Skyline Outlined in Lights
#1 Willy1
Posted 04 April 2004 - 06:40 PM
#2 John T Roberts
Posted 04 April 2004 - 06:41 PM
I think that now since the Christmas Light tradition has disappeared, the buildings with the partially burning lights should turn them off permanently and maybe try to find another way to brighten up the skyline.
#3 johnlp
Posted 04 April 2004 - 06:43 PM
BRING BACK THE LIGHTS!
#4 Willy1
Posted 04 April 2004 - 06:43 PM
That picture - when was that? FW looks so small compared to now! That was before the FW National Bank was even built (The Tower).
#5 John T Roberts
Posted 04 April 2004 - 06:44 PM
#6 mikedsjr
Posted 04 April 2004 - 06:44 PM
#7 johnlp
Posted 04 April 2004 - 06:45 PM
True, because of the long exposure, the lights look like solid bars of lights instead of the individual bulbs.
I would be all for only lighting the lights during the Holidays, which if I recall was the only time they did it. In some old news footage from channel 5 (then WBAP-TV) when JFK came to Ft. Worth they stated that this was the only time that the "Famous Skyline Lights" were lit outside of the holidays.
I'd love to see a collection of night photos with the buildings lit. I only have the photo above and one other.
#8 mikedsjr
Posted 04 April 2004 - 06:45 PM
#9 John T Roberts
Posted 04 April 2004 - 06:46 PM
#10 jonnyrules23
Posted 04 April 2004 - 06:46 PM
Paschal rules!!!
#11 John T Roberts
Posted 04 April 2004 - 06:47 PM
I think the only way we are going to get the skyline illuminated again is for some of the other building owners to think about neon or floodlighting on their buildings. Another way to do it might be to allow rooftop signs again.
#12 normanfd
Posted 04 April 2004 - 06:47 PM
Where I live in the Trans-Pecos, the Legislature has created a framework for regulating light pollution here in order to preserve the observations at McDonald Observatory, despite that the low population density of the area does not seemingly create as serious a problem as other observatories around the country have encountered. Tourists here, especially children, often express amazement at how starry the skies are at night here. Restoring some of that in metro areas would be a good thing.
#13 John T Roberts
Posted 04 April 2004 - 06:47 PM
#14 clintonaxa
Posted 04 April 2004 - 06:48 PM
#15 normanfd
Posted 04 April 2004 - 06:48 PM
As far as flood/search lights such as the Hollywood Bowl is famous for? Use those only sometime in the future if enemy bombers are really threatening the city.
Perhaps the most cost-effective way to provide proper illumination for safety is reflective caps over lighting. It makes no sense to have an outdoor light bulb shine in all 360 degrees when its purpose is to provide lighting at ground level. Reflecting up-going light back to the ground provides twice as much lighting at street level, or provides the same at half the cost. The same concept could be used for illuminating downtown skyscrapers. Lighting could simply be placed at the top of the building shining downward rather than from the ground up.
Take another look at those lights at the pictures posted on this thread. Notice how much the more typical city lights outshine the amber lights in the photos without providing any coherent or interesting pattern from a distance.
#16 DaPanther84
Posted 04 April 2004 - 06:49 PM
#17 Urbndwlr FW
Posted 04 April 2004 - 06:49 PM
OTOH, all of the other buildings most certainly should have more prominent lighting. That is a no-brainer way to improve the image of a downtown - make it look brilliant and active from afar at night.
#18 jonnyrules23
Posted 04 April 2004 - 06:49 PM
#19 dismuke
Posted 04 April 2004 - 06:50 PM
I have said it before in other threads, but the upper floors of The Fair/Commerce Building cry out for such nighttime lighting. Notice that the downtown building that stands out the most at night is the Sinclair Building. The Commerce Building has the potential to easily become the second most distinguished nighttime building on the skyline.
I don't think the glass curtain walls would look good if flood lights were cast upon them.
