At last
,
I found the right place to ask my question; although, it appears someone else already asked basically the same thing
.
my question is/was: Is it a myth or a fact that using a camera flash in a museum, art exhibit, etc. can actually damage the items on display
?
I see both sides of the argument above: Photons=Damage and Flash=Fist Fight
The reason I still ask is: this restriction happens everywhere you go on vacation. More importantly, it is intrepreted differently every where you go as well i.e. No Flash, Some camera types Flash o.k., Flash from a distance only...etc. There are just too many versions of what is/is not o.k. Thats why I don't know if the flash prohibition is based on actual modern science
.
As far as I know, most modern camera flashes are very small and only produce a small amount of light over a very limited distance. Surely that brief flash of light from my trusty point-and-shoot does nothing when compared to the constant exposure to the floresant/halogen lights already bathing the display cases 12 hours a day. Likewise, I am aware that some high dollar external flashes, practically give off gamma radiation...and probably shouldn't be used outside of a professional photo studio, so those logically are not the typical tourist situation.
I totally agree though if a "normal" camera flash actually causes damage, then we should not go around using the flash. However, if it is more of a courtesy as some say, then I think the posted signs should uniformly read "no flash photography" and not add the "your camera will rouine our exhibit" part.
Any thoughts? Naturally, I'ld love to see this explained on an episode, but if someone has some definitive proof that Camera Flash=Art Damage, I'll settle for that too. (By definitive, I mean something other then an opinion or personal experience...show me the science please)
