Picture taking
 

My sister and I are going to Italy this August and we're planning to go to two cities, Florence and Rome. I was just wondering which places forbid/allow people to take pictures inside(a museum for example)?

My photos from October 2002 includes lots from inside the Vatican (no flash allowed), but none from inside the Ufizzi. My recollection is that pics were okay in the Vatican, without a flash, but that no pics were allowed in the Ufizzi.

Photography is forbiden in the Uffuzi as well as the academaia.
the vactican allows photos in most of the musuem but not the sistine chapel

Five years ago, photography (without flash) was allowed in most of the Uffizi. Have the rules changed?

MaryFran-
Were you able to get good pictures without flash? I always don't understand this "rule" -in places such as museums/churches that tend to be dark, it's almost impossible to get good shots without sufficient lightning.

I think that flash isn't allowed because it can damage the paintings. That is why it is allowed in churches with mosaics, but not with paintings.

Flash can damage paintings but there is also the " we want you to buy the post card factor"

no photos allowed of David.

YOu can take pictures inside St. Paul, lots of other churches are no nos- but you can take photos inside Cosmos & Damion which is in the forum and has a beautiful mosaic in the apse, you can put money in to light it up and because the floor has been raised you are closer than normal to the apse - I got great photos of that mosaic.

There's museum of statues at Piaza Navona, can't remember the name, but they allow photos without flash.

Joelle

Back up your own shots with bought postcards or booklets of places. They will be better than anything you can take yourself. And the two together (your own & professional photos) make a good combo to show friends.

What I remember from my visit to the Sistine Chapel in Feb besides the awesome setting was every few minutes you would hear a loud booming voice "NO CAMERAS!".

The detail in the photos I took in the Vatican Museum may not have been as sharp as I might have liked, but the images serve their purpose, which is to remind me what the "real thing" was like and what I felt in seeing them originals. The Vatican Museum experience is unparalleled in combining the setting with the art. It's just unbelievable!

I never know whether links to my photo albums on Shutterfly or Dotphoto will work, but here's one to try:
http://share.shutterfly.com/osi.jsp?...Sw&notag=1

"Seeing them originals"? Trust me that "them" was a typo and not my dogpatch background creeping up on me again.

Hi P,

At the entrance of most sites you will find signs (with pictures) letting you know if cameras are permitted.

I have used 400 or higher speed film with no flash quite successfully (when pictures are allowed) and now that I've switched to digital, I prefer using no flash in most cases. Indoor lighting appears more natural, and you haven't created any shadows that wouldn't have been there naturally. A good photo editing program can tweak up a too dark image later on (obviously you can only go so far -- I really only do "tweaking"). I'm more successful tweaking digital pics than those that were taken on film and later scanned.

Using 800-speed film indoors can provide excellent results. I've had great success in many facilities including the Louvre, d'Orsay, Vatican and Uffizi Museums.

I travel with a couple of throw-away Kodaks for "people shots". Postcards are best for me of Historical sights. If I lose either I am only out a couple of bucks unlike my Digital.

No photos allowed of David? That must be new--in 1999 it wasn't a problem.

I noticed a big difference in photography restrictions at sights in Italy between trips in 1999 and 2003.
Many churches and museum used to allow photography, but no flash. I think the problem is that few people either care to or know how to turn of the flash on their cameras, so now many of the sites allow no photography (though no one seemed to care at the Ufizzi if you took the shot of the Ponte Vecchio out the window).
I always found the use of flash in duomos/cathedrals especially annoying because in most cases it is worse than useless. All the flash does for something 50 feet away is make the picture darker since the camera adjusts the exposure to include the light from the flash.
The best thing is to either have a small tripod or else just set the camera down someplace or brace it against something. You can get nice shots of the ceilings by laying the camera down on it's back on a convenient surface and using the timer function so you aren't touching it at all.

Are videocameras allowed?

Thanks.

Hi crystal,

Rules for videocams are the same as for cameras. Each place will have a sign.

Taking photos of the David is not permitted. Everyone does it.

Noooooooooo!! I'm about to cry :'( What's a visit to Italy without having your own shots of Michaelangelo's and Bernini's David????? This is such a disappoint; I love taking pictures and this would've been a great opportunity for me to snap away. Anyhow, are video cameras allowed?

There are more restrictions for video cameras than regular cameras. They are banned in some places where still photography is allowed.
As for taking a picture of David, you'll have to settle for taking a photo of one of the copies that stands in the piazza (the name of which escapes me) adjacent to the Ufizzi.

