The experience of being in the sistine chapel is nice but a bit spoiled by the fact that there are hundreds of tourists in the chapel as well and Italian guards are pushing you to move and be in the center (Often yelling at tourist who aren't moving fast enough and throwing out of the chapel anyone trying to take a picture).
Sistine Chapel
41–50 of 246 posts
Re: Sistine Chapel
#42Just remember: whatever piece of code you're working on right now; whatever tiny feature on a tiny website you're trying to implement; that is your Sistine Chapel.
Re: Sistine Chapel
#43Having never visited, I did not realize until how high the density of nudity per square meter was.
There are uncovered breasts! Penises! Can't find any vulvas unfortunately. It's funny to think that they would have to censor this on American television because of the religious right. Another way to think of it: Miley Cyrus is actually more covered than many of the characters in the Sistine Chapel.
Re: Sistine Chapel
#44Re: Sistine Chapel
#45This is an extreme violation of the Chapel's no photography rule. I hope they catch whoever did this.
It's the Vatican's own web site...
Re: Sistine Chapel
#46Very nice. In fact, almost nicer than being there (though you should do that anyway if you get the chance). Because now you can experience the details for as long as you want without a hundred other people around you who are just as annoyed at you as you are at them. I get it that a tourist complaining about tourist attractions being too crowded is total hypocrisy on my part. But at the same time what I wouldn't give…
P.S. Tourists are worse at Pisa.
Re: Sistine Chapel
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's the Vatican's own web site...
I always wondered why there's a no photography rule. Is it because of copyright or because it's a sacred site? (Although the mere fact that we're watching a 360 photo on the site means that it's probably copyright).
Re: Sistine Chapel
#48Very nice. In fact, almost nicer than being there (though you should do that anyway if you get the chance). Because now you can experience the details for as long as you want without a hundred other people around you who are just as annoyed at you as you are at them. I get it that a tourist complaining about tourist attractions being too crowded is total hypocrisy on my part. But at the same time what I wouldn't give…
I don't know... I recall the interior being very quiet, with a really good atmosphere. I remember being amazed by the geometry of the ceiling, which you can't really see from this site. It's very much 'over-hyped' in some sense though, If you're not really a fan of great art I can see it being a 'meh' moment. P.S. Tourists are worse at Pisa.
Re: Sistine Chapel
#49What you can't get from your computer screen is the scale of it all. You can intellectually get it by looking around at reference points in the image, but you can't feel it the way you can when you are there.
This would be especially true if one had a similar view of St. Peter's. There's almost no way to convey the sheer enormity of it without actually physically being there. That's one of the things I remember the most from my visit: that feeling of being so tiny inside this massive, ornate indoor space that is so big, there's a haze when you look from end to end.
Re: Sistine Chapel
#50This is an extreme violation of the Chapel's no photography rule. I hope they catch whoever did this.
It's the Vatican's own web site...