photograghing museum items

[amazona]

I struggle with the issue of how to make interesting photographs from museums that allow photography -- and hence you have a real risk of your photo looking like every other photo of the same item.

This photo is from the National Atomic Museum and is a close-up of one of the B28 thermonuclear weapons that were dropped accidentally on Spain in 1966. The conventional explosives detonated but the nuclear bombs did not explode. I'm not sure if I'm satisfied that a photo is the best way to capture the emotions aroused by this story, but I tried to share a little of the spooky feeling of getting close to the dents on the device:

The conservation movement is a breeding ground of communists
and other subversives. We intend to clean them out,
even if it means rounding up every birdwatcher in the country.
--John Mitchell, US Attorney General 1969-72

[Be Brave]

1. Here's my honest critique.

But first of all, dear Lord, which country accidentally dropped that bomb? It's a scary story which deserves telling.

Okay here are my comments on the picture. As someone who was not aware of the story (until now) and as a non-expert on weapons systems, I could not tell from the picture what it is. But then again, maybe that was the point, or maybe not. My best guess would probably be an aircraft engine. Could there have been another perspective which would have been able to give the viewer a good idea of what you were trying to convey, and yet remain uniquely yours? Maybe it would have been a good idea to shoot from other perspectives, using different view angles/focal lengths, and then choose which one of the photos best tells your point. Did you take such other photos?

My two cents, and I would like to see more of your photos.

[amazona]

2. the United States dropped 4 of the bombs during refueling

As far as I know, Spain has never allowed us to refuel over their airspace again. Plutonium dust was spread over a wide part of Spain, and one of the 4 bombs was not found for 80 days! It is a heck of a story.

I did take other photos, but I'm not happy with them. The museum is a very "busy" space with lots of signs and other "stuff" crowded in there. At least these bombs weren't under glass. It is even more difficult for me when I am trying to photograph museum items under glass. Argh! It is a bigger issue for me than just the one photo. I'm going to have to think and experiment a bit more.

The conservation movement is a breeding ground of communists
and other subversives. We intend to clean them out,
even if it means rounding up every birdwatcher in the country.
--John Mitchell, US Attorney General 1969-72

[Be Brave]

3. Aaay, I should have known it was the US who dropped it.

And four bombs at that! Yikes! Actually, that bomb picture, now that I know what it is, is growing on me.

Ah, yes, busy museums can be a problem when composing. I'm curious, regarding your experimentation with shooting museum items, have you tried shooting without flash, which would entail higher film speed (if film) or higher ISO (if digital)? Also, have you had problems with some musuems not allowing picture-taking?

[amazona]

4. yes and yes

Yes, I've tried shooting without flash but not as much as I should. I've gotten that suggestion before, probably need to slow down and take it seriously since I do have a good tripod.

I have encountered more and more museums that do not allow picture-taking, even museums that once allowed picture-taking now saying it is against the rules. Art museums are particularly guilty of this. Of course there are probably good and valid reasons why you can't have flash going off all day on works of art. Most frustrating are museums where you can't take photographs of "some" objects and you don't know which ones are off-limits until someone scolds you. :-(

The conservation movement is a breeding ground of communists
and other subversives. We intend to clean them out,
even if it means rounding up every birdwatcher in the country.
--John Mitchell, US Attorney General 1969-72

[RC]

17. Have you thought of getting a Circular Polarizer?

http://www.buydig.com/shop/product.aspx?sku=CROCPL72

Circular Polarizing Filters are used to increase color saturation, like darkening blue skies so that white clouds stand out. It eliminates reflections from non-metallic surfaces like glass and water. It helps reduce softness in scenery caused by atmospheric haze. This filter will not change the overall color balance of a photograph.

Polarizers are commonly used to control glare on water and to allow the camera to see below the surface. They are also used to reduce glare on car bumpers and to control reflections on plate-glass windows. Polarizers are so versatile that they can perform the opposite functions as well. Some cinematographers use polarizers to increase or enhance reflections, simply by changing the filter?s setting. "Circular" refers not to the shape, but a special design that does not interfere with metering of auto exposure or auto focus systems

[amazona]

18. you know what...I did used to have something like this

I do remember having a polarizing filter for my old film camera. But since I've gone digital I haven't had one. Will have to investigate.

