What is the most famous present-day object that can be seen only in person (no photographs exist)?

[Absolute]

I am looking for the most famous object that can be seen in person by an average member of the general public, but has never been photographed (or at least, any photographs of it have been destroyed and future photography is prohibited), such that the only way to see it is to go visit in person.

Is there such a thing in the modern world?

Note that I said "most famous". That implies it has to be somewhat famous, such that you'd actually want to see it, but photography is prohibited or otherwise impossible.

[gonzomax]

Bigfoot?

[Beware of Doug]

The naughty bits of Miss Scarlett Johansson.

[Chief Pedant]

I'm not sure there are any published photographs of whatever it is that passes for the Ark of the Covenant inside the Church of Our Lady Mary of Zion . But it gets passed off as the actual Ark, so in one sense what's inside is "famous" even if it's not the Ark (which, sadly, it probably ain't).

I have read that its guardians are not disposed to average people gawking at it, so I'm inferring from your OP that "average person" means an average guy could see it if allowed. The dilemma here is permission.

[Alka Seltzer]

The Ark of the Covenant? Said to be held by the Ethiopian Orthodox Church. No, I don't believe it either, but some sort of religious artifact might be your best bet.

Britney Spear's.... no wait there are pictures of that.

[Alka Seltzer]

Pipped on both counts. I'll just add that, unlike Ms Spears, I don't think Ms Johansson puts hers on public display, which disqualifies them under the terms of the OP.

[aceplace57]

The toilet in the Oval Office or the Pope's bedroom? Seriously, there's lots of rooms in the White House & Vatican that aren't open to photography. Even though they are public buildings.

Anything outdoors can be photographed. Even military installations are photographed by spy satellites.

[Alka Seltzer]

Originally Posted by aceplace57

The toilet in the Oval Office or the Pope's bedroom?

Sorry, disqualified.

Originally Posted by Absolute

I am looking for the most famous object that can be seen in person by an average member of the general public, but has never been photographed....

I was thinking about a toilet in a famous building, but with the advent of camera-phones someone out there probably does have a photo.

[Chronos]

Maybe some of the exhibits at the Mütter Museum, which doesn't allow photography? Some pics have leaked out, but I don't think all of them.

[robert_columbia]

is it required that the object is visible to the general public? If not, then something like the alleged Ark of the Covenant in Ethiopia would probably qualify (has any person other than its caretaker, Orthodox or not, been allowed to see it?)

If so, I'd make a WAG that candidates might be found on military bases. For example, personal photography is forbidden in some sensitive areas in the US that one can visit relatively easily. For example, the outer grounds of the Pentagon may be visited without a pass, but there is a sign that you are subject to search anywhere on the outer grounds (though they don't seem to actually do that). But then, there are plenty of photographs OF the Pentagon that you can find.

[scr4]

I think there are films that are shown to the public, but no reproductions have been released. Does that count? The 2010 restoration of Metropolis, for example. Or the short films shown in the Ghibli Museum.

[Mangosteen]

When I was in Xian in 1985, photographing the buried terracotta soldiers was prohibited. One could go inside the structure to look at them, but you'd have your camera confiscated if the guards saw you take a picture.

Things might be different now over 25 years later

[Giles]

Originally Posted by Mangosteen

When I was in Xian in 1985, photographing the buried terracotta soldiers was prohibited. One could go inside the structure to look at them, but you'd have your camera confiscated if the guards saw you take a picture.

Things might be different now over 25 years later

But there are pictures, e.g., in the Wiki article.

[AaronX]

Cecil Adams?

[Mangosteen]

Originally Posted by Giles

But there are pictures, e.g., in the Wiki article.

One could purchase photos in the gift shop taken by official government photographers, but you could take your own pictures.

[levdrakon]

Originally Posted by AaronX

Cecil Adams?

What makes you think an average person would be allowed to see him in person?

[Beware of Doug]

Originally Posted by Alka Seltzer

Pipped on both counts. I'll just add that, unlike Ms Spears, I don't think Ms Johansson puts hers on public display, which disqualifies them under the terms of the OP.

