Fixed it for ya:)

E492BB4B-607E-464E-897C-B9182F2D239F.jpeg.jpg
 

Attachments

  • E492BB4B-607E-464E-897C-B9182F2D239F.jpeg.jpg
    E492BB4B-607E-464E-897C-B9182F2D239F.jpeg.jpg
    330 KB · Views: 585
Last edited by a moderator:
From Sunday:

DSC07715.jpg
DSC07717.jpg
DSC07721.jpg


DSC07725.jpg


42
 

Attachments

  • DSC07715.jpg
    DSC07715.jpg
    309.6 KB · Views: 520
  • DSC07717.jpg
    DSC07717.jpg
    638.3 KB · Views: 495
  • DSC07721.jpg
    DSC07721.jpg
    584.6 KB · Views: 521
  • DSC07725.jpg
    DSC07725.jpg
    641.6 KB · Views: 524
I like it too but I wish the building had more of a rich deep tone of colours for the facade. It would make the building stand out more .
 
It's a clunker. It has nothing that draws the eye up. Too many little turns in the shape of the building, which make it completely lose a distinct form. You could see what they were going for with the tip of the triangle podium brought up the tower and then capped. This is the one nice line of the building (view from the north west). But there is too much other stuff going on for it to pop. And what you are left with is a very large bland tower.
 
Here's the clunker, nothing to raw the eye up to, yesterday, from a couple other angles:

DSC17822.jpg
DSC27818.jpg
DSC27828.jpg
DSC37518.jpg
DSC47515.jpg
DSC47516.jpg
DSC47517.jpg


42
 

Attachments

  • DSC17822.jpg
    DSC17822.jpg
    885.9 KB · Views: 558
  • DSC27818.jpg
    DSC27818.jpg
    765.2 KB · Views: 541
  • DSC27828.jpg
    DSC27828.jpg
    724.1 KB · Views: 492
  • DSC37518.jpg
    DSC37518.jpg
    576.2 KB · Views: 529
  • DSC47515.jpg
    DSC47515.jpg
    637.9 KB · Views: 475
  • DSC47516.jpg
    DSC47516.jpg
    496.6 KB · Views: 536
  • DSC47517.jpg
    DSC47517.jpg
    551.8 KB · Views: 482

Back
Top