Random Photos
#1
Posted 30 January 2008 - 12:53 PM
--
Kara B.
#2
Posted 30 January 2008 - 04:31 PM
Bruce Burton
#3
Posted 30 January 2008 - 04:36 PM
Dave still at
Visit 360texas.com
#4
Posted 30 January 2008 - 05:07 PM
--
Kara B.
#5
Posted 30 January 2008 - 05:18 PM
Dave still at
Visit 360texas.com
#6
Posted 30 January 2008 - 05:27 PM
Hey does anyone know if its true about some of the buildings downtown FW - that people party on top of the buildings? Like the patrons of local bars upon closing go to the top of the buildings to keep partying?...?
Just wondering....
#7
Posted 31 January 2008 - 12:29 AM
#8
Posted 01 February 2008 - 02:22 PM
Is that patio furniture reflecting in the glass,on the top right of the pic?If so,where would it be coming from?
#9
Posted 02 February 2008 - 10:16 AM
--
Kara B.
#10
Posted 15 September 2008 - 09:01 PM
This is a picture of North Main Street, up to the turn at like 21st street. I have highlighted The Mercado.
I like this picture because it is from a unique perspective. (Far away and high up from my 34th floor perch)
I took this yesterday in the rain washed clean air. (400mm, no 2x because must be on tripod for that and I cannot tripod around the corner of my balcony to see north.) I did crop the picture about 40% so would have been a great use for my 2x.
#11
Posted 17 September 2008 - 08:03 AM
And as long as I'm on the balcony...
#12
Posted 17 September 2008 - 08:51 AM
#13
Posted 17 September 2008 - 11:07 AM
I think you're pulling my leg about seeing yourself in the photo, but just in case:
Because I use my camera in astronomy, I keep it to the second best I can. Surely within 5 seconds.
My info tag with that photo says it was taken at 7:34:51 AM. So give or take a couple of seconds at most.
BTW: The sun rose at 7:14 this morning. For proof, see my picture in the "Photos in the Distance" in this Photography section.
P.S. Sure wanting to make it in the T&P Condo's one of these days. Hint, hint. Have only been in train station.
#14
Posted 18 September 2008 - 08:25 AM
I think you're pulling my leg about seeing yourself in the photo, but just in case:
Because I use my camera in astronomy, I keep it to the second best I can. Surely within 5 seconds.
My info tag with that photo says it was taken at 7:34:51 AM. So give or take a couple of seconds at most.
BTW: The sun rose at 7:14 this morning. For proof, see my picture in the "Photos in the Distance" in this Photography section.
P.S. Sure wanting to make it in the T&P Condo's one of these days. Hint, hint. Have only been in train station.
Aw man, I was a little bit earlier than that yesterday... That would have been cool if it was me though!
You'll have to come by the T&P some time. I don't have the amazing downtown view like you, but the 10th floor view of the southside is pretty neat. I'm trying to borrow my friends camera and tripod so I can try my hand at some Fort Worth photography from my point of view.
#15
Posted 16 October 2008 - 03:38 AM
My name is Bob Atkinson, i was actually born at 2222 Jacksboro highway, in October 1961,
My dad is, Charles Robert Edward Atkinson, or, (Bob) as he was known, he was in the aircraft industry.
Basically, i was born in the house next to the main big white house, 2222, we knew the couple who owned it very well, they where a really nice couple, they used to look after our litle dog some times!
Anyway, my mum & dad remember it when it was used for gambling, & the woman of the night!
I was hopeing i could here from someone about there mempories of 2222, or anyone who remembers us, (The Atkinsons)or to know anything about it at the time we where there in 1961.
I hope to here from someone there, as i am now here in Suffolk, England, England being my mum & dads birth place.
Thanks, & dope to here from someone soon regarding this.
Thanks, Bob Atkinson.
texanbob2you@yahoo.com
#16
Posted 18 October 2008 - 11:33 AM
And they had a great idea for the old one on the way down. Drop it on one of those loud and rude motorcycles!
(And the freon that escaped was a thousand times less pollution than an average motorcycle emits!)
