HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Photography Forums > Found City Photos


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Apr 9, 2008, 6:31 PM
latennisguy's Avatar
latennisguy latennisguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Back in L.A.
Posts: 552
Incredible Photos of Houston

I've noticed how many people underrate houston's skyline...(in this forum and others). So here are some incredible photos of Houston via flickr:


flickr deneyterrio


flickr P3t3rT


flickr OneEighteen


flickr emmiegrn


flickr OneEighteen


flickr sabotai


flickr eflon


flickr telwink

feel free to post others if you feel they are Incredible!
__________________
La arquitectura es música congelada. - Schopenhauer, Arthur
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Apr 10, 2008, 6:56 PM
latennisguy's Avatar
latennisguy latennisguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Back in L.A.
Posts: 552

flickr AlphaTangoBravo / Adam Baker


flickr diveofficer


flickr mlsnp


flickr deji 01


flickr P3t3rT
__________________
La arquitectura es música congelada. - Schopenhauer, Arthur
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Apr 10, 2008, 7:50 PM
NewAtlantisMiami NewAtlantisMiami is offline
Atlantis Rises Again!
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 554
Thumbs up

You are so right! Those are some incredible shots of Houston. And I think this is the first time I have seen a photo of all of its buildings in context in relationship to each other. Wow!

I have never underrated Houston's skyline though. With all your buildings that are over 500 feet tall, you've been third behind New York and Chicago for over 20 years now! But look out! Miami is hot on your heels!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Apr 10, 2008, 8:39 PM
Xeelee's Avatar
Xeelee Xeelee is offline
Baryonic Lord
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 2,080
Excellent pics.

And NewAtlantaMaimi is right... Miami is catching up...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Apr 10, 2008, 8:45 PM
SFUVancouver's Avatar
SFUVancouver SFUVancouver is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kelowna
Posts: 5,673
I think Houston's bad reputation overwhelmingly stems from this old photo:


Source from the book The City Assembled by Spiro Kostof

It's like a bad mug shot that dogs a celebrity for years or a photo of a politician in a comprimising situation.
__________________
VANCOUVER | Beautiful, Multicultural | Canada's Pacific Metropolis
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2009, 2:22 AM
Atlantan26 Atlantan26 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFUVancouver View Post
I think Houston's bad reputation overwhelmingly stems from this old photo:


Source from the book The City Assembled by Spiro Kostof

It's like a bad mug shot that dogs a celebrity for years or a photo of a politician in a comprimising situation.
Wow! I have never seen anything like this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2009, 2:28 AM
Dan Denson Dan Denson is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Austin now, Houston soon
Posts: 1,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlantan26 View Post
Wow! I have never seen anything like this.
Based on the buildings on the edge of downtown that are visible in the photo, it looks like possibly early 70s. Most of that area is filled in now, thank goodness.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2009, 6:34 AM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 25,536
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Denson View Post
Based on the buildings on the edge of downtown that are visible in the photo, it looks like possibly early 70s. Most of that area is filled in now, thank goodness.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted May 8, 2011, 2:35 AM
Leafer10's Avatar
Leafer10 Leafer10 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Calgary
Posts: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFUVancouver View Post
I think Houston's bad reputation overwhelmingly stems from this old photo:


Source from the book The City Assembled by Spiro Kostof

It's like a bad mug shot that dogs a celebrity for years or a photo of a politician in a comprimising situation.
Being from Calgary, I envy the downtown parking! Obviously things in Houston have changed, beautiful city!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted May 8, 2011, 2:40 AM
AusHou AusHou is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 640
Wish that old photo would go away. But it does show how much things have changed on that side of downtown.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Apr 10, 2008, 9:09 PM
SLO's Avatar
SLO SLO is offline
REAL Kiwi!
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: California
Posts: 9,840
Yeah, I dont know that people under rate the Houston skyline. It is definitely impressive, after NYC & Chicago its in the second tier with 6 or 7 other cities....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Apr 10, 2008, 10:01 PM
NewAtlantisMiami NewAtlantisMiami is offline
Atlantis Rises Again!
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 554
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by SLO View Post
Yeah, I dont know that people under rate the Houston skyline. It is definitely impressive, after NYC & Chicago its in the second tier with 6 or 7 other cities....
Houston's skyline is more than second tier. With the number of buildings that it has that are over 500 feet tall, it has had a lock on third behind New York and Chicago for over 20 years now.

Los Angeles had a boom in the late 80s and early 90s, which gave it the tallest building west of Chicago, but it wasn't enough to give it the third biggest skyline in the country such as Houston had.

