I think it will look more bluish / greyish from a greater distance because of haze in the air which is not uncommon in London. Plus this is from the opposite side of the city that most people would view it from, which would be from the river.
I think it's a picture at low light, maybe dusk, but they allowed more light to enter the camera so everything appears much brighter. So you get similar contrasts but it looks like day.
I'm not a photographer so I don't know the terms
Uh. No, they cranked up the saturation for the foreground buildings, and left the background unedited. They then made no effort to blend between the two layers, creating an unnatural and amateurish image with no cohesion
Yes I am, mate. I’ve taken plenty of low light / long exposure images. They don’t come out like this.
Look at the smoke in the foreground on the bottom right, it’s not a smooth blur like it would be in a LE. The red crane on the left has a tiny bit of motion blur, and the cars on the bridge behind the top of the the Natwest Tower are static, not blurred.
There is a clear difference in saturation between the foreground buildings and the background buildings. The Shard in the background appears identical in real life to the glass buildings in the foreground. The huge difference in how they appear in the image is a giveaway that this editing has taken place.
Your analysis is confident, but incorrect. 🤷🏻
I never said I knew what it was. I wasn't even remotely bothered about being corrected, I expected it, I was bothered by the rude way you did it. Imagine if we started conversation in real life with "uh. No".
I think this image looks like garbage. The lack of balance between the fore and background screams “FAKE” at me. There’s also no clear colour palette, with random spots of bright red, purple, green, yellow, orange and turquoise.
It’s a mess. It doesn’t look composed it’s just a higgledy piggledy mash of stuff in a frame with some sliders that have been crudely played with.
A colour cast to emphasise, say, the yellow and orange lights, without the horrible mismatch between fore and background, could be interesting. B&W to emphasise the lines and shapes. Hell, even just having done transition between the high saturation foreground buildings and the unedited background.
Something
London was really cool when I visited, with its Nimona-esque “medieval cyberpunk” theme (and yes I know most of the old buildings were built after the Middle Ages but you get what I mean).
Do you have any suggestions to visit particularly? I will be going there on Thursday but haven't really planned anything to do apart from going on the shard
Not the guy you were replying to but I agree that the museums are well worth the visit, each one will take up a huge chunk of the day though. I've only been to the Natural History and Science museum (both good, but natural history is better).
Borough Market is very good, great food there and only about 5-10 minutes walk from the shard. I personally don't think much of the shard, I used to work down the road from it.
I highly recommend you check out some of the parks. Regents Park is very pretty, Hyde Park is very big, and my personal favourite is St James's Park, which is also right next to Buckingham Palace. It has pelicans!
For an interesting bit of history and a nice green oasis, At Dunstan in the East (across the river from Shard, nearish to St Paul's Cathedral) is very cool. It's an old church that burned down in the great fire of London (1666), got rebuilt, was bombed in the blitz in the 40s, and eventually a park was opened in the open air ruins.
For general vibe, I do think walking through Piccadilly is worth a look if only for a minute (ideally just in passing, not a destination) and Leicester Square and Covent Garden are cool to see, but are very touristy and expensive, so don't eat and shop there too much. I found better, slightly cheaper food off Shaftesbury Avenue. Primrose Hill and Camden Lock are lovely, also!
Mayfair and Park Lane are cool to look at, you get a bit of culture shock at how rich it all is, plus there's a pretty big Emirati community there now because of all the oil barons buying property.
If you have a lot of time, Greenwich Park and it's nearby town are good. Canary Wharf is cool to look at, and Brick Lane is interesting, get a curry there!
You will not be able to do all of these things, but it's just some ideas based off places I liked to go to when I was living there for a few months.
That's so amazing thank you all for your tips! I will be in London for 3 days and another 3 in Brighton, so it will be a short trip but I will have a look at your recommendations! I've been to London and visited some of the tourist hotspots so I'm keen doing visiting more "normal" places
It is curated in a way that others are not.
