twosummers
Loc: Melbourne Australia or Lincolnshire England
10 for me.
The pictures are nice. I wish people were not quite so heavy handed with intensification of the colors, but I must plead guilty of doing that myself.
12 for me. But I think their concept is a little skewed. Why big cities? The big cities were just the jumping of place for me. I'm much more interested in the countryside away from the cities!
21 For me however, some of these locations were while I was in the USN from 1959-1963. Bought my first Nikon SLR camera from the base store in Sasebo, Japan, September 1959!!
I think it's 16 for me, but although I've been to Hong Kong & San Francisco I didn't get out of the airport at either (basically just refuelling stops) so maybe they don't count.
Like @Retired CPO I don't get the way the list is almost entirely urban. If I didn't miscount only 2 of their list are not cities.
I'm sure I could come with a list of 50 natural/historical spots I've been that would IMO beat most of their very urban list.
And like @tairving I feel they've overdone the saturation. Almost got to the point of putting me off going back to places I've known & loved.
16 for me. There are at least another 5 on my near term bucket list when travel starts again.
MadMikeOne
Loc: So. NJ Shore - a bit west of Atlantic City
13- some more than once. Some on this list I have absolutely NO interest in visiting. Spending any time in huge, crowded cities full of high rises is not my idea of fun.
33, but I find the list more than a bit arbitrary. No Great Wall or anywhere in China, Kyoto, Cairo, Bangkok, India, St Petersburg, Tanzania, Viêt Nam, Cambodia, New Zealand, Nepal just to think of a few that are more memorable than many of these but they list Phuket? Nice rather than Paris? I could go on and on.
When asked, a man replied, "I subscribe to Playboy magazine, for the same reason I subscribe to National Geographic magazine. I like to look at places I know I'll never visit"
sb
Loc: Florida's East Coast
Retired CPO wrote:
12 for me. But I think their concept is a little skewed. Why big cities? The big cities were just the jumping of place for me. I'm much more interested in the countryside away from the cities!
Well - this is not a list of places to go before you die. It is a list of "The most instagramable places". Since I do not do Instagram, I don't really care. Some of these are wonderful big cities, but agree - where are the national parks and stunning archeological sites. You may have been to many of these beautiful European cities, but if you have not been to Alaska, Yellowstone, or Yosemite, then you have missed some of the Earth's most stunning places. It is not all about posting online that you have been somewhere famous.
sb
Loc: Florida's East Coast
tairving wrote:
10 for me.
The pictures are nice. I wish people were not quite so heavy handed with intensification of the colors, but I must plead guilty of doing that myself.
And I hate it when someone sticks in a sun peeking over the distant horizon but the sunlight in the photo is clearly coming from another direction.
Stash
Loc: South Central Massachusetts
Six - New York City, Seattle, Chicago, San Francisco, Philippines, Tokyo.
I've only been to eight. I'm a little surprised tho that Copenhagen didn't make the list.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.