2 ms·
To be fair museums themselves make this worse. I still haven't come across a museum (granted I don't go a lot) that had exhaustive good-quality photographs of a
by avar 11y ago
To be fair museums themselves make this worse. I still haven't come across a museum (granted I don't go a lot) that had exhaustive good-quality photographs of all their exhibits available online.
So to give this girl the benefit of the doubt. Maybe this is the only time she'll be in London, she only has a few days, and she's genuinely interested in the art, but taking photos of it to inspect it later allows her to enjoy more of it than hanging around carefully looking at individual pieces at the expense of not seeing any of the others at all, ever.
- matwood 11y ago> To be fair museums themselves make this worse. I still haven't come across a museum (granted I don't go a lot) that had exhaustive good-quality photographs of all their exhibits available online. Bingo. I do go to a lot of art galleries and museums and this is a huge problem. I get back and want to find that item that was very interesting and study it more, and the best I can find is some grainy picture on wikipedia that someone else took.
- JazCE 11y agoWell, they have to incentivise you to visit. I can understand why they don't put their pieces online, they want you to come, maybe pay for entrance or donate, buy something from the gift shop. Putting it online is rightly, or wrongly, detracting from that.
- matwood 11y agoMaybe, but that does not make sense to me. If anything, pictures online make me want to go see something in person. Also, the popular pieces can usually be found online which does not fit the model of must come to see. My guess is the less popular pieces are so numerous that it is too expensive to properly photograph and host images of everything.