Month: August 2014

Call for Papers: Collaboration with Artists in the Preservation of Artistic Heritage: Theory and Practice

The Electronic Media Group (EMG) and Objects Specialty Group (OSG) of the American Institute for Conservation (AIC) join with the International Network for the Conservation of Contemporary Art –North America (INCCA-NA) to call for papers for a special joint session on the topic of collaboration with artists at the upcoming AIC Annual Meeting in Miami, FL, May 13-16, 2015.
Recognizing that artists have a stake in the legacy of their work has shifted conservation practice in recent decades.  Moreover, it is possible to maintain a critical art historical discourse while also integrating the voices and opinions of the artists within preservation strategies for their artworks. The mission of organizations like INCCA-NA has been guided by the possibilities of this shift. Increasingly, these practices are flourishing at major museums across the country.
Many conservators are actively seizing opportunities to interview and otherwise interact with artists. This session seeks to provide a venue for novice and experienced practitioners alike, from conservation and allied preservation-related fields, to share their outlook on and practice of collaboration with artists and their associates.
Topics to address may include but are not limited to:

  • The AIC Annual Meeting theme of “Practical Philosophy or Making Conservation Work” What are the practical considerations in collaborating with artists? How does theory translate into practice and how does practice inform theory?
  • What is the value in collaborating with artists?  How has practice supported this?
  • Interview tips and techniques.
  • Collaboration with artists beyond the interview.
  • Case studies.
  • Collaboration with artists in the preservation of ephemeral materials, obsolete media, and installation art.
  • Finding time and resources for an artist interview program.

 

How to Submit an Abstract

Email your abstract in Microsoft Word (NOT as a pdf) to Ruth Seyler, AIC Membership and Meetings Director, at rseyler@conservation-us.org.
Please send an abstract of 500 words maximum, along with a bio of 300 words maximum per author to Ruth by Wednesday, September 10, 2014. In the case of multiple authors, please list all authors and include an email address for each author. If you have questions or would like to discuss an idea for a session, please contact Ruth Seyler.
You may also submit your abstract for consideration for other sessions at the AIC Annual Meeting, as detailed below.
Please indicate your first choice session for your submission as “EMG/OSG/INCCA-NA Joint Session”.
 
Session Types
Abstracts will be considered for the following session types.
General Sessions – General Session papers must specifically address the meeting theme.  Recent efforts to provide a variety of session formats will continue and authors accepted for general session presentations may receive requests to participate in lightning rounds or concurrent general sessions.

Specialty Sessions – Specialty Session papers are encouraged to address the meeting theme but may also explore other topics relevant to that specialty. Specialty sessions will include: Architecture, Book and Paper, Collection Care, Electronic Media, Health & Safety, Objects, Photographic Materials, Paintings, Research and Technical Studies, Sustainability, Textiles, and Wooden Artifacts.

Poster Session – Posters may address the meeting theme, but presenters can also address their current research interests. Posters are presented in the Exhibit Hall.
Submission Guidelines

  • You may submit an abstract for a combination of the three session types: General Sessions, Specialty  Sessions, or Poster Session. You may submit your presentation to only one or two sessions if you so choose.
  • If you are submitting a Discussion/Interactive Session, please submit only for that, since the format is not compatible with the other General Session choices
  • Please indicate on the abstract the session/sessions for which you want the paper to be considered.
  • Please limit your choices to three sessions and rank them in order of preference. For example, your preferences could be one of the following:
    • 1st Choice: General Sessions, 2nd Choice: Objects Session, and 3rd Choice: Wooden Artifacts Session
    • 1st Choice: General Sessions, 2nd Choice: Poster Session, and 3rd Choice: Book and Paper Session
    • 1st Choice: Photographic Materials Session, 2nd Choice: Electronic Media Session, and 3rd Choice: Research and Technical Studies Session
    • 1st Choice: Book and Paper Session, 2nd Choice: Book and Paper Session, 3rd Choice: Book and Paper Session
    • 1st Choice: General Sessions – Concurrent Interactive/Discussion Session
  • When listing your three session choices, please remember that if you are interested in a joint session you only need to list that as a single option. For example: if you want your second choice to be the Book and Paper and Photographic Materials Joint Session, don’t list it as either Book and Paper Session or Photographic Materials Session but list it as the Book and Paper and Photographic Materials Joint Session.

