INDX as seen in its final height:
IMG_5081.JPG
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5081.JPG
    IMG_5081.JPG
    1.9 MB · Views: 2,149
Yes it is.

42
 
Earlier in the day:
IMG_5166.JPG

IMG_5167.JPG

IMG_5169.jpg

IMG_5171.JPG

IMG_5172.JPG

IMG_5180.JPG

IMG_5188.JPG

IMG_5179.JPG
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5188.JPG
    IMG_5188.JPG
    1.9 MB · Views: 1,579
  • IMG_5171.JPG
    IMG_5171.JPG
    2 MB · Views: 1,573
  • IMG_5180.JPG
    IMG_5180.JPG
    1.7 MB · Views: 1,575
  • IMG_5169.jpg
    IMG_5169.jpg
    1.9 MB · Views: 1,577
  • IMG_5166.JPG
    IMG_5166.JPG
    1.8 MB · Views: 1,611
  • IMG_5172.JPG
    IMG_5172.JPG
    2.1 MB · Views: 1,584
  • IMG_5179.JPG
    IMG_5179.JPG
    2 MB · Views: 1,572
  • IMG_5167.JPG
    IMG_5167.JPG
    1.9 MB · Views: 1,621
It's beyond me how a 180m building looks so small in the skyline. Can barely even see it. It seems like a tower in this city must be over 200m to even be noticed in the skyline, but thickness also plays a big role too I'm sure. KPMG really stands out but that's mostly due to the girth.
 
travis3000 said:
It's beyond me how a 180m building looks so small in the skyline. Can barely even see it. It seems like a tower in this city must be over 200m to even be noticed in the skyline, but thickness also plays a big role too I'm sure. KPMG really stands out but that's mostly due to the girth.
Click to expand...

I've always thought INDX looked rather chunky for its height, but in many ways, its more of an illusion considering a lot of the building's lower half is obstructed often obstructed.
I dislike like how the setbacks are barely visible from NPS, I really thought the stepping-stoned roofline would provide a nice visual transition to FCP behind it (which it does from a skyline perspective, but not at ground level).
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top