Исаакиевкий Собор [Isaakievskiy Sobor]
Isaak Cathedral


http://www.photo.sbor.ru/Piter/_________________/images/P1070516.jpg
http://www.photo.sbor.ru/Piter/_________________/images/P1070518.jpg
http://www.photo.sbor.ru/Piter/_________________/images/P1070517.jpg
http://www.photo.sbor.ru/Piter/_________________/images/P1070528.jpg
http://www.photo.sbor.ru/Piter/_________________/images/P1000223.jpg
http://www.photo.sbor.ru/Piter/_________________/images/sever_front.jpg
http://www.photo.sbor.ru/Piter/_________________/images/ug_front.jpg
http://www.photo.sbor.ru/Piter/_________________/images/zapad_front1.jpg
http://www.photo.sbor.ru/Piter/_________________/images/P1070869.jpg
http://www.photo.sbor.ru/Piter/_________________/images/P1070872.jpg
http://www.photo.sbor.ru/Piter/_________________/images/P1070866.jpg
http://www.photo.sbor.ru/Piter/_________________/images/P1070889.jpg
http://www.photo.sbor.ru/Piter/_________________/images/P1070874.jpg
http://www.photo.sbor.ru/Piter/_________________/images/P1070891.jpg

http://club.foto.ru/gallery/images/preview/136082.jpg

9/10
I won't give a higher score because I don't like those small golden domes on the steeple,they just could be better.

9.5 Because I like the interior a lot. The exterior is okay, but not my favorite.

The inside is amazing.

This one is really wonderfull

http://www.photo.sbor.ru/Piter/_________________/images/P1070874.jpg

i love the exterior colors; dark browns. and of course, the interior is spectacular.

they sure don't build 'em like they used to...

9/10. Love that golden crown, and the interior dome.

9,5/10

This is one of those architectural moments featuring a cultural *lightbulb*. More specifically, one of "leading up to the cold war" voltage. This Cathedral could double as any number of US state capitols.

The edge powers both making attempts to get into the Euro party.

Thankfully I appreciate such overtures when achieved with such odd novelty. They explain how Europe played sandwich for so long! Fantastic- 8.5

Looks too European to be Russia.

I like it very much!

I withdraw my vote

I withdraw my vote


Ok

10/10/10/10/10!!!!!
amazing, I'm ashamed I never heard of this one before!

Marvelous, beautiful! 90/10.;)

10/10


:drool:

9/10

ALMOST perfect...

I would like to change my vote to 10/10

fixed.

Stunning, 9,5/10, but almost 10,

perfect 10/10

Absolute beauty. 10 out of 10.

9/10

outer is amazing and the inner is a great architecture with paint work

10/10 This is pure art..

9,5/10 it's awesome

8.5/10

9/10

I realy love it. The inside is absolute superb. 9.5/10.

9/10

9/10

8 for the outrageous use of gold

9.5/10 ;) Amazing!

10/10

wonderful :)

10/10

Perfect! 10/10

9/10

9/10

10/10

10!

Amazing

1O :)

10/10

Just Magnificent!!

10. i like the interior.

10/10

I don't like it, kinda looks like a cheap imitation 5/10

Imitation of what kind

Imitation of what kind

St. Peter's Basilica in Rome 1506 - 1626
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/15/Petersdom_von_Engelsburg_gesehen.jpg/800px-Petersdom_von_Engelsburg_gesehen.jpg

St Paul's Cathedral in London 1675 - 1708
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b3/StPaulsCathedralSouth.jpg/441px-StPaulsCathedralSouth.jpg

Panthéon in Paris 1758 - 1789
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/53/Pantheon_paris.jpg

Anyway it's imposing and looks much better than Saint Basil's Cathedral in Moscow ;)
8,5/10

:uh: is fantastic 10/10

9/10

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fe/Stasov_trinity.jpgSt. Peter's Basilica in Rome 1506 - 1626


St Paul's Cathedral in London 1675 - 1708


Panthéon in Paris 1758 - 1789


Anyway it's imposing and looks much better than Saint Basil's Cathedral in Moscow ;)
8,5/10




