# DISCUSS: Skyline Massiveness Factor



## Shera

*Skyline Massive-ness Factor (or Skyline Immersion Factor)*



It is a new kind of skyline rating that tries to avoid rating skylines based upon how much of it is visible over a distant horizon. The popular skyline ratings in use placed a heavy emphasis on how many buildings stood over a certain height, and gave greatly diminishing returns on buildings that only stood less than 100 feet above the minimum baseline (of 90m or so). According to the "official" Emporis skyline rating, a single 80-floor skyscraper would yield as many points as a whopping 400 buildings that are 19 floors in height! To the average pedestrian, which is more impressive: 400 19-floor buildings in a city or a single 80-floor skyscraper? Which gives more of an urban feeling? Which gives the city a more "massive" feeling? 

It is like seeing how pretty a model girl is without being able to come within 200 feet of the girl, let alone touch or feel her hair and flesh. Usually, to be able to truly know the immersion factor of a city's massive-ness, one must be able to immerse into the core of the city. Only a pedestrian would be able to truly appreciate the "wow" factor of all the high-rises from both up-close and from a-far. 

The new kind of skyline rating tries to take into account BOTH the massive-ness of a city's core (even if most buildings are only 12 floors) and the height of the skyline that can be viewed from up to 100km away. Buildings that are under 500 feet in height still receive diminishing returns on the amount of points per floor or per 10 feet; however the diminishing returns are not so penalizing that a 91m building would yield only 1 point like with Gramsbergen's ratings.

In this new rating system, a super-massive city like Sao Paulo or Buenos Aires would no longer score so low. Sao Paulo has often been touted as the most vertical city, with well over 5,000 high-rises, but Emporis's "new" skyline rating (not the original one) leaves Sao Paulo at #51, below Las Vegas ranked #35 or Pittsburgh ranked #41. A visitor from Sao Paulo would certainly not see Las Vegas as a massive skyscraper city. The immersion "wow" factor of the massive-ness of the city's core would hardly be maintained by a few high-rises of Las Vegas as compared to over 5,000 high-rises of Sao Paulo. Sao Paulo is far more likely to give an "urban" Star Wars or Gotham feel than just a small bunch of 2-3 supertalls.

The reason why the scoring begins with only 10 floors is that with 10 floors, it would boost the urban immersion factor of many massive cities in Europe and Latin America, such as London and Buenos Aires. It is in hopes that a single 10-floor building would at least give some credit to thousands of 8-floor buildings that will not be accounted for in cities such as Paris, for Paris should get some boost in its generally low ratings with whatever 10-floor buildings it has above the rest of those 8-story buildings. The "mini-skyscrapers" in Tokyo would also get some credit, as many of those thin buildings look just like skyscrapers from up-close.




*Algorithm for calculating score of skyscraper rating:*

10 floors: 100 points (10 points per floor), 11 points per 11 floors, 12 points per 12 floors, and so on..
20 floors: 400 points (20 points per floor)
30 floors: 900 points (30 points per floor)
40 floors: 1600 points (40 points per floor)
50 floors: 2500 points (50 points per floor)
60 floors: 3600 points (60 points per floor)
70 floors: 4900 points (70 points per floor)
80 floors: 6400 points (80 points per floor) 
90 floors: 8100 points (90 points per floor)
100 floors: 10000 points (100 points per floor)
(100 points per floor for over 100 floors -- the "squared" ratio stops increasing here)

*PLUS (400 times the squareroot of (# of feet of the building+1500) MINUS 15800). If there is no measured height, then the height will be equal to the number of floors times 12 feet. * 

That way, a 10-floor building that is 100 feet tall would achieve a total of *300 points (100 points from 10 floors* and *200 points from [ 400 * sqrt (100+1500) ] - 15800 )*.

The Empire State building would get 10200 points from 102 floors and 5177 points from 1250 feet, for a total of 15377 points (12.3 points per feet), which is equal to ~51 of 10-floor, 100-foot buildings despite being only 12 times taller. 


For skyscraper structure types that are not substantially consisted of floors or stories (monumental halls, religious buildings, silos, monuments, pyramids, etc.. not including antennas), a minimum of 150 feet is required for there to be any points. Zero points for floors will be given unless there are more than 10 floors in that structure. 

A church with a 150-foot tall spire has 448 points. A church with a 200-foot tall spire has 693 points. The 289-foot tall US Capitol has 1019 points. The Washington Monument (555 feet) has 2233 points.

150ft spire = 448 points (~3.0 points per feet)
200ft spire = 693 points
300ft spire = 1171 points (3.9 points per feet)
400ft spire = 1636 points 
500ft spire = 2089 points
600ft spire = 2530 points (4.2 points per feet)
700ft spire = 2962 points
800ft spire = 3384 points 
Eiffel Tower (986 feet tall) = 4144 points
1000ft spire = 4200 points, which is 6x of a 200ft spire (4.2 points per feet)
CN Tower (1815 feet tall) = 7231 points (~4.0 points per feet) 

The Burj Dubai would have 16200 points for 162 floors and 10074 points for 2684 feet, for a grand total of 26274 points (9.8 points per feet). Although the Burj Dubai is 2684 feet, or only 26.8 times taller than a 100-foot building that has 10 floors, it achieves a score equal to ~88 of those 10-floor buildings. It would have scored even higher if it had more floors instead of a 600-foot spire.

*100ft building with 10 floors = 300 points (3 points per feet)

200ft building with 20 floors = 1093 points (5.47 points per feet, ~3.6x of a 100ft, 10-floor building)

300ft building with 30 floors = 2071 points (6.90 points per feet, ~6.9x of a 100ft, 10-floor building or ~1.9x of a 200ft, 20-floor building,)

400ft building with 40 floors = 3236 points (8.09 points per feet, ~11x of a 100ft, 10-floor building, ~3x of a 200ft, 20-floor building)

500ft building with 50 floors = 4589 points (9.18 points per feet, ~15x of a 100ft, 10-floor building, ~4.2x of a 200ft, 20-floor building)

600ft building with 60 floors = 6130 points (10.22 points per feet, ~20x of a 100ft, 10-floor building, ~5.6x of a 200ft, 20-floor building, ~3x of a 300ft, 30-floor building)

700ft building with 70 floors = 7862 points (11.23 points per feet, ~26.2x of a 100ft, 10-floor building, ~7.2x of a 200ft, 20-floor building, ~3.8x of a 300ft, 30-floor building)

800ft building with 80 floors = 9784 points (12.23 points per feet, ~32.6x of a 100ft, 10-floor building, ~9x of a 200ft, 20-floor building, ~3x of a 400ft, 40-floor building)

John Hancock Center (1127ft, 100 floors) = 14702 points (13 points per feet)*

Note how a 400ft, 40-floor building is equal to almost exactly 3 of 200-ft buildings, and how an 800ft, 80-story building is also equal to almost exactly 3 of 400-ft buildings, maintaining a quite linear 3:2 multiple ratio of the halves among the high-rises and skyscrapes between 150 feet and 900 feet.

One of the reasons for this new alogrithm is that the impressivity (especially the immersiveness) factor starts to become quite linear as the buildings keep on increasing in height beyond 700 feet. The points-per-feet ratio gradually drops off after 800-1000+ feet depending on the number of floors, and always slightly drops off after 100 floors, due to the per-feet algorithm. Although the building would remain visible over trees and other structures from a greater distance, maintaining the visibility of the skyline from dozens of miles away, the linear increase in height loses its linearity when viewing up close, due to the logarithmic nature of perspective. For example, when viewing from the street level on the other side of the street, a 700 foot building would appear only 1.5 times taller than a 350 foot building, not 2 times. Also, a super-tall, like the CN Tower for example, is given slightly less credit per foot due to the rare nature of these buildings, as those buildings are rather unlikely to crowd the sky, contributing to greater immersiveness when inside of a city, or when approaching the city from a distance. Also, such a supertall would take away from the rest of the skyline, making other buildings look much smaller than they really are, thus detracting from the seeming "massiveness" of the city as a whole. 

