Taking Photos Allowed or Not...
 

Just thought I'd start a thread with some observations regarding picture-taking and the rules...<BR>I have a Fuji Finepix 4900Z - a fine digital camera that has a 2.4Mp sensor but produces 4Mp pictures (due to sensor configuration). It can be set to 125 to 800 ASA (ISO) and 3sec to 1/1000sec shutter. The Zoom is 6X (35-210 equivalent for 35mm). It will do manual or fully automatic or anything in between. Typically, unless I'm pushing the limit, I use "automatic" mode.<BR> Most churches in Rome and other cities allow cameras. St. Peter's is wide open, no limits. Of course, it is all frescoes, not paintings, so fairly immune to damage from the ultraviolet in flashes. Many have "no flash" requests; most churches remind people not to disturb services in progress.<BR> Many museums say "no photos"; to some extent, this is or is not honored. The Vatican museums were wide open - but the Sistine Chapel is "no photos". We rushed through the suggested route to get there early after opening; nobody bothered me (I didn't use flash). One fellow was even videotaping openly. By the time we visited the entire Vatican Museums and returned to the chapel, it was crowded and the guards were being busybodies. They were shooing the tourists sitting on the little step in front of the altar; but crowded means more people to hide behind.<BR>The hard part of taking these photos is aiming, and holding a camera steady for the 1/20 to 1/4 second required for a no-flash exposure. The Last Supper is about 1/8 f2.8, better lit than I expected. Practice, practice, practice.<BR> Some places like Siena's Duomo post "no photo" signs but make no effort to stop you. The Firenze Academia let me snap away at Michaelangelo's Slaves, but stopped me as I was lining up on David. Step behind a pillar... In Pisa, people were even using flashes in the Cathedral. Where I can, I use a little 6" tripod that you can sit on a chair or hold against a pillar to get a steady shot. I use self-timer of 2 seconds to ensure that the camera isn't shaking from pushing the button. (No remote or shutter-release cable options on my camera.)<BR>When I was in Venice 2 years ago, there was a tourist with a similar little tripod for interior shots of St. Mark's - 2 sec at F/8 for ASA125 on a sunny day. This year (2001) there seemed to be more attendants paying more attention to what people were doing.<BR>Also, some outdoor shots did not turn out as well as they could because it was a cool foggy cold front, some days.<BR>Also, digital cameras don't do night shots very well. Unlike a film camera, the longer you expose digitals, the more "snow" or "noise" the picture develops, instead of accumulating light like film. My camera has a maximum exposure of 3 sec. For shots like the Collosseum or Ponte Vecchio lit at night, it was just fine. <BR><BR>There were some places - like St. Sebatian's catacombs - where it seemed that picture taking in defiance of the request not to would seem inappropriate. <BR><BR>One down-side of Digital - I typically filled one of my 64Mb SM-cards each day; I brought my laptop on the trip to download the pictures each night. Fortunately my camera, laptop, and CD-Wrier/MP3CD player all have 100-240V adapters, so I did not need a voltage converter - but did use an octopus plug to charge them all each night.<BR><BR>Anyone else have thoughts or ideas on photography?

The "no photo" signs often mean "no flash" because of the degrading of the art work it produces. Not sure why you think that doesn't hurt frescoes.<BR>Took my digital (3.3MP) and reduced resolution by one stop so that on a 64Meg card I got 199 images, which I could edit as I went. Am VERY pleased with the outcome after many years of lugging heavy SLRs and backup P&S.<BR>I have a Photoshow zip drive to download to (no computer required) which is about the size of a large VHS tape--very portable. You can store pics and/or show on a TV. Decided not to take it to France this trip because of voltage concerns and not being thoroughly acquainted with it. I did fine with 3 memory cards.<BR>I took most of my interior pictures with available light because that is, of course, how we see it--not with a flash cone.<BR>The other thing I am enjoying about digital is that I don't have a stack of 300 photos to contend with storing. I NEVER thought I would feel this way about digital.