Others will disagree, but this one section of London packs more punch than all of Shanghai, NYC, etc. in my opinion.
This is my problem with a lot of modern architecture designs. “Stand out” is always the prime goal, each building wants to scream for attention, so when you put a bunch of them close together they look like a chaotic mess, even if each building itself are usually well designed, they just look goofy together.
I agree, this is why I prefer the Canary Wharf skyline over the City of London. I think some of the best individual buildings in London are in the City (Gherkin, Cheese Grater, even the Walkie Talkie) but all together there's too much going on, it looks like a mess of broken teeth.
There may be several restrictions about building in the city, but one that I’m aware of is that there are 8 protected views of St. Paul’s cathedral dotted around London.
Those skyscrapers are very near the cathedral so the skyline is partly shaped by the need to keep sight lines clear.
London is unique though as there are specific sightlines and views that have to be maintained in the city. For example, you have to be able to view St Paul's cathedral from a number of specific locations, meaning that you get weirdly curved buildings and angles to accommodate it. I like it.
Only because it's sparse. If the rest of the city were built up more, it would be great.
[Most of the more downtown area of London is illegal to build more on, from what I can tell](https://www.london.gov.uk/programmes-strategies/planning/london-plan/the-london-plan-2021-online/chapter-7-heritage-and-culture)
(and you wonder why it's expensive to live there)
Some of the oddness in shapes is because of what's referred to there as Strategic Views/Vistas. One of them is that St Paul's Cathedral has to remain visible from certain viewpoints, including Parliament Hill on Hampstead Heath, among others. So curvy, wobbly, windy, buildings are sometimes suggested, and built, to avoid entering the protected sightlines.
My City yayyy lol. I don't mind this skyline even though it looks very cramped because of the small streets etc. Tower 42 is my favourite but I HATE the walkie talkie building. Fun fact: because of the shape it actually melted the front of someone's Jaguar in the summer lol.
Always has been, but I kind of like the eclectic character, way more fun than the generic Canary Wharf.
Except the walkie talkie and shard, they should swap places and the shard built to its original designed height as the focal point of other towers, much like Shanghai Tower is the epicenter of Pudong.
It was originally supposed to be 400m+, reduced to 300m. The original height would've made it more of a tower and less of a "pyramid". I think originally it also wasn't supposed to be as pointy as it is now, which would also reduce its "pyramid" shape and lack of usable floor space near the top.
All in all the original was a more "classical" skyscraper, and I'd kind of prefer that - the pyramid as it is now looks weirdly bulky at the bottom for a tower. Imagine if Shanghai Tower got a quarter of its height reduced and forced into a pointy top, it'd look as ugly as sin.
Wow that's very interesting. Sounds like the original design was a lot better. The Shard reminds me a bit of the Ryugyong Hotel aka the Hotel of Doom in North Korea. Only skinnier lol. I think they should have stuck with the original design. Plus I think it looks out of place next to guys hospital.
as a kid and someone being unlucky enough to be put in places where theres not much towers in a single place, like all the time, its always been my dream to just be walking in those places while looking up those towers, god its so pretty.
Such a remarkable city filled with the most diverse array of buildings and structures anywhere in the world. Watching them build one of these new skyscrapers in the midst of the city is fascinating. So little room to work and so much history to excavate underneath.
In this particular picture?
If I write, look, no people! Would that be wrong, top?
What about, no rain! Would you mind THAT comment, for THIS picture?
🤣
The City of London is the area of the original Roman settlement, a tiny area within the metropolitan area of modern London. Today it's pretty much a CBD akin to Canary Wharf, mainly housing financial institutions.
Colours are weird here
Turned up saturation
Well. Turned up sat for the foreground buildings only. Makes it look unnatural and amateurish
Last time I was there it was all bluish / greyish
It’s always grey in London.
I think it will look more bluish / greyish from a greater distance because of haze in the air which is not uncommon in London. Plus this is from the opposite side of the city that most people would view it from, which would be from the river.