The number of floors are given larger emphasis since it is closely correlated to the massivity of the skyscraper. A 700-foot building with 70 floors would almost always appear to be greater in magnitude than a 700-foot building that includes a 150-foot spire and 35 floors. The number of floors also incresaes the square-footage of the building for office or residential space, and the number of levels and windows for viewing from within. 


Of course, it is a subjective ranking system for treating the rough statistics of cities with a different perspective that tries to account for a new kind of "wow" factor. 

Once again, this kind of rating is not focused upon the exponential returns of super-tall syscrapers in a city like Dubai, but rather focused upon the massiveness of a city like Tokyo or Singapore where 20-30 story buildings are to be spotted across the horizon in all directions. Therefore, Dubai will be ranking lower in terms of city "massiveness" compared to the Emporis ranking. After the birth of a 10-floor skyscraper in Chicago in 1885 (and several others in the following years), skyscrapers of different sizes and heights add greatly to both the skyline aesthetics and the "urban forest" density.

The data is gathered from Emporis skyline ranking: 
http://www.emporis.com/en/bu/sk/st/sr/
and from E. Gramsbergen's list here:
http://homepages.ipact.nl/~egram/skylines.html
There is also a new skyline ranking by Emporis here:
http://www.emporis.com/application/?nav=skyline_ranking but it does not add much after looking at Gramsbergen's list which also include adjacent areas in the metropolitan area, outside the official city district. 
It is to be stressed here that Emporis data only complies a list of buildings within the political district of the city, and does not cover the metropolitan area such as Jersey City, which is a mile away from Manhattan for example. Another critical factor regarding Emporis data is that it is quite incomplete especially with most cities in Asia. 
A few other sources are used such as Wikipedia and the forums here, like with the number of 11-or-more floor buildings in Shanghai that was provided by the Chinese government. Hopefully, the members here on the forums will become the best source as you dear readers contribute to the list by adding buildings. Only the figures with credible sources will be added to the list below. Such credible sources could include the new 3D building models added to Google Earth, or directly verifiable pictures that allow one to count the buildings (and the number of floors) that have not yet been accounted for on Emporis.

*List of Predicted rankings after looking at different sources of data (keep in mind that it is a flexible, on-going project that will be changed according to improved data contributed by SSC members here from verifiable sources):*

*Ranked City | #Buildings over 12 floors (+ under construction) | # 90m+ Bldgs, M total over 90m | Emporis pts*



Code:


1.  Hong Kong  			7654+112	3018,	84922m		126540
2.  New York City+NJ		6252+156	881, 	36193m	 	38013+
3.  Shanghai			6704+121+?	583, 	19493m		14681+
4.  Sao Paulo  		     	5662+435+?	289, 	3978m   	16817?
5.  Seoul+metro			2922+33+? 	294, 	8610m		16805+
6.  Tokyo+Yokohama	     	3094+27 	690, 	21047m		13284+
7.  Beijing			899+37++??	258,	5371m		6307?+
8.  Moscow  			2031+84?	152,  	4411m 		6399?+
9.  Singapore 		     	4337+210	329, 	7697m 		17335
10.  Chicago+metro		1180+37 	340, 	16464m		17096
11.  Guangzhou			504+22++? 	342, 	10368m		10989+
12.  Rio de Janeiro  		2514+139	94,   	1644m		5681
13.  Chongqing			536+55+??	357,	8849m		7799?+
14.  Shenzhen			348+26++?? 	240,	7923m		6890?+
15.  Toronto+Mississauga	1999+110	222,  	6053m		9405
16.  Buenos Aires  		1692+50? 	109,  	2274m		4649?+
17.  Dubai+Sharjah		480+333 	294,  	16704m		10057+
18.  Istanbul  			2141+196	85,    	2432m		3766
19.  Bangkok  			780+81		421,  	13375m		12933
20.  Kuala Lumpur+metro 	598+81? 	221,	7674m		6443?
21.  Osaka+Sakai		1239+20 	149,  	5473m		4501+
22.  Mexico City+metro		1450+106	114,	2665m		2909+
23.  London  			1445+96 	48,    	1576m		2949
24.  Sydney+metro		954+22		137,	4693m		4681
25.  Manila + Makati ??		258+61+?	175,	6598m		2671++
26.  Jakarta 			387+143 	180,	5590m		4801
27.  Nanjing  (incomplete)	76+48++??	98, 	4903m		2114??
28.  Kyiv 			1528+42 	55,	677m		2236
29.  Mumbai			958+270 	94,	2764m		3894
30.  Recife 			1036+158	96,	1245m		4342
31.  Wuhan 			479+17+?	155,	2959m		4117?+
32.  Macao 			557+68		122,	2574m		4661
33.  Caracas			1109+23 	65,	1592m		2715
34.  Melbourne			530+24		105,	3626m		4058
35.  Paris 			580+2		111,	2617m		2292
36.  Miami+Miami Beach   	442+29		112,	4909m		4894++
37.  Houston			349+17		114,	4812m		3689
38.  Curitiba			822+32		61,	721m		2957
39.  Santiago			1092+359	34,	459m		2189
40.  Los Angeles 		502+8		90, 	3842m		2793
41.  Tianjin		 	287+99+??	70,	2798m		2394?+
42.  Madrid 			1130+10 	18,	942m		1719
43.  San Francisco+Oakland 	488+6		117,	3592m		2485+
44.  Vancouver			623+24		103,	1550m		3544
45.  Honolulu			456+5		94,	1690m		3581+
46.  Campinas			931+49		1(90m),	0m		1291
47.  Panama City 		211+206!!!	101,	3274m		2963
48.  Atlanta+Sandy Springs	287+10+?	96,	3791m		2600+
49.  St. Petersburg		837+35		8,	63m		1168
50.  Philadelphia+Camden	332+5		69,	2638m		2255
51.  Montreal			454+9		62,	1675m		1777
52.  Fortaleza			583+84		4,	23m		1907
53.  Gold Coast City		277+15		66,	1409m		2921
54.  Frankfurt 			290+9		38,	1776m		1200
55.  Salvador			546+151  	18,	329m		1569
56.  Dallas 			240+9		66,	2762m		2424
57.  Taipei+metro??		186+4+?? 	57,	1993m		1453++
58.  Xiamen 			257+76? 	81,	1482m		2260
59.  Benidorm			383+13		34,	538m		1693
60.  Seattle+Bellevue		247+16		63,	2455m		2136
61.  Boston+Cambridge		282+13		57,	2330m		1834
62.  Calgary			244+14		66,	2118m		1783
63.  Brisbane			240+18		57,	1713m		1656
64.  Washington+metro		625+21+?	14, 	147m		N/A


The above list is a rough draft. Whenever there's a "plus" sign next to the Emporis ranking, it means that I have already added score from another city in the metro area or that the Emporis ranking clearly does not include metro areas as indicated in Gramsbergen's skyline rating. When there is a question mark, it usually means that the data is generally regarded to be quite incomplete. The data fails to account for the floor space of a building, such as those wide/long 10-floor commie blocks in Moscow that are massive groundscrapers, with perhaps as much floor space as a dozen of thin 12-floor high-rises. It also fails to account for the vast number of 6-9 floor buildings in several cities such as Paris or Shanghai for instance.

