Institutions such as the Metropolitan Museum of Art , the Art Institute of Chicago , the National Gallery of Art , the Indianapolis Museum of Art , and the Getty Museum —to name a few—all allow photography in some or all of their permanent-collection spaces. Certainly, there are practical reasons for doing so. No- photo policies can be difficult to enforce. We have to ask ourselves, are we using our guards appropriately? Social media also complicates the issue. Moreover, places like the Brooklyn Museum and LACMA have high-resolution images from their collections available for free on their websites.
The biggest hurdle to wide-open photo policies is the issue of copyright. Museums often do not hold the copyrights to the works they display, which creates legal problems when visitors start snapping away. Naturally, there are museumgoers who will occasionally break the rules: a visitor to the Indianapolis Museum recently took pictures all over the building—including galleries that were off limits to photography—and then offered them for sale online.
This type of behavior, however, is an extreme exception. For years, advocates of open-source culture and a growing chorus of art bloggers have lobbied for less restrictive photo policies on the grounds that our shared artistic legacy is intended to be, well, shared.
Not to mention that there is no small irony in being forbidden to take pictures in cultural establishments that celebrate the work of artists like Andy Warhol , Sherrie Levine , and Richard Prince , figures whose work is based, to a large degree, on the photographs of others.
These same institutions, however, are often perpetually short on cash. They constantly seek to boost revenue and cut costs. One method some places have used to achieve these goals is to ban photography of part or all of their collection. The ban is important because for the typical U. Museums that ban photography are fighting a losing battle since high-quality cameras are getting smaller and more wearable.
Clothes and glasses from companies like Snapchat and Google mean tiny spy cameras are no longer in the realm of science fiction. How can some museums generate more revenue and still satisfy our desire to take photographs? Patrons can take as many pictures as they want as long as they pay upfront for the privilege.
Another interesting idea is the policy enacted at the Newport Mansions , which are summer homes built by the elite of the Gilded Age. In the mansions, only smartphone cameras are allowed. Larger cameras are banned in an attempt to prevent high-resolution pictures from being taken, which protects gift shop revenue. Unfortunately, with the rapidly improving resolution of smartphone cameras, this policy is only a stopgap.
Banning tripods , which people trip over, and selfie sticks, which occasionally hit artwork and other patrons, makes sense. However completely banning photography in an age in which almost everyone has a camera in their phone no longer makes sense.
It is time for museums and historic sites to develop more creative policies like a photography fee charged at entry. Portsmouth Climate Festival — Portsmouth, Portsmouth. Edition: Available editions United Kingdom. Become an author Sign up as a reader Sign in. The Eclectic Economist Insights into how the world works. Share this Post Share this Tags Museums , Top Ten. Never miss a post Get new blog posts delivered straight to your inbox.
No spam. Leave a Comment. More from The Blog. Posted On: Sep 24, Posted On: Sep 19, Welcome to the Summer of Awkward! Posted On: Jun 12, View Posts by Category On Instagram theeverywhereist I didn't want him to take a photo of me because I. I mean, it looks like a f. Matching my lipstick to my popsicle like a boss.
0コメント