#17
Posted 23 October 2008 - 10:07 AM
Tale of Two Cities. ( or 4)
Handley Power Plant on Lake Arlington
#18
Posted 08 November 2008 - 10:05 AM
Never saw anyone decorate this for Halloween! Oakwood Cemetary.
#19
Posted 03 December 2008 - 11:55 AM
#20
Posted 03 December 2008 - 01:20 PM
I have the same issue when taking images in a room where one window becomes the prime light source. Natural light entering through the window naturally bends around and illuminates the window jambs. Never can get a nice crisp edge. You would think the window jamb would be in shadow.
Angle of incidence is = to the angle of reflection back to the camera lens. The sun rise extends farther to the right beyond the right image edge.
Maybe apply the same thought pattern to the sunrise lighting spilling around building edge.
http://van.physics.u...ing.php?id=1883
http://scienceworld....Reflection.html
Dave still at
Visit 360texas.com
#21
Posted 05 December 2008 - 08:33 PM
#22
Posted 05 December 2008 - 09:39 PM
#23
Posted 06 December 2008 - 09:57 AM
(I think new limits mostly went from 100k to 250k)
I have sure never noticed that design in the sidewalk...
#24
Posted 06 December 2008 - 10:14 AM
Dave still at
Visit 360texas.com
#25
Posted 06 December 2008 - 06:43 PM
(I think new limits mostly went from 100k to 250k)
I have sure never noticed that design in the sidewalk...
It's in front of the (vacant, and for sale) Moncrieff bank building on the NE corner of that block, if memory serves me.
#26
Posted 07 December 2008 - 05:42 PM
I am guessing they are more secure (Security wise) than a regular window, but I don't know that.
You have to wonder if that plywood sign area near the roof is empty because the City will not allow a sign there or it is just under transition?
#27
Posted 07 December 2008 - 07:22 PM
City would have required the plywood, but only if it were a broken window that needs to be covered. If it were a sign they wouldn't need to cover it with plywood.
#28
Posted 08 December 2008 - 08:29 AM
--
Kara B.
#29
Posted 15 December 2008 - 07:27 PM
#30
Posted 16 December 2008 - 01:00 PM
I thought it was snowing at I30 and Loop 820E but the white stuff is bagged insulation. I would have liked to have caught the shot of this truck falling off that icy, elevated ramp!
#31
Posted 16 December 2008 - 05:25 PM
Black Dog Tavern
#32
Posted 19 December 2008 - 12:18 PM
#33
Posted 19 December 2008 - 01:52 PM
Dave still at
Visit 360texas.com
#34
Posted 28 December 2008 - 04:33 PM
I have three pictures for your review. Two of the YMCA and one of the YWCA. Great buildings. I like the YWCA more as is seems less altered from its original.
YMCA
YMCA up high. I wonder if I am looking at 1924 bricks next to 1985 bricks. (For extensive remodel.)
YWCA Building
#35
Posted 28 December 2008 - 08:42 PM
#36
Posted 04 January 2009 - 07:48 PM
#37
Posted 04 January 2009 - 09:35 PM
Favorites? #7 (Carter Burgess)and #10. (Electric Building.) I really love this last shot. You can't beat having reflections of other buildings windows on your subject building. I also like that "Wall of Barnett tower" in the background.
On a side-note, WT Wagoner Building. Am always surprised that the windows are so sparse on the North Side. As that is such an old building (1919 I think) there must not have been a really tall building on its north side negating any need for windows. I guess it was just cost savings. North windows are never smart in Texas as the sun only come in them in the summer. Maybe it was just being green. (Comfortable, more likely.) Grand building, yes. For 1919, absolutely stunning. I sure always wish I could get in some of these classics. (Besides getting a part time job at XTO)
#38
Posted 04 January 2009 - 10:23 PM
#39
Posted 04 January 2009 - 11:53 PM
Interesting. This implies to me that a glass tower cannot be built in downtown FW without it taking at least half a block. Of course, there are other reasons why a glass tower wants a bigger footprint, but it's interesting to me that it can't legally be done without some sort of waiver.
#40
Posted 05 January 2009 - 12:27 AM
--
Kara B.
