^If you don't see how Boston's skyline is anywhere close to Montreal's then why continue posting about it over and over with the same photo on that hill? At least give Boston a fighting chance by posting a second angle (like below) like you did for Montreal. This is a discussion forum after all.
On that note, instead of the same back-and-forth, I'm interested to understand what QUALITIES actually influence people's subjective perspective of what makes a good skyline. If we understand the criteria you're using to rank a skyline it'd be easier to discuss and compare skylines based on those criteria.
Some of the Qualities of a skyline that seem to factor in the most:
Peak Height, Bulk, Density, Peaks & Troughs, Variations in shapes and materials, Topography, Natural Environment, Signature buildings, Plateau, Multi-Polarity, Taper (rather than giant skyscraper right next to SFH)
Some questions:
What are some qualities I missed?
How much weight does each of these qualities hold to you? Most to least important?
Are there any dealbreakers for you? (E.g. I can't enjoy a skyline that's too similar throughout, I don't like skylines without a beautiful natural environment, etc.)
What are some questions you have for other forumers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klippenstein
|