I hate you. You have a point, but that just makes me hate you more, you hateful person, you.

[AnalogSignal]

Every night we see things in our dreams that cannot be photographed.

[AaronX]

Originally Posted by levdrakon

What makes you think an average person would be allowed to see him in person?

Doesn't he do book signings?

In Singapore, the military bases don't allow photography, but all the males have to go through them, so I guess they're a good candidate.

[GreasyJack]

It doesn't quite fit the bill as a single object, but sometimes you get viewings of dead celebrities that are open casket and open to the public. Any old schlub can show up and gawk all they like, but they usually have goons on hand to make sure nobody takes any pictures.

Although, along similar lines, Kim Il Sung's embalmed body might fit the bill. His mausoleum is the biggest tourist attraction in North Korea-- supposedly most North Koreans are expected to visit a few times a year and if you do one of the very-guided tours it's pretty much a mandatory stop. But it is definitely not a spot you are allowed to take pictures and security is insanely tight, even by North Korean standards. Perhaps there are some official pictures somewhere but, other than some grainy shots from his funeral, they're not on the internet.

[tumbleddown]

Originally Posted by Mangosteen

When I was in Xian in 1985, photographing the buried terracotta soldiers was prohibited. One could go inside the structure to look at them, but you'd have your camera confiscated if the guards saw you take a picture.

Things might be different now over 25 years later

Markedly, it was the location of a task on The Amazing Race a couple of seasons ago.

[cochrane]

Originally Posted by scr4

I think there are films that are shown to the public, but no reproductions have been released. Does that count? The 2010 restoration of Metropolis, for example. Or the short films shown in the Ghibli Museum.

The Metropolis restoration has been released on DVD and Blu-Ray on November 16, 2010.

[don't ask]

Obama's birth certificate?

[njtt]

Originally Posted by AnalogSignal

Every night we see things in our dreams that cannot be photographed.

So the contents of your dreams are famous?

[salinqmind]

Originally Posted by levdrakon

What makes you think an average person would be allowed to see him in person?

I assume he walks about among us, incognito. Perhaps using another name.

[AnalogSignal]

Originally Posted by njtt

So the contents of your dreams are famous?

Suppose I dream of someone painting a moustache on the famous Mona Lisa painting. This cannot be photographed.

[Bridget Burke]

Originally Posted by AnalogSignal

Suppose I dream of someone painting a moustache on the famous Mona Lisa painting. This cannot be photographed.

Marcel Duchamp beat you to that dream....

[Mangosteen]

Originally Posted by Mangosteen

One could purchase photos in the gift shop taken by official government photographers, but you could take your own pictures.

Sorry, you COULDN'T take you own photos.

[Zsofia]

Originally Posted by GreasyJack

It doesn't quite fit the bill as a single object, but sometimes you get viewings of dead celebrities that are open casket and open to the public. Any old schlub can show up and gawk all they like, but they usually have goons on hand to make sure nobody takes any pictures.

Although, along similar lines, Kim Il Sung's embalmed body might fit the bill. His mausoleum is the biggest tourist attraction in North Korea-- supposedly most North Koreans are expected to visit a few times a year and if you do one of the very-guided tours it's pretty much a mandatory stop. But it is definitely not a spot you are allowed to take pictures and security is insanely tight, even by North Korean standards. Perhaps there are some official pictures somewhere but, other than some grainy shots from his funeral, they're not on the internet.

Kim Il Sung may be the best bet, then.

[Sailboat]

Do photographs exist of the interior of the Kaaba?

[Snickers]

Originally Posted by GreasyJack

Although, along similar lines, Kim Il Sung's embalmed body might fit the bill. His mausoleum is the biggest tourist attraction in North Korea-- supposedly most North Koreans are expected to visit a few times a year and if you do one of the very-guided tours it's pretty much a mandatory stop. But it is definitely not a spot you are allowed to take pictures and security is insanely tight, even by North Korean standards. Perhaps there are some official pictures somewhere but, other than some grainy shots from his funeral, they're not on the internet.

