"Pss, hey buddy. you want to see some photos in the back?"

**dsphotog** · 2-Jul-2012, 21:41

Last time I visited the Oakland Museum all the photos were lit well, except one historic panorama print displayed in a much darkened room.

**Mark Sawyer** · 3-Jul-2012, 01:18

Originally Posted by dsphotog

Last time I visited the Oakland Museum all the photos were lit well, except one historic panorama print displayed in a much darkened room.

The lighting choice illuminates what value the museum puts on that old panorama, and on the others.

Most photographic materials are more sensitive to damage from light than paintings and sculptures.

Museums take their preservation duties veeerrrry seriously. And if they have a curator or conservationist dedicated to photography, they'll be the most obsessive-compulsive about it. It's in their job description.

Ansel Adams left his original negatives to the Center for Creative Photography so that students and photographers could study them and print from them. The negatives are locked away in deep-freeze and will never see the light of day, darkroom, or dim gallery again.

**Steve Smith** · 3-Jul-2012, 02:46

Most of you seem to be missing the OP's point that the photos themselves were well lit but the rest of the space was dark.

Steve.

**Robert Brummitt** · 3-Jul-2012, 05:42

If silver will fade with light, As the museums are saying and doing to preserve.
Then I guess ink jet prints will fair better in the future. It's just a shame that photography has to bee seen in cave lighting compare to paintings or other arts.

**CantikFotos** · 3-Jul-2012, 06:06

Two years ago, I went to an Ansel Adams exhibition at the Columbia Museum of Art (Columbia, SC). The photographs were almost impossible to view. The lighting was extremely dim and the walls were painted a very dark gray. It was the worst show I've ever been to.

http://www.columbiamuseum.org/art/exhibitions?exID=59