If you wish to dispute/argue any of the rankings, please back your statements with something from a verifiable source. If there's nothing directly verifiable, please at least include a picture that directly supports a statement. Even an image from Google Earth that shows long shadows imposed by the buildings would be appreciated. Skyline panoramas are also quite useful for comparing cities. 

I would very much appreciate any constructive contribution, which should be fun and perhaps a far truer compilation of rankings than the one that Emporis provides, for many of the aficionados here!



UPDATE: 

Here are my predicted scores of the top 10 cities of the world: 



> Some guess that Seoul has close to 50,000 high-rises.
> 
> And some estimate that Sampa also has over 40,000 high-rises while others guess a little over 20,000. (I'd guess close to 30,000 with 10+ floors??)
> 
> It'd take me like 100 hours to try to count 50000 buildings when driving a helicopter over the city! Perhaps we should just launch a satellite for the purposes of calculating the height of each building and for modeling each of them into a virtual 3D map program? LOL, I'm just dreaming!
> 
> Dear readers (especially the moderators here), I am curious, how would you rank your top 10 cities with this new "massiveness" factor rating? Would you put it this way:
> 
> (keeping in mind that I'll respect the "first skyscraper in the world from Chicago being 10 floors", so I'll use the 10-floor minimum as stated in the new rating system)
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> [B]Rank, City (predicted score)       |    high-rises   |  average floors, comment[/B]
> 
> 1)  Seoul   (100 million points)        ~30-50,000 ?     16-17, few talls
> 2)  Hong Kong Territory (90 million)    ~9,000 	         27, many super-talls
> 3)  Shanghai   (75,000,000)             ~15,000          19, some super-talls
> 4)  Sao Paulo  (65,000,000)             ~22-40,000 ?     16, very few talls
> 5)  Moscow   (55,000,000)               ~17,000	         16-18, few talls
> 6)  Beijing  (50,000,000)               ~12-25,000 ?     15-18, few talls
> 7)  New York City  (40,000,000)         ~8,000	         21, many super-talls
> 8)  Tokyo  (28,000,000)                 ~7-15,000 ?      15-16 floors???
> 9)  Guangzhou  (22,000,000)             ~6-7,500 ?       16-17 floors??
> 10)  Shenzhen  (20,000,000)             ???
> -or-  Chongqing (18,000,000)            ???
> 
> What do you think??? (Note: the "average floors" is derived from the grand total of the number of floors for all of 10+ floor buildings added together, then divided by the # of high-rises.)
> 
> If the average height of high-rises in a given city is twice that of the other city with the same number of buildings, then the score should be 3 times higher (actually 4-6 times higher if the average height of that other city was very low to begin with) using my new scoring algorithm that fails to account for floor space. Moscow would score so high (probably #2 or #3 in the world) with square footage, completely destroying Shanghai with perhaps more than twice the square footage of high-rises due to massive 10+ floor groundscrapers that are only counted as 1 building each.


----------



## coth

Emporis database is way far from to be completed, so those points means nothing.


----------



## Shera

(Edit: I do see how your criticism is constructive in a way.) However, if you do nothing about it, Emporis will likely remain the only database out there no matter how much you disagree with it or speak up against it.

The points here about Emporis are also in criticism against Emporis. However, it's not all about Emporis.

Some of the other points here (with greater significance) are:

1) Introducing a new scoring algorithm for skyscrapers for obvious reasons stated above (to prevent Las Vegas from scoring higher than Sao Paulo for example).

2) Replacing Emporis as the only source as we team up here on SSC in counting the buildings. We could tag the satellite maps of cities and mark each buildings with the floors they have and feet/meters in height. With over 300,000 members here on SSC, I hope that some of us could try to contribute to such a database that replaces Emporis for most cities, especially those in Asia. Emporis does not accept every single member who tries to contribute--this fact was made quite obvious after a popular internet guy from Shanghai compiled a list of newly accounted-for buildings, only to be refused by Emporis. 

Dear forum readers, please, I beg you all, let's have fun with expanding whatever we have from Emporis. It'd be nice to create a Wiki-like database where it's an on-going project in which all of us continually add new data (or edit flawed data). Google Earth is letting people model 3D buildings and then add it onto the map. Why cannot we SSC members do the same and add building floors/height to a database?


----------



## Shera

Emporis might mean nothing to some people here on SSC and other skyscraper forums, but it certainly means a lot to millions of people on the internet who find Emporis' ranking through Google or Wikipedia, etc.. yeah, I know this sucks..

Hey moderators, if you'd like, why not make your own top-10 or top 20, or even top-60 list of cities with the most high-rises? Or anybody else? Just for fun?

Now, I gotta go and start counting as many buildings as I can find on Google Earth with the help from millions of pictures! No way I can do it all by myself.. no way, Jose!

Hope we could have fun with this (as long as it's civil with level-headed discussions).. cheers!


----------



## philadweller

I would take the city with dozens of building that are less than 20 stories over the city with 3 or 4 megatalls and not much else. 

Washington DC is the perfect example of this. Compare it with Houston which is very tall but not nearly as bustling at street level.

I was looking at some old photos of Philadelphia and realized it seemed more massive when there was a height restriction. 
Look at all the buildings that are 30-40 stories tall. They are still around but eclipsed by the 50 plus story clusters.
1952








1982








Now all of the old buildings are behind the new ones from this angle. Looking north from the south you can see the reverse. All the layers.


----------



## Shera

^^ Thanks for the information on Philly! In the 1930's, Philly was rather close to downtown Manhattan in terms of high-rises, believe it or not. 

It goes further to show how the greatly exaggerated exponential scoring by Emporis on a supertall versus a medium-low high-rise (an 80-floor building scoring equal to 400 of 19-floor buildings) could be far too skewed for many enthusiasts who wish to appreciate a city with lots of medium-low high-rises.


----------



## the spliff fairy

Also bear in mind (as discussed before) most of Shanghai's highrises aren't counted by Emporis, that relies on local residents volunteering information, and does not accept non-English/ German data.

According to the Shaghai Urban Planning Bureau there are over 4000 highrises over 18 storeys, predicted to reach 5000 by next year.


----------



## Shera

the spliff fairy said:


> Also bear in mind (as discussed before) most of Shanghai's highrises aren't counted by Emporis, that relies on local residents volunteering information, and does not accept non-English/ German data.
> 
> According to the Shaghai Urban Planning Bureau there are over 4000 highrises over 18 storeys, predicted to reach 5000 by next year.





Shera said:


> .. like with the number of 11-or-more floor buildings in Shanghai that was provided by the Chinese government...



Pretty much all we have is the following information (after I searched for it on Google), from http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aNBlpA5LzFUM&refer=us . Wikipedia and Emporis also say the same thing. I also read it on a Chinese website saying pretty much the same thing. 


> Shanghai, the nation's commercial capital, built 6,704 towers of *11 *or more stories since 1990, city government figures for 2004 show -- 4,312 of them in the past five years.


4,312 in only 5 years is just amazing. It's almost too hard to believe... magnificent! If there are any other sources with more data, I would appreciate it. So, what we do know for sure is that it is "at least" 6,704 buildings of 11 floors or more. 

Perhaps it is to be predicted that Shanghai will score higher than New York City with my new scoring algorithm, since it looks like Shanghai does have substantially more high-rises than NYC that it should score higher even if NYC has much more skyscrapers over 500 feet tall. Thanks again for the post. Any further help would be appreciated, especially with cities in China, Brazil, or S. Korea!!


