Manhattan aerial views

[swivle]

Artist: Gregory @ Pbase
all images copyright

http://www.pbase.com/gregory/image/25417600/large.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/gregory/image/25417574/large.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/gregory/image/25417585/large.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/gregory/image/25417613/large.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/gregory/image/25417623/large.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/gregory/image/25417631/large.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/gregory/image/25417642/large.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/gregory/image/25417663/large.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/gregory/image/25418182/large.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/gregory/image/25418183/large.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/gregory/image/25418184/large.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/gregory/image/25418185/large.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/gregory/image/25418186/large.jpg

[TLOZ Link5]

Yowza, those are hot. Thanks.

[swivle]

no prob :wink:

[Sikis]

Looks almost like a miniature. Great pics.

[Edward]

swivle, whenever you post pictures and you are not the owner, you have to also post the copyright information.

[ZippyTheChimp]

There are two issues involving direct linking, sometimes called hot linking, that go beyond the courtesy of listing credit.

1. It deprives the owner of the image from getting traffic on their site. This has become an issue at pbase among serious photographers, who post images as samples of their work to attract sales or services. Many want the site owner to disable direct linking.

2. It may seem that posting the site url and copyright credit along with the image is a good tradeoff, since it gets the image owner exposure at other locations. However, this ignores the second issue, which is theft of bandwidth. When you direct link an image that is hosted on another site, you are using the bandwidth of that site to download the image. The site owner gets no traffic to his site, but he still pays for the bandwidth.

[swivle]

Edward Posted: Sun Nov 07, 2004 11:36 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

swivle, whenever you post pictures and you are not the owner, you have to also post the copyright information.



No problem, I'm normaly pretty good about it...won't let it happen again

ZippyTheChimp: There are two issues involving direct linking
Agreed Zippy, This is the first time I've hot linked on this forum (I think) ,
I normally use my host for the exact reasons you posted below.
I think all but two threads I created are using my host...and the only reason
I did not use my host then was because we switched servers and our site was down...
I have unlimited bandwidth (hot linking allowed), and I use it!

[ligel]

Nice pics man

[swivle]

glad you enjoyed them

[SnowMan]

Great pictures...I miss NY....

[Haman yaf3]

thank you so much

they're very nice photos

[Radiohead]

Lower Manhattan 1855
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2168/2170746122_1d6357aebb_o.jpg

Lower Manhattan with Brooklyn in distance 1876
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2069/2170115099_23e9a7484d_o.jpg

Lower Manhattan 1906. Purportedly the first aerial photo of NYC, by JH Hare.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2050/2170742902_b434352462_o.jpg

Lower Manhattan 1922. Notice the construction boom of the previous 16 years.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2377/2170743488_782bfd481d_o.jpg

Lower Manhattan 1942
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2390/2170090723_49341d5faa_o.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2390/2170090723_ff25a7073c_b.jpg

Lower Manhattan 1988
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2107/2169947859_a55b0931fa_o.jpg

Lower Manhattan Around 2000 (apparently with some computer enhancments)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2109/2170927174_548c7176da_o.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2109/2170927174_ec6b3bdebe_b.jpg

Lower Manhattan today
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2255/2170980612_9cd374efcd_o.jpg

Lower Manhattan 2100??
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2314/2170185385_814329d9bb_o.jpg

[pianoman11686]

Clearly not realistic^. (Where's the new WTC?)

Thanks for the pics. Something they showed me, which I'd never noticed before, was the relative lack of highrises east and north of the Battery, and especially along the coast, until post-WW2. Makes you wonder if, had there been more buildings like that one outlier with all the setbacks, the downtown skyline wouldn't have been damaged as much by the likes of 55 Water and its waddling cousins.