I dont have any intresting to have disscussion with you ,becouse you can t see where is Renessance style with Barocc and where Neoclassic .ST Isaac was built 1818 -1858 in Later Neoclassic style ( or Empire style) in tradition Russian-Bizantien formula : Greec cross groundplan. ST Peterburg didn t need in imitation this neoclassic style - this city is open air museum for this style from mid 18 cent .(when this was born ) In 1750-1840 Peterburg was MECCA for European architects who could to create fantastic neoclassical plans and ideas hear- was invited best and talanted artists from Italy,France,England and for this ideas Russian emperators paid crazy money. By the way architector of this Cathedral is Montferrand -he studied in the famous atelier of Percier -father of Empire style !!!
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/F/Fe/stasov-trinity.jpg
http://img-2006-12.photosight.ru/05/1801772.jpgThis is samples of other "imitation" neoclassic style in Peterburgs-Troizki /Kazan Cathedral 1801 /1828

I dont have any intresting to have disscussion with you ,becouse you can t see where is Renessance style with Barocc and where Neoclassic .ST Isaac was built 1818 -1858 in Later Neoclassic style ( or Empire style) in tradition Russian-Bizantien formula : Greec cross groundplan. ST Peterburg didn t need in imitation this neoclassic style - this city is open air museum for this style from mid 18 cent .(when this was born ) In 1750-1840 Peterburg was MECCA for European architects who could to create fantastic neoclassical plans and ideas hear- was invited best and talanted artists from Italy,France,England and for this ideas Russian emperators paid crazy money. By the way architector of this Cathedral is Montferrand -he studied in the famous atelier of Percier -father of Empire style !!!
Please, don't give me lessons on styles in architecture. ;) In this case styles mean only details, but direct inspirations are clear for everyone who can see, especially when it comes to Rome (neoclassicism was directly inspired by renaissance classicism) and Paris (also neoclassicism). Reassuming, this cathedral is great, but isn't original. No wonder, Europe is full of copies and copies of copies and Russians those days desperately desired to appear Western European.

I don't like it, kinda looks like a cheap imitation 5/10
an envious person ;)

Please, don't give me lessons on styles in architecture. ;) In this case styles mean only details, but direct inspirations are clear for everyone who can see, especially when it comes to Rome (neoclassicism was directly inspired by renaissance classicism) and Paris (also neoclassicism). Reassuming, this cathedral is great, but isn't original. No wonder, Europe is full of copies and copies of copies and Russians those days desperately desired to appear Western European.

Russians don t need to seems something else.
You are from Poland and other person TwItch too. It s saying almoust all about yours posting.Our discussion will be constructive when Poles will to get out a lot of complexes according with Russia and I guess with Germany .May be this is problems inside Polish nation if Poland lust 220 years was nothing during 180 years and only about 30 years as state ?

Vlad, I think Petr doesn't mean something offence here. It is clear that some similarity to those cathedrals is exist (not imitation or copy). They're slightly similar to each other, so there is nothing wrong that St. Isaak is a bit similar to these great cathedrals. I just disagree it's a cheap imitation, it was clearly unfounded and jealous. ;)

Russians don t need to seems something else.
You are from Poland and other person TwItch too. It s saying almoust all about yours posting.Our discussion will be constructive when Poles will to get out a lot of complexes according with Russia and I guess with Germany .May be this is problems inside Polish nation if Poland lust 220 years was nothing during 180 years and only about 30 years as state ?
Yes, Poles are genetical rusophobes and until I admitt, Russians are genial nation, which is obvious, I have complexes. :crazy:
The fact is, during imperial era Russian tsars hired Western European artists to built western looking capital in St.Petersburg. Those western artists used examples which were their heritage, and not necessary heritage of Russia.
Vlad, I think Petr doesn't mean something offence here. It is clear that some similarity to those cathedrals is exist (not imitation or copy). They're slightly similar to each other, so there is nothing wrong that St. Isaak is a bit similar to these great cathedrals. I just disagree it's a cheap imitation, it was clearly unfounded and jealous. ;)
If course it isn't cheap. It was designed by great European architects. On the other hand St.Petersburg looks little bit artificial, because its architecture isn't an effect of local evolution, but an effect of import. It's sth like contemporary Shanghai and especially Dubai.

