Are You a No Photo Rule Breaker?
The Basilica of San Marco towered above me. I snapped off a few photos of its half exposed, half under-construction exterior. This was our first Italian landmark, and Steve Rick’s advice was spot on to visit in the mid-afternoon when the crowds were smaller.
Brand new Samsung NX3000 camera in hand, I was ready to photo document its interior – the Byzantine architecture, the glittering mosaics, the golden altar, the tomb of Saint Mark. But I was halted by a sign at the front door.
“No Photography.”
It was a rule that I discovered was in place at most Italian churches and landmarks. And if photography was permitted, flash photography was not.
Apparently, most tourists viewed these rules as guidelines that didn’t apply to them.
All throughout the Basilica of San Marco and elsewhere, tourists of all nationalities snapped off photos with everything from high end DSLRs to camera phones.
If the sign read “No photography”, the majority of tourists photographed. If the sign read “No flash photography”, the place was lit up like a night club lined with strobe lights.
Perhaps everyone feels like this blogger? That it was his right to take pictures. After all, he dealt with the masses of tourists at the Vatican with 4 children. The Catholic Church should take pity on him and let the rules slide.
Have we really become this selfish as tourists?
That we can simply trample on ancient artifacts and paintings, because, gosh darn it we paid to be there. Do we not care that we are destroying history for future generations to enjoy? But hey, we have to post that picture on Facebook to prove to our friends that we were there.
I’ll admit that at first I was a bit peeved.
Sure, I would have loved to capture photos at the catacombs in Rome, on our tour of the Capuchin Crypt, under the many layers of history beneath the Basilica San Clemente, and in the Sistine Chapel. But soon I started to find relief in the no picture taking rules. There was no pressure to study the painting to capture the right angle or light.
I paused not to snap a photo, but to admire the artistry. Artistry that is better than any photo I could muster. Instead of building a collection of photos that will either collect dust and get lost in the memory of my computer, I captured experiences that will last a lifetime.
I also understood the reasoning behind the rules.
First, flash photography can be quite harmful to artwork and historical artifacts. If every tourist was permitted to flash away, then the costs of maintenance would be astronomical if even possible.
Second, throngs and throngs of tourists visit Italy. The museums, churches, and ruins are overrun by them. The lines outside the Vatican, the Coliseum, Saint Mark’s Cathedral, and the Doges Palace make the line for Space Mountain look minuscule. If picture taking was permitted, then the lines would be even longer allowing only a portion of tourists to enter.
Third, and I think most important, sometimes “no photography” rules exist for religious purposes. Take the Sistine Chapel for example. The Catholic Church deems this room to be a very holy place. While they allow hordes of tourists to visit it, they permit neither talking nor photography. Yes, it is true that the Vatican security obnoxiously “shushes” everyone. And, it is most annoying to be shoulder-to-shoulder in the tiny room for what felt like only a fleeting moment to stair up at the masterpieces. But to ignore the “no picture” rule is to disregard their religious views. Or are they just a bunch of silly Catholics?
I saw tourists posing in front of bodies of saints preserved in wax making funny faces. I did not see this same irreverence towards the Buddhist religion when I was temple touring in Thailand. There, it seemed tourists had more respect. Not once did I see someone sitting on Buddha’s lap and rubbing his belly for a good photo op. But maybe I’ll try that out next time?
Headed to Italy? – In Venice, check out the latest hotel reviews for the perfect place to stay. We stayed at the Westin Europa & Regina. It was a great place, but not budget friendly (we used points). If you can swing the cost, do it! Use this Lonely Planet pocket guide to Venice to help navigate the best spots and restaurants.
For Rome, I highly recommend Trevi 41 Hotel for its central location, filling breakfast, and spacious rooms. The Pocket Guide to Rome will help you there too. I also have a helpful guide on packing for your European adventure!
I like to take photos a lot as my blog proves! But I think one should respect the signs. And it can spoil the experience of seeing somewhere like St Mark’s properly if you are surrounded by flashing cameras. It is a religious place and it can seem a bit like stepping into a bunch of paparazzi unless some peace is respected and cameras put away.
Thanks for being a conscientious traveler. Personally, I am just happy to be invited to their house of worship to witness their culture and their artwork. As an invited guest, I feel I am obligated to respect their rules.
Thoughtful article. I’m generally with you on the no photography thing, if requested. It is a matter of respect. Can’t say I’ve strictly adhered to that rule, though, but when I have deviated it’s been very subtle (iPhone at the waist) which makes for crappy photos anyway.