I agree. Those building look best if management can convince a certain amount of tenants to simply leave their lights on overnight. In many cases, I think such buildings can look more interesting at night than they do in the day.
#20 Nick
Posted 06 April 2004 - 07:48 PM
Before I give the answer who can tell me were this is taking place even now?
Hint- its not one builing . These faces are cute by the way !
#21 Nick
Posted 06 April 2004 - 07:59 PM
But I hate the one with thos X's on it. It looks like a afterthoght. With no planning. Just a big X on all side looks so odd.and ugly.And thos tiny towers on top?Very odd looking building.
Reunion Tower also looks odd too me.That big ball looks like a Giant Afro to me.
#22 Nick
Posted 07 April 2004 - 11:56 AM
#23
Posted 03 November 2004 - 08:57 PM
"News from Burnett Plaza is that exterior building maintenance will require that the building’s decorative perimeter lights be turned off for a time. Once complete, the lights will be turned back on, with all bulbs burning brightly."
I wonder if they will have them burning by the day after Thanksgiving? Also, how do you like the skyline with Burnett Plaza's lights off?
#24
Posted 04 November 2004 - 12:44 PM
Also, how do you like the skyline with Burnett Plaza's lights off?
I can barely see it from 820 + 35W. I like having a brighly lit skyline.
I yearn for some vertical development. Maybe Jerral Jones should have come to Fort Worth.
I'm sorry, but whether or not people have a view of the courthouse is not that important to me.
#25
Posted 06 November 2004 - 11:37 AM
(Taken at recent TCU home game)
#26
Posted 06 November 2004 - 02:59 PM
#27
Posted 15 November 2004 - 02:02 AM
(...and then they could update that FW Omni heilcopter intro for once and for all!.. zoom! zooooom!)
cheers
lobs
#28
Posted 15 November 2004 - 08:41 PM
#29
Posted 16 November 2004 - 12:42 AM
I think it is time for some neon and for illuminating architectural features. Maybe some buildings could do just the rooftops in neon, while others could outline the entire building with it, yet others could remain with the incandescent lights. A few historic buildings could throw light on their facades highlighting their tops. Maybe a few strategically placed roof signs, and a lighted corporate logo or two could be added in the right places. If you throw in the illuminated tops of Pier 1 Place, The Tower, and the Tandy Center, then you might have a pretty nice nighttime skyline.
Hear, hear!!!
#30
Posted 16 November 2004 - 09:21 AM
man, that really puts the darkness into perspective.. in that shot FW almost looks like it's the downtown of one of those lil' dinky cities.. (Abiline, Lubbock, Waco)
The Prentiss folks [Burnett Plaza] should understand their lightbulb legacy and keep 'em going -- there has to be a solution to their worries.. I'm not a light engineer by any means but wouldn't the problem of maintenance and storm damage be eliminated by having the lights linked in a continual string in clear tubes almost like those Christmas lights you see in tubes -- only more of an industrial size? :]
#31
Posted 16 November 2004 - 09:26 AM
-------------
Unbreakable
A new shatterproof light bulb is on the way
Light bulbs which have been sealed in a special coating could put an end to clearing up tiny shards of glass. British company Fotolec has discovered that if bulbs are covered in a small amount of a strong fluoropolymer they become unbreakable. It's claimed that the coated bulbs could even survive being hurled at the wall. The shatterproof bulbs will set you back about £3 a piece.
#32
Posted 16 November 2004 - 12:11 PM
#33
Posted 16 November 2004 - 04:48 PM
#34
Posted 16 November 2004 - 11:18 PM
#35
Posted 17 November 2004 - 01:42 PM
I like the amber lights outlining the buildings and I'm all for keeping traditions when we can. But, if the tradition is going away and is going to look bad, then I'd rather see Burnett Plaza lit with similar revolving colored lighting. They could even put the "light source on the tops of other buildings or poles surrounding the building... Or they could install the lights in a unifor pattern around the outline of the building... The idea is to treat the building like a giant projector screen to catch the revolving color patterns.
