• CreateProblemsEnglish
    23·
    2 months ago

    I’m obsessed with this photo. I love all the subtle changes in the colors of the reflections on the windows.

    Were you just in the right place at the right time, or were you specifically trying to capture this?

    • hanke@feddit.nuOP
      18·
      2 months ago

      I’m glad you liked it!

      I was having dinner outside watching the sun set over the city with my girlfriend. She noticed the colors in the reflections in the building. I have been trying to encourage her to get into photography, so I handed her the camera to take the shot. She managed to capture it really well!

      The colors might be a bit exaggerated in post processing, but it is a great shot none the less!

  • Dabundis@lemmy.world
    111·
    2 months ago

    If you’re an architect, understand that this is the MEP equivalent of fighting words.

  • NoRodent@lemmy.world
    7·
    2 months ago

    Wait, that’s a photo? I thought it was a stylized rendering at first. The colors are almost vaporwave.

    • Obi@sopuli.xyz
      7·
      2 months ago

      Whoever is doing this is probably pretty passionate, I don’t think they start you off doing these kinds of buildings as a rookie.

  • AItoothbrush@lemmy.zipEnglish
    45·
    2 months ago

    Cool and all but did they really need to build it? I think every big city should have one really tall building you can go up and look down but other than that skyscrapers are a huge waste of money, manpower, resources, etc.

    • awwwyissss@lemm.ee
      7·
      2 months ago

      How so? I’ve always just assumed that kind of extremely dense urban construction was better environmentally. One big system to manage HVAC, economies of scale when building it, tiny actual footprint relative to usable space, etc.

      • AItoothbrush@lemmy.zipEnglish
        7·
        2 months ago

        The gain from building higher isnt linear. You have to use more space for elevators, re-enforcements, safety(fire for example), etc. The cost of the apartments go up drastically so most people who buy them dont live there, they just invest. Midrises are much better in all of these aspects. Also the materials needed for skyscrapers harder to mamufacture so with all of these they are just plain worse for the environment. Göterborg is a pretty good example of how midrises are better in almost every case.

          • AItoothbrush@lemmy.zipEnglish
            2·
            2 months ago

            There are exceptions of course but its mainly cities like the centre of tokyo where you have extreme density, money and incentive to live. Of course the other thing is skyscapers are cool af. I think the solution is the same as with cars and a lot of other things: moderation.

            • awwwyissss@lemm.ee
              3·
              2 months ago

              Lucky for us humanity excels at moderation and responsible use of technology, right?

              … right?

      • LordKitsuna@lemmy.world
        21·
        2 months ago

        One big system to manage hvac, which needs to constantly work overtime because you built an insanely gigantic Greenhouse. To be fair that can be solved by simply not making the entire goddamn outer surface glass windows but that’s a different conversation

        • awwwyissss@lemm.ee
          1·
          2 months ago

          Would be interesting to see reflective shades on large, glass-facade buildings to augment HVAC systems.

          Shades open in the winter to cut waste from heating, then down in the summer to keep it cool.

    • hanke@feddit.nuOP
      31·
      2 months ago

      Oh, most certainly not. I completely agree with your statement. It is a really unnecessary monument of capitalism where the owner of the building company owns the top floor as his own apartment or something like that.

      But it looks cool 🙂