expo5770 said:
quick shot from last week that I forgot to post here.
View attachment 541329 different aspects
Click to expand...

expo5770 said:
quick shot from last week that I forgot to post here.
View attachment 541329
Click to expand...
Some aspects of the building show better than others. I like this one especially, with Union Station and the Royal York hotel in the foreground. Even the otherwise undistinguished building on the south side adds some balance and counterpoint. I wonder if the designers had envisioned this vista.
 

Love it or hate it, this boldly lit new tower is a clear sign Toronto’s reserved image is history​


www.thestar.com

Shawn Micallef: Love it or hate it, this boldly lit new tower is a clear sign Toronto’s reserved image is history

TD Terrace is lit up like a bright electric dagger stuck into the heart of downtown Toronto at night.
www.thestar.com www.thestar.com

"The lights have sparked divergent opinions: some like it, some very much hate it. I took an informal, totally unscientific poll on social media and it was nearly 50-50 for and against. It’s a classic, subjective question of personal preference."
 
tdt-01.jpg
 
70Challenger said:
The lighting is what people take issue with? I would have guessed it would be the architecturally unsympathetic signs on top that look like an alien face together with the facade openings.
Click to expand...
I honestly didn't realize that the lighting was a problem because I like it. Even though I don't live in Toronto, I find it pleasant to see that most people don't have an issue with the lighting. The closest building that I can compare TD Terrace to is the Bank of America Tower in Dallas. It reminds me of the lighting there, how many people embraced it when it opened back in '85, and how it also changed colors during holidays or special occasions. I guess some people don't like change! Lol.
 
Bold would be if the whole building was lit with the LED light bars. I don't care myself for bright LED light bars. One brightly lit tower in the night skyline would enhance the look
 
MasterJay731 said:
I honestly didn't realize that the lighting was a problem because I like it. Even though I don't live in Toronto, I find it pleasant to see that most people don't have an issue with the lighting. The closest building that I can compare TD Terrace to is the Bank of America Tower in Dallas. It reminds me of the lighting there, how many people embraced it when it opened back in '85, and how it also changed colors during holidays or special occasions. I guess some people don't like change! Lol.
Click to expand...
I don’t understand why people don’t have blackout curtains?!
 
It’s not that I dislike the lighting as such. I do believe, however, that we need to consider this as part of the general problem of “light pollution.“ There is the cumulative effect on the environment of generating the electricity to power the light displays of buildings like this around the globe. Consider any satellite photo you have seen of urban areas of the earth at night. Is that display, visible hundreds of Km up, really necessary? A little wasteful perhaps? Scientists have identified a number of other negative effects but I will leave the matter here.

My own preference would be for lighting that is mostly engaged on celebratory occasions and left unused the rest of the time. If that were the case, I would be happier about this particular structure.
 
The whole city is one giant projector pointing into the night sky. Having one building equipped with a few extra LEDs doesn't move the needle on light pollution.

There's more to life than a super rational calculation of whether a few extra lumens are worth emitting and if it's okay to burn a few extra grams (micrograms?) of CO2 for those lumens.

And if you're concerned about the environment, what you really should be against is office buildings like this being constructed at all. Because it'll be hosting white collar jobs that can be done from home, the building itself is a massive and entirely unnecessary CO2 contributor.
 
I like the lights, adds a little more character and something interesting to the skyline. although I do think they're very bright, almost a little bit like an led light strip you'd see in a teenagers bedroom lol. wish they were slightly more "matte" like the cn towers lighting.
 
Undead said:
The whole city is one giant projector pointing into the night sky. Having one building equipped with a few extra LEDs doesn't move the needle on light pollution.

There's more to life than a super rational calculation of whether a few extra lumens are worth emitting and if it's okay to burn a few extra grams (micrograms?) of CO2 for those lumens.

And if you're concerned about the environment, what you really should be against is office buildings like this being constructed at all. Because it'll be hosting white collar jobs that can be done from home, the building itself is a massive and entirely unnecessary CO2 contributor.
Click to expand...
The weird thing about that is I don't think anyone here was talking about light pollution as being the issue with the lighting here. Probably because in part they already know one tower in thousands isn't going to make diddly of a difference if they decided to dim it's lights for the ages. Rather the "garishness" of the thing being the primary concern for right or wrong.
 
UtakataNoAnnex said:
The weird thing about that is I don't think anyone here was talking about light pollution as being the issue with the lighting here. Probably because in part they already know one tower in thousands isn't going to make diddly of a difference if they decided to dim it's lights for the ages. Rather the "garishness" of the thing being the primary concern for right or wrong.
Click to expand...


Right but I think Undead's point was that we're purely talking about the aesthetics of the lighting as a subject of debate, so why even bother bringing up "light pollution" when it's a completely different issue?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top