Pictures inside the Sistine Chapel

Has anyone taken pictures inside the Sistine Chapel? I’ve heard by some that photography is not permitted and by others that you can use digital cameras without the flash. Can anyone please elaborate.

I haven't been there yet, but I have been reading a current and accurate Rome guidebook, which advises that no photography is allowed in the Sistine Chapel. It appears that in the Vatican Museum itself, photography is permitted without flash, but not in the Sistine Chapel.

Photography is not allowed in the Sistine Chapel.

That being said, on our visit last fall there were flash bulbs going off all over the place. It was like a rock concert in there it was so crowded, and loud too. The guards try to stop the offenders, but there are probably three guards and thousands of people. Probably not exactly what Michelangelo had in mind.

Do not take pictures in the Sistine Chapel!!!! It's considered disrespectful.

And just because other people are snapping photos all around you, doesn't mean its ok. I was there and didn't do it, and the image is firmly implanted in my mind... beautiful. When the day comes that I forget what it looks like, I'll just have to go back to Rome. :cool:

NO photgraphy at all in Sistine chapel ... no FLASH photography elsewhere in the Vatican museum. Like poster above said ... regardless of what other disrespectful tourists do ... don't contribute to the American tourist's poor image abroad. Some places (like the Accademia) actually have you place cameras in plastic bags when entering the museum ... if you remove them from the bag ... guards will escort you out of the museum.

We saw the guards warn a man, who then took another picture. He was immediately escorted out of the building.

As other posters have said, it is disrespectful.

I swear I'm not playing devil's advocate by why is is disrespectful to photograph a church? I would have thought it was to prevent light damage to the art.

I've read that the company who paid for the cleaning and restoration of the artwork has exclusive media rights. So I guess if it's a matter of disrespect....it would be for the rights of the company who has the exclusive rights.

what about video?. Can you take video inside these places?

This thread is very representative of the misconceptions that so many travelers have.

Just to clarify: Photography, without a flash, is allowed throughout the public areas of the Vatican Museum, except for the Sistine Chapel, where no picture taking is allowed.

You can draw whatever conclusions that you wish about the above stated policy, but "disrespectful" is a strong word and in all probability only a small part of the reason that no picture taking is allowed in the Sistine Chapel.

And I'm very troubled by the statement "Don't contribute to the American tourist's poor image abroad". That is the kind of sweeping generalization that we need a whole lot less of in today's world. The OP asked a perfectly reasonable question (How do you know that the OP is American? How can you be sure that those taking flash pictures where they shouldn't are American?) and chose this forum to find his/her answer.

Palms: that was a very well-put statement.

I am a christian but I find it odd to say that taking pictures of a church is disrespectful when charging admission and touring people through one is not. If it were disrespectful to make a church a tourist attraction, then folks would only be allowed in for worship services.

Photography of any kind is not allowed in the Sistine Chapel, although photos without flash are taken regularly (but surreptitiously). I also know photography of any kind is not allowed of the original David, but I've also seen cruiser's photos of the statue.

It is my humble opinion that these huge tourist draws offer an opportunity for making money in selling books featuring photos of these sights. I don't understand how photography without a flash could damage either the paintings or the statue. Nevertheless, the rules are the rules. Whether you decide to break them is a personal decision.

This excerpt from the NEW YORK TIMES might clarify the issue:

"ONE of the most troubling aspects of the angrily debated, nearly decadelong project to restore the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel had to do not with Michelangelo but with Japanese television. The Vatican accepted an offer from the Nippon Television Network of Toyko to pay for the restoration and to record on film the work of the conservators. In return, Nippon was granted exclusive rights over Sistine Chapel photographs for several years, after which control reverts to the Vatican."

Ahha! Thanks for the info, AltaJoe.

Karen

HostKaren@CruiseCritic.com

It is not disrespectful to take photographs in a church. It is disrespectful to do anything when you have been specifically asked not to do so.

I beileve you are also asked not to take pictures on the Doges palace secret tour. There are very few guide books with pictures of the behind the scenes tour available.

It is not disrespectful to take photographs in a church. It is disrespectful to do anything when you have been specifically asked not to do so.

Well put, Andy.

While not disagreeing with previous comments, and believing that what Susan M said is correct,I have a somewhat different spin on the issue - unless you're a professional photographer, and you can empty the Sistine Chapel of the hundreds of other visitors in the room when you're there, why would you WANT to take a photograph? The quality of your photograph could not possibly match the quality of other pictures of the Sistine Chapel (whether in a fine art book or on a postcard), so you're better off getting a high quality picture elsewhere.

I've observed in my travels, and I'm just as guilty as any most of the time, that tourists have some compulsion (obsession?) with documenting their presence somewhere by taking a photograph, even when they (or their friends or family) are not also in the photograph. I can understand taking pictures of places that haven't been photographed before (e.g., some beautiful but unfrequented landscape), but why take pictures of Michelangelo's David in the Accademia in Florence, or his Pieta in St. Peters in the Vatican, or ... you name it. Rarely will "our" pictures be as good as what you can get elsewhere.

Now I'm off my soapbox.

K'ville Sam

That's an interesting take on it, Sam. You do see lots of parents with kids on cruises, at Disneyworld, whatever, constantly posing and documenting the holiday but not actually being a part of it. We often buy postcards as souvenirs, particularly of hard-to-photograph places.