I just returned from Italy and was a little surprised at how many churches and museums had no photo policies, rather than just no flash. I adhered to the policies as found and bought postcards. I didn't feel like switching out 100 speed for 400 or 800 for a few shots, especially when photos were not allowed. I saw very very few people not going by the signs posted. I did get good hand-held shots with 100/400 speed film in Florence's baptistry, Duomo, and Santa Croce, along with St. Peters, San Giovanni in Laterano, and Santa Maria Maggiori in Rome. There was enough light in della Salute in Venice to get a photo of the large painting behind the altar with 100 speed film. I will admit if I had seen many others taking photos in the other places, I might have tried a couple, but my camera is not very inconspicuous. I was very pleased with the interior shots I got, compared to past Europe trips with a point and shoot camera. I now use a Canon A2 and a Canon EOS-5. I have prime lenses, but the widest aperture on the lenses I used for the trip was 3.5. This proved adequate most of the time. I generally shoot on aperture priority mode, so I just set the aperture for as much depth of field as the comparable shutter speed would allow with most scenics. I didn't attempt any shots in the Sistine Chapel, although I wouldn't think it would be all that hard to pull off with the right film. I have seen many personal photos on the Web of David and the Sistine Chapel. I knew ahead of time about photography prohibitions regarding the latter but was surprised about David. It is not really the same, but I took lots of very good shots of the David on Piazza Signoria and bought a postcard of the real one. The only thing that irritates me about any of the restrictions is that sometimes it is done just so the place can sell posters and postcards. A sign in one place stated it this way.

Kodak film is the answer to everything. Forget Fugi and use Kodak and try and keep the 3,000 people that are getting layed off at Chirstmas a break. Take tons of pictures and buy tons of cameras, just use Kodak.

Hi, Maurice: Just returned from 17 days in Italy. We used a Nikon digital camera. The only place we were forbidden to photo was the Sistine Chapel. The rest (including the Accademia in Florence)allowed non-flash photography, and our Nikon Coolpix 775 came through admirably. Some great interior shots - the camera corrected for lack of flash.<BR><BR>I think some museum guards interpret the photography issue in their own way.<BR><BR>Mary Kay

Those are not frescoes in St. Peters, they are mosaics. (Fresco is the technique used by Michaelangelo on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. It can be damaged by flashes.) The mosaics (many tiny tiles) duplicating the original paintings in St. Peters were a brilliant inspiration which has kept the originals safe. The technique was clearly perfected by the school of artists employed by the Vatican.

Must be my Alzheimer's setting in. Yes, I meant mosaics - coloured glass and stone is immune to fading the way pigment can.<BR>I think the storage technology (like zip drives) is evolving; by next year there will be hand-sized products like ImageBank or Digital Wallet or Terapin Mine that will do hassle-free downloads on the road.<BR>Kodak does have some good products - I seriously considered a camera of theirs, since they were the only ones with a programmable interface. But, in the end 6x zoom was a better choice than the ability to do unattended time-lapse photography.<BR>Definitely, better than film.

We just got back from a 7-week trip, all over Europe plus Cairo, with a digital camera, a Kodak 290Z. Loved it! Storage of the digital photos was a concern, since we have no laptop, nor one of those Digital Wallet storage gizmos, which is expensive.<BR>We had a 16 MB and and a 64 MB card, and filled both several times. We found three photo processing shops to upload the files to CD: one in Montpellier, France, one in Bari, Italy and one in Pireas, Greece (near Athens). We also found just one cybercafe that would agree to upload files directly from the camera to storage space on my website using their computer. That place was Le Web Bar in Paris. One of the photo techs recommended we buy a generic and not a Kodak Flashcard, since for that you need Kodak software.<BR>WE took an adapter so we could use the high speed recharger. In spite of the adapter, the charger got fried wwhen we plugged it in, so we had to buy a European adapter. <BR>Some of these are on the Fodor's picture page <BR>http://geocities.com/dhfsbf/fodorite/pictures.htm<BR>under "Dina and Blair's Roman Empire Tour"<BR>Just one photo misfortune. A sad story!<BR>We were at the Pyramids when a small swarm of Egyptian schoolgirls about 13 years old surrounded us, calling out the few English words they knew, "Welcome to Egypt! Fantastic! Hello! Fantastic!" One introduced herself and several others, including a teacher and two small boys. I offered them a postcard of my hometown (Seattle) whiich they snatched like it was cash, and my some illustrated business cards (I am a bellydancer) which they squabbled over. They insisted their teacher take her camera out and photograph us all together. Then my husband aimed the digital camera while they posed, giggling. After we said good-bye and walked away, my husband said, "You're gonna kill me." He'd forgotten to recharge, and at that very moment the batteries had run out!!!!

