museums and photography

I'm guessing that the selfies and Instagrammers were creating too much congestion. I've been to galleries where a large tour group- maybe 50 folks- all insisted on taking multiple selfies in front of each featured painting. It was more than maddening!

Things move slow in Spain, not like in fast-paced USA. In many ways we still live in the 20th century in Spain. Probably those photography rules date back to when flash was a big issue in museums, but the Prado hasn't bothered to update their rules since the last century ;-)

As they say, Spain is different lol!

Yes, the difference is annoying. Many allow photographs today. A small number do not. Some will sell a photo permit.

Possibly they want you to purchase a book with pictures.

What I noted about this at the Prado was how less distracting it was to not feel compelled to take a photo of something famous or something I liked. I could focus on the artwork...just like the artist intended...and be kept in my mind's eye instead of on a cloud or phone where no one really looks again.
However, people aren't always careful about removing flash, and some phones still emit a small light flash to correct low lighting. Enough of that will endanger the art.

It is their display, their museums, and their approach to security both the theft and degrading of art work via flash. What difference does it make what their motivation is for prohibiting photos? Personally I like so I am happy to see it.

I was told by a guard at the National Gallery in London once that sometimes the issue is who owns the picture. In that instance if it was owned by the National Gallery you could take pictures. If it was on loan from a person or another museum you could not.

Now, I did not find that true at all at the Vermeer Exhibition at the Rijksmuseum. I think you could take non-flash pictures of everything in the special exhibition area.

PS....NOT a museum administrator, just a museum hound, hahaha!!

Not all museums are going to address photography in the same manner. In my own museum limited photography is allowed in our gallery.

For one it certainly is a copyright issue, or at least the rights to ownership of the image of an object especially regarding commercial photography and videography. This is especially a concern with regard to loaned objects and the owner's rights over the loan, plus any limits established by the owner.

Camera flash and the concern for light damage to artifacts use to be an issue (still is for a number of museums), but less so now with the advances in light reducing glass/film for display cases. Display case lights are on proximity sensors, to illuminate objects only on the approach of a visitor, then turn off when they walk away. Museums are also managing the ambient light, have reduced their gallery light levels and are aiming fixtures away from artifacts.

I do like to take a handful of photos in a museum - of the item, not of myself, but I will gladly forego that option if it eliminates the selfie crowd. I agree with a previous comment how nice it is to just focus on the beautiful art instead of thinking if it should be photographed.

I've just been to the RIjskmuseum and the The Mauritzhuis in the Netherlands. They both allow photography. Its VERY annoying. It takes forever to get your chance to actually SEE the art, and IMHO it takes away from the mood and enjoyment. How are you really seeing the art, the brush stokes, the colors, the light and how it makes you feel if you just pop over and take a photo? Just buy the books and prints. I don't need a photo to remind me about my visit to The Leighton house in London. It blew me away. It's a shame that this trend has started.

interesting replies! thanks all.

i admire art, one of the main reasons i travel. i also like to make my own image of an image made by someone else. that's my thing.

i suppose ownership of works of art, even things created long ago gives one a certain right regarding reproduction.

@vap: your answer is fascinating. while not a commercial photographer, i am a professional cinematographer. display lighting is different from movie lighting but i understand color rendition, heat, uv, etc, and take a keen interest in the quality of light used in museums. some get it right, others are terrible at it, even some famous institutions. i was impressed how the scrovegni chapel makes a point in their promo video that they use advanced lighting technology to make the colors of the frescoes more accurate. the florence academia also made a big deal of the new lighting for their david display.

Years ago one could take photos in the Prado museum. On both my first and second trips to it in 1978 and 1994 visitors could take both photos and video in it. In 1978 it was 8mm movie, not video. You just couldn’t use flash. I visited it in 1999 and while photos could still be taken, video was forbidden. It supposedly had to do with not wanting security systems recorded. I have no idea when photography was forbidden in it.

@cala - same thing with the Palace. You used to be able to take photos and video. I have video inside the palace from 1994.

I do find it disheartening when I can't take a photo of a picture I like and the museum doesn't sell postcards of that picture. I would also have loved to have been able to take photos inside the beautiful Royal Palace in Madrid. Maybe some of these rule against taking photos have to do with security so people can't photograph where the security cameras are located?

There is no uniformity to it. The museums we go to are often very small. But they have something very unique that only a scholar would find important. The staff, often doesn't know why a particular item is very important and needs to enforce a general rule. I may know something is clearly out side of copyright, but the staff doesn't know, this. Thats when you have to talk to admin, and see if you can get special permissions. This usually works in the smaller museums, especially if you offer to pay a small permit fee. :)

In my experience after visiting numerous art galleries, museums and historic sites, there seems to be several basic "rules" regarding photos.....

• No photos allowed under any circumstances
• No flash photos, tripods or selfies
• photos allowed with an extra cost permit
• photos allowed with no restrictions

As others have mentioned, the rules against use of flash is quite common, as the bright light can degrade valuable art. Also as mentioned, use of tripods and taking selfies is often banned as it causes congestion and infringes on the ability of other visitors to freely move about to view the exhibits. Thankfully my camera has a lot of flexibility so I can often set it to get good images without a tripod.

There seems to be varying levels of enforcement on photos. Some places I've visited that have had total bans don't seem to care about throngs or tourists flashing all over the place with mobile phone and P&S cameras. Some people simply don't have a clue on how to switch off the flash, so they take picture with flash even if prohibited. Other sites are very strict and those who flaunt the rules will find themselves angrily ejected very quickly.

