[Contra]

Am I off base by suggesting that the posting of instagram pics where you can barely see the building in question are of no use and therefore a waste of everyone's time? What do you all think?

42

Do we feel a singular post can be considered "a waste of time"? I feel that's overly subjective and is pushing some of the freedoms of an open forum... It's one picture, it takes half a second to scroll past it.

 

[smably]

I'm fine with putting all the artsy wide-angle Instagram shots in the Toronto Skyline thread. I don't really mind them in project threads, but that thread seems like a more natural place for them.

 

[officedweller]

I often think that there is an abundance of "where's Waldo" type skyline shots posted on Urban Toronto in various threads.
(i.e. there it is from Etobicoke)
The most useful way of posting is to post a reasonably close pic first, then another pic zoomed out to show context.
If you can't show a close-up, then you probably shouldn't be posting that pic.

 

[Johnny Au]

As someone who much prefers UT and personally finds the Instascourge annoying, one can always use the NoScript browser add-on/extension. Alternatively, one can also disable JavaScript. UT (and its images) is still perfectly viewable and comment-able.

 

[interchange42]

I appreciate all the comments coming in, interesting to see them.

Do we feel a singular post can be considered "a waste of time"? I feel that's overly subjective and is pushing some of the freedoms of an open forum... It's one picture, it takes half a second to scroll past it.

I think more than scrolling past, the question is more "thread was flagged as having something new, clicking on it, loading 7 posts with 8 photos each, oh the new one is only insta."

I do realize that everyone will have a different reaction, and I'm not proposing to censor, I just think that it's worth having people weigh in every once in a while. Like I said, it's interesting to see the responses, and thinking about it all…

42

 

[ushahid]

I will be more careful next time and post pics which clearly shows the project.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

I don't mind if it is shared from a developers instagram page. Then I become aware that they have an instagram page and I check it out.

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

I often think that there is an abundance of "where's Waldo" type skyline shots posted on Urban Toronto in various threads.
(i.e. there it is from Etobicoke)
The most useful way of posting is to post a reasonably close pic first, then another pic zoomed out to show context.
If you can't show a close-up, then you probably shouldn't be posting that pic.

I do want to apologise to those who may have been offended by criticsms of those types of subject in the distance shots...it's a small pet peeve of mine. But feel free to continue to make them, if that's what your folks are into when showing the gravity of new buildings relative to the skyline.

 

[differential]

I'm okay with all kinds of photos as long as the building in question is in them.

View attachment 256386

This building is not actually going to be purple is it? Shame if not.

 

[DSCToronto]

I do want to apologise to those who may have been offended by criticsms of those types of subject in the distance shots...it's a small pet peeve of mine. But feel free to continue to make them, if that's what your folks are into when showing the gravity of new buildings relative to the skyline.

You really do not have to apologise for making what seems like a very reasonable comment. (i.e. one I agree with!). Frankly, I would add that adding the umpteenth photo (from a common vantage point) of a much-photographed building using a cheap (and somewhat out of focus) camera is equally annoying. Some buildings have few pictures (or few from certain angles) and in these cases something is better than nothing but unfortunately ......

 

[officedweller]

I'm not really annoyed by the posts - I just find it difficult to find the building in question!

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

You really do not have to apologise for making what seems like a very reasonable comment. (i.e. one I agree with!). Frankly, I would add that adding the umpteenth photo (from a common vantage point) of a much-photographed building using a cheap (and somewhat out of focus) camera is equally annoying. Some buildings have few pictures (or few from certain angles) and in these cases something is better than nothing but unfortunately ......

...you think grain'aries should belong on farms instead of pictures? I hear you.

But keep in mind, not everyone can afford a good camera or phone that has one. Some of us who post here are actually poor - we're here though, because we still have to look at the buildings they build. So those of us who can, will contribute a pictorial can't guarantee it will be taken on gear used by National Geographic.

Where as I still maintain that one can still control in what way a "Where's Waldo?" shot can be taken, regardless of income. I hope that makes sense.

And thanks for encouragement though. /bows

 

[mburrrrr]

The glass is almost complete for the office space. Flowers for the occasion.

The Backstage pool sure does look inviting or is that looking for an invite.

 

[Khaloody]

These railroads are an eyesore to our city

 

[urbanflight]

These railroads are an eyesore to our city

I agree. The Gardiner Expressway is also a big eyesore.