<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" > <channel><title>Comments on: No Photo:  A Discussion on Museum Photo Policies</title> <atom:link href="http://www.artfagcity.com/2008/01/25/no-photo-a-discussion-on-museum-photography-policy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2008/01/25/no-photo-a-discussion-on-museum-photography-policy/</link> <description>New York art news and reviews.</description> <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 04:20:00 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator> <item><title>By: mike</title><link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2008/01/25/no-photo-a-discussion-on-museum-photography-policy/comment-page-2/#comment-333836</link> <dc:creator>mike</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sat, 30 Jul 2011 21:25:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.artfagcity.com/2008/01/25/no-photo-a-discussion-on-museum-photography-policy/#comment-333836</guid> <description>One of the reasons I go to museums is to see works that I don&#039;t know much about and when I do see them, I like to photograph the art and the placard. If I&#039;m not able to do so, it is very difficult to do further research on the piece when I&#039;m back home. If the museum would provide more information on each piece with an app, for example, this would great enhance the visitors experience. Then, if it is a cherished piece, it would be even more desirable to buy a copy or a book on related works.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One of the reasons I go to museums is to see works that I don&#8217;t know much about and when I do see them, I like to photograph the art and the placard. If I&#8217;m not able to do so, it is very difficult to do further research on the piece when I&#8217;m back home. If the museum would provide more information on each piece with an app, for example, this would great enhance the visitors experience. Then, if it is a cherished piece, it would be even more desirable to buy a copy or a book on related works.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: JR</title><link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2008/01/25/no-photo-a-discussion-on-museum-photography-policy/comment-page-2/#comment-226911</link> <dc:creator>JR</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 11:57:59 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.artfagcity.com/2008/01/25/no-photo-a-discussion-on-museum-photography-policy/#comment-226911</guid> <description>Hmmm why not just sneak a few quick pictures with a cell phone camera with the flash disabled? If its a crowded location or you have a few friends with you, that makes it easy to get away with! Sometimes its just easier to quietly break certain rules than question or try to change them!</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmmm why not just sneak a few quick pictures with a cell phone camera with the flash disabled? If its a crowded location or you have a few friends with you, that makes it easy to get away with! Sometimes its just easier to quietly break certain rules than question or try to change them!</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: JR</title><link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2008/01/25/no-photo-a-discussion-on-museum-photography-policy/comment-page-1/#comment-312505</link> <dc:creator>JR</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 11:57:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.artfagcity.com/2008/01/25/no-photo-a-discussion-on-museum-photography-policy/#comment-312505</guid> <description>Hmmm why not just sneak a few quick pictures with a cell phone camera with the flash disabled? If its a crowded location or you have a few friends with you, that makes it easy to get away with! Sometimes its just easier to quietly break certain rules than question or try to change them!</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmmm why not just sneak a few quick pictures with a cell phone camera with the flash disabled? If its a crowded location or you have a few friends with you, that makes it easy to get away with! Sometimes its just easier to quietly break certain rules than question or try to change them!</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: JR</title><link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2008/01/25/no-photo-a-discussion-on-museum-photography-policy/comment-page-1/#comment-312506</link> <dc:creator>JR</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 11:57:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.artfagcity.com/2008/01/25/no-photo-a-discussion-on-museum-photography-policy/#comment-312506</guid> <description>Hmmm why not just sneak a few quick pictures with a cell phone camera with the flash disabled? If its a crowded location or you have a few friends with you, that makes it easy to get away with! Sometimes its just easier to quietly break certain rules than question or try to change them!</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmmm why not just sneak a few quick pictures with a cell phone camera with the flash disabled? If its a crowded location or you have a few friends with you, that makes it easy to get away with! Sometimes its just easier to quietly break certain rules than question or try to change them!