#41
Posted 05 January 2009 - 08:07 PM
First, I am definitely no architect, so keep it simple please.
Why would a/the city require no windows if the building was built to the property line?
Robert, I may not be able to wrap my head around your explanation since i can't be there to walk the area and put it into perspective, but would you please try again on your explanaton of the north wall/core etc.
I get the idea of the building core housing the utilities/elevators etc. I even get that the east side and south side face streets and the west side faces an alley (why would anybody want windows looking over an alley, she asked facetiously). Not being there I am guessing the building in question takes part of the block, and there is an area where another building could be built north of /and next too (sharing a wall?). Are ya'll saying that for the entire life of the building there has been no structure to the north, and the building was built without windows on "spec" in case another building came along?
What is a light well?
Why would building codes prohibit windows along the north wall....is that in reference again to the possibility of another building adjacent to the wall?
Could ya'll explain this to me, please? There seem to be so many glass buildings in Fort Worth now, does this mean that all of them had to have a waiver? and what reasoning would be used to get approval for the waiver instead of choosing another design for the building? Is glass a cheaper commodity now, than steel concrete or what ever other building material is used?
Oh, and which building is the Carnegie (sp?) I thought the old library that would have been a benefactor of that largess was torn down long ago?
Thanks,
GenE
p.s. I love all the pictures, but this thread is almost a year old, and takes a long time to load. Could we move the posts from this year to a thread called Random Photos 2009 and rename the old thread Random Photos 2008?
gbs
#42
Posted 06 January 2009 - 11:25 PM
First of all, there was a three story building next door to the W.T. Waggoner on the north side that was constructed before the Waggoner Building. You can see evidence of this building on the W.T.'s north wall. Something happend to this building where it was later reduced to only one story. It was recently removed by XTO and you can see the evidence of the one story remainder being there below the upper wall line, also on the north wall.
These buildings and early skyscrapers were constructed before the invention of air conditioning and modern day lighting. Therefore, in order for the occupants to stay somewhat less hot, and be able to see their work. All buildings had to provide light and air to each office. This was achieved by small floor plates and floor plans of the skyscraper portions being shaped like a "C", "L", "J", "U", or an "E" if the floor plate was large enough. To make the principal facades of the buildings more impressive, the architects usually turned the wings of the building away from the street. The areas between the wings of the buildings were called light wells because they allowed light and air into all offices. This also explains why alley facades had windows. If you have ever walked into an original corridor in these buildings, you would find the corridors had operable transoms above the doors and sometimes borrowed lights (windows). These allowed the air and the light from the windows in the offices to even enter the corridors and to provide cross-ventilation through the building.
The building code actually doesn't deny windows on a property line. The allowance for openings in a structure's wall relate to the distance between two different buildings and to the fire rating requirement of that exterior wall. If a building faces a street and its wall is on the property line, then there won't be another building constructed immediately next to it; therefore, the fire rating of the exterior wall is reduced. With this reduction windows are permitted. When another building can be constructed closer, or your new building is closer than a certain distance to an existing one, then the requirements for the wall ratings are increased, depending on the distance. This increase starts to reduce the size of the windows and can dictate the type of glass (fire rated or wire glass). If two buildings can be constructed right next to each other, then that requires the highest rated wall between them. They can even be on the same property, and sometimes this comes into play with additions to buildings that have exceeded the allowable floor area for that building type. I am way oversimplifying the building code here, so there can be many variations of this. There are also ways of making this issue go away, including removing the property line by replatting, and I think the W.T. Waggoner block has been replatted into one lot. This also eliminated the alley. Therefore, my previous statement about the W.T. could be untrue if the building were constructed on the block platted as one lot. That block was originally platted with individual 25' x 95' lots facing Houston and Throckmorton Streets with an alley down the middle. Now, if the building was constructed in the corner of the site where the lot and block were the same with windows on all four sides, a new building would have to be constructed either without windows facing the W.T. Waggoner, or it would have to be placed a specified distance away to allow openings in those walls.
The building code is a very complicated book and I'm trying my best to explain it in laymen's terms. The reason for all of these rules in the building code is to keep fire from spreading from building to building and from roof to building. If you think about it, it even makes a lot of sense.
