Hi everyone,

I'm planning my first-ever trip to Europe this summer (late July to mid-August) and could really use your expertise! I'm looking to visit Italy, France, and Spain over about 3 weeks, and I’m trying to find the right balance between sightseeing and downtime.

My current draft itinerary:

• Italy (7 days) – Rome, Florence, and possibly Venice
  
• France (6 days) – Paris and maybe a day trip to the Loire Valley
  
• Spain (7 days) – Barcelona and either Seville or Madrid
  

I’ll be flying into Rome and flying home from Barcelona. I’m in my early 30s, traveling solo, and love art, food, history, and photography. I’m okay with a bit of fast travel but don’t want to feel rushed every day.

Questions:

1. Is this itinerary too ambitious?
   
2. Would you recommend cutting a city or adding a hidden gem?
   
3. Best transport options between these countries?
   
4. Any festivals or events I should look out for?
   

Would really appreciate any thoughts, tweaks, or destination advice from fellow travelers.

Thanks in advance!

Have your flights been fully booked?

Yes, way too ambitious and you will likely rushed. You will be traveling at the absolute height of tourist season to very popular destinations. And travel between points have a great distance between some of them (the countries).

Granted, your intention for 6 days in Paris is decent. But many points in the Loire Velley do not make for a viable day trip from Paris.

I have not yet been to Spain but you do not have time for three major cities in 7 days, two cities is pushing it. Same with Italy.

Check out rome2rio for your transit options.

Think of your itinerary in terms of nights, not days. You lose time each time you change hotels and locations in transit. And rule of thumb is that 4 nights gives you 3 full days sightseeing, 3 nights is 2 days and so on.

Edit: some museums and landmarks have closure during the week, usually Monday or Tuesday. This may impact some your plans.

An analogy, which is a recommendation: The kid in the candy shop who tries to eat everything in sight inevitably gets a bellyache.

The Italian segment is too much. I don't think the other two are that bad.

What sort of photography? Street? Cityscape? Or?

Within Italy you'd take the fast train.

Getting to Paris you would be best flying. Use either Easyjet or Vueling. Not Ryanair . They use a relatively remote airport in Paris.

You'd then fly to Madrid but you could take the train. I don't think you should waste the time with the train to Madrid. It's not that long of a trip but you'll likely find relatively few departure times. You also don't have the time.

Train to Barcelona.

Seville is a bit of an outlier in terms of location if you need to get back to Barcelona. Easier to get back to Madrid but you're flying from BCN?

Yes, that itinerary is too ambitious.

Travel_Nerd has already given you some great advice. I’ll add that it’s very difficult to know how to advise you without knowing your interests or why you have chosen these particular locations, but FWIW:

As an art lover, I would not consider trying to see Rome AND Florence in less than 10 days. JMO. To include Venice, I’d want another 3 or 4 days.

I agree that 6 days, to include ONE day trip, is reasonable for a first visit to Paris.

With 7 days in Spain and Barcelona as a priority, you might consider Barcelona and one of the smaller towns near it (e.g., Girona or Tarragona). OR 7 days in Madrid and nearby cities (e.g., Toledo and Segovia). OR 10 to 12 days in Andalusia – Seville AND Cordoba AND Granada.

Good luck with your planning!

The only way to feel rushed is to feel you have to accomplish a lot each day. For example, you can go to Rome for just 3 nights, and you won't feel rushed if you only want to see two things per day. You will simply have to limit what you see. The next time I go to Rome will probably be for five nights.

My 'hidden gem' is to recommend that you rent a car for at least 3 days. Get out into the countryside and explore places that would otherwise be difficult to access. North of Barcelona, for example, there are amazing places that are truly hidden in the hills and mountains of Catalonia. A photographer's dream.

What kind of Festival do you have in mind? In summer, they tend to be outside the major cities, where other Euopeans like to spend their vacation time. There is nothing more exciting and photogenic than a street theatre festival, but the idea that one is going on at a time and location you can easily get to is unlikely. I have planned vacations around them, not the other way around.

Here is one I have been to in France, about the time you are looking to go. It is an exceptional experience, but not within easy reach of your stated trajectory:

https://www.ariegepyrenees.com/en/pr...-marionnettes/

Personally I would save Paris for another trip.
If you want downtime you have to plan it in and with your current ideas there is little if any space for it, apart from on a train.
Rent a car, or better a bicycle, and explore some countryside. Just visiting (over)crowded cities in the heat of summer will be exhausting.

You have too many places on this itinerary. In Italy, you can easily spent a full week in either Rome or Florence, so perhaps drop Venice. Six days in Paris is good but Seville should be dropped from Spain. Again you could easily spend a full week in either Barcelona or Madrid. It is going to be hot in all of Europe in the summer so you will have to plan around that.

Your Italy segment sounds like it was copied from a basic one week bus tour of Italy from a discount package. Don't try it since each change of city kills an entire day. The package tours have already arranged hotels and transport and meals. You can't do that on your own. Of course, you could book a land only Rome Florence Venice package tour, adding your own days at the beginning and end of that package so you can do justice to Venice and Rome.

My Spain experience is too long ago to be relevant. Paris calls for more days than you have listed.