I asked about the battery charging issue before we went and someone suggested that I might be able to use the bathroom shaver plug for the recharger and it worked. We did not leave it plugged in unless we were in the room, however. I had gone prepared just to buy batteries.

Hi to all,<BR>As pointed out above the pictures in St Peter's are not frescoes, they are in fact mosaics. The reason being that all the flashes were detoriating the art work so the Vatican had them all removed and put in their Art Gallery or in other Basilicas for safe keeping. The Sistine Chapel is "no flash" and "no photos". The reason "no flash" is to protect the wonderful frescoes and to ensure that they are there for many more generations to enjoy!!!<BR>The reason for "no photos" at all is because Nippon who provided the funding for the restoration work have exclusive rights to all pictures in the Sistine Chapel.<BR>I am a tour guide there and it really frustrates me to see people taking flashes (even though signs forbid it and their is also an audio announcement forbidding it). People think this is clever and that they have achieved something special.<BR>NO! All they do is ruin what is there and this could mean that others in the future may not be able to see them. Also if it becomes a really big problem ith people abusing the rule, then everyone will eventually be made to check their cameras in. Can you imagine the queues at the check in and check out if this ever happened!!<BR>Please, please be respectful and follow the rules. They are there for a reason. Buy a postcard instead.<BR>Marianna

Rules is rules: if "no flash" is posted, then thems the rules. As Marianna pointed out, what right do I have to jeopardize a work of art? Oooh I'm so important that I can deny future generations the beauty of a da Vinci fresco? Jheesh...<BR><BR>Even if there are no posted signs (like in small churches not on the tourist map), common sense says "don't use flash" - whether it's to protect the artwork, or to show respect.<BR><BR>I'll try no-flash photos, even with 200 or 400 speed film...and buy back-up postcards. If the photos come out, great. If not, oh well... I have a wonderful photo of Venus de Milo just in natural light, and another of workmen in Versailles. If I'd used a flash, I don't think the photos would have been as good. I also have a photo of all black, with about 6 yellow lights - not a freakin' clue what it is (an example of "oh well"), but I used it as a mat for another picture "yeah, I meant to take that picture just like that"...<BR><BR>No-flash works really well in sunlit rooms with mirrors, like the Hall of Mirrors at Versailles - and a flash just reflects off the mirrors anyway and makes a big white blob.<BR><BR>

I too have been amazed at the number of<BR>people who think it's clever to take a <BR>flash photograph when a museum supervisor's back is turned. I've seen it happen in the Uffizi, the Louvre and - worst of all - during Mass in the cathedral in Assisi. It seems to me that for some people it's not enough to experience works of art - they have to prove that they were there by photographing them themselves. Are they the same people who like to experience their entire holiday through a camera lens? You know the type - they're so busy taking the photograph or using their video camera, that they never give themselves the chance to really see what's in front of them. Then they get home and bore people to death with endless photos/videos of their latest trip.

Can someone recommend a good website for learning about digital cameras? We are going to Italy in April and I am interested in a digital camera to take with us. I am a complete novice though! Thanks. Sandy

Sandi, you can go to www.photo.net and do a search on digital cameras. I'm sure you'll find more than you want.<BR><BR>Digitals are looking better everyday, but most of the lower end ones have serious lag time...meaning that when you press the button it can sometimes take several seconds for the camera to actually take the shot, which is not too good for anything but buildings.<BR><BR>Along the same lines, the between-shots processor time in the camera is too long. You'll be eating a ton of batteries, too, because if you want to edit shots all day, and use flash, they don't last long.<BR><BR>A lot of the digital claims are nothing but marketing hype. Very few models are capable of producing a shot that can be enlarged over 8 x 10, and that's pushing it. Believe me, I've tried.<BR><BR>I know it sounds like an attractive way to go, but do you really want to spend your precious traveling time downloading photos to a computer, or searching out an internet cafe to upload? Especially when film is readily available?<BR><BR>Digital may be the way to go in the future, but unless you have one of the higher-end models from Nikon or Canon, with interchangeable lenses, you're presently better off with good old film...my opinion of course.<BR><BR>Lots of travel photos: http://www.jimtardio.com

Oh, I forgot. Please obey the rules pertaining to flash photography. All you do is ruin it for everyone else down the road.<BR><BR>I'm guilty of violating the Sistine Chapel's no photography rule, but that rule is based on a business deal with the Japanese. It has nothing to do with hurting the artwork. I didn't use flash, however. Even so, the ceiling is too far away for flash to effective.<BR><BR>When I shot the statue of David, there were no rules at all for photography. You could shoot all you want with or without flash...not the case anymore.<BR><BR>I don't like to shoot in churches and museums anyway. You're not going to get a shot that's better than a post card, or those strips of slides they sell.<BR><BR>Save your film, or your pixels, for the street life.

