NEW YORK | One World Trade Center | 1,776' Pinnacle / 1,373' Roof | 108 FLOORS - Page 1639

Michael.Lee.Pics.NYC · #**32761** Posted **Jul 4, 2013, 11:51 AM**

This was shot by me last night.

Hamilton Park View of Lower Manhattan (P1700016-1_17-2_18-3_19-4_20-5_tonemapped) by Michael.Lee.Pics.NYC, on Flickr

I contacted the forum admin yesterday because I objected to the doctoring of my images to show illuminated beacons and light streams on my photos. I take care in taking and processing my images and I do not authorize anyone to change my images. I am otherwise fine with linking back to my Flickr pages as long as they are properly credited and are not modified. Thank you.

kpdrummer82 · #**32762** Posted **Jul 4, 2013, 1:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael.Lee.Pics.NYC

I contacted the forum admin yesterday because I objected to the doctoring of my images to show illuminated beacons and light streams on my photos. I take care in taking and processing my images and I do not authorize anyone to change my images. I am otherwise fine with linking back to my Flickr pages as long as they are properly credited and are not modified. Thank you.

Y'know I was gonna say something to whoever photoshopped that picture from across the river. Very idiotic of them to do something like that and not give credit or even leave the watermark. Anyway, glad to hear you're not leaving, seeing as how you have the best pics out there lately. Hope you're excited for tonight! Thanks for all the great pictures recently, everyone.

franktko · #**32763** Posted **Jul 4, 2013, 1:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by kpdrummer82

Y'know I was gonna say something to whoever photoshopped that picture from across the river. Very idiotic of them to do something like that and not give credit or even leave the watermark. Anyway, glad to hear you're not leaving, seeing as how you have the best pics out there lately. Hope you're excited for tonight! Thanks for all the great pictures recently, everyone.

Well, Traynor did leave the copyrights and the links back to Michael flicker page - I went there and had a look at many beautiful pics from him. I think he just took a beautiful pic to play around with, testing what the spire and beacon would look like without fully realizing that the original photographer would object - which I totally understand.

I'm glad to hear we'll still be able to enjoy Michael's original pictures on this forum

QUEENSNYMAN · #**32764** Posted **Jul 4, 2013, 3:23 PM**

Hey everyone Happy 4th of July. I did some videos this morning as well as pictures, here is 1 video 2 more to follow later.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NFlj...ature=youtu.be

Weztex · #**32765** Posted **Jul 4, 2013, 4:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsr

Wow better (and a lot bigger) than mine!

But where's the rest of the complex?

They couldn't find a lego tenant.

QUEENSNYMAN · #**32766** Posted **Jul 4, 2013, 5:04 PM**

Next 2 videos later pics!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ww9MyTYuxY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KF4vRfFNtyE

bigreach · #**32767** Posted **Jul 4, 2013, 5:06 PM**

That Red illuminated spire, in my opinion, is the best.. "Reminds me of Darth Vaders Light Saber." Very Bright.

NewYorque · #**32768** Posted **Jul 4, 2013, 6:19 PM**

Forgive my aggressive question, especially for some of you who seem to be quite emotional, but:

As we know that the antenna of North Tower was thicker, and more massive than the current mast, and it WAS NEVER considered as a part of the structure of the tower; HOW can we imagine a second that the slim and skeletal mast of 1WTC will be considered as an entire part of the tower ??

No way at all...

Oh I know what some of you may reply: "the antenna of North tower was added years later, whereas the current mast has foundations in the concrete core"...

Yes but that doesn't prevent the mast from being just an assembly of skeletal pieces of iron...

So... hard to refer to a "spire"...

Thunderpriest · #**32769** Posted **Jul 4, 2013, 7:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by NewYorque

Forgive my aggressive question, especially for some of you who seem to be quite emotional, but:

As we know that the antenna of North Tower was thicker, and more massive than the current mast, and it WAS NEVER considered as a part of the structure of the tower; HOW can we imagine a second that the slim and skeletal mast of 1WTC will be considered as an entire part of the tower ??

No way at all...

Oh I know what some of you may reply: "the antenna of North tower was added years later, whereas the current mast has foundations in the concrete core"...

Yes but that doesn't prevent the mast from being just an assembly of skeletal pieces of iron...

So... hard to refer to a "spire"...

The designation will come from the CTBUH.
In my opinion...the fact that the "spire" is a guyed mast that is integral to the building will see it fit their criteria.

