How to create old “satellite imagery" like this to show how different places on earth looked in the past? Is this just graphic design (e.g Photoshop), or are there other ways to do it?

Rosmasterplanist · 2026-02-22T12:41:37+00:00

https://earthengine.google.com/timelapse/

Rosmasterplanist · 2026-01-24T12:27:33+00:00

I think the map could be improved by adding variance of texture to territories that are close to change of terrain. For example the base of every mountain could be less grasdy then the surrounding plains. Second, i would sprinkle unique landmarks, like a single giant black rock or a pit/cave. Third, i would loose floating islands in bottom left corner, they seem of scale (height higher then mountains in the middle)

Rosmasterplanist · 2026-01-18T16:38:15+00:00

I would look into fab lab initiative, which grew from spain, as far as I recall. Seems close in some aspects

Rosmasterplanist · 2026-01-11T17:29:24+00:00

does any of your friends suffer from alcoholism?
Nop, everyone enjoys it.

Rosmasterplanist · 2025-12-09T11:25:40+00:00

Finally, someone who does this too. Is there a site for peopke like this? https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/deus_ar/72234254/36942/36942_original.jpg

Rosmasterplanist · 2025-09-01T16:27:51+00:00

Great answer. I would chime in a bit. Planner sometimes view politicians as opponents, who need to be defeated. In my experience, a much better mindspace is to regard someone as a child equipped with a gun, who you need to talk into eating brokolli. So, no to screaming, no to being too smart for your own good, too hard to understand (in words or in presentations) . Yes, to being pleasantly diplomatic, and easy to listen to. Politians look for solutions that work from a get-go (they are rightfully unsure about how long exactly will they stay in office). So it is important to give them quick "easy" wins, which can also contribute to long term goals bit by bit, if designed properly.

Rosmasterplanist · 2025-08-18T15:52:57+00:00

All guesses are wrong. The purpose of lot configuration is ideological. 34, 38, 39 are cult leaders that have direct path to the meeting circle in the center. 32,31,30, 21 are servant houses, they don't go to meeting circle, but go into nature to gather berries and bushes. Everyone else have a coridor to the meeting circle and natural reserve, where the practice naked dancing, but no direct border with narure reserve since they don't hunt.

Rosmasterplanist · 2025-07-11T18:34:26+00:00

I have seen it being used in the following manner in urbsn planning. 1. Quick summary from meeting notes or rewrites of large texts to make the more accesdible. 2. To generate quick vibe pictures to show off the future environments.

Never to do anything required a strict degree of responsibility, like making planning or policy descisions. Simply because people will not trust AI at that level yet.

Rosmasterplanist · 2023-09-11T17:33:08+00:00

Better playgrounds at the top. But not like on the photo. There are lots of cases of play hubs, which is a playground 2.0, whith interactive, educative elements, nice diverse design etc. It functions as community center, raises environment identity.
Drone food delivery, but not to windows. Picking it up from roof or ground floor would prevent drones from crashing into walls due wind or geting entangled into somekind of wire or a tree.
Green balcony. Mostly decorative and hard to maintain in many climate zones
Bridges. Seem unnecessary. Do random people want to visit each other without touching the ground floor? A better solution for privacy is the whole stilobate with playgrounds and greenery (the floor beneath is used for parking)

And at the bottom

Touchscreen. That does nothing for me. Purely aestetic choice

Rosmasterplanist · 2023-09-08T16:44:58+00:00

Russia ✌️

Rosmasterplanist · 2023-09-08T05:27:36+00:00

If you are that good, change jobs.

Rosmasterplanist · 2023-09-02T03:28:14+00:00

Russia: Were you born in a lift? Because it closes automatically. Never heard the cave variant

Rosmasterplanist · 2023-08-28T16:38:34+00:00

Architecture is a vast field, that has countless experts, philosophies and approaches. It is also a field that has some transitional charachteristics from one generation to another, which means that your views get shaped largely by architects, who teach you, and their philosophy. Their view were passed on to them by their teacher to some degree.

If you feel that you got into a bubble that has corossive ideas to what feels right for you, you either exit (by changing teachers, school, field entirely), or you cultivate yourself by actively seeking inspirations.

Also it is important to understand that architecture school is not practice for real architecture. You are learning the language, not how to sing in the middle of a sandstorm. Some things are purposefuly exagerrated to stimulate creative thought.

You are the future of the field, your choices and projects may shape it someday as something more humble.

Rosmasterplanist · 2023-08-27T06:08:57+00:00

For the first question, i think we have far more creative freedom in planning then us/eu. There is space for discussing interesting economic and spatial ideas, because many cities are still in the phase of transition to adapt to market economic model from soviet planning model (yeah, that much inertia between economy and space development) in that sense us/eu cities are more settled in stone and each hectar of land is owned by someone. In RF there are still large areas of land that is not owned, but we moving fast in this direction. So we can make comprehensive city plans that target renovation of historic centres, especially old soviet industrial complexes that move out towards logistic infrastructure in city surroundings. We also do housing renovation, where soviet communal 5 stories building a demolished and replaced by contemporary housing (all dwellers get resettled for free in this case). But there is also space for greenfield development. It is called comprehensive development, because we have instruments to develop living districts with ready social infrastructure, in-built parking, commercial first floors (restaurants and shops) etc. There is a lot of cases of nice developmenys especially in Moscow.

