You mean weird-city.
(My new favorite term because I audibly laughed at both its initial use and the response-use).

And yes.

I'm astounded how some people get so weirded out by anyone who does things differently from they way they do it. For the life of me, I cannot understand how anyone can be "bothered" or "offended" or "think they should be shot" because people at their own table use a hand sized phone to take a picture of their own food. How on earth does that interfere with your meal? Loud talking, talking on the phone, or being obnoxious I can understand, but I can't imagine what's so obtrusive about their taking a picture (unless they're using flash, and I rarely see that).

Agreed, tom.

Why GAF as long as they're not taking a picture of your food? I think your reaction is hugely out of proportion to the "crime" and I find that more concerning.

Just because you have a b!tch doesn't mean you have to express it.

Color me crazy then. I don't take photos of my greasy drippy cheesesteak from Papa John's but I do have photos from Nobu, Morimoto, Boulud, Thomas Keller, a few Jose Andres restos, a few Ramsays...places where the food looks every bit as good as it tastes and can be amazingly well-presented. I was watching an old Bourdain episode a few weeks ago, I think it was when he was at Ferran Adria's before it closed, and he and his two chef friends were whipping out their phones at every course to capture it.

As long as I'm not reaching across to photograph YOUR food, what do you care? If you really do care about that, maybe that's where crazy lives.

I take atmospheric pics of the beers I drink and sometimes post them on FB, Untapped, and Beer Advocate twitter feeds. Yes, I know there are alcoholics out there, but if they are browsing Untapped or Beer Advocate, then they're probably already off the wagon.

For musuem gift shops, I like the one at the de Young in SF. It's pretty good. I also enjoyed a few in Singapore quite a lot - the Asian Civilizations museum and the chinatown museum (can't rsmember the name).

"As long as I'm not reaching across to photograph YOUR food, what do you care? If you really do care about that, maybe that's where crazy lives."

Yea, that's what I say, and although several insist people should be shot (or worse) for photographing their food, I have yet to hear a single reasonable reason for why or how it bothers them. All I basically can interpret from their protests is "I don't do it, so anyone who does should be shot".

I guess I can see how some could be bothered by people taking pictures of art and stepping in front of them to do so, but as to the food thing -- I really don't have a clue why it bothers anyone.

Is it weird to ban weird? Will banning banning tear the space-time continuum?

Ok, seriously: I’d rather hang out with someone who takes photos of their nachos than somebody who judges what other people eat.
JMMOG.

if we hang out can I take a photo of you eating your food?

I go to a lot of art museums. This just isn’t a thing I’ve noticed to the extent in the OP - except the Mona Lisa is a crazy mob scene.

I take pictures in art museums. The only time I’ve taken a selfie is in a mirror at the Phila Art museum and with a Van Gogh self portrait at the Rijksmuseum.

I take pictures - of paintings I like, and of new to me artists I want to learn more about. Sometimes when paintings are hung too high for me, I take a picture and then can peruse the details later at my leisure.

I don’t often take pics of food, but I did take a picture of a Langos with Nutella in Budapest this week. Or of crazy good desserts I’ve had.

What? I'm really confused. Many people are diabetic so food pics should be banned? That's a new level of unhinged.

After you go somewhere, especially somewhere different, what is one of the most common questions people ask: "what was the food like?" At least half the stuff I eat while traveling is completely unknown to me. The food photos are fun!

I guess that's me too. I'm always at the odd painting in the corner, alone. The good bit about that is that photo or not, you're never in someone else's way and can stay as long as you like. I don't take a picture of it, I just try to remember it. If it was that good, it'll stick there in my brain pan as long as I need it.

It's when I look across the room at the famous thing and the people who are posing those peace signs and duck lips (as described above) where I think "maybe photography isn't such a good idea over there". Or just as bad, where they're imagining that they're free lancing work for Art Monthly as they squat and position, fiddle with the exposure and aperture settings, then check their shot on the screen and do it all again while there is a line of irritated people behind them (who then do the same thing when they get up there!).

>>they squat and position, fiddle with the exposure and aperture settings, then check their shot on the screen and do it all again while there is a line of irritated people behind them (who then do the same thing when they get up there!).<<

An honest question, no snark meant by this, but take the cameras out of their hands. Are you equally annoyed if people stand there that same amount of time, change position, squat, lean, shift positions to contemplate the art? Are you equally annoyed having to wait for them to finish contemplating the art in that spot for you to do the same? Is there a time limit on how long someone should look at art before they relinquish that spot, or is it only when they're doing something other than strictly looking at the art? What if they're standing there sketching the piece? Is that annoying too?

I tend to do that, I'll observe it head on, move to read the label, move back to see it again. If there's something that seems to change color with different light or change perspective from a different angle, I'll move to see it. I recently participated in a study at a local museum where they connected head-gear with little sensors on it to track how long we look at art, read the labels, move from piece to piece. It was very cool to do, but I wonder what the results will show them.

No, it's a fair question but I should start by saying annoyed isn't really the right sentiment. It's rare that it happens where I'm standing or looking. It's just more something that seems a bit inconsiderate when I notice it, usually from afar.

I think of it like this: you know when you're walking down the footpath and someone is posing on one side and their friend is taking a photo from the other side? And maybe you stop and wait so as to not get in the way of their shot. But, if they were just in the same positions, talking, you'd go on through?

It seems like the social construct is to give and be expected to give priority to a photo in progress. Thus, there may usually be a few people all enjoying a painting at once under normal circumstances... even daring to lean in to check the artist's technique for a moment though the person next to them is viewing it too. But I notice when there is a person lining up a photo, people do that same thing they do on the footpath. They stop, they make sure they're not getting in the shot, watching the photographer instead of the painting and essentially waiting their turn. In a way, photography seems to sort of monopolizes the space where simple viewing does not. Which is why I think that if a person is going to take a picture, they ought not make a big, time consuming production of it.

I am baffled by the “ fidgeting with the exposure and aperture” comments bc I rarely see people with these cameras anymore.

Even so, I can easily spend 5-10 minutes in front of a Bosch or Bruegel or huge Monet - and that’s blocking a painting a lot longer than the picture takers. Is this more acceptable? Or too long? I shift my position to make room for others, but sometimes I do monopolize a space for a bit.

Reading so many of the comments above, I'll repeat how I interpret what many of these are actually saying --" I don't take pictures so anyone who does is an inferior, stupid, careless person who should be shot because they don't have the same customs I have".

Thank goodness for that. I was afraid you were going to have to shoot me.

Nikki, you know that'd never happen. Mostly because I love you, but also because I'm a lousy aim.

I love art galleries. I take lots of pictures (no selfies) because I often want to know more about the artists and this allows me to document and I especially enjoy looking at the art later.

I really don't see any difference touring art galleries and photographing what I see and taking pictures of buildings or landscapes when I travel.

As many have said, it's not the photo taking, it's that they take 500 years to get it done. Even on the street. As I'm waiting, sometimes I say "Some time today, please." or maybe "Take it or I'm walking through."

I'd like to ban leaf blowers, please. They should be replaced by leaf suckers.