I'm with elvira on this one.<BR>I use 200 ASA film only -- when I'm inside I either lean on someone/ something and/or hold my breath. The pictures maynot be razor sharp -- but they have a softness that often reflects the actual light in those interiors.

Sandy here is a good website for learning about digital photography--not particularly about cameras.<BR>http://www.cliffshade.com/dpfwiw/<BR><BR>Some of what Jim says is true and he is certainly entitled to his opinion. there can be lag time--there are things that can be done to minimize it. I am at a point in my life (after about 50 years of 35MM photography) that I don't require many 8X10's, but my digital will give me a very acceptable one. The convenience of not having to deal with 400 pictures from a trip by the stack but rather by the thumbnail on my computer is a big plus. I can also make an album of my journal with some small illustrative photos. I can take pictures of things I wouldn't before--my dessert in a French restaurant, the decorated butter dish on our barge in Burgundy--etc. And when I custom enlarge and crop my pictures I don't miss my 210 SLR telephoto lens. And I really didn't miss the heavy camera and lens around my neck. Loved using available light/no flash all the time for the mood of the pictures. This was the first time relying explicitly on my digital--2 weeks in France. Recharged batteries only once even after doing some serious editing. It is manageable.

I agree - "no flash" is there for a reason. I highly admire those works of art and would not want them damaged. "No photo" seems to be an arbitrary rule, and I would use my judgement; I would find taking pictures during a Mass (or as mentioned above, in the catacombs)rude. We di buy lots of postcards too, but as an example - what has changed in the Accademia? "David" stood outdoors in weather and sunlight for centuries before being ensconsed in the Accademia. Is this a "buy-our-postcards" money grab?<BR>Then there's the issue of the "stupid tourist" syndrome. (We've all met them). <BR>"He took a picture - why can't I?" <BR>"He didn't use-a flash"<BR>"So, what difference does that make? He still took a photo, just like me."<BR>Eventually, it becomes easier to say "no photos!"<BR>Like everything to do with being a guest, you have to avoid doing things that are trully offensive.<BR><BR>Yes, there is an "autofocus" lag that's more pronounced on digitals. On my Fuji 4900 it's typically about 1/2 sec to 1 sec. This is enough to ruin some action opportunity shots if you don't preplan. You can prefocus - push the shutter half-way beforehand.<BR><BR>As I said earlier - my charger said "100-240V"; it worked fine with a plug adapter. This is a small plastic chunk about 1" by 1" by 1/2", with the European round prongs and a NA socket. It just converted the physical plug without doing voltage conversion. I had a 3-way NA octopus plugged into that to handle the camera, laptop, and CD drive (all 100-240V power bricks). Worked just fine!

Ok call me a moron when it comes to all this digital camera talk. I am in the market for one. What does everyone recommend and why? How did you all learn so much about them?. Just by taking photos and playing around with them? ANy help would be appreciated. Maybe someone can offer a free tutorial.

I must say how appaled I am at the insensitivity of many of the replies here. If the church is signed no photos, it is not your place to justify why you are an exception. If you think that you don't need to follow the "no photo" policy just because it is based on someone's business deal, who are you to break the rules. Have you ever heard of ethics and morality? What makes you so important.<BR><BR>The point of travel, I feel, is to feel the life and experience of being somewhere else; to get into a different lifestyle and a different rythym. To be a guest in someone else's land and to have respect for what that represents is the key thing you get. What is being expresssed here is a competitiveness and boorishness that makes me sad for the selfishness of my fellow Fodorites.<BR><BR>If the sign says no photos, you have the right to complain, to not go in, to stage a street protest, and even, *gasp!*, trash the place on the message boards here and elsewhere. What you do not have the right to do is take a photo.<BR><BR>Play nice. Share. Take turns. If you bring candy, bring enough for everybody. Respect others.