SkyscraperCity Forum banner

Scenic Cities

138K views 348 replies 116 participants last post by  Jaehaerys 
#1 ·
It's amazing how much scenery can make or break a city. Rio de Janeiro without it's epic mountains would be just another dull developing world skyline, albeit probably still with excellent culture. Then again, Paris has one of the most boring settings imaginable, save for Montmartre, yet is one of the most beautiful cities in the world.

What are your favourite natural settings for cities, and what do you think the scenery adds or takes away? Here are my best urban landscapes, in ascending order.

1. Lisbon: amazing scenery, with the sparkling bay and the castle hill. I think the situation is what makes Lisbon such an awesome city, since tbh its architecture, though aesthetically pleasing, is no different from most of the rest of the mediterrean.

2. San Fransisco: similar to Lisbon in many ways, though the architecture compliments the landscape better what with the skyscrapers and the bridge.

3. Rio: in some ways the grey block shaped buildings help with the city's exotic image, since it can't be confused with an American or European city, but I feel the landscape rather dwarfs teh city itself, apart from the majestic statue of Christ the Redeemer.

4. Hong Kong: couldn't be better, huge skyscrapers complementing the hills perfectly, in a city that might otherwise have been something of a Dubai.

5. Edinburgh: again, architecture matches the setting: the castle makes a fine centrepoint with the Royal Mile running down the spine of the crag, and arthur's seat makes Edinburgh truly unique. It's not my favourite architecture style but it's still beautiful.

6. Venice: my favourite scenic city, for obvious reasons: complements it perfectly.

Honourable mention to magnificent mountain cities, such as Munich, Vancouver, Innsbruck, Grenoble, and Darjeeling. I feel all should be better renowned for their beauty than they are.
 
See less See more
#163 ·
Ciudades del Norte Chileno
Entre el mar y el desierto

Abro este thread para presentarles las grandes ciudades del norte Chileno que se distinguen por sus exóticos e impresionantes paisajes, su historia y su impresionante desarrollo!


Arica (194.000 habitantes el 2002)


Morro de Arica por miroab, en Flickr


Iglesia de San Marcos por miroab, en Flickr


Calle peatonal de Arica por miroab, en Flickr


Vista de la Avenida Chile desde el morro por miroab, en Flickr


Edificio del FFCC Arica a La Paz por miroab, en Flickr

Iquique (216.000 habitantes el 2002)



tomada con mi nueva Sony_DSC-HX5V iquique chile por AUSTROX, en Flickr


les rues d iquique... por tryst@n, en Flickr


Invierno En Iquique -Playa Cavancha por karimendez, en Flickr


Iquique por panamericana 2010, en Flickr


Iquique - Chile por sanesqo, en Flickr

Antofagasta (285.255 habitantes el 2002)

(casi todas las fotos de Bishonen! xD son geniales!)


RUGBY por Vicente ☼ Bishonen, en Flickr


Splash! por Vicente ☼ Bishonen, en Flickr


Balneario de Antofagasta por Vicente ☼ Bishonen, en Flickr


Skyline costero de Antofagasta por Vicente ☼ Bishonen, en Flickr


Antofagasta, día después de la Lluvia por Vicente ☼ Bishonen, en Flickr


La portada Antofagasta por DJ Sacred, en Flickr
 
#164 · (Edited)
Busan(The second largest city in south korea) has some scenic parts, especially sea clouds on the beach look fantastic and mysterious.




Flickr에서 cadaka2000님의 1-4


Flickr에서 cadaka2000님의 1-6


Flickr에서 cadaka2000님의 1-1


Flickr에서 cadaka2000님의 1-7


Flickr에서 cadaka2000님의 1-30


Flickr에서 cadaka2000님의 1-13


Flickr에서 cadaka2000님의 1-34


Flickr에서 charliebrummitt님의 Interesting geology




Flickr에서 blueoceanpalm님의 부산




http://www.flickr.com/photos/zero-photo/8623515237/in/photostream


http://www.flickr.com/photos/zero-photo/8623515205/in/photostream


Flickr에서 Nomad Within (Pete DeMarco)님의 View from Igidae coastal path
 
#176 ·
That's not really true though. While there is more farm land in especially Denmark and Sweden than in Norway, so obviously more cities are built in that kind of landscape, there are lots of exceptions. Both Stockholm and Helsinki are basically built in archepelagos. Stockholm is also quite hilly. Further north, lots of towns are surrounded by mountains.
 
#180 ·
^^ It is also fair to say that as soon as someone says something about Norway - especially if positive, that you turn up and tell them how rubbish Norway is.

We all have our little foibles when it comes to our posting. I didn't see anything wrong with what Adde said myself, it isn't flat here, but then it's also not extremely hilly either. It's pleasant and "undulating" I guess one could say without being hilly like San Fran, or mountainous like Bergen.
 
#181 ·
^^ It is also fair to say that as soon as someone says something about Norway - especially if positive, that you turn up and tell them how rubbish Norway is.
I just said how mountainous it is compared to elsewhere in Scandinavi+ Finland (I'm a little bit unsure about how Iceland looks outside of Reykjavik), something which I personally consider to be a good thing. I just comment on how I see it and Norway is rubbish in many areas concerning cities. You are more than welcome to visit the country to see for yourself. Why should I hide it? I do not hide what I think is great either, like some of the scenery, growth rates, some modern architecture, some historic architecture, etc. Look through my post and you will soon discover that and my comments aren't really that biased as you may think it is.

We all have our little foibles when it comes to our posting. I didn't see anything wrong with what Adde said myself, it isn't flat here, but then it's also not extremely hilly either. It's pleasant and "undulating" I guess one could say without being hilly like San Fran, or mountainous like Bergen.
It's pedantry. Nowhere is completely flat, but Stockholm is so compared to most Norwegian cities just like Malmø is so compared to Stockholm again. I do think it should be obvious to anyone what was meant with the initial comment. And my comment about Addes habits was not specially about that comment, but general trend. I will admit that I probably should not have brought it up hindsight though.
 
#184 ·
#185 ·
For me, personally, Stockholm is a scenic city (not because I just live here). It is built on islands and there is water almost everywhere. Also, not all the city is flat. The southern parts of the city are hilly and some places are even suitable for climbing. :)
I agree that it is a scenic city, but I do think it is flat compared to the cities mentioned previously in Norway. :)
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top