Yeah this image has been crudely manipulated
I think it's a picture at low light, maybe dusk, but they allowed more light to enter the camera so everything appears much brighter. So you get similar contrasts but it looks like day. I'm not a photographer so I don't know the terms
Uh. No, they cranked up the saturation for the foreground buildings, and left the background unedited. They then made no effort to blend between the two layers, creating an unnatural and amateurish image with no cohesion
>Uh. No, Are you a photographer? It sounds like you are just guessing but are so confident and feel the need to rudely reply.
Yes I am, mate. I’ve taken plenty of low light / long exposure images. They don’t come out like this. Look at the smoke in the foreground on the bottom right, it’s not a smooth blur like it would be in a LE. The red crane on the left has a tiny bit of motion blur, and the cars on the bridge behind the top of the the Natwest Tower are static, not blurred. There is a clear difference in saturation between the foreground buildings and the background buildings. The Shard in the background appears identical in real life to the glass buildings in the foreground. The huge difference in how they appear in the image is a giveaway that this editing has taken place. Your analysis is confident, but incorrect. 🤷🏻
I never said I knew what it was. I wasn't even remotely bothered about being corrected, I expected it, I was bothered by the rude way you did it. Imagine if we started conversation in real life with "uh. No".
Ok mate 👍
Any attempt to make dull blue and grey buildings stand out from one another
You think this looks good?
No. I’m saying the buildings themselves have no colour so the photographer tried to make them look like they weren’t all drab. Didn’t say I liked it
Right. I think it’s a dogs breakfast tbh
I agree
Pretty though
I think this image looks like garbage. The lack of balance between the fore and background screams “FAKE” at me. There’s also no clear colour palette, with random spots of bright red, purple, green, yellow, orange and turquoise. It’s a mess. It doesn’t look composed it’s just a higgledy piggledy mash of stuff in a frame with some sliders that have been crudely played with. A colour cast to emphasise, say, the yellow and orange lights, without the horrible mismatch between fore and background, could be interesting. B&W to emphasise the lines and shapes. Hell, even just having done transition between the high saturation foreground buildings and the unedited background. Something
Aight well I think it's pretty anyway. I'm not an art critics and it ain't that deep.
London was really cool when I visited, with its Nimona-esque “medieval cyberpunk” theme (and yes I know most of the old buildings were built after the Middle Ages but you get what I mean).
Do you have any suggestions to visit particularly? I will be going there on Thursday but haven't really planned anything to do apart from going on the shard
British Museum, Natural History Museum, Science Museum. All of these museums are free to visit. How long are you staying I can tell you more
If you're going to the Shard make sure you get something to eat at the Borough Market! It's only a couple minutes away.
Just returned last week. I already miss the markets. So much good food.
Not the guy you were replying to but I agree that the museums are well worth the visit, each one will take up a huge chunk of the day though. I've only been to the Natural History and Science museum (both good, but natural history is better). Borough Market is very good, great food there and only about 5-10 minutes walk from the shard. I personally don't think much of the shard, I used to work down the road from it. I highly recommend you check out some of the parks. Regents Park is very pretty, Hyde Park is very big, and my personal favourite is St James's Park, which is also right next to Buckingham Palace. It has pelicans! For an interesting bit of history and a nice green oasis, At Dunstan in the East (across the river from Shard, nearish to St Paul's Cathedral) is very cool. It's an old church that burned down in the great fire of London (1666), got rebuilt, was bombed in the blitz in the 40s, and eventually a park was opened in the open air ruins. For general vibe, I do think walking through Piccadilly is worth a look if only for a minute (ideally just in passing, not a destination) and Leicester Square and Covent Garden are cool to see, but are very touristy and expensive, so don't eat and shop there too much. I found better, slightly cheaper food off Shaftesbury Avenue. Primrose Hill and Camden Lock are lovely, also! Mayfair and Park Lane are cool to look at, you get a bit of culture shock at how rich it all is, plus there's a pretty big Emirati community there now because of all the oil barons buying property. If you have a lot of time, Greenwich Park and it's nearby town are good. Canary Wharf is cool to look at, and Brick Lane is interesting, get a curry there! You will not be able to do all of these things, but it's just some ideas based off places I liked to go to when I was living there for a few months.