Good point. Lenin's embalmed body is similar - you can go in, but no cameras are allowed (you leave them at the desk, then pick them back up after). Unlike Kim Il Sung however, I think that pictures of Lenin in his glass casket do exist. What about Mao Zedong?

Interesting funny about Lenin's casket: to get to it, you go down a flight of stairs, then make a sharp right-hand turn into the viewing area. But the granite walls are so highly polished, and the whole area rather dark (except for the casket, that's got some amazing theatre style lighting, let me tell you) that it's kind of difficult to see where you're supposed to go. When Mom and I went through, two older ladies directly in front of us ran straight into the wall. Which was kind of helpful, actually; saved me and Mom from doing the exact same thing.

After they collected themselves, much giggling was had, by both the ladies and everyone who'd seen the "bump." Which aggravated the somber guards a bit; they all frowned at us. Which led to more giggles. Not exactly the atmosphere they wanted.

[Frisco]

Isn't this a photo of Kim Il Sung's body?

http://www.everseradio.com/top-five-...rs-but-mostly/

[TerpBE]

Originally Posted by Sailboat

Do photographs exist of the interior of the Kaaba?

Yes. (and video)

[Alka Seltzer]

Originally Posted by AnalogSignal

Suppose I dream of someone painting a moustache on the famous Mona Lisa painting. This cannot be photographed.

<Family Fortunes Buzzer Sound>

Unless you believe Inception was a documentary, the average joe could not see your moustached Mona Lisa in person. Nor is a dream an object.

[AnalogSignal]

Originally Posted by Alka Seltzer

Unless you believe Inception was a documentary, the average joe could not see your moustached Mona Lisa in person. Nor is a dream an object.

Everyone is theoretically capable of seeing their own version of a moustached Mona Lisa in their dreams. The Mona Lisa is an object within a dream.

[Alka Seltzer]

Originally Posted by AnalogSignal

Everyone is theoretically capable of seeing their own version of a moustached Mona Lisa in their dreams.

Ah, I see what you mean, but I'm afraid I'm going to make the buzzer sound again.

<Buzz>

Everyone's version of the moustache in their dream would be different, so it's not the same object. Handlebar or Salvidor Dali?

[iamthewalrus(:3=]

Originally Posted by Alka Seltzer

with the advent of camera-phones someone out there probably does have a photo.

This is pretty much going to cover the whole question.

Things that can be seen by an average member of the general public generally don't have enough access restrictions to prevent at least a few of them from taking photographs, and the average member of the general public now carries a camera at all times.

[md2000]

No limits on photography in the 3 pits of the terracotta warriors nowadays. They ask for "no flash" IIRC but don't seem to care.

[Elendil's Heir]

Originally Posted by Beware of Doug

The naughty bits of Miss Scarlett Johansson.

Or Barack Obama, or Queen Elizabeth II, or Muammar Qaddafi, or....

[GilaB]

Originally Posted by Alka Seltzer

<Family Fortunes Buzzer Sound>

Unless you believe Inception was a documentary, the average joe could not see your moustached Mona Lisa in person. Nor is a dream an object.

I think you meant this. BRRRRRRRAAAAAWWWWRWRRRMRMRMMRMRMMMMM!

[AnalogSignal]

Originally Posted by Alka Seltzer

Everyone's version of the moustache in their dream would be different, so it's not the same object. Handlebar or Salvidor Dali?

Allow me to revise the hypothetical. I have a dream that a gorilla is holding the Mona Lisa. You have a dream that a polar bear is holding the Mona Lisa. In both of our dreams, the Mona Lisa looks just like the original. However, neither of us can photograph the Mona Lisa held by an animal as we saw it in our dreams.