The current glass towers were built without variances relating to their glass walls, as far as I know. Due to demands by tenants for large floor plates, these buildings basically take up one entire block. When a building is this large, then the wall ratings for the exterior wall have been removed and the exteriors can be all glass. In other words, the nearest an adjacent building can be when a building takes up one block is 60 feet. At 60 feet, the exterior walls are not required to be rated and the amount of glass is not limited. Please note: The type of building construction also plays a factor in this determination.
I will separate the photos later this week.
#43
Posted 07 January 2009 - 06:28 PM
Thanks John, you explanation was great, and as much as I appreciated it, I have to say that you probably could have
saved yourself a lot of typing if you had just mentioned the windows/fire connection. Sometimes I just need to be hit over
the head with the logic of a situation.
Last question. I am sure that codes will vary from city to city, but it sounds like the logic of architecture will be the same from
city to city. If I am correct in that assumption (this is where the question generates a simple yes/no answer) then I could use
what I learned from you, to explore Austin this weekend, weather permitting, and get more of an appreciation for the buildings here.
And sorry for referring to you as Robert instead of John. (grin)
GenE
#44
Posted 07 January 2009 - 08:41 PM
Last question. I am sure that codes will vary from city to city, but it sounds like the logic of architecture will be the same from
city to city. If I am correct in that assumption (this is where the question generates a simple yes/no answer) then I could use
what I learned from you, to explore Austin this weekend, weather permitting, and get more of an appreciation for the buildings here.
I think the logic you speak of is derived from building codes (i.e. construction science), and not necessarily architecture. I would be willing to bet that architects would very much like to have windows installed on facades that are built up to the building line.
#45
Posted 25 January 2009 - 07:11 PM
Barnett building. The big beast of Fort Worth. Sucking up the setting sun.
I like this building very much. (Texas and Florence Street) I always want to buy it and do something nice with it. It has a great view of the city. It is a classic design with plenty of nice touches like glass block windows, plenty of rock work etc...
Now the problem with this same building... It is totally trashed out on the inside. Talk about underutilized. I think it is vacant. But take a look at these decorating touches. Curtains? Nasty rags. Really, really bad. If I owned property on that street I would be screaming. (I guess I am currently screaming.)
I guess having a trashed out interior is not a municipal violating because here is its neighbor on Texas Street, separated by only one building.
#46
Posted 26 January 2009 - 02:45 PM
Barnett building. The big beast of Fort Worth. Sucking up the setting sun.
Beautiful picture, but isn't this Burnett Plaza? I humbly apologize if I am wrong.
Now the problem with this same building... It is totally trashed out on the inside. Talk about underutilized. I think it is vacant. But take a look at these decorating touches. Curtains? Nasty rags. Really, really bad. If I owned property on that street I would be screaming. (I guess I am currently screaming.)
I know how you feel. This is a fabulous building. Looks like it could have ground-floor retail. There is a serious lack of urban retail space in this city, IMO. It is a shame what's going on on the inside.
They'll get around to it someday...
Voice & Guitars in Big Heaven
Elementary Music Specialist, FWISD
Texas Wesleyan 2015
Shaw-Clarke NA Alumna
#47
Posted 26 January 2009 - 03:21 PM
#48
Posted 26 January 2009 - 03:57 PM
This is the front of the old PD service center. From what I understand it was originally a bowling alley. I've been all through it and, yes, it's pretty trashed.
#49
Posted 30 January 2009 - 07:33 AM
I took this shoot this morning of the 7:03 leaving Fort Worth for Dallas. (I think it is 40% nurses heading for the Hospital district in Dallas.)
On Saturday I mentioned the old Montgomery Ward building (Tindall Storage) having new life and being lit up as XTO is working on the interior. I really like the looks of this building with a few lights on. I think my wife figured out why. She said it looked like a little Christmas snow village. Then I thought of this... I used to play with model trains (In a childhood "cheap" fashion) and I remember having a toy building next to my railroad tracks like this building. My toy building was not illuminated but wished it was. Well this one is...
#50
Posted 01 February 2009 - 07:48 PM
A little bit of the waxing moon above the building.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users