[Vecais Sakarnis]

In this thread I'll post my photos from anywhere I've been.

1. Prague. Prague's aerial views is showing probably the closest to perfectionism as I've seen. Just look at these rooftops going uphill, mixed with historical spires and the complete, harmonious composition they make. I don't know city which could surpass this.

 

[Galro]

Nice picture.

 

[Vecais Sakarnis]

2. Madrid. If Prague is outstanding from aerial perspective, then Madrid is the absolute champion in Europe in terms of cityscape. Amazing architecture in 10-15 floors high buildings, which are built in sides of grand avenues - no other European city can offer such wonderful cityscape experience and that's the main reason why I love Madrid so much (there are others too, like incredible nightlife, weather, beautiful parks and other districts) - it's between my TOP3 cities in Europe.

 

[Vecais Sakarnis]

3. Stockholm. View to Gamla Stan (Old Town) from one of the ferries leaving for beautiful islands. Stockholm is amazing in many aspects but one of it's main trumps is the perfect waterfronts. Swedish capital is still my favorite city, although competing harshly with Madrid and Barcelona.

 

[dj4life]

Great photographies. Thank you, Vecais! I am looking forward to seing more.

 

[Dompcz]

Nice photos, each of these photos show probably some of the strongest sides for each city (in terms of architecture and landscape). I'm not sure which are my favorite TOP cities in Europe, there are too many of them. I can only say that I would put Stockholm at the top in most overrated European cities list. Especially here in SSC and even miestai.net forum where some guys create some 100 posts a day with photos from pretty much the same angles and information from some small events which are happening in Stockholm. I have nothing against that though, just don't get why Stockholm is so special for some guys. In my recent trips I visited these cities: Barcelona, Rome, Amsterdam, Edinburgh, Madrid, Stockholm. Out of this list, Stockholm is at the very bottom, even small Edinburgh is more impressive for me.

 

[Italiano95]

^^ I know that many people here on this forum think that Stockholm is overated, but I have to say that I think they're wrong!

Stockholm is a beautiful and great city and I always get a special feeling when I'm in Stockholm! Although I don't think it's overated I have to agree that there are several other European cities just as great and impressive as Stockholm is and some might even be more impressive than Stockholm is! But that's not because Stockholm is bad or boring in anyway, that's just because Europe has such great and cool cities, of that list that you named I think that both Rome and Amsterdam might be more impressive than Stockholm is, but on the otherhand that's two of the absolutly most famous, special and impressive cities in the world so that might not be so strange!

Europe is a great continent with great cities! :cheers:

 

[Galro]

Nice photos, each of these photos show probably some of the strongest sides for each city (in terms of architecture and landscape). I'm not sure which are my favorite TOP cities in Europe, there are too many of them. I can only say that I would put Stockholm at the top in most overrated European cities list. Especially here in SSC and even miestai.net forum where some guys create some 100 posts a day with photos from pretty much the same angles and information from some small events which are happening in Stockholm. I have nothing against that though, just don't get why Stockholm is so special for some guys. In my recent trips I visited these cities: Barcelona, Rome, Amsterdam, Edinburgh, Madrid, Stockholm. Out of this list, Stockholm is at the very bottom, even small Edinburgh is more impressive for me.

I agree. I think Stockholms waterfront makes a great picture like shown above, but other than that ... I much prefer cities like Paris, Vienna, Barcelona, Madrid, Valencia, Sevilla, St. Petersburg, Rome, Venice, Napoli (ignoring their social problems), Prague, Budapest et.c.

 

[Vecais Sakarnis]

Well, it depends on taste. For me, Rome looked actually a bit depressive with all those ancient ruins and neglected buildings (of course, it still had beautiful places but... I would never prefer to live in Rome than Stockholm, even with all it's much better weather). I wasn't very excited also about Paris. Yes, it do have many great palaces, churches, monuments and so... but the regular cityscape with all those one and the same colored and designed Hausmann buildings was a bit boring to me.
Why I like Stockholm so much? It's partly irrational, partly rational. I can't explain the irrational part, but here some of rational reasons - it's amazing waterfronts, where buildings are built sometimes in several levels on rocky coasts; it's many islands and water areas and bridges which connects them makes unique cityscape; it's great development level in terms of buildings maintenance, infrastructure, transport and everything... I like this perfectionism and well-thought living environment.

 

[datoriprogram]

I just got home from Barcelona and it was lovely (Except for the service), so looking forward to your "review" of it! And I won't get in this Stockholm discussion, I'm too biased I wouldn't put it in front of Paris, Rome or Venice though, that's for sure! But I wouldn't put it after Edinburgh, Napoli or Sevilla, that's also for sure, hehe. Dammit, I said I wouldn't get in this discussion...

Great photos btw!