I like the idea of neon lighting on buildings... but what about lights that are projected onto the buildings themselves - maybe laser lights of some sort... of course, we'd have to keep it from being too Vegas-like. I think the concrete facade of Burnett Plaza would be cool if the entire building seemed to change colors at night.
#36 gdvanc
Posted 17 November 2004 - 07:04 PM
What sort of price range are we talking about to design and install better lighting on, say, Burnett Plaza? How much to maintain it? And what affect, if any, would it have on revenues?
Maybe none of that matters if the building's owners are local and full of civic pride. But if the property is just an investment, then they're probably goint to want to see a return on such a project.
#37
Posted 17 November 2004 - 07:17 PM
#38 gdvanc
Posted 17 November 2004 - 08:14 PM
... maybe they could ask the city for a TIF for new lighting.
Most of downtown is covered by existing TIF's #3, #6, & #8. I suppose they could conceivably use funds from those, but I don't know much about the details.
TIF or not, I'm sure bright minds could come up with creative approaches. Right or wrong, a city's skyline is part of its image.
#39
Posted 17 November 2004 - 10:51 PM
Burnett Plaza could actually do something really creative with their lighting if they wanted, I mean, they have all that empty space on the front facade created by the elevator shafts. I like the idea of having a technicolor display that changes colors sporadically (is that kind of what you're talking about, Willy?)
Oh yeah, and the COMMERCE BUILDING MUST BE ILLUMINATED. End of story.
#40 gdvanc
Posted 18 November 2004 - 12:16 AM
Ok, so something needs to be done to the skyline.
It seems so dark from the highway. Not very inviting at all. You can't even tell that anything's going on there. Drives me crazy.
Unfortunately, the buildings that would be most easily seen from the highways have fairly uninteresting facades IMHO. The lights themselves would have to provide the interest because the textures of the faces are relatively bland. I think that's why neon keeps popping into my mind even though I agree that too much would be bad.
Again, I'm glad The Tower went with lighter glass compared to the other glass towers. As has been mentioned before, C-B and the twins look fairly dark even with interior lights on.
Burnett Plaza could actually do something really creative with their lighting if they wanted, I mean, they have all that empty space on the front facade created by the elevator shafts. I like the idea of having a technicolor display that changes colors sporadically (is that kind of what you're talking about, Willy?)
Agree: Some sort of multi-colored lighting in the elevator core seems like an obvious opportunity for a statement, although something much more basic could still be an improvement. Not sure what to do with the rest of the building, though. It needs something.
Oh yeah, and the COMMERCE BUILDING MUST BE ILLUMINATED. End of story.
Absolutely. But will the owners spring for it?
Radisson Plaza should be lit, too - although you'd want to be careful about annoying the guests.
Gratuitous link: Bright Lights, Big City (from sign-industry mag Signs of the Times)
#41
Posted 19 November 2004 - 02:15 AM
#42
Posted 19 November 2004 - 04:38 PM
Radisson Plaza should be lit, too - although you'd want to be careful about annoying the guests.
You probably mean something like this:
After the Texas Hotel was restored, the above picture was the lighting scheme that was present on the building for several years. The uplights on the windows were a restoration of the original lights installed on the building in 1920. When the building opened that upper floor was a ballroom. After the restoration, the floor contained suites. I have heard that the reason the illumination stopped was that it bothered the guests who were paying high dollar for the top floor suites. The picture above was taken in 1981. At the current time, only the large flood light on the canopy that aims upward is turned on.
#43
Posted 19 November 2004 - 09:54 PM
hmmm?.....
#44 gdvanc
Posted 20 November 2004 - 06:45 AM
I probably do.You probably mean something like this:
Looks nice. It's unfortunate that it didn't work out. Thanks for posting the picture.
Too bad they decided to convert the ballroom. It might have been the right business decision, but it would seem like it was a cooler space before.After the Texas Hotel was restored, the above picture was the lighting scheme that was present on the building for several years. The uplights on the windows were a restoration of the original lights installed on the building in 1920. When the building opened that upper floor was a ballroom. After the restoration, the floor contained suites.