42nd Annual Meeting – Book and Paper Group Session (BPG), May 30, “Salvage of Paper Materials from the Flooding of São Luiz do Paraitinga” by Fernanda Mokdessi Auada

 On Friday May 30th, Ms. Fernanda Mokdessi Auada presented an account of the joint salvage effort undertaken by the Nucleus for Conservation of Public Files of São Paulo (APESP) and the Nucleus of Restoration-Conservation Edson Motta, Laboratory del National Service for Industrial Apprenticeship (NUCLEM-SENAI) following the 2010 flooding of São Luiz do Paraitinga, Brazil. Collective gasps went up from the audience as Auada showed photographs of the devastated city. Among the images was the city all but subsumed by the Paraitinga river, and shots of devastating structural damage to the city’s principal church (São Luiz de Tolosa) and its municipal library. 
 

During the flood of 2010, the fall of the city’s principal church
During the flood of 2010, the fall of the city’s principal church

 

Thousands of documents, over 15 linear meters in total, were immersed in the flood waters for over 20 days. The papers related primarily to the population’s citizenship and legal identity, making it vital for conservators to save the information contained in the wet and moldy files. Despite the grave condition of the documents–and the challenge of having virtually no money or trained support staff–the overall salvage was a success, Ms. Auada said.

The documents arrived for salvage in three allotments. The first two allotments were treated manually, using traditional flood damage salvage procedures. First, the documents were separated and air dried flat on top of absorbent paper. The documents were then individually documented and inventoried during dry cleaning, these steps carried out in a dedicated cleaning area. Documents that could not be separated mechanically after drying were separated while immersed in an aqueous bath. Papers soiled with heavy accretions of dirt and mud were washed to recover legibility. The papers were then mended, flattened and rehoused in paper folders and corrugated polypropylene boxes. Incredibly, 95% of the documents in the first and second allotments were recovered.

The third allotment, from the Public Ministry, proved to be more problematic, calling for radical treatment. These documents arrived at the APESP three months following the flood, after having been stored wet and housed in garbage bags. Upon drying the materials, it was determined that the extensive mold damage would be impossible to treat using traditional methods. Representing a “worst-case” scenario, this allotment of 176 files was submitted to decontamination by gamma irradiation. The moldy documents were packed in corrugated cardboard boxes and sent to the Radiation Technology Centre for Nuclear and Energy Research Institute (CTR-IPEN) at the University of São Paulo. While still within the cardboard storage boxes, the documents were dosed for disinfection (not sterilization) at 11kGy. This was the first time this type of salvage procedure had been carried out in Brazil.

Following irradiation, the papers were separated and dry cleaned using brushes. The dry removal of the mold spores proved easier and faster than the first two non-irradiated allotments, with sheets separating easily. Perhaps most importantly, the biohazard was eliminated, eliminating the need to quarantine the documents during documentation and dry cleaning. Ms. Auada described the costs of the treatment as acceptable, even within the project’s meager budget. The irradiated documents will be monitored for long term effects of the radiation, with polymerization of the cellulose being of primary concern.

Job Posting: Conservator of Works of Art on Paper, Floating World Gallery (FWG) / Chicago, IL

Conservator of Works of Art on Paper, Floating World Gallery (FWG).
 
FWG has created a new full-time position for a paper conservator who will treat the Japanese prints and paintings in our collection and work in tandem with our current team of conservators and managers.  Given the specialized nature of our collection the candidate should have a demonstrated interest in the preservation of classical and modern Japanese works on paper and a familiarity with the practical treatments used to improve the most common issues associated with their ephemeral papers and fugitive pigments.  The candidate must also have the ability to work efficiently on projects requiring independence, communicate effectively and manage a busy schedule.
 
Located in Chicago, FWG is the largest gallery in the US specializing in Japanese art.  It provides a rich resource for conservation education and hands-on exposure to museum quality works of art.  Candidates must have a Master’s degree in art conservation and at least two years of experience beyond graduation.  Candidates should send a letter of interest to wls@floatingworld.com, including educational and professional qualifications as well as aspects of relevant work experience.  Those invited for an interview will be asked to bring additional information.  Salary will be commensurate with the candidate’s skills and credentials ($36,000 to $48,000 per annum plus benefits).