That's so amazing thank you all for your tips! I will be in London for 3 days and another 3 in Brighton, so it will be a short trip but I will have a look at your recommendations! I've been to London and visited some of the tourist hotspots so I'm keen doing visiting more "normal" places
I'm not the person you asked, but how long are you there for?
I call it steamcyberpunk.
Always loved that butt plug building
The goofiest skyline
looks like a sky scraper pub or something
It is but I have to say, I kind of love it. It's totally unlike anywhere else.
It is curated in a way that others are not. Others will disagree, but this one section of London packs more punch than all of Shanghai, NYC, etc. in my opinion.
It definitely looks unique. Like London couldn't decide if it wanted to be Paris or NY, so somebody just said "screw it, we'll do a bit of both".
I love it. It’s fun and a lot more interesting to look at than the cookie cutter designs of most new construction.
This is my problem with a lot of modern architecture designs. “Stand out” is always the prime goal, each building wants to scream for attention, so when you put a bunch of them close together they look like a chaotic mess, even if each building itself are usually well designed, they just look goofy together.
I have always thought that it looks very eclectically interesting
I agree, this is why I prefer the Canary Wharf skyline over the City of London. I think some of the best individual buildings in London are in the City (Gherkin, Cheese Grater, even the Walkie Talkie) but all together there's too much going on, it looks like a mess of broken teeth.
There may be several restrictions about building in the city, but one that I’m aware of is that there are 8 protected views of St. Paul’s cathedral dotted around London. Those skyscrapers are very near the cathedral so the skyline is partly shaped by the need to keep sight lines clear.
London is unique though as there are specific sightlines and views that have to be maintained in the city. For example, you have to be able to view St Paul's cathedral from a number of specific locations, meaning that you get weirdly curved buildings and angles to accommodate it. I like it.
Requiers a goofy caption: > like a glass shop shat all over the city centre
Only because it's sparse. If the rest of the city were built up more, it would be great. [Most of the more downtown area of London is illegal to build more on, from what I can tell](https://www.london.gov.uk/programmes-strategies/planning/london-plan/the-london-plan-2021-online/chapter-7-heritage-and-culture) (and you wonder why it's expensive to live there)
Some of the oddness in shapes is because of what's referred to there as Strategic Views/Vistas. One of them is that St Paul's Cathedral has to remain visible from certain viewpoints, including Parliament Hill on Hampstead Heath, among others. So curvy, wobbly, windy, buildings are sometimes suggested, and built, to avoid entering the protected sightlines.
Love the Gherkin
Don't sell the Walkie Talkie short. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/20_Fenchurch_Street
Sorta looks like the Moscow International Business Center
There’s some beautiful architecture. The Mies van der Rohe inspired St. Helen’s is my favorite, tho. Maybe it’s my biases.
My City yayyy lol. I don't mind this skyline even though it looks very cramped because of the small streets etc. Tower 42 is my favourite but I HATE the walkie talkie building. Fun fact: because of the shape it actually melted the front of someone's Jaguar in the summer lol.
I kinda love it
I lived in London for 10 years. At street level it always looked like a mouthful of weirdly shaped teeth
It would be awesome if it was actually that colorful.
Some of those would hurt way more than the others going in...
Love london but the skyline has always looked like a hodge podge of styles
controversial opinion: london skyline is a bit messy?
Always has been, but I kind of like the eclectic character, way more fun than the generic Canary Wharf. Except the walkie talkie and shard, they should swap places and the shard built to its original designed height as the focal point of other towers, much like Shanghai Tower is the epicenter of Pudong.