I always carry a large and very noticeable dSLR camera so if photos are not allowed, I'm usually approached very quickly when I enter a site. If a photo permit is offered at a reasonable cost, I usually pay for that (although not everyone does, but they take pictures anyway). I sometimes pack along a tripod, but don't use it at indoor locations. I always follow the rules. If I agree not to take pictures, I don't try to "sneak" a few.

There are various reasons why you cannot take photos and most of them have been discussed. One that hasn't been brought up is that some museums do not want you to take photos that will earn you money. Personal use, yes. Your website or FB or Instagram for your business or YouTube, no.

Recently went to a museum and photos were fine except for one exhibit as they objects were all on loan from a private owner. I still saw a woman making her own secret photos. Some people have no ethics and believe the rules apply to everyone else, just not to them.

If you have ever been in the Louvre gallery with the Mona Lisa you would beg for photo restrictions everywhere! I admit that I'm 72 and don't have a Facebook account. But why is it essential to selfie yourself, or spend more time getting a photo of a painting than time spent gazing at the painting.

I'm more concerned about more glass (and railings) in front of paintings, because of both unhinged vandals and self-involved activists looking for publicity for their cause. Is spray paint really the way to criticize wealthy museum trustees?

It is their display, their museums, and their approach to security both the theft and degrading of art work via flash. What difference does it make what their motivation is for prohibiting photos? Personally I like so I am happy to see it.

Agree 100% Frank.

I still saw a woman making her own secret photos. Some people have no ethics and believe the rules apply to everyone else, just not to them.

I hate those people. I had a museum photography epiphany a few years ago. I decided to stop taking pictures of the exhibits/art and just be in the moment. If I truly love something - I can buy a postcard, then take a picture of the postcard to share on social media.

5th day in madrid. visited all 3 major museums in the city. yes, there is no uniformity of the photo 'rule'. while the prado is strictly no photos, the thyssen-bornemisza is just the opposite (i presume flash, tripods, and selfie sticks are still a no-no- as it should be). the reina sofía is in the middle and confusing; some rooms are off-limits to cameras (says so on placards), and others have no such signs. the confusing part is that in a room with no apparent restriction, the guard still said no.

a lot of different opinions have been expressed so far. i stated my position earlier on.

of the three museums, i enjoyed the thyssen the most. amazing collection, beautifully displayed, less crowded, and just an easy relaxed atmosphere. the prado of course has a world-class collection. where else in the world can you see goya's black paintings? seeing the 'drowning dog' with my own eyes was as fulfilling as i had always imagined. the reina sofía is not my cup of tea but the place is a who's who of modern artists. the fact is, between the three you are certain to have an 'art attack', or two!

as for the comment about gear, i carry pro equipment but have never been singled out, either with offers of photo permits or treated with extra suspicion. i suppose that's a good thing!

I remember being at the Accademia in Florence and it was prohibited to take a photo of David. I abided by the rule, though quite a few people were taking photos. I bought a postcard instead. That was in 2005. I just happened to open up that guidebook a couple weeks ago and found that postcard. I did take photos of the David statue out in the plaza as a sort of consolation prize but always wondered about all those other people just snapping away in the museum. I also remember in Scotland, at Edinburgh Castle, there is a section called the National Scottish War Memorial. I walked in there and immediately started taking a photo of something and a guard in full military fatigues was instantly all over me about no photography. Only then did I see the sign. I felt so embarrassed that I felt like I had desecrated a memorial site that I just did a quick look around and left.

This article is several years old now, but is still a fascinating read about this topic. I suspect many more museums have gone the "allowed but no flash or tripods" route since this was published.

@History Traveler: thanks for posting the article! i agree with the author. looks like some museums like the prado are still trying to stick a finger in the proverbial dyke while others like the thyssen, uffizi, and the rijksmuseum are being progressive and going with the flow. i am just glad that all these exist and that i am able to enjoy them in my own way along with millions of others. these works of art have transcended ownership and belong to all humanity.

I love taking pictures in museums.

AND, I would love it if museums uniformly banned the practice.

More enjoying 'being in the moment,' as Estimated Prophet said. Less jockeying for position or waiting for the crowd to thin. And it would likely ease crowding somewhat.

Years ago, we never got close to the Mona Lisa because of the 50 people in front it with their cell phones raised in the air. (The picture I took was of the crowd with their cell phones, just to show the ridiculousness of it.) Down the hall, another one of Leonardo's works (Virgin of the Rocks) was pretty well unnoticed.

Just my 2 cents.

We visited the Rijksmuseum last August and I was not using flash, which I thought complied with the rules, but a woman came up to me, very agitated saying that I could only use my cellphone, no cameras at all.

Later on one of the upper floors, that same woman came at me again and said no photos at all for that section. Everyone else was taking cell phone photos and I saw no signs prohibiting photos.

I remember visiting the Sistine Chapel for the first time in 1983 and photos without flash was allowed. I had a nice SLR camera that I placed on the floor and took great photos of the frescoes. In 1990, I was back to the Sistine and no photos at all were allowed, the Japanese had paid for cleaning up the frescoes and they owned the rights to photos (not sure how long).

The key is to find out the rules before you enter the museum/

It's worth noting that these reasons can vary depending on the specific museum and its policies. Museums have the autonomy to establish rules that align with their mission, collection, and overall visitor experience goals. If you have concerns or questions about a specific museum's photography policy, reach out to the museum directly