42nd Annual Meeting – Textile Session, May 30, “Stressed about Pests? A Panel-led Discussion on Integrated Pest Management” Moderators: Bernice Morris, Patricia Silence, Rachael Arenstein.

This session included three presentations on Integrated Pest Management (IPM). The first speaker, Bernice Morris, is the IPM coordinator at the Philadelphia Museum of Art (PMA.)   Bernice said that IPM began in earnest at the PMA in 1990. She has built on this foundation, developing an IPM system consisting of dividing the museum into risk zones, the use of barcoded (numbered) blunder traps (with pheromone lures as needed), and iPhones outfitted with barcode readers. The iPhones scan the bar code on each trap. The pest type and count are entered, and the data is sent to a computer, becoming a row on a spreadsheet. This makes the gathered data accessible for analysis. The number of traps and the frequency of monitoring are dependent on zone type. In addition, all museum staff are now aware of the importance of prevention and vigilance. The staff has a “bug hotline,” and Internet reporting for pest sightings. It is a very low cost system with the exception of the iPhones, and for those with moth problems the pheromone lures are expensive but worth the investment. The textiles in the collection are most vulnerable while moving in and out of the galleries, and the museum. New acquisitions and loans come into the museum wrapped in plastic. They are isolated and examined, and if evidence of infestation is found the objects are treated with low temperature treatment or anoxia treatment to kill all insect life stages of the infestation.
 
Patricia Silence is the Conservator of Museum Exhibitions and Historic Interiors at the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation (CW). As she said it is “the oldest and largest outdoor living history museum in the United States.” CW had always depended on outside pest management professionals. She and her colleagues developed a vision of what a successful IPM plan would accomplish: “prevent harm to people, collections, and buildings, use minimal pesticides, and foster a sense of ownership of the IPM program in the foundation employees.” Due to the complicated interconnected nature of the collection, architecture, landscaping, livestock, commercial entities, and residences, it was determined that it is would be best to have someone who was on the CW staff to manage the IPM. Ryan Jones was hired as the integrated pest management specialist. The IPM has been so successful the program has expanded to include monitoring and treatment of termites. He and an army of other staff members have certification for pesticide application, but housekeeping, routine trap monitoring, and building inspections and maintenance reduce the need for pesticides. A holding room, and freezing and anoxic treatments are used for objects with infestations. The staff can report pest sightings via intranet; identification sheets with common pests are made available with a pest specific follow-up sheet sent after identification. Patricia has taken a holistic approach.
 
Rachael Arenstein is currently the conservator at the Bible Lands Museum in Jerusalem, Israel. However, as a former conservator in private practice she spoke about some of the challenges she noticed with smaller museums that lack IPM plans. She felt that the biggest problem was most often that pest damage is not recognized and is thought to be the natural effects of age or light damage. Rachael pointed out that all museums have some kind of pest problem. Small museum are understaffed, under-resourced, collections are crowded, and if there is an infestation the staff is just “grossed out.” Mistakes are made using inappropriate products and procedures.   Rachael is a member of the IPM Working Group, which grew out of colleagues banding together to learn how to deal with infestations. Over the past ten years Rachael and these colleagues have created an invaluable resource, Museumpest.net. It is everything one might want or need to know about IPM: prevention, monitoring, identification, treatment solutions, and implementation of an IPM plan, and more. Through the site you can join the Pestlist, an e-mail distribution list that allows members to ask questions, and receive answers and advice from museum and preservation professionals, entomologists, and other practitioners.
 
The speakers opened the floor to questions and discussion. The first question was concerned with how to get the staff to “buy into” the importance of protecting the collection. The reply to this was that presentations to staff showing damage, or potential damage were helpful. Unfortunately, it often takes a major infestation to drive home the importance of IPM. Other questions were asked about pheromone traps, how to handle a museum wide dermestid infestation, if there were any lasting effects from the use of Vikane fumigation, and “are crack and crevice” treatments of any use. The answers were helpful, but too lengthy to address here. All roads lead to http://museumpests.net (and housekeeping.)
 