----------



## coth

Moscow has 24000+ 9+ story buildings.
9-11 story types are not very widespread, so should be around 20000 - 22000 of 12+.

this small part of southeast









and this is southwest


----------



## Shera

Thanks!

Here are some more panos of Moscow:










Credit: Vikulin.ru

One that nicely shows some of Moscow's buildings:










Credit: Christopudov


















Credit: russos.without.ru


----------



## Shera

Hey, do you think Beijing has as much as Moscow? I'd die for some credible statistics on the # of high-rises in either city.. thanks for your estimate, though! Here is Beijing:










source: http://img71.exs.cx/img71/2393/Beijingpano_2.jpg


----------



## Shera

Some guess that Seoul has close to 50,000 high-rises.

And some estimate that Sampa also has over 40,000 high-rises while others guess a little over 20,000. (I'd guess around 30,000 with 10+ floors??)

It'd take me like 100 hours to try to count 50000 buildings when driving a helicopter over the city! Perhaps we should just launch a satellite for the purposes of calculating the height of each building and for modeling each of them into a virtual 3D map program? LOL, I'm just dreaming!

Hey Coth (or anybody else, especially the moderators here), I am curious, how would you rank your top 10 cities with this new "massiveness" factor rating? Would you put it this way:

(keeping in mind that I'll respect the "first skyscraper in the world from Chicago being 10 floors", so I'll use the 10-floor minimum as stated in the new rating system)



Code:


[B]Rank, City (predicted score)       |    high-rises   |  average floors, comment[/B]
 
1)  Seoul   (100 million points)        ~30-50,000 ?     16-17, few talls  
2)  Hong Kong Territory (90 million)    ~9,000 	         27, many super-talls
3)  Shanghai   (75,000,000)             ~15,000          19, some super-talls
4)  Sao Paulo  (65,000,000)             ~22-40,000 ?     16, very few talls
5)  Moscow   (55,000,000)               ~17,000	         16-18, few talls
6)  Beijing  (50,000,000)               ~12-25,000 ?     15-18, few talls
7)  New York City  (40,000,000)         ~8,000	         21, many super-talls
8)  Tokyo  (28,000,000)                 ~7-15,000 ?      15-16 floors???
9)  Guangzhou  (22,000,000)             ~6-7,500 ?       16-17 floors??
10)  Shenzhen  (20,000,000)             ???
-or-  Chongqing (18,000,000)            ???

What do you think??? (Note: the "average floors" is derived from the grand total of the number of floors for all of 10+ floor buildings added together, then divided by the # of high-rises.) 

If the average height of high-rises in a given city is twice that of the other city with the same number of buildings, then the score should be 3 times higher (actually 4-6 times higher if the average height of that other city was very low to begin with) using my new scoring algorithm that fails to account for floor space. Moscow would score so high (probably #2 or #3 in the world) with square footage, completely destroying Shanghai with perhaps more than twice the square footage of high-rises due to massive 10+ floor groundscrapers that are only counted as 1 building each.


----------



## the spliff fairy

that Beijing pano is old already (2004 I think), considering in 2007 alone it had as much highrise space u/c as all the office space in NYC, in preparation for the Olympics.


----------



## Shera

the spliff fairy said:


> that Beijing pano is old already (2004 I think), considering in 2007 alone it had as much highrise space u/c as all the office space in NYC, in preparation for the Olympics.


Well, I've read somebody else say the same thing here on the forums, but before I allow myself to believe it 100%, I need to see some data from a truly credible source. It could have as well come from a news anchorman saying things just to catch your awe. 

To quote Guaporense, who has already provided a sensible argument against this claim:


Guaporense said:


> 1- The only news that you posted that had some real data on construction space is for Beijing, and it is wrong to say that 1.07 billion square feet is "about three times the total space in Manhattan" (whatever this can mean), since only midtown has about 300 million square feet of office space in 350 major buildings (these buildings make only a fraction of total office space in Manhattan). Total office space in Manhattan is several times that area, and total closed build space is several times total office space, total closed build space should be at least *several billion square feet*.
> 
> 2- The media normally exaggerate news regarding everything because it attracts more attention.


If you have a newer pano, let's bring on that picture of Beijing! Perhaps somewhere on the Chinese forums? 

I'm also thinking that Shenzhen should score higher than Chongqing. What do you guys think? Right now, I don't have time, but if you got good panos of either cities, or any others, please bring them on! Thanks, Spliff Fairy!


----------



## oliver999

i have most authority shanghai highrises amount, by shanghai statistics bereau:
http://www.stats-sh.gov.cn/2003shtj/tjnj/nj09.htm?d1=2009tjnj/C1004.htm
in 2008,shanghai has highrises(above) 8 storey :16109
above 30 storey:847
20-29 storey:2763
16-19 storey:3493
11-15storey:6978


----------



## Shera

oliver999 said:


> i have most authority shanghai highrises amount, by shanghai statistics bereau:
> http://www.stats-sh.gov.cn/2003shtj/tjnj/nj09.htm?d1=2009tjnj/C1004.htm
> in 2008,shanghai has highrises(above) 8 storey :16109
> above 30 storey:847
> 20-29 storey:2763
> 16-19 storey:3493
> 11-15storey:6978


Wow, thanks a million! :bow:

So, for the grand total of buildings with 11 or more floors would be: 6978+3493+2763+847 = 14,081 buildings, correct? 

To be completely honest, I was guessing that Shanghai has around 15,000 buildings with 10 or more floors!!! Wow, this is definitely bull's-eye for me, yay!!! :banana:


----------



## oliver999

Shera said:


> Wow, thanks a million! :bow:
> 
> So, for the grand total of buildings with 11 or more floors would be: 6978+3493+2763+847 = 14,081 buildings, correct?
> 
> To be completely honest, I was guessing that Shanghai has around 15,000 buildings with 10 or more floors!!! Wow, this is definitely bull's-eye for me, yay!!! :banana:


yes, from the site, you can see : in 2008, shanghai increase 70 above 30storey buildings, 338 20-29 storey buildings.


----------



## Shera

To quote Citypia with some excellent pano's on portions of Seoul:



citypia said:


> I am really sorry.
> I can't find a 360-degree panorama of Seoul taken from the top of the mountain in Seoul.
> But these panorama are taken from the top of one of surounded mountains.
> Unfortunately, lots of ugly buildings in Seoul are seen in this panorama.hno:
> 
> pics from DC
> SCROLL ------->
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One from Flickr:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And the last one, from bigshadow.net:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For more on Seoul, here's an excellent thread: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=784014


----------



## Shera

To quote Staff, 



staff said:


> Seoul is definitely a candidate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It might be the city in the world with most commieblock apartments.


----------



## Shera

To quote Jacks on Shanghai:



jacks said:


> Tallest? No, that'd be HK, Dubai or maybe Chicago.
> Most beautiful? I prefer HK myself.
> Best? I don't know, but how could any skyscraper nut not love this...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By dirtyforker at 2009-10-10


thanks to Staff for the following picture:


----------



## aBe

Awesome!

I never knew that Moscow is that big.
Sao Paulo and Shanghai are definitely out of this world...HUGE.

I guess that Immersion-Factor might eventually will sideline those city-state/island cities. Do not think that you'll get 'immersed' in small Singapore, Monaco or even Taipeh do you? They have nice skylines tho'..


----------



## Shera

aBe said:


> Awesome!
> 
> I never knew that Moscow is that big.
> Sao Paulo and Shanghai are definitely out of this world...HUGE.
> 
> I guess that Immersion-Factor might eventually will sideline those city-state/island cities. Do not think that you'll get 'immersed' in small Singapore, Monaco or even Taipeh do you? They have nice skylines tho'..