[GreasyJack]

Originally Posted by Frisco

Isn't this a photo of Kim Il Sung's body?

http://www.everseradio.com/top-five-...rs-but-mostly/

I think that's a screen capture from footage of his funeral (which is on YouTube and is entirely as strange as you would expect). After his funeral they massively renovated the palace into an enormous mausoleum, so while I suppose you can see a picture of dead Dear Leader, you can't see a picture of his fancy new digs or his long-term embalm job.

Of course, jumping through the hoops to get into North Korea in the first place might be a little beyond what the "general public" would be willing to go through.

[Heyoka13]

Go outside and glance at it, and realize no photograph ever has done it justice;





THE SUN

[HeadNinja]

Milton Berle. He just took out enough to win.

[Alka Seltzer]

Originally Posted by AnalogSignal

In both of our dreams, the Mona Lisa looks just like the original.

Sorry, in my dream the Mona Lisa has enourmous false teeth and is trying to escape from her frame in order to bite me.

To be more serious for a moment, I don't dream with that degree of fidelity. I have a mental representation of the Mona Lisa, plenty good enough to recognise the picture, but I couldn't tell you what is in the background. My mental picture will differ from yours, and both will differ from reality.

[Schnitte]

MY contribution to that interesting debate: Floaters in your eye, which show up in your vision. Most people have them, but you can't photograph them (at least not from within, to see them the way you would see them in everyday life).

Obviously, though, each person has their own floaters, so that may not count by the OP's rules.

[AnalogSignal]

Originally Posted by Alka Seltzer

To be more serious for a moment, I don't dream with that degree of fidelity. I have a mental representation of the Mona Lisa, plenty good enough to recognise the picture, but I couldn't tell you what is in the background. My mental picture will differ from yours, and both will differ from reality.

Fair enough but I could argue the fidelity of the Mona Lisa image in your mind is not relevant. You probably could not recall a perfectly realistic image of your mother's face purely from memory either.

What matters is, in your mind, you saw a polar bear holding the Mona Lisa and you would not be able to produce a photograph of this event (without Photoshop or other trickery).

[coremelt]

Originally Posted by GreasyJack

Of course, jumping through the hoops to get into North Korea in the first place might be a little beyond what the "general public" would be willing to go through.

Anyone can go to NK as long as you pay for a guided escorted tour. It's only journalists that have a hard time getting in. Doesn't seem to be that expensive either, from $1000US for a 5 day tour.

[Alka Seltzer]

Originally Posted by AnalogSignal

Fair enough but I could argue the fidelity of the Mona Lisa image in your mind is not relevant. You probably could not recall a perfectly realistic image of your mother's face purely from memory either.

Indeed, my mental image of my mother's face isn't much more detailed than that of the Mona Lisa. I know she has green eyes, but I can't picture them. I couldn't even tell you what colour my sister's eyes are.

However, I'd argue that it is relevant. Lets take the simplest possible example, say we both look at exactly the same shade of blue. Is our mental representation of it the same? How do you know your mental blue isn't closer to my red? I suspect the difference isn't that radical, and also that they are not identical, but no-one has ever been able to prove this.

The sort of thing I'm talking about here are called Qualia. People experience the world quite differently, and it's entirely possible the differention starts at a very fundamental level.

Our representations of the Mona Lisa are each different and unique. They are of the same object, but they are not the same thing. Also, they don't exist in our minds as discrete entities, they come with a raft of associations. Do you find the picture sad? Wistful? Humourous? Cold?

[Superhal]

Kind of a loophole, but all US government documents are available to the public because of the Freedom of Information Act of 1966. However, the only way to see what is under the redaction is to be a government employee or government official. Probably this is similar to jail correspondence.

As an intellectual exercise, I would say "anything that hasn't been discovered yet." For example, the only way to see a cave that nobody has discovered before would be to discover it yourself, and by definition, no possible photos could exist. Also, there's new plant, insect and animal species discovered daily that have never been photographed until discovery, and are relatively open to the public. However, once it's discovered, I doubt it's impossible today to not find a picture of it.

Another possibility: court cases that are closed to the media. Usually, an audience is allowed to watch the proceedings, but photography is not allowed, which is how court artists make their money.