The speakers have posted their presentations on the Museum Pest web-site:
http://museumpests.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/AIC-2014-Stressed-about-Pests-Morris-FINAL.pdf
http://museumpests.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/AIC-2014-Stressed-about-Pests-Silence-FINAL.pdf
http://museumpests.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/AIC-2014-Stressed-About-Pests-Arenstein-FINAL.pdf

Job Posting: Full Time Associate Conservator, Contemporary Conservation (NY, NY)

Contemporary Conservation, a New York City based conservation studio specializing in contemporary art, is seeking a full time Associate Conservator.  The candidate should have demonstrated ability and experience in the treatment of a broad range of contemporary artworks and be capable to work under tight deadlines in our fast paced conservation studio. Working with a team is essential. The candidate should have a Bachelors in Art conservation from an internationally recognized conservation program, and/or equivalent professional experience plus a demonstrated ability to problem solve and work on a wide range of contemporary materials. The candidate should be familiar and experienced with the recent conservation discourse and with a great variety of modern conservation techniques and paint systems.
Applicants should possess an in-depth knowledge of contemporary and modern art. Excellent written and verbal communication skills are required, as well as basic photographic documentation. Strong organizational skills are necessary. Required tasks include assessing a works condition, reporting, accurately estimating treatment times, preparing proposals, and onsite work. Applicants should have profound knowledge in objects and/or painting conservation and experience working with installation art, painting, sculpture, outdoor sculpture to name a few. Ability to make independent decisions sustained by analytical and theoretical application is essential. Applicants must be organized, goal oriented, structured, and willing to adapt to new challenges. They must be able to work collaboratively within a dynamic team. Familiarity with Macintosh platforms is preferred, and a working knowledge of Filemaker, InDesign, and Photoshop is ideal.
Interested applicants should email with a cover letter, resume, contact information and three professional references as well as three sample treatment reports. Please send all documentation to studiomanagercc@gmail.com. Incomplete applications will not be considered.
Deadline for applications is September 15th. Please do not call about this position. Contemporary Conservation offers competitive salary to commensurate with experience, and a total compensation package that includes health care and a matching 401(k) program. CC is an equal opportunity employer.

42nd Annual Meeting – Health and Safety Session, May 31st, "Sustainability for the Conservator: Mold Remediation"

This short session was presented by Chris Stavroudis (Conservator in Private Practice) and Steven Pine (Senior Conservator for Decorative Arts, The Museum of Fine Arts Houston, and AIC-CERT member), and was sub-titled “Lessons from Super Storm Sandy.”
Chris began the session by acknowledging that he is not a mold expert, though he has had plenty of experience dealing with mold and art/artifacts, and highlighted Elise Rousseau in the audience as a fellow AIC member with significant mold remediation experience (Elise also presented an excellently detailed and informative poster at the meeting, which can be found here). The activities of the Cultural Recovery Center in Brooklyn immediately following Super Storm Sandy dealt with a lot of mold. The CRC opened to provide expertise to assist artists and owners in salvaging their works. Chris referenced the Mold Remediation workshop, and summarized mold as a form of biodeterioration that also acts as an allergen, and that mold by-products can stain art or be toxic to people. He mentioned that most people have some sensitivity to mold, and some people develop a hypersensitivity either through multiple exposures or even single instances of massive overexposure.
As this was a Health & Safety Session, the emphasis was on Personal Protective Equipment – gloves, suits, respirators or full masks with cartridges for toxic mold by-products. The PPE needs to be appropriate for what you’re working on/the environment you are working in. In instances with large amounts of mold,  eye protection can be important. You particularly do not want to track mold everywhere or bring it home.
Some tips on PPE:
When working with a large amount of moldy objects, it can be a good idea to have multiple rooms to separate the bulk of mold activity – hot/warm/cold sections, where hot  = the highest mold activity.
It is ideal to use a Tyvek coveralls/body suit – while they are meant to be disposable (and personally I feel you should discard the suit after exposure, though at ~$12 each this may become cost prohibitive), you can also wipe down suits with sanitizing wipes or an alcohol/water solution.
You also want to bring separate clothes to go home in – you can bring kitchen bags to segragate your clothing when changing into PPE. There will be less cleaning of associated bags and clothes when leaving a “hot” area.
Steven Pine volunteered to demonstrate the right way to put on your PPE – the demonstration was somewhat hilarious, with a couple false starts and emphasized the need for a buddy-system to help.

AIC2014 Health & Safety - Mold remediation
Steve Pine demonstares how to put on your PPE.