According to the CTBUH web site:

Height is measured from the level of the lowest, significant, open-air, pedestrian entrance to the architectural top of the building, including spires, but not including antennae, signage, flag poles or other functional-technical equipment. This measurement is the most widely utilized and is employed to define the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat rankings of the "World's Tallest Buildings."

The footnote relating to antennae, signage, etc reads thusly:
Functional-technical equipment: this is intended to recognize that functional-technical equipment is subject to removal/addition/change as per prevalent technologies, as is often seen in tall buildings (e.g., antennae, signage, wind turbines, etc. are periodically added, shortened, lengthened, removed and/or replaced).

Therefore...in my opinion...the spire will be recognized as a structural element and counted towards the architectural height.

Matt · #**32770** Posted **Jul 4, 2013, 9:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hudson11

dmb609 on instagram

Ugh... so tacky and gaudy. It looks like a carnival ride!

One segment of red, one segment of white, and one segment of blue would do the trick and would look so much more refined and elegant.

IMO, this is incredibly disappointing and looks straight out of a county fair carnival ride. Where do I get my corn dog on a stick and my cotton candy?

sw5710 · #**32771** Posted **Jul 4, 2013, 10:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by NewYorque

Forgive my aggressive question, especially for some of you who seem to be quite emotional, but:

As we know that the antenna of North Tower was thicker, and more massive than the current mast, and it WAS NEVER considered as a part of the structure of the tower; HOW can we imagine a second that the slim and skeletal mast of 1WTC will be considered as an entire part of the tower ??

No way at all...

Oh I know what some of you may reply: "the antenna of North tower was added years later, whereas the current mast has foundations in the concrete core"...

Yes but that doesn't prevent the mast from being just an assembly of skeletal pieces of iron...

So... hard to refer to a "spire"...

The old antenna had a steel support mast like this under it's outer white and grey dome. The steel structure here has a few tons on the old one but has no outer dome to look bigger. As for the last post. The spire will be lit white most of the time. They will light it different colors for special days or events.

Hudson11 · #**32772** Posted **Jul 4, 2013, 10:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt

Ugh... so tacky and gaudy. It looks like a carnival ride!

One segment of red, one segment of white, and one segment of blue would do the trick and would look so much more refined and elegant.

IMO, this is incredibly disappointing and looks straight out of a county fair carnival ride. Where do I get my corn dog on a stick and my cotton candy?

1. Its a test.
2. This was taken right next to the spire so of course it's going to seem overly bright, you can even see the light being projected.

you can't please everyone i guess.

JayPro · #**32773** Posted **Jul 4, 2013, 11:20 PM**

Besides, isn't it supposed to be a dymanic color display? If so, then I should with due respect question the wisdom of making a judgment based on a photo still.

Hudson11 · #**32774** Posted **Jul 4, 2013, 11:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by NewYorque

Yes but that doesn't prevent the mast from being just an assembly of skeletal pieces of iron...

So... hard to refer to a "spire"...

that there describes most spires out there, especially those here in NYC.

Fluffybagel · #**32775** Posted **Jul 5, 2013, 1:47 AM**

I don't get it, it's dark and the fireworks show started. I'm watching by the SI Yankees stadium, why hasn't the beacon lighted up yet???

iiConTr0v3rSYx · #**32776** Posted **Jul 5, 2013, 1:54 AM**

Because the Port Authority are idiots.

There were rumors a few days ago that they cancelled lighting it in fear of "weather issues or the ESB having the better light show"

Fluffybagel · #**32777** Posted **Jul 5, 2013, 2:06 AM**

Man, that's freaking BS. The port authority is really run by monkies...

qwho · #**32778** Posted **Jul 5, 2013, 2:44 AM**

Watching the NBC coverage... Wish they would light it up...

bigreach · #**32779** Posted **Jul 5, 2013, 3:10 AM**

So the Red spire is fake? Is that what Michal lee is saying?? Too bad I liked it.

TheCap'n · #**32780** Posted **Jul 5, 2013, 3:17 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by iiConTr0v3rSYx

Because the Port Authority are idiots.

There were rumors a few days ago that they cancelled lighting it in fear of "weather issues or the ESB having the better light show"

That was just speculation on my part as to possible reasons why they may have scrubbed the lighting for tonight. Otie says it's because of late submission of papers for approval that cost them the chance to do it tonight. I trust his sources over anyone else on either of these forums, so I'm sure that's the reason why it didn't happen tonight.