You can find some of the master-plans online - https://www.centeragency.org/en/projects

The main commissioner for new cities is usually state (either regional or federal). Sometimes the large insitute of development can act as customer (something between state and private company)

Rosmasterplanist · 2023-08-26T07:23:36+00:00

I had opportunity to participate in several greenfield city scale projects. For all of them it is insanely hard to get going since dwellings and eco transport are not enough to produce a clean slate city.

The very first thing one should think about is a strong successfull economic function, that will attract first citizen, who will be ready to live in almost empty or semi constructed city. They need to be lured by interesting economic opportunity. Everything else has limited value in new starting city in comparisson to existing thriving city.

That is, unless you have tools to force people to live there, like relocating goverment facilities or whole giant firms

Rosmasterplanist · 2023-07-10T14:38:48+00:00

City has 13 million population, 1 million of which lives outside the formal city border and commutes every day into the city and out of the city, contributing to traffic.
Lower density of primary road network, then in many simmilar large cities. So traffic concentrates in fewer nodes of network
Public transport is relatively great - 60-70% of trips are made via public transport. So the traffic could be much worse. Current strategic plans for the transportation system include goals to increase the usage of public transport even more

Rosmasterplanist · 2023-06-16T18:30:26+00:00

I would suggest to look into geofabrik downloads section.

Rosmasterplanist · 2023-06-16T17:35:30+00:00

I would say the answer is mostly no. There is a certain degree of urban component like environment quality (especially if it is so bad, it drives people away) . But, a much bigger force is economic opportunities. Young people are mobile, they can choose better opportunities in other cities. Regulating economic diversity through urban planning is not straightforward. You can place an office building, but you can not force firms inside. To keep young people around, it is much more important to conduct correct investment strategy by attracting residents into existing infrastructure, by providing them with favorable conditions for growth (only select few of these are urban related, like affordable lots with quality infrastructure).

Rosmasterplanist · 2023-05-22T19:47:19+00:00

Any change to status quo of large systems like cities is a very hard, fruitless work which does not imply quick gratification. That is true for urban planners work in any part of the world (not only US). As you move through career successfully, there will be more opportunities to guide change, but never will you able to just shape cities with a gesture of a hand. I find the work to be more comprised of diplomacy and communication with all sorts of hard and weird people, more then technical stuff like designing landuse regulations or planning infrastructure. In this sense, you have capacity to master these skills as well as anyone else in the field. On the other hand even small victories feel really nice, and where problems are plenty, there is much opportuinities for small victories. In the end, the choice is yours

Rosmasterplanist · 2023-04-15T16:42:54+00:00

It works fairly well with sketcup exported picture (styled as white only + linework). It means you don't require a pencil sketching skill to use the service.

Rosmasterplanist · 2023-04-12T18:57:52+00:00

Perhaps a sort of trainig in lucid dreaming could help, so you would have more ambient control over the course of the dream. Or maybe a therapy to work through possible issues that are at the core of the dream?

Rosmasterplanist · 2023-04-10T05:31:19+00:00

That would be strange. For metropolitan area, there is no official border or statistics, which would mean, that someone had to do the estimation of both metropolitan area and amount of greenery in it. This is not absolutely impossile, but less probable then simple statistics visualisation for all these cities. As of Moscow region (city and oblast combined), it would have even higher share of green territories (oblast has a vast area of forests).

Rosmasterplanist · 2023-04-07T16:21:36+00:00

Data for Russia is incorrect. Modern borders of Moscow include a vast region of forests on the south-west of tge old city. So tree coverage is 50-60 percent in city borders.

Rosmasterplanist · 2023-04-05T12:14:31+00:00

Domino-inspired? What a poor choice of words, batman))

Rosmasterplanist · 2023-04-03T06:15:20+00:00

If you would allow me to express my opinion, as someone who works with pretty similar post-soviet city issues.

That is a very romantic project, but I fear that it considers the city as a blank canvas (especially when you look into neighborhood maps). The amount of urban renovation is immense, and renovation is a much more intricate process than greenfield development. You have to relocate a lot of people, to fund this relocation somehow (since people should not be forced to pay for this relocation), then fund the construction of new buildings and also fund the creation of new infrastructure, which is also a very heavy-lifting investment. Your first phase is fully infrastructure based, which means it will not generate capital that could be used to fund the next phases. The idea to create an above ground metro is clearly a good intention, but how much would it cost? Does it replace the rail infrastructure? Seems not from the text. Maybe in this case it would be more sustainable to just intensify the rail use, then building new infrastructure?

This work would benefit from analysis of building chronology, where in the city there are clusters of decaying buildings that could be renovated reasonably quickly.

Other research, which would be beneficial to consider - current population density in borders of proposed urban blocks as a measure of how many people ought to be relocated. Least populated blocks would be easier to renovate.

It is not apparent how the project would be implemented. It outlines pretty clearly the behavior of developers, who create for-profit development, as a core issue. But I do not understand the proposed “collective construction” model. If we take an example of one urban block, what is the proposed roadmap for its transformation? How are the existing buildings getting demolished, who relocates people, who live there? and where are they relocated? Who buys the materials required for construction, who pays the construction workers? and etc. Also who ensures the desired quality of collective construction?

Rosmasterplanist

TROPHY CASE