 
You should put on your Tyvek suit in a clean/cold zone. They recommend having a roll of green Frog Tape, in case the suit tears or as a way to make the suit fit a little better – tyvek suits are one-size-fits-all, and using the tape to tighten waistlines or shorten arm/leg lengths makes it a little less cumbersome to wear. Painters tape/blue tape does not work as well, as removing it can cause the suit to tear, it may not stick to the tyvek, and will peel in a damp environment. Steve also recommended using the Frog Tape to label yourself on the front and back, as once suited up all people tend to look the same.
Elise advised using cotton face masks (also known as a “spray sock”) when wearing a respirator, as it makes them more comfortable to wear – I would suggest making sure you are still able to get a tight fit while wearing both (doing the breathe in/out test in your respirator). You should arrive with your face mask/respirator bagged, and bag it again after use. It can be very difficult to communicate with a mask on – it may be useful to have a notepad or similar to write things down.
Tyvek shoe covers/booties are also advised as another barrier over shoes – the gap between the booties and the coverall legs can be taped closed. Using the booties with the coveralls makes everything disposable.
When getting dressed, you should put your gloves on first. Wearing cotton gloves under nitrile gloves can make long term wear less irritating. Once gloves are on, it can be difficult to tear tap, so you need a buddy or prepare torn tape strips accessible beforehand. Wearing multiple nitrile gloves or thicker work gloves can be useful, in case the outer layer is torn or stained, that way you can peel off the soiled layers.
A trick from Steve is to make a tape loops attached to arms for pens, etc – acts as a utility belt to hang things on. Also, a tip to tape down the upper part of the zipper to prevent it from traveling down while you’re working.
Overall, you are going to be very uncomfortable – it is advised to bring whatever is necessary to make yourself comfortable afterward, such as a change of clean clothing, as well as wet wipes for refreshing yourself afterward.
When removing your PPE, be strategic so that everything peels inside out – hook underneath the gloves to pull them off inside out. Encompass gloves with each other so that the interior sides are on the outside. The respirator is put on UNDERNEATH the tyvek hood, so it is removed last.
Steve Pine illustrates proper glove removal (inside out)
Steve Pine illustrates proper glove removal (inside out)

Elise cautioned that all items in contact with mold (including PPE) may need to be disposed of as hazardous waste – clear trash bags are good for hazmat disposal, as it allows waste management to assess the contents.
There are occasionally problems when working in a disaster environment, such as how much PPE you where when your host doesn’t or can’t wear any? It is a judgement call on the part of the conservator, and based on how bad the situation is.
After the PPE demonstration, the talk went to mold treatments, and some new recipes that are being used (namely Elise Rousseau’s research and application – see poster). The speakers mentioned the recognition that fungi have a growing resistance to fungicides and bleaches, and warn against using thymol. As there was a lot of information being passed very quickly, I managed to snap some pics of slides with recipes and treatment protocols – be advised that all materials should be tested to determine the effects of remediation treatments! You have to weigh the effects of the treatment against the possible effects of mold growth on the art/artifacts.
Slide from AIC2014 Health & Safety - Mold remediation
Slide from AIC2014 Health & Safety – Mold remediation

Slide from AIC2014 Health & Safety - Mold remediation
Slide from AIC2014 Health & Safety – Mold remediation

AIC2014 Health & Safety - Mold remediation
AIC2014 Health & Safety – Mold remediation

Slide from AIC2014 Health & Safety - Mold remediation
Slide from AIC2014 Health & Safety – Mold remediation

AIC2014 Health & Safety - Mold remediation
AIC2014 Health & Safety – Mold remediation

AIC2014 Health & Safety - Mold remediation
AIC2014 Health & Safety – Mold remediation

There was also some discussion on how to build containment units, something that Elise is also very well versed in. A double walled containmnet unit with doors and air extractors/scrubbers with HEPA filters or venting to the exterior is recommended – I managed to snap a pic of an illustrative slide, but I would recommend working with an engineer or someone well versed in creating such a unit before building one yourself.
AIC2014 Health & Safety - Mold remediation
AIC2014 Health & Safety – Mold remediation

All in all it was a very informative session with great tips and advice from people who have a lot of experience working in mold remediation – there is definitely room for more research on the effectiveness of traditional and emerging remediation treatments, as well as getting a better understanding of how mold and mold remediation treatments could affect various types of substrates. Also, it would be useful to have a clear step-by-step guide for putting on and removing PPE in the appropriate order for mold treatments – perhaps the presenters could work on publishing a short chart in the AIC Newsletter?