LOL :cheers: 

_____
*
Hong Kong*, credit by bleedingOrange:










___

New York City, from RFCD100 (pbase):


----------



## Manila-X

When it comes to skyline massiveness its always gonna be HK and NY though Shanghai, Tokyo and Dubai are breaking through. Sao Paolo comes close but they need taller buildings.


----------



## HK999

interesting thread. the main difference between HK and NYC is that HK has more slender / thiner skysrapers. so it appears that HK is a sea of skyscrapers (which it is). NYC on the other hand (manhattan) has bulky, fat and massive towers. that's why manhattan has not a _skyline _but a _skymass_. the other problem is that NYC doesn't have many highrises outside of manhattan (at least they are not as tall as HK's). so one has the feeling brooklyn / queens is just a sprawl area because of manhattan's over 50 200m skyscrapers domination.


----------



## Shera

Yeah, but there are lots of 6-9 floor commieblocks in the Bronx, Brooklyn, and Queens. Nearly half of the Bronx is made up of those commieblocks. Flatbush, Coney Island, Flushing, etc.. are commieblock "towns" in the boroughs.

Yeah, I wish there would be more skyscrapers in downtown Brooklyn and Queens, too. Those places are just so ugly. Jersey City looks pretty nice, but it still looks so drab compared to downtown Manhattan. Roosevelt Island also looks nice when taking a tour around it on the bus. It'd be nice if there were skyscrapers right next the Yankees stadium!


----------



## HK999

right, jersey city is on the right way! it has a pretty decent skyline for its population and is developing very nicely. as you mentioned the main problem is the balance between manhattan and the other boroughs (in terms of skyscrapers). that's why many people think (including me in the beginning) that outside of manhattan NYC isn't so dense compared to other cities in the same category. 

for example: if you put a 200m skyscraper in the heart of midtown or even downtown it gets lost in the sheer mass. many skyscrapers in the range 150 - 200m are hidden, just not visible from the distance. but if you build this skyscraper in brooklyn downtown or somewhere else (there should be some highrises though) it has a greater impact. that's exactly why some skylines with not the half skyscrapers of NYC have sometimes the same or even better impact to the observer.


----------



## Shera

Mr. Uncut said:


>


That was a cool computer animation 3D graphics model, even if the logarithmic progression angle of the horizontal plane was skewed (making buildings start to look flat in the distance faster than it should) and many ~10-floor buildings omitted in detail.

I wonder what program was used to model this.


----------



## dmarney

Shera said:


> That was a cool computer animation 3D graphics model, even if the logarithmic progression angle of the horizontal plane was skewed (making buildings start to look flat in the distance faster than it should) and many ~10-floor buildings omitted in detail.
> 
> I wonder what program was used to model this.


I think its just google earth


----------



## dmarney

These pictures are amazing! especially the panoramas


----------



## RafflesCity

Some pics from Singapore.

From flickr










A panorama taken by OffPeakClassic










And a pano I took.


----------



## hkskyline

chinarulez said:


> interesting thread. the main difference between HK and NYC is that HK has more slender / thiner skysrapers. so it appears that HK is a sea of skyscrapers (which it is). NYC on the other hand (manhattan) has bulky, fat and massive towers. that's why manhattan has not a _skyline _but a _skymass_. the other problem is that NYC doesn't have many highrises outside of manhattan (at least they are not as tall as HK's). so one has the feeling brooklyn / queens is just a sprawl area because of manhattan's over 50 200m skyscrapers domination.


Yes - I think the drop in height once you cross either the Hudson or East River is very dramatic. The Jersey side has a few skyscrapers along the waterfront now, but Queens / Brooklyn seem quite empty.

In terms of massiveness, I think Sao Paulo probably has the biggest skyscraper cluster. Shanghai is probably up there as well.


----------



## [email protected]

Some pics of Paris...


----------



## Shera

Thanks Rafflescity and [email protected] for the pics! Those panos of Singapore are awesome!


----------



## coth

Shera said:


> 7) Moscow (25,000,000) ~10,000 (or 23,000 high-rises?!?),


Found the official data. But mind it's only buildings under City of Moscow administration. Very large amount of highrises of continues urban area located on the side of Moscow province.

Stats for residential buildings only.
http://housing.mos.ru/dmghtml/housing/index2009.html
*Floors | Buildings | % | Total floor area (thous m2) | Occupied floor area (thous m2) | Apartments | Lifts*
1-4 | 10 482 | 26,5 | 5072,4 | 3 120,5 | 68 950 | 490
5 | 9 585 | 24,2 | 31 571,8 | 20 526,3 | 642 431 | 2 107
6-9 | 7 427 | 18,7 | 51 802,2 | 33 760,7 | 984 031 | 31 630
10-15 | 6 804 | 17,2 | 54 157,0 | 32 727,0 | 1 022 113 | 36 692
16-22 | 4 890 | 12,3 | 60 517,7 | 35 407,7 | 1 020 690 | 30 073
23+ | 431 | 1,1 | 8 186,9 | 4 778,5 | 104 982 | 2 938
Total | 39 619 | 100,0 | 211 307,9 | 130 320,7 | 3 843 197 | 103 930

In total there were 39 619 residential and 75 185 non-residential buildings as of January 1, 2009.
http://mos.ru/?documentId=120736


Russia has a limit of 25 levels for standardised buildings. Moscow province prefer to utilise standards at maximum. So most of modern buildings built recently on outskirts of Moscow on the side of the province mainly 25-story tall. In anyway add at least 20-25% to total count to get number of highrises in Moscow. There was almost no 10 and 11-story series, so most of 10-15 are above 12 storeys. Also, most of series are multisectional, so if you count each section as a building you can multiply the result at least by 5 times.

So (6 000 + 4 900 + 500) * 1,20-1,25 = ~14 000 of 12+ story residential buildings. Number is rapidly growing, especially on the side of the province, as city's territory is almost fully built up, except several reserved areas.

It's hard to tell how much there 12+ story administrative buildings. I think we can count at least 2000. Number of administrative highrises isn't really big. So in total it will be at least 16 thousand highrises.

For City of Moscow administration only.

*2008*
10-15 | 6 744
16-22 | 4 792
23+ | 383

*2007*
10-15 | 6 676
16-22 | 4 662
23+ | 332


----------



## Shera

coth said:


> Found the official data. But mind it's only buildings under City of Moscow administration. Very large amount of highrises of continues urban area located on the side of Moscow province.
> 
> Stats for residential buildings only.
> http://housing.mos.ru/dmghtml/housing/index2009.html
> *Floors | Buildings | % | Total floor area (thous m2) | Occupied floor area (thous m2) | Apartments | Lifts*
> 1-4 | 10 482 | 26,5 | 5072,4 | 3 120,5 | 68 950 | 490
> 5 | 9 585 | 24,2 | 31 571,8 | 20 526,3 | 642 431 | 2 107
> 6-9 | 7 427 | 18,7 | 51 802,2 | 33 760,7 | 984 031 | 31 630
> 10-15 | 6 804 | 17,2 | 54 157,0 | 32 727,0 | 1 022 113 | 36 692
> 16-22 | 4 890 | 12,3 | 60 517,7 | 35 407,7 | 1 020 690 | 30 073
> 23+ | 431 | 1,1 | 8 186,9 | 4 778,5 | 104 982 | 2 938
> Total | 39 619 | 100,0 | 211 307,9 | 130 320,7 | 3 843 197 | 103 930
> 
> In total there were 39 619 residential and 75 185 non-residential buildings as of January 1, 2009.
> http://mos.ru/?documentId=120736
> 
> 
> Russia has a limit of 25 levels for standardised buildings. Moscow province prefer to utilise standards at maximum. So most of modern buildings built recently on outskirts of Moscow on the side of the province mainly 25-story tall. In anyway add at least 20-25% to total count to get number of highrises in Moscow. There was almost no 10 and 11-story series, so most of 10-15 are above 12 storeys. Also, most of series are multisectional, so if you count each section as a building you can multiply the result at least by 5 times.
> 
> So (6 000 + 4 900 + 500) * 1,20-1,25 = ~14 000 of 12+ story residential buildings. Number is rapidly growing, especially on the side of the province, as city's territory is almost fully built up, except several reserved areas.
> 
> It's hard to tell how much there 12+ story administrative buildings. I think we can count at least 2000. Number of administrative highrises isn't really big. So in total it will be at least 16 thousand highrises.
> 
> For City of Moscow administration only.
> 
> *2008*
> 10-15 | 6 744
> 16-22 | 4 792
> 23+ | 383
> 
> *2007*
> 10-15 | 6 676
> 16-22 | 4 662
> 23+ | 332


Thank you!!! Thank you!!! My hat goes off to you in appreciation!!!

