Florence

[Matheous-2]

I am visiting the city next month and was wondering if any ABrs have experienced any problems with taking photographs inside the famous buildings eg. Palazzo Vechio?
I do appreciate potential long term damage caused by light (flash) but hopefully non-flash is allowed?
Thanking you in anticipation....

[jno]

this was taken last month (and appears to be a new site to visit)

http://www.neverendin...ecchio-arnolfo-tower/

Generally... I went to the Fenice in Venice a couple of years ago and photography was banned. Everyone was doing it anyway.

[sunny-dave]

The real problem is that most "idiots with cameras" (not, I hasten to add, meaning the OP here) just don't know how to turn the s*dding flash off - you only have to look at the Olympics where endless flashes are going off all round every stadium - when the cameras would actually take better pictures with the puny, ineffective flash turned off.

So if I was trying to perserve a historic site I'd just ban all photography, because any attempt to just say 'no flash' is doomed to fail because of the rank ineptitude of the great unwashed majority of camera (mis)users.

[sunny-dave]

'preserve'

[jno]

I know what you mean, sunny-dave. But I took photos at the Olympics (evening session) with flash on. Why? Because it forced a quicker shutter speed, meaning less time to blur the photos.

Okay, most of them were blurred anyway (as I knew they would be, my camera's not fancy). But some came out well. I actually took two in some cases - with and without flash - and those with flash were generally sharper. So there's a method in my madness.

[sunny-dave]

I'd like to think that most of the other flashers had worked that out jno ... but "I hae me doots".

And in daylight (where I have also seen the mad flashers, flashing away) the flash will actually tend to slow the shutter speed to allow the flash to sync ...

[ChuckFickens]

Or you could just put the camera in sports (action) mode and turn the flash off.

[Matheous-2]

Have to agree with Sunny Dave here- built-in flashes are useless at distances over approximately 15-20 feet, so if you do get some sharp shots it's down to luck or good ambient light.
However, my question was not intended to be a technical one,but rather one about permission....I am taking note though that 'everyone did it anyway'.
I probably will ensure my flash is 'forced off' and shutter makes no sound and possibly even tip my way into permission!

[spudqueen]

I'm sorry, but if museums/art galleries etc ask for no photography then I don't see why you need to break the rules and take photographs. You know damn well the reasons why - you've put it in your question. Either don't take photographs and buy postcards or write and ask for permission first. They may just grant it if you can demonstrate why you need to take them and that you understand how to take them.

[Mosaic]

I tell yer wot - having paid an obscene amount to look at Michaelangelo's David I was most defo getting a photo, and I did too. They have security people watching like hawks so I suggest you work in twos thusly:
One go fairly close to bag the photo.
Number 2 linger far back down the gallery behind a crowd, fire off the flash, pocket you camera and look around behind you.
Security will come racing down the gallery while number 1 bags the photo untroubled.
Worked for me.

[Graham-W]

I agree with spudqueen. I know it's nice to take your own photos but postcards are very good these days and mounted, in an album, who'd know the difference.

[Mosaic]

Spudqueen - I agree where light-sensitive works are concerned but a marble statue is not light-sensitive.
And I know that of which I speak, being a qualified and time-served museum curator.

[Graham-W]

With the National Trust they are worried that you may not be photographing the contents of the houses, but rather the security systems with a view to a re-visit outside of normal hours.

[Matheous-2]

Photography is very dear to my heart and I did not wish to turn this into a debate. I was hoping someone was going to tell me that even some museums allow photos and some don't . I do respect official policy but have a passion to see the Hall of the 500 and the Vassaro which might prove to cover Leonardo's masterpiece " Battle of Angiari" I will not use flash as it often kills ambience, but may still try to discreetly photograph a portion of the Vassaro. I just wanted to know in advance what I'm up against.

[Mosaic]

Go for it Mat. The photography policies are different wherever you go....and cameras are better and more discreet than ever.
The National Trust thing about security systems has long since been superceded by the simpler route of kidnapping the site manager's family and holding them hostage while s/he provides you with access to anything you want.
Or ram-raiding.

[jno]

just be discreet. They probably won't notice and possibly won't care. The photo I linked to before was taken from the Palazzo, and presumably nobody objected.

The NT blanket ban on photos has been rescinded (which prompted me to rejoin; I left when it was imposed, as photography is dear to my heart too). Some individual properties still have one, mostly they say for copyright reasons - the furniture may be owned by someone else who doesn't want it photographed.

[Matheous-2]

Thanks very much guys.....I just needed a bit of positive encouragement. If I get the shots I'm after I will post a link here to my Flickr web page....