Job Posting: Clock Restoration Project at the City Hall / Courthouse in Minneapolis

The Clock Restoration Project at the City Hall / Courthouse in Minneapolis is officially advertised as of today (August 13th) with proposals due by September 24th, 2014.  This project is being procured through the Hennepin County Best Value Process and will be posted on their website.  The site visit and training are not required, but are encouraged a those selected for interviews will need to communicate a good understanding of the building and project.  The first two site visits will also include training on the Best Value Process.  The schedule for site visits is as follows:
Training plus project walk thru – August 27th meeting will be held in room 132 from 1:30 to 4:30 pm
Training plus project walk thru – September 4th meeting will be held in room 132 from 1:30 to 4:30 pm
Last Project Walk thru with no questions – September 10th meeting will be held in room 105 from 1:00 to 3:00 pm
 
The City Hall / Courthouse is located at 350 S 5th Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota
 
To obtain the RFP documents, please go to Public Plan Room of the Franz Reprographics website:
http://www.ipdservices.com/clients/franz/?FranzReprographics&Show=Planroom
Proposers can look at the documents online, download them, and order prints from the website.  All addenda will also be posted to the website and plan holders will be listed and notified when new documents are available.  Proposers can view the documents as a guest (without signing in) but will need to register with Franz to get a username and password to be listed as a plan holder in order to do anything more than just looking at the documents online.  Downloads will be free.  Printing and mailing costs will be the responsibility of the bidder.
 
If you have questions, please contact Bob Mack or Angela Wolf Scott at 612-341-4051.

42nd Annual Meeting – Paintings Session, May 30, “The Reconsideration of a Reattribution: Pierre-Edouard Baranowski attributed to Amedeo Modigliani” by Elise Effmann Clifford

Elise Effmann Clifford, Head of Paintings Conservation at the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF), presented a case study dealing with the complex topic of evaluating a painting’s attribution, drawing on the research of psychologists to consider the biases at play when conservators and scholars approach such investigations. The artwork in question was a portrait of Pierre-Edouard Baranowski, which entered the collection of the FAMSF as a painting by Amedeo Modigliani from 1918. After a demotion in attribution in the 1990s, the painting was subsequently reattributed to the artist in recent years. Effmann traced the research trails of both investigations in her talk, evaluating the reasoning of each that led to their opposing conclusions.

Portrait of Pierre-Edouard Baranowski by Amedeo Modigliani, c1918, Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco. Photo: art.famsf.org
Portrait of Pierre-Edouard Baranowski by Amedeo Modigliani, c1918, Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco.
Photo: art.famsf.org

