News   May 17, 2024
 2.7K     3 
News   May 17, 2024
 1.8K     3 
News   May 17, 2024
 11K     10 

Munich U-Bahn Flickr photoset

A few of those actually remind me of Toronto

100579309_6dc4fa2fb3_b.jpg


117152644_1a1042c9ff_b.jpg


117194163_be6d1ab4af_b.jpg


The signature stations are on a whole other level though.
 
I love the fact that many of these stations are just concrete shells but they understand that you can make a statement with lighting and colour.

It seems like people at the ttc have no sense of design and colour theory at all anymore.

The colours on the sheppard line are disgusting. Pale yellow? Beige, orange, and brown? wtf is this. 1970?

You know ttc, there are other ways to light a station that boring white compact fluorescents.
 
^Actually almost all the stations I saw in the photo set are lit by "boring white compact fluorescents". It's the way that the lighting fixtures that hold the fluorescents that are different, and the materials and colours that the lights are shining on that make the stations different. Fluorescent lighting lasts longer and produces less heat than incandescent lighting, they're cheap and are universally used, so I can't see why people shouldn't use it.

As for the Sheppard Subway stations, I think they're actually the best attempt TTC has ever made at station design. In fact TTC didn't even design the Sheppard stations- the artwork and design was done by outside professionals and artists. Much better than the in-house TTC station designs of the entire Bloor-Danforth Line. In my opinion the worst station in terms of lighting is York Mills.
 
I love the fact that many of these stations are just concrete shells but they understand that you can make a statement with lighting and colour.
It's the way that the lighting fixtures that hold the fluorescents that are different, and the materials and colours that the lights are shining on that make the stations different.

Exactly. What strikes me most about this photoset is that even the signature stations don't look like they necessarily cost a fortune. That and they seem to be far better maintained.

As for our own system, I can maybe chalk up the rusting and often-missing aluminum siding, the crumbling concrete and general griminess to inadequate funding, but what excuse does the TTC have for things like the ugly turquoise ceiling strips at Bloor, the proliferation of MS Word fonts, or the embarrassing school-project-like customer notices telling us about spitting and garbage goblins?

Much better than the in-house TTC station designs of the entire Bloor-Danforth Line.

While far from flashy, most of the stations on the B-D are at least cleanly and consistently designed, plus they use the TTC font. I find stations like Bathurst and Jane quite pleasing, though of course maintenance is a problem as always.
 
A number of these Munich photos remind me much more of Montreal than Toronto. Even the blue cars resemble Montreal somewhat.

Toronto's stations have a certain 60s kind of appeal, but an awful lot of them, particularly along Bloor-Danforth, have no individuality. In Montreal, and apparently in Munich, design was stressed more heavily, and each station looks very individual. In Montreal some of the stations have truly impressive huge volumes of space above the track level, and almost all of them have decorative elements including unique light fixtures, murals or backlit glass artworks, etc. etc. ...
 
A number of these Munich photos remind me much more of Montreal than Toronto.

The Munich and Montreal metro systems have a lot in common. They are both relatively new networks, having been completed largely from the 60s to the 80s with larger, more impressive-looking modernist (and later PoMo) designs for their stations – both networks shiny and new for large-scale international events like Expo and the Summer Olympics in both Munich and Montreal.
 

Back
Top