other words, apart the islands of Houses and 'slams', the rest is all the same height homogene and that is not for me a skyline like the ones compared to Shanghai or NYC.

People confund building skyline of SP city with its 'geographical' skyline, I mean the buildings in Paulista avenue are just bumped up, because the geographical hill difference of about 200m from the hill in middle the 2 rivers, pushing the averages buildings Up, but this is not man-made, just came as result of nature. Of course, because this fact, they put the of about 30 communication antenna ontop the buildings there and because of that, people think it is a skyline along the Avenue. Sure those Antennas make the constructions from average 50m to upto 200m, but this is a very small skyline if we compare to the Shanghai one that is from 50m upto more than 400m, which is much more massive in height.

So the Amplitude the Senoidal Curve of skyline buildings in Shanghai and in New York is much more impressive and like people said here massive than in Sao Paulo, which i would put in far away back in list.

Quantity of average midrises or highrises buildings do not make a skyline concept, neither as massive.

2 is much more 'massive' skyline than 1:
'Quantity is not much important for an important skyline, imo'


Ah I forgot... Source: Me, Paint by me... OMG!

Conclusion:s

A- In final words, unfortunatly Sao Paulo does still not have a massive high building to improve its poor skyline. But that happens to all brazilian cities, because the stupid cityhall laws there.

B- This thread is totally funny about this city x city discussions... I would skip, just posted, cause relationed my born city.

[volguus zildrohar]

I will never understand the appeal people find in Sao Paulo's skyline. It's a forest of nondescript concrete buildings with occassional variation. It's a Zerged skyline - hit 'em with quantity instead of quality.

[M.K.]

Originally Posted by volguus zildrohar

I will never understand the appeal people find in Sao Paulo's skyline. It's a forest of nondescript concrete buildings with occassional variation. It's a Zerged skyline - hit 'em with quantity instead of quality.

If you added what i said in simpler words, than i agree.
If it was an against, than you didn't understand what i wrote. But this could be a problem i don't know english. Only the masters here do.

BTW, your avatar of Zoom infinitum is tremendous interesting.

[SLO]

Originally Posted by uaarkson

From Shera @ SSC:

Take a look at my sig if you want to see in motion how truly absurd Manhattan's skyline is.

One of my favorite photos and I agree this is tops for me as far as skylines go.
We know Shanghai and Sao Paulo are bigger and more spread out than Manhattan, but Manhattan is denser and taller, you dont see anything short. The Shanghai and Sao Paulo shots you see small stuff interspersed throughout.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by SouthmoreAve

When a city's skyline encompasses the entire city limits, then its not a skyline. Its their cityscapes.

Sorry Sao Paulo, thats not a skyline at all, thats your cityscape. But, you can have both. Shanghai has a skyline(s), but has a SP cityscape as well.

SouthmoreAve speaks the most sense in this thread.

The most massive collection of buildings does not a skyline make.

[Trantor]

Originally Posted by Zapatan

Are you seriously asking that?

100 storey buildings make a skyline because they are skyscrapers. I personally do not consider a 12 storey building to be a skyscraper because it's not very tall, It's a low highrise.

too bad you dont really need SKYSCRAPERS to have a skyline.

Originally Posted by SouthmoreAve

Sorry Sao Paulo, thats not a skyline at all, thats your cityscape. But, you can have both. Shanghai has a skyline(s), but has a SP cityscape as well.

so you mean this is not a skyline

[Zapatan]

So we are more debating on to what the difference between a skyline and cityscape are.

In my opinion, a skyline is the arrangement and the silloutette when looked at from afar of skyscrapers in a downtown setting. A cityscape I have always thought to be compiled of much shorter, but still decently tall objects like church spires, cathedrals, old castles, smaller but famous building, buildings that are big but not tall etc.

I've always generally gone with the pretty standard 150 meter rule to separate highrises from skyscrapers, as buildings in the 100-150 meter range are tall, but not really "sky scrapingly" so. That's just my opinion though, some would argue that skyscrapers start lower, or even higher.

I can't post a picture from my computer but if you take my hometown, Guadalajara, Mexico for example, it has a few highrises 80-120 meters scattered in a few parts and loads of 3-5 storey buildings, obviously. I wouldn't say the city really has a skyline at all though, more just a few highrises. On the other hand, if you take a city like New York, Chicago Hong Kong etc.. You can see massively tall buildings sticking up against the sky in the distance with nothing else in the city visible.

That's the point I was trying to make, When I personally think of massive, I not only think of quantity, but height makes skylines extremely more massive. You can't argue that there isn't a ridiculous difference between a 100 foot building and a 1000 foot building. The Sears Tower and the Empire State are two supertalls I have seen in person, and they were both overwhelmingly huge.

[PartyLine]

Here's Hong Kong

[Zapatan]

Yea Hong Kong is a beast.

[LSyd]

this thread makes baby jesus cry.

-

[village person]

Since many of the photos posted are aerial photos with the buildings set against the.... ground, perhaps the title should be "Most Massive Groundline."

Admin? A change?

We must fight for the rights of skylines to have their sky back! Who's with me?!

[PartyLine]

Not shure if anyone has shown Tokyo

[Trantor]

Originally Posted by village person

We must fight for the rights of skylines to have their sky back! Who's with me?!

[MolsonExport]

It was much easier to debate skyline masses back 10 years ago, when few would question NYC's dominance, followed by Hong Kong, Sao Paulo, and Tokyo (in whatever homer order you prefer).

Today, can we really meaningfully argue that Sao Paulo beats out Shanghai or vice versa? Personally, given the combination of height, clustering, and sheer mass, I would tip my hat to Shanghai, but then Sao Paulo is insanely vast in scope, as is Tokyo, Seoul...and what city beats the dense clustering that is Hong Kong?

I think that it makes more sense to talk about a hierarchy of skylines, as opposed to rank ordering (a la global cities: Alpha, beta, etc.).

In no particular order within-cluster:

Alpha Major Massive Skylines
-Shanghai
-Tokyo
-Hong Kong
-Seoul
-Sao Paulo
-New York City

Alpha Minor Massive Skylines
-Beijing
-Mexico City
-Shenzehn
-Buenos Aires
-Chicago
-Toronto
-Dubai
-Singapore
-Chongquing
-Guangzhou
-Osaka

Beta-Major Massive Skylines:
-Manila
-Bangkok
-Sydney
-Los Angeles
-Rio de Janeiro
-Kuala Lumpur
-Moscow
-Miami
-Panama City
-Vancouver
-Atlanta
-Mumbai
-Wuhan
...