 
The first of these investigations began soon after the painting entered the FAMSF collection in the early 1980s, when scholars and dealers first raised doubts over the authenticity of the work. These were based on the existence of another portrait of Baranowski by Modigliani in the collection of Robert and Lisa Sainsbury from 1937-1999, and referred to as the ex-Sainsbury painting in this talk. This work has airtight provenance and little doubt over authorship.  It is painted in a style typical of the artist. Two portraits of Baranowski were mentioned in the earliest catalog of Modigliani’s work, but this states both were on canvas, where the FAMSF painting is on hardboard. Only the ex-Sainsbury painting is mentioned in subsequent catalogs. The provenance of the FAMSF painting was unknown prior to 1953, the year the donor purchased the work. A report from the FAMSF conservation department notes an underlying composition of what appeared to by a figure similar to those in an early series by Modigliani. Early restoration treatments to address flaking paint were noted, as was an early campaign of overpaint in the face. Expert opinions were sought, and at least 7 records from dealers and scholars exist in the curatorial file stating they did not consider the painting to be by the artist, that something was not quite right. The FAMSF painting’s lack of technical similarities to the ex-Sainsbury painting, incomplete provenance, its absence in early catalogs of Modigliani, including the irrefutable Ambrogio Ceroni catalogue raisonne, and the frequency of Modigliani forgeries all contributed to a decision to deattribute the painting. This was made official after the painting was taken to England to compare to the ex-Sainsbury painting in 1994.
Prompted by questions raised by the family of the donor, a technical investigation of the painting began in 2011. Effmann found more information on the unusual underlying painting, finding other similar compositions by the artist, also on hardboard. She found other examples of similar paint application, and discussions with conservators and scholars revealed that the artist showed a great deal of variety in his technique. There were several fingerprints found in the paint, ignored in the earlier investigation. Effmann also traced the provenance almost back to the artist. Current experts were consulted in light of the new information, and the attribution to Modigliani was reinstated.
Effmann notes that in hindsight, the authenticity of the painting seemed obvious. She found herself reflecting on the trajectory of research and reasoning that led to the initial conclusion that the painting was a poor-quality copy, and the role that bias may have played. The idea that such research outcomes may be influenced by cognitive biases has never been examined in the context of conservation, so Effmann turned to psychology, where the topic has been a significant area of research since the 1970s. She discussed the implications of heuristics, or cognitive shortcuts, we make constantly in order to quickly and efficiently process the vast amount of information we encounter. These heuristics usually serve us well, but cognitive psychologists have studied numerous ways in which they can lead to predictable errors or biases. Effmann identified several biases at play, including Attribute Substitution, when a difficult question is unconsciously replaced by a simpler one. Here, the question of ‘is this painting genuine?’ was replaced with ‘does this painting look like the other painting?’ Confirmation Bias (the tendency to favour information that agrees with preconceived hypotheses), Overconfidence Bias (overestimating the accuracy of one’s conclusion), and even Hindsight Bias (feeling as though one ‘knew it all along’) were all at play in the course of these events. (A good introduction into this topic is Daniel Kahneman’s ‘Thinking Fast and Slow’, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011).
When we sit down at our microscopes, don our UV goggles, take endless notes, measurements, and photographs for documentation, it is easy to think we are looking at these artworks objectively. But the reality is: we’re not. Whether we’re embarking on a large-scale research project, or writing a condition report, we are drawing on previous experience and opinion which is necessary to guide us and make sense of the world around us efficiently, but can also lead us astray. Effmann says she’ll continue to research the topic of bias in the future, and I look forward to seeing what she finds. I know that I’ll be considering the reasons behind my reasoning much more carefully from now on.

Calling all creative cooks

The Art Fund of Great Britain organized an “Edible Masterpieces” project (http://www.artfund.org/get-involved/edible-masterpieces/about-edible-masterpieces) as a fundraiser (and fun-raiser). Inspired by this, and knowing how many conservation professionals, curators and artists enjoy being creative in the cuisine, Francesca Bewer (Harvard Art Museums) and I thought it would be great fun to attempt something similar to raise funds for the FAIC in conjunction with the annual AIC meeting in Miami in 2015.
The complex logistics of scheduling, combined with restrictions imposed by hotel food service regulations at the Miami conference venue have led us to reframe this idea. Instead we would like to propose a well-illustrated cookbook that compiles recipes and DIY instructions for inventive, witty, delicious, delightful, healthy, etc… dishes inspired by works of art. These could be a salad inspired by the colors of a Van Gogh painting, a stew composed from the foods in a Dutch still life, or a cake constructed like a cubist sculpture. Submissions would consist of a recipe and/or directions, accompanied by a photo of the finished product and/or visual documentation of the various steps involved, and a short blurb identifying the work of art that inspired the dish.
We are currently looking for feedback on this idea. Should we receive enough positive responses by October 1st (so that we can announce it in the November AIC News) we are sure we can bring this project to fruition. Submissions would be due by February 1, 2015 to allow for the production of some sample pages to show at the meeting — if not produce the entire cookbook!
Please let us know if you would be interested in participating.
Rebecca Rushfield wittert@juno.com
Francesca Bewer francesca_bewer@harvard.edu

42nd Annual Meeting – Workshop, May 28, "Responding to Mold Outbreaks after a Disaster"

