3 ms·

On a slight tangent, does flash photography damage paintings? I see always people using flash in museums. I assume it's because they don't know how to turn it

by melling 10y ago

On a slight tangent, does flash photography damage paintings? I see always people using flash in museums. I assume it's because they don't know how to turn it off.

moron4hire 10y ago
It is because they don't know how to turn it off, but also it does not damage paintings.
- hkmurakami 10y ago
  I'm totally theorycrafting, but if sunlight can make things age and fade (ex: books), wouldn't the light from cameras build up to do some amount of damage as well? Or is the wave spectrum of the two substantially different so that this analogy is moot?
  - 4ad 10y ago
    Most museums don't display watercolor paintings and many types of photographs or display them for short periods of time in very dark rooms. Watercolor paintings suffer greatly from light. (As to whether flash is particularly bad, that is debatable...)
    - TheOtherHobbes 10y ago
      High-end photoprinters use special paper and ink that is tested for its lightfastness. Turns out that traditional processes like C-Type are less lightfast than high quality digital prints. But slightly more obscure processes like Selenium toning are more lightfast still. Of course if you have a digital source, you can always make a new print. This doesn't sit well with the commercial art world which considers most of the value to be in a unique handmade tangible object imbued with creative manna by the genius of the artist, and not in a reproducible image that anyone can copy.
    - melling 10y ago
      In another post, you said flash does cause damage. "Yes, flash definitely damages paintings."
  - jbob2000 10y ago
    Camera flashes don't produce ultraviolet light, which is the damaging stuff.
- pvaldes 10y ago
  It depends on the pigments used in the painting. Some are known to be unstable.
4ad 10y ago
Where are you from? Most museums I visited specifically banned flash photography. In fact, most banned all photography. Yes, flash definitely damages paintings.
- pharrington 10y ago
  Museums that ban photography do so for copyright reasons. The radiant energy of the camera flash is minuscule compared to the energy of the other photons lighting whatever you're looking at. Don't leave canvas paintings out in the sun.
  - 4ad 10y ago
    > Museums that ban photography do so for copyright reasons. Of course, I wasn't implying otherwise.
- BugsJustFindMe 10y ago
  In fact, most banned all photography. That's almost always because of overprotective display and reproduction rights agreements, not physical protection of the works themselves.
  - 4ad 10y ago
    > That's almost always because of overprotective display and reproduction rights agreements Duh. Of course. Why do you think I would think otherwise? It is, however a very usual practice, which is why I find photography in museums unusual enough to ask for a clarification.
    - itp 10y ago
      That seems like an unnecessarily hostile response. Even if you already knew that, other people reading the conversation might not have known it. There's no call to interpret a declarative statement as a personal attack, or implication that your knowledge was in some fashion lacking.
    - 10y ago
panic 10y ago
Here's an article investigating the subject: http://people.ds.cam.ac.uk/mhe1000/musphoto/flashphoto2.htm http://people.ds.cam.ac.uk/mhe1000/musphoto/flashphoto2.htm tl;dr: "Clearly, flashes from 'smartphones' cannot be regarded as a conservation threat in any properly lit gallery."
- dwringer 10y ago
  One wonders, though, about the flash units in modern digital mirrorless/SLR's. They can be quite bright, and since the cameras have UV filters on the sensor already (and many people use additional UV filters over the lens) there's a good chance minimizing UV emissions from the flash was not high on their list of priorities.
  - StavrosK 10y ago
    > since the cameras have UV filters on the sensor already there's a good chance minimizing UV emissions from the flash was not high on their list of priorities Oh, on the contrary, we like our batteries to last as much as possible.

by melling 10y ago

On a slight tangent, does flash photography damage paintings? I see always people using flash in museums. I assume it's because they don't know how to turn it off.

moron4hire 10y ago

It is because they don't know how to turn it off, but also it does not damage paintings.

hkmurakami 10y ago
I'm totally theorycrafting, but if sunlight can make things age and fade (ex: books), wouldn't the light from cameras build up to do some amount of damage as well? Or is the wave spectrum of the two substantially different so that this analogy is moot?
- 4ad 10y ago
  Most museums don't display watercolor paintings and many types of photographs or display them for short periods of time in very dark rooms. Watercolor paintings suffer greatly from light. (As to whether flash is particularly bad, that is debatable...)
  - TheOtherHobbes 10y ago
    High-end photoprinters use special paper and ink that is tested for its lightfastness. Turns out that traditional processes like C-Type are less lightfast than high quality digital prints. But slightly more obscure processes like Selenium toning are more lightfast still. Of course if you have a digital source, you can always make a new print. This doesn't sit well with the commercial art world which considers most of the value to be in a unique handmade tangible object imbued with creative manna by the genius of the artist, and not in a reproducible image that anyone can copy.
  - melling 10y ago
    In another post, you said flash does cause damage. "Yes, flash definitely damages paintings."
- jbob2000 10y ago
  Camera flashes don't produce ultraviolet light, which is the damaging stuff.
pvaldes 10y ago
It depends on the pigments used in the painting. Some are known to be unstable.

4ad 10y ago

Where are you from? Most museums I visited specifically banned flash photography. In fact, most banned all photography. Yes, flash definitely damages paintings.

pharrington 10y ago
Museums that ban photography do so for copyright reasons. The radiant energy of the camera flash is minuscule compared to the energy of the other photons lighting whatever you're looking at. Don't leave canvas paintings out in the sun.
- 4ad 10y ago
  > Museums that ban photography do so for copyright reasons. Of course, I wasn't implying otherwise.
BugsJustFindMe 10y ago
In fact, most banned all photography. That's almost always because of overprotective display and reproduction rights agreements, not physical protection of the works themselves.
- 4ad 10y ago
  > That's almost always because of overprotective display and reproduction rights agreements Duh. Of course. Why do you think I would think otherwise? It is, however a very usual practice, which is why I find photography in museums unusual enough to ask for a clarification.
  - itp 10y ago
    That seems like an unnecessarily hostile response. Even if you already knew that, other people reading the conversation might not have known it. There's no call to interpret a declarative statement as a personal attack, or implication that your knowledge was in some fashion lacking.
  - 10y ago

panic 10y ago

Here's an article investigating the subject: http://people.ds.cam.ac.uk/mhe1000/musphoto/flashphoto2.htm http://people.ds.cam.ac.uk/mhe1000/musphoto/flashphoto2.htm tl;dr: "Clearly, flashes from 'smartphones' cannot be regarded as a conservation threat in any properly lit gallery."

dwringer 10y ago
One wonders, though, about the flash units in modern digital mirrorless/SLR's. They can be quite bright, and since the cameras have UV filters on the sensor already (and many people use additional UV filters over the lens) there's a good chance minimizing UV emissions from the flash was not high on their list of priorities.
- StavrosK 10y ago
  > since the cameras have UV filters on the sensor already there's a good chance minimizing UV emissions from the flash was not high on their list of priorities Oh, on the contrary, we like our batteries to last as much as possible.