Since you seem to have nailed down Italy as a start and Barcelona as a finish, Paris is a time consuming diversion, especially with the lost time from two transfer days. Myself, my own preferences would advise Paris and Rome, cutting Spain, but if you are already financially committed to Italy beginning and Spain finish, leave Paris for its own trip next time and add the days to Italy.

Because you will be travelling at the height of the summer tourist season, it would be wise to nail down your lodging reservations as soon as you have a practical itinerary (which you do not now have). And do not forget air conditioning unless you really like heat.

As near as I can tell, the entire trip is only big-ish cities with a possible day excursion to somewhere in the Loire Valley. I love European cities, their museums, historical treasures, architecture, etc. But a fast-paced, 3-week trip of only cities, with so much time lost in transit and so many entry lines everywhere, would not make for a good first-time exposure to Europe IMO. Unless you have a high tolerance for heat and humidity, you may find it difficult to maintain this pace for 20+ straight days.

I would want to mix in some small(er) towns/villages here and there... slow down and get away from the tourist list-checking mania. FYI, some of Italy's great art treasures are not in Rome, Florence or Venice but in smaller towns.

If you can't change your flights, I'd stick to Italy and Spain, leaving France for another trip. If flights can be changed, I'd seriously consider spending your time in one country or one country plus nearby sights in an immediately adjacent region... such as Spain + Portugal, or Spain + southern France (Carcassone or Bordeaux), or Italy + Dolomites or Swiss Alps or an island or a lake.

Okay it depends on you're used to but I wouldn't call either Florence or Venice "big" cities. Venice I think is now under 60k residents. That's a university not a big city.

Whatever choices the OP makes should be based on their interests.

"art, food, history, and photography."

I'd say that's mainly a city trip. Unless they're hoping to do wildlife or landscapes.

Skip Venice.
Rome - Florence: train
Florence (or Pisa) - Paris: plane
Paris - Sevilla: plane
Sevilla - Madrid: train
Madrid - Barcelona: train.
You can of coursde not visit all the gems in the cities you mention, but only the most popular highlights

I asked what the OP means by photography but if photography matters I'd keep Venice and ditch Florence. There is a reason Venice is FULL of photography tours.

I am currently in London on the way home from Sicily where had a chat with several people from Rome and they were complaining how hot the summers have become with temperatures as high as 43-45. Humidity is not low either. You will also not be able to keep up a full days worth of exploring for more than 10-14 days until you are going to have to take a break for a day. You will probably also need time in the evenings on several days to do laundry. I enjoy driving through the countryside in Europe but that does not seem to fit your interests. Andalusia and Tuscany would make the most sense if you wanted some time in the countryside but you would have to drop Paris.

I don't define "big city" by permanent population or square kilometers. Both Florence and Venice receive about 5.5 million visitors a year. By various counts, there are upwards of 80 museums in both Florence and Venice, plus churches, piazze, etc. Neither feels like a small town to me, and that's in relatively off-season months. I haven't been to either in high season summer when tourist numbers are their highest.

I agree with everyone's comments, though the OP is not crazy either. It is possible to stick with the basics of the proposed itinerary (without the 'options').

Most importantly, the OP needs to figure out the time and budget needed to go from one country to the other. This website shows the main options using planes or trains or buses. For budgeting purposes, best to plug in the dates:

https://www.rome2rio.com/

Thanks so much for your thoughtful response!

I haven’t booked flights yet, so I really appreciate the reality check. You're right—traveling in peak season and trying to cover that much ground could definitely lead to burnout. I’ll take a closer look at reducing the number of cities, maybe dropping Venice or choosing between Seville and Madrid to allow more time in fewer places.

I also hadn’t considered how much time hotel changes and travel days really eat up—thanks for that tip, and the heads-up on museum closures too. I’ll use Rome2Rio to explore transit options and rethink the pacing of the trip a bit more realistically.

Appreciate your help!

It is a very busy schedule, but I know people who have pursued even more ambitious itineraries and enjoyed the experience greatly.

A lot depends on your interests, which we don't know. An art lover will tell you to allow five days for Florence, which would be much more than enough if you have no intention of going to a museum.

You don't seem to be considering travel time at all. You don't magically get from Venice to Barcelona unless you travel by magic carpet. I recommend counting nights in a place rather than days: four nights gives you three full days; when cities are close together (like Rome and Florence), you may get another half day on the travel day. You need to remember also that flight time or rail time isn't a realistic measure of travel time. This is especially true with flights because the airports are usually some distance from the cities. In all cases, you also have to consider the time to pack, check out of the hotel, and get to and from the airport or station.

I suggest you rephrase your trip to nights at each destination. Then make a list of the things you'd like to see or do in each place and see how many days you'd need for those activities. Maybe you'll either pare the list or cut the number of destinations.

For planning travel, I don't much care for Rome2Rio. I prefer Google Maps, which has accurate information on trains, buses, and even air travel. Once you know where and when you want to go, you can use thetrainline.com to find tickets, including discounts, on trains and long-distance buses. I use skyscanner.net to find flights, especially on budget airlines (which are less "budget" every year).

Interesting! My experience has been different. Maybe it depends on location or maybe things have changed. In any case, looking at BOTH sources -- rome2rio and google -- might give a better idea of options.

P.S. My strategy when faced with different information is to go to the web-sites for the transportation options, the train or bus or airline websites. From my perspective, it's easy to do that from the rome2rio website, which includes the links.