 

[dj4life]

You can write what you want, but Stockholm is not overrated! I would not want to describe the same advantages as Vecais did, but the city has something that many people like. Maybe it is the simplicity in everything (something grand, but not too posh, something old, old-school, but yet much modern things, too). It is simply a city that is nicelly-balanced (for instance, between nature and urbanism). Of course, this is the advantage of many cities in our region, however, if we compared Stockholm to cities like Paris, Rome or London, the one seems to be more balanced (if we take not only architecture into consideration). There are many things to do and see in Stock and there is something that attracts people from far away.
Anyway, tastes vary and many things rely on our education, as well. It is like musical taste - some like pop (Paris, London, etc.) and some prefer something more alternative.

 

[Galro]

But I wouldn't put it after Napoli that's also for sure, hehe. Dammit, I said I wouldn't get in this discussion...

Ignore the current derelict affair the city is in, and I'm sure you will. Napoli got a historic fabric that is pretty much unmatched in Europe - I believe the historic core is considered to be largest in Europe. Add a beautiful location on top of it, and you have a great looking city. But does have some serious social problems at the moment though.

Genova is another Italian beauty I like.

You can write what you want, but Stockholm is not overrated!

I think it is. So do Dompcz apparently. You of course will never agree with us because you're among the ones who overate it.

 

[datoriprogram]

I think it is. So do Dompcz apparently. You of course will never agree with us because you're among the ones who overate it.

Well, it's subjective isn't it? You guys might just underrate it (which I think you are) - another side of the coin

I haven't been to Genoa, though. The cities I've visited in Italy are Rome, Milano, Venice (just for 2 days tho), and Napels (and its surroundings).

 

[Galro]

Well, it's subjective isn't it? You guys might just underrate it (which I think you are) - another side of the coin

Yes, it is. I have absolutely no problem with people saying that they think Stockholm is Europes best city or whatever, but I should be equally allowed to say that I think it's overrated, which I do. dj4life makes it sound like we are not allowed to say Stockholm is overrated. Case closed. But both I and Dompcz think so, and we should be allowed do too.

I haven't been to Genoa, though. The cities I've visited in Italy are Rome, Milano, Venice (just for 2 days tho), and Napels (and its surroundings).

You need to visit Genoa, Florence, Verona and Turin then. Four very nice cities right there! I'm sure you will love the flag of Verona too!

 

[datoriprogram]

Yes, it is. I have absolutely no problem with people saying that they think Stockholm is Europes best city or whatever, but I should be equally allowed to say that I think it's overrated, which I do. dj4life makes it sound like we are not allowed to say Stockholm is overrated. Case closed. But both I and Dompcz think so, and we should be allowed do too.

You need to visit Genoa, Florence, Verona and Turin then. Four very nice cities right there! I'm sure you will love the flag of Verona too!

Yes absolutely! I just pointed that you said he was overrating the city, which inflicts with his opinion

Yes, I really do. And I love the flag of Verona, it reminds me of something I can't put my finger on

 

[Italiano95]

I would just like to stick in and say that I think that Italian cities are absolutly awsome, I've been in Turin, Rome, Venice (3 times), Florence (2 times), Genoa, Siena, Lucca, Perugia, Bolzano, Caorlé (3 times), Pisa and little (but beutiful) Assisi and I can tell you that all of them are just outstanding!

They are all both very urban and very, very beautiful and charmful!

I would very much like to see several other Italian cities like Verona, Napoli, Milano, Bologna and Palermo so if any of you have been there I would really appreciate if you could tell me something about them and how you experienced them! :cheers:

 

[Dompcz]

You can write what you want, but Stockholm is not overrated!

Well, lets just agree that people can have different opinions. There are just too many beautiful cities in Europe which in terms of old architecture are much more beautiful for me than Stockholm. As mentioned, Italy alone has at least a couple more beautiful cities (I guess here my opinion is similar to the one of Galro). I might be hated in NordBalt section after these words but oh well, I'll say it: I think that all Nordic cities in general are not competitive in terms of attractiveness for tourists and especially if we talk about old architecture. Just take any bigger city from lets say Central Europe: Vienna, Prague, Budapest - they are way more impressive. I haven't been to Copenhagen yet though (my friend said that he liked Copenhagen more than Stockholm). By the way, I'm not talking about where are better conditions to live or which city/region is more developed, clean, etc. - Nordic capitals would be among top choices for me too, but they are just a little bit boring for me as a tourist and there are too many way more interesting/beautiful European cities.
As for Stockholm, I agree, it has excellent location, those islands, waterfront, bridges - it's nice to look from a far, sadly street level is completely different story though.

Sorry, Vecais for hijacking your thread, waiting for more photos.

 

[Vecais Sakarnis]

It's great that this thread has inspired a discussion and brought some aliveness here.

4. Pärnu. Estonia's main seaside resort is a beautiful town with unexpectedly much to offer for it's size (~45 000) both in historical and modern architecture. In general, it's a city of villas (as all seaside towns are), but it has also great historical core, as you see in this picture of town's main shopping street.

 

[Tin_Can]

^^
Mind you,big half of the historic Pärnu city centre was simply demolished and paved over with asphalt in 1950s...

 

[Vecais Sakarnis]

They demolished buildings already ruined by war or they demolished just because of Soviet planning?