On the other hand St.Petersburg looks little bit artificial, because its architecture isn't an effect of local evolution, but an effect of import. It's sth like contemporary Shanghai and especially Dubai.
I think comparing with cities like Shanghai and Dubai is misplaced. Skyscrapers with neoclassic and baroque?? The ensemble of historical Peterburg has built not in some years but in some centuries! It was evolution. St. Petersburg looks western for sure, but is quite naturally, Russia as east as west country, mix of cultures, so if St. Petersburg is our "western" capital, Moscow - "eastern". On the other hand many Polish cities has clearly German architecture.

Looks too European to be Russia.

I like it very much!

Russia is both European and Asian...:)

I think comparing with cities like Shanghai and Dubai is misplaced. Skyscrapers with neoclassic and baroque??
Those days baroque and neoclassicism were as modern as architecture of skyscrapers now. You can't measure value of the historical and new architecture from the contemporary point of view.
The ensemble of historical Peterburg has built not in some years but in some centuries! It was evolution.
I get it. :)
St. Petersburg looks western for sure, but is quite naturally, Russia as east as west country, mix of cultures, so if St. Petersburg is our "western" capital, Moscow - "eastern". On the other hand many Polish cities has clearly German architecture.
But westernization started with the foundation of St.Petersburg, just like westernization in Poland started in the XI-XII centuries, just after Christianization. Russians adopted western examples in architecture for good, and from this point of view St.Petersburg is a beginning of some bigger process, not only a whim of a few absolute monarchs. :)

Those days baroque and neoclassicism were as modern as architecture of skyscrapers now. You can't measure value of the historical and new architecture from the contemporary point of view.

Lol but this process were going for centuries, now we see how the cities growing just for some years!


But westernization started with the foundation of St.Petersburg, just like westernization in Poland started in the XI-XII centuries, just after Christianization. Russians adopted western examples in architecture for good, and from this point of view St.Petersburg is a beginning of some bigger process, not only a whim of a few absolute monarchs. :)
It is normal process. You know, probably it could better name not "started westernization", but "rebirth westernization". The short story. :)

In the X-XII centuries before the Mongols came Kievan Rus was close to all the European monarchies. So southwest part of Rus was under Polish occupation and became then Ukraine and Belarus, and northeastern part of Rus was under Mongols occupation which became Russia. After the occupation in the XIII-XV centuries new Russia became a bit closed country like China or Japan, but it was unnaturally, so in the XVII-XVIII centuries Russia opens to the West again and St. Petersburg was a symbol! :cheers:

It is normal process. You know, probably it could better name not "started westernization", but "rebirth westernization". The short story. :)

In the X-XII centuries before the Mongols came Kievan Rus was close to all the European monarchies. So southwest part of Rus was under Polish occupation and became then Ukraine and Belarus, and northeastern part of Rus was under Mongols occupation which became Russia. After the occupation in the XIII-XV centuries new Russia became a bit closed country like China or Japan, but it was unnaturally, so in the XVII-XVIII centuries Russia opens to the West again and St. Petersburg was a symbol! :cheers:
Rus, till Constantinople was captured and sacked by the crusaders in 1204, was influenced rather by Byzantium, than by the western Christians, who culturally had much less to offer those days. Of course, I know about the dynastic connections, but it's a long story for another occasion. :)

9/10

9/10

:omg:

10/10

9,5/10

10/10

9.5/10 almost 10, but I know Russia has much betters cathedrals also;)

Yes, Poles are genetical rusophobes and until I admitt, Russians are genial nation, which is obvious, I have complexes. :crazy:
The fact is, during imperial era Russian tsars hired Western European artists to built western looking capital in St.Petersburg. Those western artists used examples which were their heritage, and not necessary heritage of Russia.

If course it isn't cheap. It was designed by great European architects. On the other hand St.Petersburg looks little bit artificial, because its architecture isn't an effect of local evolution, but an effect of import. It's sth like contemporary Shanghai and especially Dubai.

This is nonsense to read!!! Petr, St Petersburg in the time of its fame was extreamly cosmopolitan sity and Russian in the same way.

10. Excellent. Regards.

10/10

10/10

http://cache.photosight.ru/img/1/f71/4001571_large.jpg

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/4600/raskalov.42/0_352db_3e5d94ad_orig

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4106/5155141872_20a551e055_b.jpg

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/5500/sa7sha.28/0_68a32_84a4d17a_XXL

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/4401/i-smelov.c/0_42f2e_b9679c2a_XXL

9/10. Beautiful!

The interior is amazing but the outside could be better, 9/10

10/10

10/10

10/10

7.5/10