:dance:

Now, we have official information on Shanghai and on Moscow in this thread that I created!!! What's next? Seoul? Sampa? :cheers:

So, for all buildings over 10 floors, there are 12,125 residential buildings that are officially accounted for. After adding 25% on top of that yields 15,000 buildings, then plus 2,000 more commercial buildings for a grand total of 17,000 skyscrapers over 10 floors! I know this is not 100% official, but at least we have a much more accurate estimate! 

If that many of them in the outskirts are all 25 floors, then it should really boost the average height, perhaps yielding a score close to or higher than Shanghai using my "Massiveness" algorithm, even if I do not split up the wide buildings into 5 sections!

Here's *Shanghai* by comparison, from 2008:



oliver999 said:


> i have most authority shanghai highrises amount, by shanghai statistics bereau:
> http://www.stats-sh.gov.cn/2003shtj/tjnj/nj09.htm?d1=2009tjnj/C1004.htm
> in 2008,shanghai has highrises(above) 8 storey :16109
> above 30 storey:847
> 20-29 storey:2763
> 16-19 storey:3493
> 11-15storey:6978


I think Moscow already beats Shanghai in the 16-22 floors category with nearly 5,000 accounted-for residential buildings, before adding the commercial buildings or those new 25-floors in the outskirts!

*Thank you once again, Coth!!!*


----------



## Shera

I went ahead and updated my predicted ranking scores, after bumping Moscow up to #5, tying with Beijing:



> Some guess that Seoul has close to 50,000 high-rises.
> 
> And some estimate that Sampa also has over 40,000 high-rises while others guess a little over 20,000. (I'd guess close to 30,000 with 10+ floors??)
> 
> It'd take me like 100 hours to try to count 50000 buildings when driving a helicopter over the city! Perhaps we should just launch a satellite for the purposes of calculating the height of each building and for modeling each of them into a virtual 3D map program? LOL, I'm just dreaming!
> 
> Hey Coth (or anybody else, especially the moderators here), I am curious, how would you rank your top 10 cities with this new "massiveness" factor rating? Would you put it this way:
> 
> (keeping in mind that I'll respect the "first skyscraper in the world from Chicago being 10 floors", so I'll use the 10-floor minimum as stated in the new rating system)
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> [B]Rank, City (predicted score)       |    high-rises   |  average floors, comment[/B]
> 
> 1)  Seoul   (100 million points)        ~30-50,000 ?     16-17, few talls
> 2)  Hong Kong Territory (90 million)    ~9,000 	         27, many super-talls
> 3)  Shanghai   (75,000,000)             ~15,000          19, some super-talls
> 4)  Sao Paulo  (65,000,000)             ~22-40,000 ?     16, very few talls
> 5)  Moscow   (55,000,000)               ~17,000	         16-18, few talls
> 6)  Beijing  (50,000,000)               ~12-25,000 ?     15-18, few talls
> 7)  New York City  (40,000,000)         ~8,000	         21, many super-talls
> 8)  Tokyo  (28,000,000)                 ~7-15,000 ?      15-16 floors???
> 9)  Guangzhou  (22,000,000)             ~6-7,500 ?       16-17 floors??
> 10)  Shenzhen  (20,000,000)             ???
> -or-  Chongqing (18,000,000)            ???
> 
> What do you think??? (Note: the "average floors" is derived from the grand total of the number of floors for all of 10+ floor buildings added together, then divided by the # of high-rises.)
> 
> If the average height of high-rises in a given city is twice that of the other city, then the score should be 3 times higher than that other city with the same number of buildings (actually 4-6 times higher if the average height of that other city was very low to begin with) using my new scoring algorithm that fails to account for floor space. Moscow would score so high (probably #2 or #3 in the world) with square footage, completely destroying Shanghai with perhaps more than twice the square footage of high-rises due to massive 10+ floor groundscrapers that are only counted as 1 building each.


Also, I added the above to my first post in the thread, to reflect the "educated" changes.. hehe! :lol:


----------



## Scion

Shera said:


> Rank, City (predicted score) | high-rises | average floors, comment
> 10) Shenzhen (15,000,000) ???


Shenzhen pano taken from the Wutong mountains. Have fun estimating


----------



## Shera

Wow, this is awesome, thanks Scion! opcorn:

Shenzhen is a pretty tall city, with an average height perhaps taller than Shanghai? What do you think? How many high-rises do you think it has? 5,000 or 6,000? The problem is, how much of Dongguan should I include for Shenzhen, and how much should I include for Guangzhou? I'd probably give Guangzhou a 30-mile radius and give Shenzhen a 35-mile radius up into the northwest and northeast?


----------



## Scion

Shera said:


> How many high-rises do you think it has? 5,000 or 6,000?


It's difficult locating official sources for high-rise tally of Shenzhen. From this forum Shenzhen has ~50 buildings above 200m. A lot of them are U/C or T/O. And at least 800 buildings above 100m. So 10fl+ could be well above 3000.



All in all I think Chongqing would rank above Shenzhen. This is a Chongqing pano from 2007, loads of new high rises would have popped up all over the place by now.


----------



## staff

^^
That's an insane CQ pano! Saved...


----------



## null

Nanjing had about *2,200* hi-rises back in 2005 (with 124 buildings above 100m)


----------



## null

Guangzhou (2008):

*>7,000 hi-rises (Incl. U/C)

100m or 100m above: 100

150m or 150m above: 50

200m or 200m above: 18*


----------



## Scion

Yep Nanjing is definitely up there. In fact, so many cities in China are choked full of 10fl+ buildings.

Nanjing










Another one worth mentioning is Hangzhou. Together, Hangzhou, Nanjing and Shanghai forms the "golden triangle" that is the Yangtze Delta.

Hangzhou


----------



## Shera

Wow, thank you so much, Null and Scion!!! That's some eye-candy, yum yum!


----------



## lokinyc

For the person that said Downtown Brooklyn was ugly. Wow, you ever been? Some of NYC's greatest neighborhoods are IN Downtown Brooklyn.


----------



## null

Shenyang, looks like abother 2,000+ Skyline to me:










Zoom in


----------



## Shera

lokinyc said:


> For the person that said Downtown Brooklyn was ugly. Wow, you ever been? Some of NYC's greatest neighborhoods are IN Downtown Brooklyn.


I have no way of knowing if you're serious or just being sarcastic? :lol: But I like Astoria (your location) better than downtown Brooklyn. It's all subjective!



null said:


> Shenyang, looks like abother 2,000+ Skyline to me:


Wow, that's by far the best pano of Shenyang ever! Most other pictures I've seen made it look like it had only maybe 500 buildings.