The conservation movement is a breeding ground of communists
and other subversives. We intend to clean them out,
even if it means rounding up every birdwatcher in the country.
--John Mitchell, US Attorney General 1969-72

[Be Brave]

5. Ok, I'll post a contribution to this thread, and hope that

others will follow.

Here is a picture I took at a small museum in a coastal town in Oregon. I wasn't really sure if I was allowed to take photos. But I was the only one in the museum, and the lone employee didn't seem to care what I did, so I shot this picture. It is a stuffed bobcat. The description said that the bobcat was found as roadkill. As you can see, the bobcat was under glass and I used flash. But photographic techniques aside, ain't he/she a beauty? (I think so.) I'm sure it's more beautiful alive.

[Lefta Dissenter]

19. but if you look at his eyes,

you can see why he'd end up roadkill. :crazy:

My dad is a Zoologist and we spent many of our trips gathering up roadkill for the UW Zoology Museum. Yes, some of my fondest memories... the pleasant aroma of dead animal in the truck for weeks on end... cleaning off the rotting vulture carcass and thinking I should just let it sit so the maggots could finish their work... OH, the joys of being the daughter of a Zoologist! :D

(and yes, it's a beautiful bobcat - look at those giant paws!)

[lakemonster11]

6. Here's my contribution.

It's very difficult to take pictures in museums---the lighting is generally low or harsh, you're often restricted in your movements, there are unpredictable crowds, and you're often not allowed to bring in a tripod or use a flash.

Nevertheless, if you take enough pictures in museums, you're bound to take a few that turn out. Here are some that I took in art museums that I'm happy with.

[amazona]

7. I especially like the top one

For some reason I like close-in texture shots. The marble (is it marble, I'm guessing?) is very expressive and human in that sculpture, and you really capture it well.

The conservation movement is a breeding ground of communists
and other subversives. We intend to clean them out,
even if it means rounding up every birdwatcher in the country.
--John Mitchell, US Attorney General 1969-72

[lakemonster11]

9. Thanks.

Thanks. Yes, it's marble.

[Xithras]

8. Re: Tripods

I've noticed that most of the museums and galleries that prohibit tripod usage DO allow visitors to carry walking sticks. Several manufacturers today sell walking sticks with integral or fold-out camera mounts that can be used as monopods, and it only takes a little practice to learn to hold it steady for longer exposures.

[Be Brave]

10. Which museum/s were you at for these photos? n/t

[lakemonster11]

11. The top two are from the Metropolitan Museum of Art

in New York. The third one is from the Vatican Museums in Rome.

[Be Brave]

12. I knew it had to be the real thing.

:)

Digital or film?

[lakemonster11]

13. Digital.

The top two I took with my Nikon D70, but the third one I took on my old Olympus point-and-shoot digital.

[Be Brave]

14. Wow, your old Olympus point-and-shoot did rather well.

He is beautiful.

[amazona]

15. here's the David cast from the V&A

Somehow I doubt they would allow this to be done today but in the Victorian era the British persuaded all sorts of cathedrals, museums, etc. to have casts made. Here's the David:



And a close-up of the hand:



Now for a really bad-looking David reproduction you have to check out Caesar's Forum in Vegas but I don't know if I have a picture of that one.

Oh, and sorry about my photos being so large. I don't know how to change the size without removing detail. I have a lot to learn!

The conservation movement is a breeding ground of communists
and other subversives. We intend to clean them out,
even if it means rounding up every birdwatcher in the country.
--John Mitchell, US Attorney General 1969-72

[lakemonster11]

16. I saw the marble David when I was in Italy,

but like in most of the museums I went to in Florence, there was no photography allowed. It's really too bad, too (although I'm glad I didn't have to fight my way through mobs of camera-wielding tourists, I suppose), because the walkway leading up to David was lined with huge blocks of marble that Michelangelo had started, but not finished, carving into statues. It looked like these figures were struggling to free themselves from the marble. It was amazing and would have made for some great photographs.