</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Marty</title><link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2008/01/25/no-photo-a-discussion-on-museum-photography-policy/comment-page-1/#comment-219390</link> <dc:creator>Marty</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 31 Jan 2010 14:53:14 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.artfagcity.com/2008/01/25/no-photo-a-discussion-on-museum-photography-policy/#comment-219390</guid> <description>There are about a dozen legitimate reasons why museums and galleries might want to ban photography, with or without flash, but &quot;avoiding damage to the exhibits&quot; is not legitimate.Fifteen years ago the National Gallery of London ran a 3-year trial and found that 400,000 photoflashes caused no more damage to paintings than the normal gallery lighting did. For a summary see: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg14519701.500-old-masters-will-not-fade-in-a-flash.htmlSee also the same conclusions published in Museum Management and Curatorship, 1994, Vol 13 (1) p.104.Internet postings are full of assertions and occasional anecdotal stories of damage caused by flash, but I have failed to find a single piece of evidence backed by science or experiment.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There are about a dozen legitimate reasons why museums and galleries might want to ban photography, with or without flash, but &#8220;avoiding damage to the exhibits&#8221; is not legitimate.</p><p>Fifteen years ago the National Gallery of London ran a 3-year trial and found that 400,000 photoflashes caused no more damage to paintings than the normal gallery lighting did. For a summary see:<br /> <a href="http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg14519701.500-old-masters-will-not-fade-in-a-flash.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg14519701.500-old-masters-will-not-fade-in-a-flash.html</a></p><p>See also the same conclusions published in Museum Management and Curatorship, 1994, Vol 13 (1) p.104.</p><p>Internet postings are full of assertions and occasional anecdotal stories of damage caused by flash, but I have failed to find a single piece of evidence backed by science or experiment.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Marty</title><link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2008/01/25/no-photo-a-discussion-on-museum-photography-policy/comment-page-1/#comment-312504</link> <dc:creator>Marty</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 31 Jan 2010 14:53:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.artfagcity.com/2008/01/25/no-photo-a-discussion-on-museum-photography-policy/#comment-312504</guid> <description>There are about a dozen legitimate reasons why museums and galleries might want to ban photography, with or without flash, but &quot;avoiding damage to the exhibits&quot; is not legitimate.Fifteen years ago the National Gallery of London ran a 3-year trial and found that 400,000 photoflashes caused no more damage to paintings than the normal gallery lighting did. For a summary see: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg14519701.500-old-masters-will-not-fade-in-a-flash.htmlSee also the same conclusions published in Museum Management and Curatorship, 1994, Vol 13 (1) p.104.Internet postings are full of assertions and occasional anecdotal stories of damage caused by flash, but I have failed to find a single piece of evidence backed by science or experiment.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There are about a dozen legitimate reasons why museums and galleries might want to ban photography, with or without flash, but &#8220;avoiding damage to the exhibits&#8221; is not legitimate.</p><p>Fifteen years ago the National Gallery of London ran a 3-year trial and found that 400,000 photoflashes caused no more damage to paintings than the normal gallery lighting did. For a summary see:<br /> <a href="http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg14519701.500-old-masters-will-not-fade-in-a-flash.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg14519701.500-old-masters-will-not-fade-in-a-flash.html</a></p><p>See also the same conclusions published in Museum Management and Curatorship, 1994, Vol 13 (1) p.104.</p><p>Internet postings are full of assertions and occasional anecdotal stories of damage caused by flash, but I have failed to find a single piece of evidence backed by science or experiment.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Queens denizen</title><link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2008/01/25/no-photo-a-discussion-on-museum-photography-policy/comment-page-1/#comment-66700</link> <dc:creator>Queens denizen</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2008 15:56:06 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.artfagcity.com/2008/01/25/no-photo-a-discussion-on-museum-photography-policy/#comment-66700</guid> <description>I suspect many museums institute a blanket &quot;no photography&quot; instead of &quot;no flash&quot; because it&#039;s easier to enforce.I&#039;ve been in a dozen or so trips to Western Europe, and there&#039;s always some moron who won&#039;t bother to shut off their flash (either doesn&#039;t care or doesn&#039;t know how).</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I suspect many museums institute a blanket &#8220;no photography&#8221; instead of &#8220;no flash&#8221; because it&#8217;s easier to enforce.