----------



## Mr. Uncut

some Photos:

Shanghai


----------



## tigerboy

With so few exceptions the Chinese city skylines are so so ugly. masses of jerrybuilt commie blocks.

With the exception of Hong Kong Chinese cities should have their score halved to account for the ugly factor.


PS No I'm not racist. I am an aesthete.


----------



## null

> PS No I'm not racist. I am an aesthete.


Never mind, nobody cares.


----------



## tigerboy

null said:


> Never mind, nobody cares.


I care my dear boy so yah boo sucks to you and all.

Commie blocks in commmie planned gerrybuilt cities are ugly. Sorry.


----------



## lokinyc

This is downtown Brooklyn. This is ugly to you? 












































a


----------



## Myouzke

lokinyc said:


> This is downtown Brooklyn. This is ugly to you?


They are talking about Skyline not street view. hno: You don't need to show us the streets.

Comparing Brooklyn to Manhattan I think Brooklyn is ulgy.


----------



## -Corey-

If we're talking about quality, then NYC and Chicago should be on top of that list, if it's about quantity then Chinese and Brazilian cities should be on top of that list. Lol


----------



## HK999

manhattan densitiy, rare angle...

JR Coimbra


----------



## desertpunk

^^ Fabulous shot! ^^


----------



## HK999

yeah, i like pictures where density and atmosphere meet together, like these:

Derek2k3









Derek2k3


----------



## Shera

Myouzke said:


> Here is one we don't talk much about is very similar to Tokyo but smaller =]
> *Osaka, Japan*
> by TOSHI @ Osakanight.com scroll------>


Thank you Myouzke for sharing! That pano surprised me about Osaka!

Some more pic's of booming Chinese cities:



Modern World said:


> very impresive, nanjing,guangzhou,tianjin,chongqin etc are not even on the list!
> Nanjing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Guangzhou
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tianjin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chongqing


And a new pano (at least for me) of *Bangkok*, thanks to maxna for posting it:









Got any more new pics to satisfy my beastly appetite?



EDIT: I finally found a new picture of Beijing! It's so awesome! 










Just kidding, but we need another pano of Beijing seriously!

All I could find was one from Brittanica Online encyclopedia (http://www.britannica.com/bps/image...e-Haidian-district-northwestern-Beijing-China), but it's still not a panorama showing wide angles:


----------



## Manila-X

Manhattan's density is already made its mark as one of the densest in the world. We cannot deny that. Its been a skyscraper city even before our parents were born.


----------



## the spliff fairy

Shenzhen:



















#


----------



## isaidso

Shanghai is amazing. I can't wait to visit. kay:


----------



## Shera

Hey guys, are there any new pictures of awesome skylines so far? Sorry I've been gone for like a month.. didn't have time to search the forums.


----------



## JayT

Wow Sao Paulo is huge!!


----------



## Shera

Hoping that this thread could be resurrected!! Could you guys please help me with the ratings?!? 

I'm not quite the traveller now (only commuting to NYC, Boston, etc.. from DC) within the past year or so. So you guys gotta help me, please!!

Emporis still sucks!

I guess when Google Earth or Bing Maps (Aerial view) covers all the major cities of the world, we'd be able to have a much much better idea...


----------



## calaguyo

^Try wiki. But it's only per country not per city.

Rank Country Number of
Buildings Combined
Heights (m) New 2011

1 China 2,950 650,150 
2 United States 2,800 580,200 
3 Japan 2,890 450,000 
4 Hong Kong 2,354 333,836
5 Brazil 950 260,000
6 Australia 950 335,200 
7 United Arab Emirates 907 310,000 
8 South Korea 900 280,000 
9 India 897 300,100 
10 France 895 129,900 
11 Taiwan 890 319,000 
12 Argentina 877 321,000 
13 United Kingdom 876 278,500 
14 Philippines 872 290,200 
14 Canada 872 288,000
15 Malaysia 852 314,200 
16 Thailand 851 278,500 
17 Venezuela 850 333,000 
18 Colombia 828 320,000 
19 Turkey 697 290,000 
20 Kuwait 600 298,200 
21 Mexico 520 180,000 
21 Panama 520 260,000 
21 Chile 520 300,120 
22 South Africa 518 302,000 
23 Republic of Macedonia 517 322,002 
24 Germany 511 280,100 
25 Indonesia 420 120,000 
26 Bangladesh 352 97,000 
27 Czech Republic 329 98,600 
28 Vietnam 328 286,300 
29 Egypt 319 92,000 
30 Qatar 319 280,700 
30 Russia 316 87,520 
31 Norway 315 100,820 
32 Peru 310 88,000 
33 Poland 308 90,100 
34 North Korea 301 17,590 
34 Sweden 301 19,520 
35 Croatia 300 78,800 
36 Finland 290 31,000 
37 Czech Republic 240 20,100 
38 Singapore 238 33,735 
39 Slovenia 222 30,220 
39 Estonia 215 18,500 
40 Macau 131 19,597 
41 Bosnia and Herzegovina 125 29,230 

Source


----------



## null

It's still a joke list, USA below Japan by # of buildings?


----------



## Los Earth

That list is soooooo etc........ out of order


----------



## Manila-X

JayT said:


> Wow Sao Paulo is huge!!


It is but the city lack buildings 600 ft or above.

Sampa's tallest building is only 558 ft


----------



## Manila-X

oliver999 said:


> manila skyline is OK, but i always feel lack something, the CBD are sperated, between CBD1 and CBD2,there are large eara small houses(or slums like western people said).


Slums in Metro Manila are only a *small percentage*.

The low-rise structures are mostly low middle income inner city homes. And in some of the pictures posted, the low-rise are more *upper-middle to upper class private homes*.

But this is what makes Metro Manila nice, skyline wise. You have various clusters instead of one mega cluster.

Even Lower and Midtown Manhattan are separated.


----------



## calaguyo

null said:


> It's still a joke list, USA below Japan by # of buildings?


If you check on the source which is the CTBUH, these are number of buildings with 50m and above. 

I may be wrong, Japan may have the most massive but perhaps most of them are short (<50m, 8th storey) mainly because of its being an earthquake prone country. Besides USA has a way way bigger land mass than Japan.


----------



## citypia

bonivison said:


> I've been to Tokyo ans Seoul
> *It's said Seoul built itself by learnning to Tokyo*
> In fact it looks a little like Tokyo
> But it's really not a rival to Tokyo
> far behind


Seoul built itself by learning to Tokyo?
Are you kidding me?
This is the ridiculous comment I've ever heard. Please, study hard before you wrote something here.

Seoul(Hanyang, old name of Seoul) was built as a capital city in *1394* while Tokyo became a capitial city of Japan in *1603*.
How could the older city learn from the newer city?

*Seoul(Hanyang, later known as Hanseong, it means 'fortress city on the Han river') was built based on confucianism ideology *as a planned city in Joseon Dynasty in Korea. Because confucianism was the rulling principle in Joseon dynasty, not from anything of Japan.
Also, new area of Seoul in 1970s was built based on models of the grid system as a planned city, *not from anything Tokyo.*

*Source*
*The history of Seoul*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Seoul

*The history of Tokyo*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Tokyo


----------



## citypia

calaguyo said:


> ^Try wiki. But it's only per country not per city.
> 
> Rank Country Number of
> Buildings Combined
> Heights (m) New 2011
> 
> 34 North Korea 301 17,590
> 34 Sweden 301 19,520
> 35 Croatia 300 78,800
> 36 Finland 290 31,000
> 37 Czech Republic 240 20,100
> 38 Singapore 238 33,735
> 39 Slovenia 222 30,220
> Source


North korea is ahead of Singapore?
Maybe, someone can count many hidden buildings in secret places of north korea?
:clown:


----------



## Senatro

a neighborhood where it is forbidden to build buildings in sao paulo


----------



## CarltonHill

anak_mm said:


> kay: :cheers:
> 
> *Metro Manila, Philippines* as viewed from Manila Bay
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _original shots by james evans_


----------



## JorelSCS

*COCHABAMBA - BOLIVIA *


----------



## staff

Is there any particular reason for Tokyo's river banks not being developed?