Miami just recently had a boom that was so incredible that what has made it to construction thus far gives Miami a third place ranking behind New York and Chicago with buildings in the 400 feet tall and up height range. In the 500 feet tall and up height range, Houston is still third, but we are not done here in Miami. The city has several more buildings planned including three supertalls with interest in further developing Miami still very strong. The planned twin Empire World towers at 1,010 feet I feature in my avatar. They were originally proposed at 1,200 feet, but the FAA said "No way!" with Miami International Airport in the middle of the city. Houston will need another big boom to stay third behind New York and Chicago in the 500 feet tall and up range.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2008, 9:26 PM
SLO's Avatar
SLO SLO is offline
REAL Kiwi!
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: California
Posts: 9,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewAtlantisMiami View Post
Houston's skyline is more than second tier. With the number of buildings that it has that are over 500 feet tall, it has had a lock on third behind New York and Chicago for over 20 years now.

Los Angeles had a boom in the late 80s and early 90s, which gave it the tallest building west of Chicago, but it wasn't enough to give it the third biggest skyline in the country such as Houston had.

Miami just recently had a boom that was so incredible that what has made it to construction thus far gives Miami a third place ranking behind New York and Chicago with buildings in the 400 feet tall and up height range. In the 500 feet tall and up height range, Houston is still third, but we are not done here in Miami. The city has several more buildings planned including three supertalls with interest in further developing Miami still very strong. The planned twin Empire World towers at 1,010 feet I feature in my avatar. They were originally proposed at 1,200 feet, but the FAA said "No way!" with Miami International Airport in the middle of the city. Houston will need another big boom to stay third behind New York and Chicago in the 500 feet tall and up range.
Sure if you are talking skyline from a distance. I'd put Miami number 3 right now. Then you get into Houston, LA, Dallas, Atlanta's coming on, Philly? maybe, San Francisco, Boston, Seattle. (all good skylines btw)
On the other hand if you are talking about density of buildings/people & vibrancy along with height than San Fran is easily #3.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2008, 10:49 PM
NewAtlantisMiami NewAtlantisMiami is offline
Atlantis Rises Again!
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 554
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLO View Post
Sure if you are talking skyline from a distance. I'd put Miami number 3 right now. Then you get into Houston, LA, Dallas, Atlanta's coming on, Philly? maybe, San Francisco, Boston, Seattle. (all good skylines btw)
On the other hand if you are talking about density of buildings/people & vibrancy along with height than San Fran is easily #3.
In the 70s, San Francisco actually was 3rd behind New York and Chicago in terms of sheer number of tall buildings until Houston moved it out in in 80s with so many buildings over 500 feet tall. San Francisco's density and vibrancy is indisputable. I would say it is second only to New York in that regard.

Houston's skyline is more dispersed throughout the city, but its sheer number of tall buildings is indisputable. Miami is not 3rd based on what has already topped out though. Statistically, according to the World Alamanac and the Almanac of Architecture and Design in terms of tall buildings, Miami's number three ranking is based on what has made it to construction that has not gone vertical enough yet to even be visible on the skyline. For some of our buildings under construction, they are still doing foundation work. With the number of Miami's buildings that have actually topped out, Houston is still third behind New York and Chicago until Miami's buildings all actually reach their height specifications. We have a few that didn't and are not actually as tall as listed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2008, 6:25 AM
SLO's Avatar
SLO SLO is offline
REAL Kiwi!
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: California
Posts: 9,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewAtlantisMiami View Post
In the 70s, San Francisco actually was 3rd behind New York and Chicago in terms of sheer number of tall buildings until Houston moved it out in in 80s with so many buildings over 500 feet tall. San Francisco's density and vibrancy is indisputable. I would say it is second only to New York in that regard.

Houston's skyline is more dispersed throughout the city, but its sheer number of tall buildings is indisputable. Miami is not 3rd based on what has already topped out though. Statistically, according to the World Alamanac and the Almanac of Architecture and Design in terms of tall buildings, Miami's number three ranking is based on what has made it to construction that has not gone vertical enough yet to even be visible on the skyline. For some of our buildings under construction, they are still doing foundation work. With the number of Miami's buildings that have actually topped out, Houston is still third behind New York and Chicago until Miami's buildings all actually reach their height specifications. We have a few that didn't and are not actually as tall as listed.
Agree on SF. And these types of photos are great.
Having spent time in both cities recently, Miami seems way in front, maybe its because you can see all the beach front highrises as well, but Houstons dt seems a bit more dense.
SF is having a pretty good boom as well, and if some of the proposed buildings get built it will be even more impressive.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2010, 4:06 AM
Fred the Fop Fred the Fop is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewAtlantisMiami View Post
Houston's skyline is more than second tier. With the number of buildings that it has that are over 500 feet tall, it has had a lock on third behind New York and Chicago for over 20 years now.