This full-day workshop comprised 4 talks by 3 conservators, all experienced with treating mold affected artworks or library/archive materials. The morning session was presented by Olivia Primanis, Senior Conservator at the Harry Ransom Center, University of Texas Austin. Primanis gave a large amount of introductory material focusing on aspects of mold that are of interest to Heritage Conservators and Caretakers. An introduction to mycology provided a basic understanding of fungal characteristics and the life cycle of aspergillus, one of the mold genera most commonly found after flood events. Details of fungal anatomy such as conidia/spore sizes were also discussed, as were activators of conidia – the conditions that encourage rapid growth. Fungal genera found on artifacts, as illustrated in Mary Lou Florian’s book Fungal Facts, was also briefly discussed. Primanis also discussed whether it was necessary to consult with fungal experts, such as industrial hygenists, who can take samples and identify the mold species. While species identification may inform mitigation treatments, it appeared that the presenter did not do any species identification during any of the case studies presented, and all mold outbreaks were treated using the same method of HEPA vacuuming to remove the visible mold, in some cases followed by attempts to neutralize the remaining microscopic elements using a 70% ethanol solution. Rather than attempt to “kill” the mold, Primanis vacuums and then works to optimize the environment to stop or slow mold growth, as historic mold killing treatments have been found to either stay in the affected material and affect users, or could potentially adversely affect the object itself.
In addition to a lengthy bibliography and access to additional downloads via a shared Dropbox folder, Primanis also provided a useful list of options to consider when responding to a mold infestation:
• What is the cause of mold growth and how can the growth be stopped?
• Should an expert, such as an industrial hygienist, be consulted?
• Should the type of mold and bacteria be identified?
• Should the mold be killed?
• What are the health and safety issues for staff and patron?
• Should the mold, and can the mold, be removed from affected building materials and artifacts?
o What methods can be used to remove the mold contamination?
o What methods can be used to assure the cleaning process has been effective?
o What will access to building and collection materials be?
The second presentation was by Ann Frellsen, Book and Paper Collections Conservator for the Emory University Libraries, a member of AIC-CERT as well as organizer of HERA (Heritage Emergency Response Alliance) in Atlanta, GA. Frellson discussed AIC-CERT response after Hurricane Katrina as well as HERA regional response activities, presenting a variety of challenges through a series of case studies. Response activities after tornado destruction in Atlanta highlighted challenges in establishing salvage priorities, as the emotionally affected owners of the collection were incapable of making those decisions, as well as communication issues. Post-Katrina AIC-CERT response inside a historic house on the Gulf coast illustrated the essential need for proper PPE, in this case including full HAZMAT suits equipped with a forced-air system. Another case study discussed how affected town record ledgers containing property data needed to remain accessible, as people were required to consult them in order to obtain proof of ownership as required by their insurance companies. A mold event at Emory University discussed the need for managing contracts with salvage companies, emphasizing that their activities may need to be closely monitored, and you need to know exactly what you want from them.
Ann Frellsen and Vicki Lee (Director of Preservation and Conservation at the Maryland State Archives and AIC-CERT member) teamed up to give a short case-study presentation cleverly titled: “Where We Did Not Find Mold, or, I Suited Up for This?” This presentation consisted of a series of images from flood/water response activities that provided the ideal circumstances for rampant mold growth (such as wet photos in plastic sleeves, wet salvage items left covered in plastic, and wet basement library items relocated to a non-climate controlled backyard shed), but exhibited no visible mold growth.
Another short presentation, titled “Creative Solutions: Thinking Outside the Box (the boxes have not shipped yet)”, presented examples of stabilization treatment ideas that developed from specific needs, such as the creation of a quick-fix solvent chamber at the Cultural Recovery Center in Brooklyn (post Hurricane Sandy) in which solvent sensitive moldy artifacts were treated by placing them in a Ziploc bag with solvent soaked cotton balls overnight. The efficacy of the treatment was not determined. Another attempt to wash and deacidify a paper item tried using crushed and strained calcium vitamins in an attempt to develop a buffering solution bath – the pH was tested at ~pH 7.5. This may be because calcium vitamins comprise calcium carbonate, not calcium hydroxide, but perhaps there were some other steps involved in the experiment that were not mentioned.
Questions from the audience:
Q. How effective is spraying an alcohol solution, when papers are general soaked in baths for 30 min?
Answer from Presenter: No testing was done to determine effectiveness, but it visually appeared to work.
Answer from Audience member: Alcohol treatment only kills surface mold via dehydration. To kill the fungal organism inside of the object or paper fibers, it needs to be put in an anoxic environment for at least 5 weeks using CO2 or Argon gas, which ruptures the cells. If you don’t kill all of the mold (not just the surface mold), then you will have dormant mold under the upper structure.
Q. Was it worth spraying then?
A. Yes, because it minimizes the spread of the spores. You can potentially maintain dormancy by controlling the environment (if possible).
Q. Should you spray, vacuum, and spray again? Vacuum, spray, vacuum?
A. Generally, spray, vac, spray, unless obviously very dirty, then vacuum first so that you can access more of the surface mold.