----------



## Spookvlieger

^^ actually I think the river banks are used for recreational green space, look on GE. It show football fields, baseball fields and parks... I also think they are prone to flooding because it has dikes protecting the city.


----------



## wino

I think Tokyo has more soul than Seoul. :lol: And definitely more massive.. 
I was amazed by Seoul pictures btw!! I just don't like those uniformed buildings. But the massiveness is just... awee.... :drool:


isn't this the coolest thing ever?! Even the miniature model looks MASSIVE! :lol:


>


----------



## Hebrewtext

Tel Aviv - Yafo


----------



## Sarcasticity

That picture of Tokyo clearly shows the skyline is very scattered, but damn, that is just too much built up area for me hno:


----------



## Manila-X

Sarcasticity said:


> That picture of Tokyo clearly shows the skyline is very scattered, but damn, that is just too much built up area for me hno:


From how we see there, there are two parts in Tokyo's skyline. That by the harbour front especially those of Shinagawa, Minato, Chiyoda and Chuo-Ku.

Then you have the so called *midtown* section such as Shinjuku, Shibuya and Toshima-Ku.


----------



## hkskyline

Tokyo consists of multiple centre nodes, roughly along the Yamanote Line. Historically, the railway companies built up around their end-stations, such as Ikebukuro. I don't think locals have a "midtown" concept even though a major development in Roppongi is called "Tokyo Midtown".

The financial institutions are clustered around Tokyo Station.


----------



## quashlo

joshsam said:


> ^^ actually I think the river banks are used for recreational green space, look on GE. It show football fields, baseball fields and parks... I also think they are prone to flooding because it has dikes protecting the city.


It's the latter reason (flooding). A 200-year flood would actually inundate a good portion of Ōta Ward:
http://www.city.ota.tokyo.jp/seikatsu/chiiki/bousai/amekaze/hazardmap/files/tamagawalight.pdf

Using that space for recreational uses is just the result, since they can't really build anything there.

Anyways, that's just one river (Tama River), albeit the largest. I wouldn't say that it's necessarily representative of all river banks in Tōkyō, as the Arakawa River and some smaller waterways like the Kanda River and all the canals in the eastern and southeastern wards are all built up to the floodwalls. 



wino said:


> isn't this the coolest thing ever?! Even the miniature model looks MASSIVE! :lol:


That model cost about ¥3 million per sq m (¥500 million total), and it's made entirely by a private developer (Mori Building). It really only shows the center of Tōkyō, though, missing about the northern third of the Yamanote Line, but it's still growing, one building at a time.

Anyways, *hkskyline* is right... Locals don't conceive of a "midtown", or even a "downtown", concept in Tōkyō. The towers aren't supertalls and they tend to just be plopped in wherever, seemingly haphazardly but generally in close proximity to a train station. With the dense blanket of midrise buildings (5-10 stories) that artificially raises the baseline, the result is that most towers tend to just blend in and you get an endless mass of buildings instead of a nice "peaked" skyline that most scraper enthusiasts seem to favor.


----------



## Momo1435

The clusters of the Tokyo used to be more obvious, but since some of the clusters have grown into 1 big sea of towers.

This big sea of towers follows the Yamanote line/Keihin Tohoku line corridor all the way from Osaki and Shinagawa via Tokyo Station to Akihabara & Tokyo Dome. It also goes into the central area inside the Yamanote loop, from Shiodome to Toranomon, Akasaka and Roppongi.

Another big cluster has started to grow in the reclaimed Island in the Tokyo bay, From Kachidoki/Tsukishima via Toyosu and Shinonome all the way to Odaiba.


And then there are still the traditional solitary clusters, Shinjuku and Ikebukuro. That will be joined by Shibuya will all the towers that have been proposed around the station. Plus the solitary towers all over the place in areas that are predominantly low rise areas.


----------



## Manila-X

hkskyline said:


> Tokyo consists of multiple centre nodes, roughly along the Yamanote Line. Historically, the railway companies built up around their end-stations, such as Ikebukuro. I don't think locals have a "midtown" concept even though a major development in Roppongi is called "Tokyo Midtown".
> 
> The financial institutions are clustered around Tokyo Station.


That is why I used the term so-called because there is really no midtown in Tokyo. 

Anyway, since most financial institutions and corporate headquarters of some local Japanese corporations are around Maronouchi, how about the office buildings in Shinjuku?


----------



## hkskyline

Manila-X said:


> That is why I used the term so-called because there is really no midtown in Tokyo.
> 
> Anyway, since most financial institutions and corporate headquarters of some local Japanese corporations are around Maronouchi, how about the office buildings in Shinjuku?


Tokyo is not just a financial centre, but also the centre of action for plenty of other non-finance-related companies. Not surprisingly, these companies would also need office space, likely in some skyscraper as well.


----------



## Manila-X

hkskyline said:


> Tokyo is not just a financial centre, but also the centre of action for plenty of other non-finance-related companies. Not surprisingly, these companies would also need office space, likely in some skyscraper as well.


Not just in Tokyo but in neighboring city / suburbs as well such as Yokohama, Saitama or Chiba.


----------



## hkskyline

Manila-X said:


> Not just in Tokyo but in neighboring city / suburbs as well such as Yokohama, Saitama or Chiba.


Well, historically, Kansai was Japan's economic powerhouse, but that started to change when the capital was moved from Kyoto to Tokyo. 

Tokyo's skyscrapers are home to a wide mix of clients. In fact, that "cocoon" building in Shinjuku is actually a school. Combined, the scattered nodal concept creates a huge urban expanse around Tokyo Bay, and a massive skyline.


----------



## Sun6

*Bangkok Panorama 360 pic 2007 Start construction > New CBD AREA *


*> Ratchatevi> PhayaThai > Wipavadee rungsit> jatujak > LadPlo> Ratchadapisek > Asok> Sukhumvit> Ploenchit> Ratchadamri > siam > Silom > Sathon>>>>>*







[/SIZE]


----------



## Sun6

Bangkok Arail










http://www.flickr.com/photos/volanth...7629633313477/









http://www.flickr.com/photos/volanth...7629633313477/


----------



## hkskyline

Guess the next time I fly to Bangkok, I should book a left window seat!


----------



## oliver999

bangkok has the largest skyline in south east asia.


----------



## oliver999

oliver999 said:


> by 小刺猬


look at shanghai from air.


----------



## cfredo

Why is that one peninsula in Bangkok so empty?


----------



## khoojyh

cfredo said:


> Why is that one peninsula in Bangkok so empty?


That peninsular is not under Bangkok Administration. hopefully it will continue stay as it is.


----------



## the spliff fairy

is it prone to flooding? Ive heard its also a wildlife sanctuary? Or at least its full of thousands of migrating storks nesting in the trees, right in the heart of the city


----------



## WTH

That is a natural park


----------



## WTH

Bangkok from above by varlamov, on Flickr


----------



## WTH

Bangkok from above by varlamov, on Flickr








Bangkok from above by varlamov, on Flickr


----------



## oliver999

massive bangkok!


----------

