I love taking pictures in museums
The primary reason I go to museums is to look at and enjoy the art. But while I'm there, I find museums to be wonderful locations offering settings and situations not found elsewhere.Yeah, I can see why, too. But it's not for me. I used to photograph parts of museum interiors for a while. I now find it too distracting. That's not what I visit museums for. I prefer to focus on what's there not what I could make of it. It's already been made, after all. I don't need to somehow rehash it.
Many museum policies about cameras are about safety and not disturbing other visitors. Just as tripods are not allowed, selfie-sticks are increasingly being banned inside museums. There is the possibility of harming the art on display as well as other patrons. Large bags and backpacks are usually banned no matter what is inside. As far as the size of the camera is concerned, the museum staff cannot be expected to know who is intending to make "professional" or commercial shots--which may be prohibited--and who just has a big ol camera. Some artists and institutions do not want their work photographed, and that is generally posted in the exhibition. Before smartphones, museums regularly sold slide pages with their greatest hits. They still sell postcards and posters. There may be the theory that personal photography cuts into those sales. It never ceases to amaze me that people take smartphone photos of all the painting in an exhibit. Just buy the damn book! They probably won't look at those photos again, anyway.
I go to a lot of museums, and I go to museums a lot. I even have a project I'm considering about museum guards. Who knows?
View attachment 346523
Louvre, Paris 2007
... the museum staff cannot be expected to know who is intending to make "professional" or commercial shots--which may be prohibited--and who just has a big ol camera. ...
They still sell postcards and posters. There may be the theory that personal photography cuts into those sales. It never ceases to amaze me that people take smartphone photos of all the painting in an exhibit. Just buy the damn book! They probably won't look at those photos again, anyway.
That said, on my trip to Venice and Florence last year I shot LOTS of photos in the museums but almost all include the other art students I was traveling with since I was documenting our travels on a daily blog.
hmmm, using the same logic, the museum staff can't be expected to know who is going to damage a work of art, so they shouldn't let anyone in!!!
if i wanted a picture of a work of art i would find anything in the museum store of greater quality than anything i could do with my camera and available light.
Yeah, but doesn't a phone or point&shoot camera suffice entirely for this? And those are virtually always allowed to be used.
As a museum guy myself, I can say that it’s mainly and often only about money.
Museums are scared shitless that someone is making money off their collections and exceptions without them getting a share.
Being it off brand guides, sellable photos, books, articles etc.
And increasingly with good reason, many “influencers” and would be pop stars use museums as cheap and convenient locations.
I remember being in the crypt under St. Paul’s in London, getting scolded by a lady for taking out my phone. Getting told it was “inappropriate”.
Tell you what was inappropriate, making the grave of lord Nelson into a hustling and bustling tourist attraction. Getting out a phone was apparently the last straw.
Funnily enough no mention of cameras.
The Louvre in Paris seems to have liberal policies. That's the Mona Lisa in the back. We and everyone else were taking pictures, similar throughout the museum. I think tripods and flash were forbidden.
Although @Helge state that in the extreme, I've also been told the same by both museum docents and security in the past. The only time I can recall being "strictly denied" the opportunity to take my own pictures is with visiting exhibits at two specific museums - Getty and Ronald Reagan Predicential Library. Others didn't seem to be bothered by it. Normally I prefer to rely on my photographic memory and immerse myself in the museum/gallery experience.
Mona Lisa room is incredible, I was around 1 minute in until I realized everything was ridiculous and left to the rest of Louvre. If I need to see that painting I will get a good reproduction. Only Sistine Chapel at Vatican Musseums is on the same level of multitude as far as I know.
As a museum guy myself, I can say that it’s mainly and often only about money.
Museums are scared shitless that someone is making money off their collections and exhibition without them getting a share.
Being it off brand guides, sellable photos, books, articles etc.
And increasingly with good reason, many “influencers” and would be pop stars use museums as cheap and convenient locations.
I remember being in the crypt under St. Paul’s in London, getting scolded by a lady for taking out my phone. Getting told it was “inappropriate”.
Tell you what was inappropriate, making the grave of lord Nelson into a hustling and bustling tourist attraction. Getting out a phone was apparently the last straw.
Funnily enough no mention of cameras.
Mona Lisa room is incredible, I was around 1 minute in until I realized everything was ridiculous and left to the rest of Louvre. If I need to see that painting I will get a good reproduction. Only Sistine Chapel at Vatican Musseums is on the same level of multitude as far as I know.
I would advise that one not pull out a camera in the Sistine Chapel. I've seen too many people called out (loudly) to even think about trying to take a picture in there. (Not that I would, anyway. Sometimes it's ok to simply observe a work of wonder.)
And the reason for the ban, which some say originally applied to professional/commercial photography but expanded to everyone due to fear of pros acting like tourists:
Why would pros want to take photos in a crowded tourist attraction today? I could possibly see a journalistic or editorial opportunity, but otherwise what commercial value could there be? The ban would seem to be more about disruption and blocking views.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?