Is this a "no photography" watcher?


303 Gallery


Until yesterday I had never seen someone seated in the front room of 303 Gallery. I'm wondering if this is in response to James Kalm's "down low" video tour of the Karen Kilimnik show, as 303 Gallery, despite its founder's interest in appropriationist art, has a strict "no photography" policy. Here is James's video on the subject. Use this link if you don't see the video below.



There is also an interesting comment thread on this post at Edward Winkleman's blog.


don't make me institute another "free the art." my sketching skills are definitely a little rusty, but it is karen kilimnik... i love her work btw!!!

so you can't photo in galleries - besides just being an annoyance when a gallery guard interrupts, i don't see the problem. commercial galleries are under no mandate to serve as educational or even edifying sources to the public. if mister portugal wants to see someone's artwork then he should contact the artist to get photos or wait for a museum show (mandate is dif from galleries) and get the catalogue.

Jason, I think anyone who wants to should be able to photograph in a gallery. 20 years from now, won't you wish someone had taken a walk-through video or installation shots of some of the shows that existed in this time? I don't think leaving art history and documentation solely up to commercial galleries is the proper approach.

Also, it's pretty funny that you think that many of the shows in the 300 or so Chelsea galleries have work that's going to end up in museum shows. That's highly unlikely. And, once they're up at a museum, you probably won't be allowed to photograph there either unless the museum owns the work.


I'm simply equating a gallery with a (high end) retail store. Try going into one of those and photographing their merchandise; you can't. A gallery is no different, except in the products on display.

Jason, I like that analogy! The next time someone says "no photos" I might say, "Oh I'm sorry I didn't realize I'm in a retail establishment."

Hey Barry,
Thanks for the posting. Yeah, I hadn’t seen “guards” posted in the front of 303 before either. Regarding Jason’s cynical view of galleries as just another retail establishment, I believe galleries are in another category. They function as venues which invite the public to visit for the purpose of viewing, and sometimes purchasing art. If art has any social importance then it transcends the level of mere consumer product. If the art is “important” then it falls into a category of cultural relevance and becomes “news” worthy hence protected by “Freedom of the Press”.

As Barry logically states there’s also the historic aspect. Please don’t photograph the President as he comes around the corner at the Book Depository, and don’t photograph those trains with the Jews going to health spas, and we don’t need to see the flag draped coffins either, please, I’m asking very politely, just be a good boy and put the camera away. An exaggeration, maybe, but you get the point.

By the way, how many times are you videoed in galleries, stories and on the street, each day with out your consent? Nobody’s making a stink about that. JK

I'm in solidarity with M from Portugal. So Jason suggests get the catalogue. Well, I emailed Pace twice for the Nozkowski catalogue and I wanted it sent to Australia. No reply. I'm &^#@ off to say the least. Now it's sold out. So I just get down low with the JK it! You provide a great service James.

Monthly Archives

Powered by Movable Type 5.2.13

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by published on February 3, 2008 3:17 PM.

Voting for Obama by default was the previous entry in this blog.

Linkage is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.