Hi
I was in the Sistine Chapel in January and took several pictures. I use Kodak Max film with 800 speed with no flash as that causes damage. I estimate what I want to shoot and where it is in relation to my camera. If you want to take pictures in a museum, use high speed film and no flash.
Alan

Hi
I've been successful in many museum with non-flash photography, and my camera is basically a point and shoot.
I use 400 film.
I carry the camera with me in my tote.
If I have to check the tote bag (in some places you do or I just want to) then I put the camera (it's small) in my pocket. If I'm allowed to use it I do,if not, not.

Many people don't understand Zo's good info that if the flash is too far away, it won't do any good. (Like all those pictures of the stage that concert goers take)

Additionally,
if the item you want to take a picture of, even with a simple camera, is lit either naturally or artificially, you can often get a better picture without the flash than with it. The camera will focus on the item that has the most light on it: that could be a statue, a painting, or a nearby window or light bulb, in which case everything else but that lit object comes out darker. At least that's been my untrainied experience.

I was in Florence less than one week ago (sniff, sniff), and there were actually 3 museum employees stationed around the David in the Accademia, as well as more in the big hall with the Prisoners. They were scouring the crowd for cameras. I was digging for my eye drops in my purse and pulled out my camera to reach them and got scolded. We observed tourists asking to photograph with no flash and they were refused. Bummer

>Taking photos of the David is not permitted. Everyone does it

Yea, that's what I thought when I was there in May. It wasn't happening. Nobody was taking pictures and if you made an attempt, there was someone there to stop you. Don't get your hopes up.

Joelle

Boy, you go away for a month or two and they change all of the rules. :)

geez, I'll be treasuring my two photos of David even more now!

The bottom line is that these rules are subject to change at any time, and they do. It's best not to rely on what someone else experienced last month or even last week. Check when you get there or you may be disappointed.

If you are using a digital camera, you can adjust it to night-landscape to take pictures in churchs and museums which don't admit flash. They are usually quite good, if you manage to keep the camera still.

Mary, thanks for sharing the photos. Great shots.

Sorry I do not understand, Though it is common, why do people take pictures in museums? Buy postcards / books, they are far better than anything you could capture with a camera....

Hmm, I guess my reply didn't go through..

Marilyn, I will keep that in mind. Thank you.

Hewlpac, I understand your confusion and yes, there are great postcards out there. However, I would rather have taken my own pictures ..my camera's my best friend :). I'm sure that there are tons of beautiful postcards/books with great photos in them but it feels impersonal to me if I'm not the one taking the pictures.

A friend recently returned from Spain and in showing her snapshots had her own, side by side with the books and postcards she bought. That gets you the personal touch AND a decent photo :-)

Paraiso said it all in answering why anyone takes pictures. Perhaps, it's hard for a "non-photographer" to understand that OUR photographs capture OUR moments.

I guess I don't see why people don't want these items preserved for future generations to enjoy.

If you have a film camera or a digital with which you can adjust the shutter speed/apature you can get fantastic pictures in places with flash restrictions. You can make this even better by bring a lightweight travel tripod (with the shutter opened longer you have to keep your hand steady). Try taking pictures of the Duomo in Florence at night. Also, take the trip to the top of the Vatican Dome- it'll be worth the view. Finally, there is a spot just across the Arno in Florence just on the hill where you can get some great wide angle shots of the city. That was when I found it to be it's most beautiful and the pictures were too. One other thing about buying the books and postcards rather than taking your own shots. They are great for some people, but I take my own photographs because I want to remember how I saw a particular place, person, or thing not the view of someone else. I also believe that if you learn how to properly operate a camera the shots that you take can be far better than the ones that come prepackaged for you.

I truly respect the reason behind the no picture taking rule in most/some places; I understand how the flash of a camera can affect the object/s being pictured. Before I started this post, I already had an idea of that. My question was really if I could still take pictures without using the flash. I apologize if I sounded selfish and hope to have not step on anyone's toes. :)

Paraiso, you have nothing to apologize for. In fact, if anything, you should be respected and applauded for checking on the photography protocol before your trip.

..another comment...perhaps flash is also prohibited as it is distracting to others who are trying to look at a painting or enjoy the museum. I certainly find it so. I am more than happy to forgo a flash picture if it assures me that i will never have my enjoyment of a painting ect disrupted by a flash..and dont get me going about flash photos in churches while someone maybe using the church for its initial reason for contruction!!