Hacker News Reader

Comment by robbyking | Hacker News Reader

These types of comments always get under my skin. They took a 45 gigapixel photo of a 350-year-old Rembrandt, I'm pretty sure they didn't shoot it in the exhibition hall using "so-called daylight LED lamps."

View on HN

Dude. Here is a photo of the setup. They didn't move it.

https://www.rijksmuseum.nl/en/nightwatch

Edit: Here is an actual video -> https://www.instagram.com/p/B00YJ7tFbyB/

As can be seen there, they of course relied on their own lighting as is standard for archival and studio photography.

This talks about an X-ray fluorescence (XRF) scanner, which uses X-rays (not visible light) to scan the painting.

It's the same scanner setup regardless of the scan that is being done. I don't know about lighting though. Here you can see some of the resulting images from a scan and they are pretty dark, but this paint is dark so who knows. https://youtu.be/l3QlXyZJpgs?t=3513

I am pretty sure they did shoot it in the exhibition hall, the painting is rather big.

Further, the OP actually brings in own experiences, you are merely guessing.

Yeah, because professional museum curators and art restoration teams are well known to just shake their heads at safely moving large exhibits, baffled at the prospect.

C'mon.

If I were a curator, I would refuse to move a 3.5x4.5 meter painting from 1642 just for taking a picture.

It seems like a no-brainer to bring the camera to the painting instead of the other way around.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com