Los Angeles had a boom in the late 80s and early 90s, which gave it the tallest building west of Chicago, but it wasn't enough to give it the third biggest skyline in the country such as Houston had.
If you're discussing sheer numbers, Houston deserves 3rd place. But if you are discussing the innovative nature of the designs, impact on architecture, the way the buildings improve or compliment the neighborhood they are situated in, etc, then it would make for a more interesting thread.

I am not knocking Houston or Miami, or any other city. I just can't be impressed by the sheer numbers of 400 or 500 + feet tall buildings. Look at the ugliness of many of the high rises in Hong Kong or Shanghai.
What IS impressive about Hong Kong and Shanghai, is the vibrant street life.
Houston, like many other American cities infected by sprawl and the "curse of the car", seems to me, city devoid of street life. All these downtown shots, and the park shots, where people are supposed to be out and about, I can' see barely a soul. The crowds, the hawkers, the pulse of street life, That's the mark of a truly great city. The park scenes posted a few posts above mine are an exception, but even that is not a good indicator of street life, because it's a forced, artificial gathering. Houston's skyline is cool, but it's disconnected from what's on the ground. I guess that's why skylines never impress me. Even New York's.

Last edited by Fred the Fop; Oct 3, 2010 at 4:37 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2010, 2:42 AM
AusHou AusHou is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 640
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred the Fop View Post
If you're discussing sheer numbers, Houston deserves 3rd place. But if you are discussing the innovative nature of the designs, impact on architecture, the way the buildings improve or compliment the neighborhood they are situated in, etc, then it would make for a more interesting thread.

I am not knocking Houston or Miami, or any other city. I just can't be impressed by the sheer numbers of 400 or 500 + feet tall buildings. Look at the ugliness of many of the high rises in Hong Kong or Shanghai.
What IS impressive about Hong Kong and Shanghai, is the vibrant street life.
Houston, like many other American cities infected by sprawl and the "curse of the car", seems to me, city devoid of street life. All these downtown shots, and the park shots, where people are supposed to be out and about, I can' see barely a soul. The crowds, the hawkers, the pulse of street life, That's the mark of a truly great city. The park scenes posted a few posts above mine are an exception, but even that is not a good indicator of street life, because it's a forced, artificial gathering. Houston's skyline is cool, but it's disconnected from what's on the ground. I guess that's why skylines never impress me. Even New York's.
This is getting so old....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2010, 2:50 AM
latennisguy's Avatar
latennisguy latennisguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Back in L.A.
Posts: 552
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred the Fop View Post
... I guess that's why skylines never impress me. Even New York's...
I think you are in the wrong type of forum. This is SKYSCRAPERpage.com
__________________
La arquitectura es música congelada. - Schopenhauer, Arthur
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2010, 3:35 AM
Fred the Fop Fred the Fop is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by latennisguy View Post
I think you are in the wrong type of forum. This is SKYSCRAPERpage.com
I'm impressed by individual Skyscrapers. Not skylines.
This is after all, the SKYSCRAPERpage.com forum.

Not the SKYLINEpage.com forum.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Apr 10, 2008, 10:21 PM
NewAtlantisMiami NewAtlantisMiami is offline
Atlantis Rises Again!
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 554
The Second Tier

Quote:
Originally Posted by SLO View Post
Yeah, I dont know that people under rate the Houston skyline. It is definitely impressive, after NYC & Chicago its in the second tier with 6 or 7 other cities....
This is how I would define the second tier. Before computers, I used the World Almanac and Book of Facts as my reference for the heights of buildings in North American cities. For many years, the World Almanac would list buildings 400 feet tall and up with of course New York and Chicago being the notable exceptions. For New York, they never counted anything below 500 feet tall. But in 2008, for the purposes of space (with the exception of New York and Chicago of course), there are 7 North American cities for which the World Almanac will only count from 450 feet tall and up. These are the cities that might now be considered second tier: Dallas, Houston, Las Vegas, Miami, San Francisco, and Toronto. Using their list starting at 450 feet tall and adding up the heights of all the buildings, Miami edges out Houston for third in the U.S. Toronto, Canada would be third if it were actually in the U.S.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Photography Forums > Found City Photos
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:15 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.