mackstud

Hello friends,

We are going to Rome in May 2019.

I found a package deal that is affordable and involves our taking a train to Venice for a 2 day stay there, before flying from Venice back home.

I've never been to Venice, but frankly the things I've heard recently about it are not encouraging. Many parts are underwater, its dirty, its thronged with tourists and overall seems gimicky.

In contrast, I keep hearing what a great place Dubrovnik is.

It would be several hundred dollars more to to Rome/Dubrovnik compared to Rome/Venice, but perhaps others here can weigh in on the relative merits of the two cities (Dubrovnik vs Venice)?

Thanks.

Chris

mackstud

Hello friends,

We are going to Rome in May 2019.

I found a package deal that is affordable and involves our taking a train to Venice for a 2 day stay there, before flying from Venice back home.

I've never been to Venice, but frankly the things I've heard recently about it are not encouraging. Many parts are underwater, its dirty, its thronged with tourists and overall seems gimicky.

In contrast, I keep hearing what a great place Dubrovnik is.

It would be several hundred dollars more to to Rome/Dubrovnik compared to Rome/Venice, but perhaps others here can weigh in on the relative merits of the two cities (Dubrovnik vs Venice)?

Thanks.

Chris

isabel

They are both absolutely gorgeous and worth seeing and also both absolutely mobbed with tourists. The 'thronged with tourists' you heard about is correct, but the 'underwater and dirty' is not. Only during certain seasons and for rather short periods of time is there flooding. All cities are dirty to some extent especially when the trash collectors can't keep up with the number of tourists, but Venice is no worse than other's in that respect. It is five hundred years old so the buildings are 'worn' - that is part of it's charm. There is no where else as unique and amazing as Venice and beautiful in it's own way as Venice.


Dubrovnik is also beautiful, the walls are amazing, the setting is gorgeous. And when the cruise ships are in port it is so crowded you can't see two feet in front of yourself.



So if you have never been to either I would pick the one that is less expensive (in your case Venice) and more convenient. But check and see what time the flight out of Venice is, often they are very early and that poses a problem for some.


I've been to Venice five times and planning another trip. I've been to Dubrovnik once, and while I am currently planning a second trip to Croatia, it's not going to include Dubrovnik. So glad I saw it, don't really feel a big pull to return.


Photos of Venice - https://andiamo.zenfolio.com/p226330896
Photos of Dubrovnik - https://andiamo.zenfolio.com/p284109872

fluff224

Chris,
Venice or Dubrovnik? That is a hard call. People either love Venice or not. Dubrovnik is IMO a magical place, especially at night. You don’t mention how many days your total trip is or how many days you would have for either city. Is this your 1st trip to Rome? That makes a difference too.

We travelled northern Italy last fall; Milan, Verona, Lake Como, Cinque Terre, Siena & ended up in Bologna. From Bologna we flew to Dubrovnik for the last 4 days of our trip. Our return flight home was out of Venice. I made flights before deciding where we would end up. We had been there a number of years ago & considered going back there for 4 days. But after a lot of reading, Dubrovnik won out. We loved it there & could have used more time.

Keep reading these forums to help make your decision. I’m sure you’ll be happy with whatever you choose is! Good luck.
Fluff

KTtravel

I enjoy both but would give the edge to Venice. However, it doesn't sound like you really want to go there, in which case I think you should pick Dubrovnik.
Both are crowded with tourists during the day but magical at night and in the early morning hours.
If you get away from the main section of Venice you can get away from the crowds in the beautiful back streets and canals. You can also visit Burano during the day. If you decide to go to Venice, do go to St. Mark's square at night to hear the orchestras playing - a trip highlight.

KarenWoo

Isabel, your photos are gorgeous as always! I especially enjoyed your photos of Dubrovnik because I am planning a trip to Croatia for spring 2019 and Dubrovnik is on our itinerary. Haven't been to Venice yet, but if your photos haven't convinced the OP, they have definitely convinced me I need to see Venice SOON!

tuscanlifeedit

A gimmick is a trick or device intended to attract attention, publicity, or business.

Dukey1

Many parts are NOT underwater, but I agree given your mindset I'd skip Venice

janisj

>>Many parts are underwater, . . . <<

Huh? Hardly, and definitely not in May. The high water (when it happens) is in winter.

>> . . . its thronged with tourists and overall seems gimicky.<<

Again, the tourist hoards aren't bad in May.

Gimicky? What does that mean? It is probably the single most photogenic city in Europe -- not a 'gimick' in sight.

But with your pre-conceived ideas, you may not enjoy it

Moderator1

Your two threads are identical with just the names of the cities reversed. They have been merged into one thread.

isabel

Karen - thanks. I have been looking at your planning thread for Croatia as I'm considering a second trip there next summer. But I would concentrate on Split and north since my first trip was Dubrovnik to Split. But sounds like you have a nice trip planned. Have you seen my trip report from our Croatia trip? Amalfi Coast, Rome and Croatia - Images of three hot but wonderful weeks The Croatia part starts half way through.

kja

I loved both, but would say that Venice is unique. I also agree that the problems with Venice are overstated. And IMO, the problems with Venice are only going to get worse, so I'd go sooner rather than later!

Too, Dubrovnik is harder to reach, and might be better paired with something that doesn't take quite so much travel time. JMO.

danon

agree with kjA

Dubrovnik is lovely, but Venice is one and only..

historytraveler

Dubrovnik

Seamus

I'm one of the travelers who thought Venice was worth seeing once. Been three times, don't plan to return. When not underwater, it is still pretty much an open sewer masquerading as a tourist attraction. As to gimmicky, how many plaster of Paris carnival masks and blown glass baubles can you stand? But that's just something that comes along with popularity, IMO, rather like Eiffel Tower key chains in Paris. If you happen to have a pigeon poop fetish you will adore P. San Marco, though!

kja

But you went 3 times? given your impressions (which, thankfully, were not like mine), what made you return?

Dukey1

Dubrovnik: the place that is never crowded, ever.

kja

I beg to disagree! On days when cruise ships are in port, Dubrovnik is decidedly crowded, and quite unpleasantly so.

thursdaysd

I imagine Dukey1 was being sarcastic. The last time I was in Dubrovnik, and it was a few years back, I had to queue to get into the old town. There are days with fewer tourists (you need to check the cruise ship schedules maintained by the port) but then it feels dead because the locals have moved out.

Venice has the advantage of being bigger, with much more to see. The area between St. Mark's and the Rialto will be as bad as Dubrovnik, but other areas are still worth seeing. May should be a good compromise between massive summer crowds and poor winter weather.

mackstud

Thank you to all for your comments.

For what its worth, I don't necessarily have a negative attitude about Venice, other than repeating what some local friends said as they didn't care for it all that much. Wish I had time to visit Dubrovnik and Venice both, especially if I could determine that I could visit Dubrovnik on a non cruise ship day!

I've just had some suggestions about the Amalfi coast, so will post a separate thread regarding that.

Thanks again,

Chris