Whiners. ;-)I have heard that the reason the illumination stopped was that it bothered the guests who were paying high dollar for the top floor suites.
#45
Posted 30 November 2004 - 06:44 AM
http://www.dfw.com/m...ts/10302354.htm
#46
Posted 04 December 2004 - 02:33 AM
As far as a comprehensive lighting theme for Downtown, here's my proposal:
- glass curtain wall buildings (Carter Burgess, City Center) should remain with the white light outlines. There has to be a way to install longer-lasting energy efficient, bright white lights now.
- buildings with masonry or concrete facades should have some sort of light projected upon them (either from below or shining at anohter angle featuring some architectural feature or the whole building). This includes Burnette Plaza, the Tandy Center, 500 W. 7th Street, the Radisson.
- absolutely no color other than white.
the reason the old scheme of outlining the buildings looked so nice was the similarity in the color (seen from a distance). If all of the buildings just use the same color light (approximately), we'll achieve a great look.
Short buildings (under 8 stories) on the fringes of downtown shouldn't have to comply with this - they don't really contribute to the skyline.
- brigher lights on the historic buildings than is done today. crank up the power on the lights on the WT Waggoner Building and the Fort Worth Club Bldg. Shine a light on the T&P Terminal and the Main Post Office to give some life to the southern end of Downtown.
Austin and Dallas unfortunatley have bright colored neon bulbs highlighting some of their buildings. Those apparently are results of unimaginative developer taste in the '80s. We shouldn't repeat their mistakes.
#47
Posted 04 December 2004 - 07:37 AM
I agree with the lighting of the facade of the buildings with "some sort of light projected upon them" to enhance the overall look at night. I don't think, however, that they should all have the same style or type of lighting. The Blackstone Hotel, or Marriott, is so right for a contemporary lighting scheme with the terraces and just the overall look of the building which would look nice with similar lighting that John gave his rendering of the The Bank One Tower replacement. The Bank One Tower replacement design has a very tasteful display of lights, even with the red, white and blue lights . I like the picture that John added of the Radisson Plaza Hotel too, looks very nice.
Of course this is just my take on things as John Q. Citizen, I'm not an architect. So I'm not trying to say anyone is wrong.
#48
Posted 04 December 2004 - 08:20 AM
#49
Posted 05 December 2004 - 11:11 PM
Too bad they decided to convert the [old Hotel Texas] ballroom. It might have been the right business decision, but it would seem like it was a cooler space before.
I agree completely. My understanding is that the reason top floor ballrooms have fallen out of favor with hotel operators is due to the logistical problem of getting large crowds to and from the ballroom using elevators. In some of the old hotels when there was an event with several hundred people in the ballroom, it could take 20 or more minutes for everyone to be able to get down - and, of course, the full elevators were a real pain for those who rented rooms in the hotel.
Still, there was a certain grandeur to the old ballrroms that today's meeting space/ballroom/multi-purpose space does not even begin to approach. And some of the old hotels had rooftop restaurants and nightclubs. And during warm weather months, they would feature bands that played happy melodic 1920s and 1930s dance tunes. Somehow, I don't see something like that working with the sort of music people listen to today.
#50
Posted 05 December 2004 - 11:18 PM
It [the Fort Worth skyline] seems so dark from the highway. Not very inviting at all. You can't even tell that anything's going on there. Drives me crazy.
I was driving in to Fort Worth from a trip I took south of the city one night a few weeks ago and went through the interchange and on to the West Freeway towards home. One thing struck me big time: The Pier One building was incredible - it stood out like a shining beacon. The lighting scheme on that one building singlehandedly outclassed the entire big city skyline located a few blocks away. Something definitely needs to be done because Pier One is only underscoring how bland our city's skyline looks at night. (And to certain mentalities that I know exist in this world.... no, the solution is NOT to turn off Pier One's lights out of "fairness" to the rest of the skyline.)
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users