It is reasonably well enforced in China, where I have seen it the most (thankfully not at the Xi’an Warriors). Most of the temples forbid inside photography (flash or otherwise).
BTW, I truly heard this comment from an American tourist in the late 80’s in the Sistine Chapel “Hey, Walt. Do you think they originally built it as a tourist attraction?”
Thanks for commenting. Let me ask you this though, if the iPhone at the waist takes crappy photos, why bother?
Oh, and I wonder if those American tourists are onto something…
I’m with you. Although I HATED not being able to take pictures in the Sistine Chapel, I understood that it is considered holy ground to many and it was not my place (or appropriate) to disrespect that. I felt the same way in the catacombs. I also learned that, in Greece, it’s disrespectful to pose in front of some of the statues. When you are in someone else’s land/culture, I think it’s appropriate to follow the rules.
Exactly! I appreciate your comment.
I liked this post until I saw the Nickelback link… I award you no points.
Such a great conversation. I’m all for the no to flash photography. If we can preserve it for another amount of years for others to enjoy – so be it. The non-flash, I’m all about the respect. But I can understand the devoted Catholic who made the pilgrimage to the Vatican and wanting to preserve that memory for themselves at home. Granted if they were so devoted, maybe they wouldn’t (because it so sacred). But here is where I can judge leniently. Otherwise, it’s to the stockades.
Admit it, you listened to the Nickelback song and oddly found yourself singing along.
A couple of things on the Catholic leniency argument. How can you tell who is Catholic or who isn’t? If they are wearing a crucifix or can recite Hail Mary? It would be too hard to enforce. Also, s a devout Christian, my first thought would not be to capture photos if I visited the Holy Land. Instead, I expect that I would find myself in prayerful meditation most of the time retracing the birth of my faith.
As always, thanks for your comments.
hey, thank you for your comment on my blog…didn`t expected ppl to actually see it, since I did it more on my friends request than anything but its awesome to know someone thought it worth it…
BTW, I really understand the no photo policy however, I did do my share of illegal museum shots on my trips, there is some fun on it!
You’re welcome. If I can give any blogging advise, it would be to stick with it.
I appreciate your honesty about the illegal museum shots. I do have to ask though, do you ever look at them? At the Vatican Museum, we watched several people snap photos of a Van Gogh. It was a beautiful painting. But I thought, “Would I ever look at a photo of a picture?
I’m afraid I do take illegal photos but i try not to be obvious about it. With no pun intended, I refer to them as the Hail Mary shots, with camera down at my waist generally pointing in the direction of what i want to take a photo of. I fully agree, though, no flash which is damaging. My camera is generally pretty good without and photoshop can brighten up the rest. When you think of the thousands that cram into the Sistine Chapel every day, surely all that human body heat and humidity has to be more damaging than non-flash photography. The works of art are spectacular and yes, I like to have a souvenir of my visit. There are many many other religious places that do allow it.
I guess if they are going to allow tourists to come and look at the place, knowing most of them are there for non-religious purposes (but then, what about regular museums?) then it seems a bit confusing. And then, they’re going to sell postcards of the interiors anyway (and, in the case of the Cappuchin ossuary, they even have tshirts) so it always feels like the rule is there so that they can make money off the sales.
I am sure you are spot on that part of the reason for the rules are to make money in the gift shop. Of course, on the flip side of that coin, the pictures could be for sale since you can’t take a photograph. They are a further means for preservation allowing tourists to still have that memory and to raise funds for upkeep because as you said, even the bodies going through the Sistine Chapel have to damage the art.
That’s true too. It is important to be able to fund the upkeep.
I usually respect the rules. Most of the times photos inside without flash don’t look that great. Just like you I do enjoy to focus on the landmark/museum sometimes without the pressure of taking photos.
Btw. There have been incidents in Asia where Western tourist had climbed up a Buddha. I remember in particular in Sri Lanka in the Buddha caves of Dambulla you could only visit with a guide to prevent this sort of behavior. Apparently some foreigners had not only touch the Buddhas there but climbed up to pose on the lap for photos back in the 70ies.
People in general have no common sense. Therefore those rules need to be there and I am always a bit shocked to see them being overstepped. Super selfish in my opion!
So someone stole my Buddha lap idea? I truly believe in being respectful of the rules. Religious sites don’t have to invite us in, and most of the time for free. We need less Ryan Lochte’s in this world!