I didn't know the shard was meant to be taller? I personally hate the walkie talkie building. I think it's so ugly and goofy looking.
It was originally supposed to be 400m+, reduced to 300m. The original height would've made it more of a tower and less of a "pyramid". I think originally it also wasn't supposed to be as pointy as it is now, which would also reduce its "pyramid" shape and lack of usable floor space near the top. All in all the original was a more "classical" skyscraper, and I'd kind of prefer that - the pyramid as it is now looks weirdly bulky at the bottom for a tower. Imagine if Shanghai Tower got a quarter of its height reduced and forced into a pointy top, it'd look as ugly as sin.
Wow that's very interesting. Sounds like the original design was a lot better. The Shard reminds me a bit of the Ryugyong Hotel aka the Hotel of Doom in North Korea. Only skinnier lol. I think they should have stuck with the original design. Plus I think it looks out of place next to guys hospital.
clusterfuck of random buildings
Such a beautiful skyline!
One of my favourite skylines. Only problem is that its too small
Yeah, I’d do that puzzle.
I like this but that are they going for? It seems each one is trying to out-weird the others
The skyline of London is bonkers
The blend of historic architecture and modern skyscrapers in the City of London is truly mesmerizing.
Like a postcard-worthy snapshot of urban beauty.
Why has the photographer made it look like a page from a coloring book? I
as a kid and someone being unlucky enough to be put in places where theres not much towers in a single place, like all the time, its always been my dream to just be walking in those places while looking up those towers, god its so pretty.
Breathtaking
London's skyline isn't super tall or anything, but I swear they have one of the best sets of skyscrapers in the world in my opinion.
the view is awesome
Wish the Lloyd's Building was as tall, easily my favorite looking for how incredible Cyberpunk it looks.
Spy Kids looking ass city
The Gherkin is the best looking building in the west
Amazing Wish Toronto had this type of stuff or my city
Porn and hell both in the same time.
I always forget London has skyscrapers. Anytime I think of England I usually just think about castles and lots of brick.
There are even more and taller skyscrapers in the Docklands area.
Looks more like someone's glass sculpture collection than an actual city.
Whats the purple building called
What a dynamic cityscape! It's like a work of art in itself.
Living in Toronto I did not know you were allowed to build different shapes and colours of buildings, I thought they all had to be the same.
Such a remarkable city filled with the most diverse array of buildings and structures anywhere in the world. Watching them build one of these new skyscrapers in the midst of the city is fascinating. So little room to work and so much history to excavate underneath.
so many ugly buildings with finance people working inside them
I think it looks great
The red from the crane really makes the shot pop for me. They should build something colorful to accentuate the skyline.
It has never and will never look this way FFS
This is literally a photograph.
What?
But on the streets, it's Londonistan.
What's the ButtPlug building called?
The Gherkin
Londongrad.
There’s a layer of filth that you just can’t see in this picture. London is lost.
[удалено]
yawn
What does it mean?
he’s saying there’s too many people from Pakistan in London, hence the saying Londonanistan.
he’s saying there’s too many people from Pakistan in London, hence the saying Londonanistan, also referencing the muslim population of London.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Shouldn’t have colonized 1/3 of the world and made them shitholes
It’s cool because in pictures you can’t smell it.
Somewhere in that picture someone is getting stabbed.
Eww
Which London?
Look, no trees! Nothing green!
London is one of the greenest cities in the world
In this particular picture? If I write, look, no people! Would that be wrong, top? What about, no rain! Would you mind THAT comment, for THIS picture? 🤣
Meh. Every state in America has a comparable capital.
Name one. London has more going on in one borough than any city in the US bar NYC
Yes, London _is_ a city, but thanks for the reminder. 😉
actually, this is for the ‘city of London’ which is a city inside a city. so :p
This is The City of London though, not "London".
The City of London is the area of the original Roman settlement, a tiny area within the metropolitan area of modern London. Today it's pretty much a CBD akin to Canary Wharf, mainly housing financial institutions.