</p><p>I&#8217;ve been in a dozen or so trips to Western Europe, and there&#8217;s always some moron who won&#8217;t bother to shut off their flash (either doesn&#8217;t care or doesn&#8217;t know how).</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Queens denizen</title><link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2008/01/25/no-photo-a-discussion-on-museum-photography-policy/comment-page-1/#comment-312503</link> <dc:creator>Queens denizen</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2008 15:56:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.artfagcity.com/2008/01/25/no-photo-a-discussion-on-museum-photography-policy/#comment-312503</guid> <description>I suspect many museums institute a blanket &quot;no photography&quot; instead of &quot;no flash&quot; because it&#039;s easier to enforce.I&#039;ve been in a dozen or so trips to Western Europe, and there&#039;s always some moron who won&#039;t bother to shut off their flash (either doesn&#039;t care or doesn&#039;t know how).</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I suspect many museums institute a blanket &#8220;no photography&#8221; instead of &#8220;no flash&#8221; because it&#8217;s easier to enforce.</p><p>I&#8217;ve been in a dozen or so trips to Western Europe, and there&#8217;s always some moron who won&#8217;t bother to shut off their flash (either doesn&#8217;t care or doesn&#8217;t know how).</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Can You Take Pictures Inside A Museum? &#171; On Being A Museologist</title><link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2008/01/25/no-photo-a-discussion-on-museum-photography-policy/comment-page-1/#comment-44100</link> <dc:creator>Can You Take Pictures Inside A Museum? &#171; On Being A Museologist</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2008 05:03:24 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.artfagcity.com/2008/01/25/no-photo-a-discussion-on-museum-photography-policy/#comment-44100</guid> <description>[...] An interesting discussion about this issue can be read here. [...]</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] An interesting discussion about this issue can be read here. [...]</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Alexander</title><link>http://www.artfagcity.com/2008/01/25/no-photo-a-discussion-on-museum-photography-policy/comment-page-1/#comment-29260</link> <dc:creator>Alexander</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 04:13:50 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.artfagcity.com/2008/01/25/no-photo-a-discussion-on-museum-photography-policy/#comment-29260</guid> <description>Regarding your post and the questions of photography and how annoying it is for you.As a former employee at MoMA and former security officer, I must say that for all the complaining that guards are completely indifferent I must stand in their defense and say that it is not only their fault for the constant photographic intrusion on the museum.  The museum is a business, not a place of culture anymore, sad for me to admit so.  Tourists are encouraged to arrive for the high admittance fee, and their experience is to be made more inclusive in that &quot;art belongs to us all&quot;, which is a false pretense to abuse paintings and other works through bland photography.The guards try their best, but YOU try standing on post for 8 hours at a time (10 on Fridays), and you try to keep people well behaved without any real powers while at the same time attempting to keep the photographers from flashing back and forth.  YOU try to prevent people from touching pieces, and then eating, and using the cell phone, I could go on just as you do when you complain.Start appreciating the people who work there instead of constantly criticizing; it is their jobs but they have more on their minds than your comfort, my friend.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Regarding your post and the questions of photography and how annoying it is for you.</p><p>As a former employee at MoMA and former security officer, I must say that for all the complaining that guards are completely indifferent I must stand in their defense and say that it is not only their fault for the constant photographic intrusion on the museum.  The museum is a business, not a place of culture anymore, sad for me to admit so.  Tourists are encouraged to arrive for the high admittance fee, and their experience is to be made more inclusive in that &#8220;art belongs to us all&#8221;, which is a false pretense to abuse paintings and other works through bland photography.</p><p>The guards try their best, but YOU try standing on post for 8 hours at a time (10 on Fridays), and you try to keep people well behaved without any real powers while at the same time attempting to keep the photographers from flashing back and forth.  YOU try to prevent people from touching pieces, and then eating, and using the cell phone, I could go on just as you do when you complain.</p><p>Start appreciating the people who work there instead of constantly criticizing; it is their jobs but they have more on their minds than your comfort, my friend.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: basic (User agent is rejected)
Content Delivery Network via Amazon Web Services: S3: static.artfagcity.com.s3.amazonaws.com

Served from: www.artfagcity.com @ 2012-02-13 09:31:12 -->
