please empty your brain below

In summer, Chiswick House is lovely for a picnic, and there's the annual pleasantly laid-back dog show coming up in a fortnight. But there isn't a whole lot to detain you in the house - it's very much a summer house rather than a main residence - so for those coming from further afield and wishing to make a day of it, it might be worth going to the nearby Hogarth House (free entry) and paying a visit to the churchyard by the Fuller's Brewery where Hogarth (and Whistler) is buried.
If you come to see the camellias, check the opening hours of the conservatories ... we ended up peering at the flowers disconsolately through the windows.
Sorry, after all that, my first thought was 'copyright issues?', assuming it was a replica of an existing item from 17whatever, why would there be copyright issues?, are the lawyers being over cautious, if the person who created it is causing problems, then make another replica and retain the copyright as part of the contract.
Sigh. I have 'local park' envy now.
It's gorgeous.
The combination of formal and informal gardens is winning. You can get briefly lost in the paths that twist through the trees. And the cricket ground is the most beautiful in west London. Henry the Heron enjoys being admired.
Not far from me and often pass by but never been in!
Looking on Google maps and going to satellite view you can take a virtual walk around the park. Not seen that before on Google maps as normal you can only navigate along roads.
Maybe they used a camera on a bicycle.
Still not a patch on the original. Get yourself over to Italy and go see Villa Rotonda. It’s just a nice 30 minute walk from the centre of Vicenza.
I've been looking at 'Copyright Issues' lately and there is quite a lot of material ( much interesting and useful stuff here https://www.arthistorynews.com/Search/copyright ) which debunks 'received wisdom'.

Many of the world's leading art institutions ( lead by US giants ) are finally loosening up on the whole copyright thing. Lets hope that this permeates sooner rather than later to the more fusty corners of Heritage World like the one in this post.

Allowing photography and dissemination of artwork images is overwhelmingly a good thing. The misguided 'protection' of nationally owned artworks and buildings is really not on. Sure if they're fragile and flash-susceptible, restrict. But really - a snap of a marble bust on Instagram or Diamond Geezer - will that cause the world to end?
re copyright ... could it be that the artworks that are embargoed do not belong to the museum itself but are on long-term loan from someone else who has made it a condition of the loan that reproduction of the image is not allowed










TridentScan | Privacy Policy