In June 2013 the province of Alberta in Canada experienced a flood that affected over 25% of its area. A state of emergency was declared and over 100,000 Albertans were evacuated. The flood caused around $6 million in damage to artifacts and buildings.
Talk presenters Emily Turgeon-Brunet and Amanda Oliver, were tasked with helping archival institutions throughout the province with recovery and future disaster planning and preparedness nearly two years after the flood occurred. There were many things to deal with including mud, water damage, mold, frozen items, and things that were improperly packed prior to freezing.
Funding from the Government of Alberta allowed the dynamic duo to assess damage and help institutions throughout Alberta with recovery from the flood and to prepare for future disasters. This included site assessments, education, writing disaster plans, performing conservation treatment, and purchasing supplies like water detection systems, frost free freezers, boxes, shelves, and disaster response supplies. Full reports were made with work plans so the institutions could meet their current and future needs and goals. They were able to hire contractors, conservators, and archivists to help with recovery and treatment.
Emily and Amanda were not only out in the field visiting institutions and helping any way they could in person, but they were also working on the home front on multiple forms of outreach. This team is currently developing a loan program where supplies like books, wet/dry HEPA vacuums, and digitization equipment will soon be made available for institutions to use on a temporary basis. They are developing an app to connect archivists across Alberta with emergency contacts and recovery specialists, as well as to put archivists in contact with one another to assist with disaster remediation.
They also have a strong presence on the web. Emily and Amanda developed and performed in a series of six how-to disaster recovery videos! They are very clear, informative, and fun! I highly recommend everyone check those out! The disaster recovery how-to videos can be found here: http://archivesalberta.org/programs-and-services/flood-assistance/how-to-videos/ After you watch the how-to videos there is a lot more to see on the Alberta Flood Advisory Programme website that they developed which can be found here: http://archivesalberta.org/programs-and-services/flood-assistance/
Category: AIC’s Annual Meeting
Provides the membership with updated news about the annual meeting. Also announces themes, deadlines for papers, need for volunteers, etc.
Joint 44th AIC Annual Meeting & 42nd CAC-ACCR Annual Conference – “The Challenges of Conservation of Artifacts from Major Disasters: Titanic, Challenger, Columbia and the World Trade Center.” Speaker: Elizabeth Beesley, May 16
Major disasters in instances such as the NASA’s Challenger and Columbia, the RMS Titanic, and World Trade Center are usually caused as a result of mechanical or thermal stresses that the object was not built to withstand. Artifacts that result from these tragedies imbue an immense cultural reaction, especially when there is a large-scale loss of life. To honor the lives lost and provide closure for survivors, these artifacts are frequently memorialized. According to Conservation Solutions, Inc. (CSI): “working on these artifacts is complex as they have unique materials-related challenges and emotional and cultural importance.”1
NASA’s space shuttle Challenger exploded 73 seconds after takeoff from Cape Canaveral, Florida, on January 28, 1986. After the explosion, pieces of the Challenger fell into and were later recovered from the Atlantic Ocean. One piece recovered from the shuttle’s left side panel patriotically displays an image of the U.S. flag. This panel contained a wide range of materials from fiber batting to ceramic tiles to stainless steel. Conservation issues addressed during treatment include chemical and mechanical damages from the explosion, stabilizing chemical damages from extended exposure to salt water, and removal of barnacles and other biological attachments.
In another space shuttle disaster, NASA’s Columbia disintegrated in Earth’s atmosphere minutes before its scheduled landing at Cape Canaveral on February 1, 2003. Unlike the Challenger, the Columbia debris was recovered from a Texas field and stored in a controlled museum climate. Frames that were recovered from the Columbia’s crew module windows were selected for conservation treatment and exhibition. CSI intentionally left scorch marks intact as well as soil and foliage embedded in the frames since these elements are significant to the history of the artifact. Conservation treatments for the Challenger and the Columbia were conducted in secrecy at the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. Due to the sensitivity and heightened security associated with these treatments, restrictions were placed on materials brought on base, treatment methods pursued, and waste produced and removed from the base. Once completed, the panel from the Challenger and frames from the Columbia went on display at the Kennedy Space Center in the summer of 2015 as part of a memorial exhibit titled Forever Remembered.
The RMS Titanic collided with an iceberg on April 14, 1912 and sank the following morning. Had there were a sufficient number of lifeboats on board, many deaths would have been prevented. Davits (image above) projecting over the side of the ship were manually operated to lower life boats into the water. One Davit arm conserved by CSI “tell[s] a poignant tale of the Titanic’s sinking as one side of the base shows the screw for the arm in its lowered position while the other is still raised, showing that one of the too few lifeboats that could have saved lives was not lowered.”2
The conserved Davit arm and base had spent decades underwater which severely impacted the iron, steel, and brass metal body and fixings. Because the structure had become quite fragile, the CSI team needed to first stabilize the Davit arm and base and then create an exhibition mount. The Davit arm and base were gently power washed to remove corrosion and the segments were sealed with wax. The mount was composed of an iron frame and steel base which provided additional support and is capable of being disassembled and reassembled for exhibition.
There were seven buildings that together formed the World Trade Center. The Twin Towers ascended high above the other buildings in the World Trade Center as well as the surrounding buildings in New York City. On the morning of September 11, 2001, two hijacked planes were flown into the towers. The towers collapsed about an hour later, destroying with them the other buildings in the World Trade Center complex.
Sections of “tridents” from the base of the World Trade Center remained intact after the collapse, and these architectural elements became an icon of durability and survival for both New Yorkers and Americans across the country. Each trident measured between 70-90 feet and weighed around 50 tons.3 They were removed by the FBI and transported from the site to an undisclosed location. The CSI team conducted treatment in 2015. The main focus of this treatment was to stabilize the paint rust and calcareous attachments, apply a protective coating, prevent water from pooling, and deter birds from nesting inside the trident. As with the Challenger and Columbia, the World Trade Center project was conducted in secret and the conservators had to abide by government restrictions during treatment. The FBI provided CSI with a camera, but conservators were not allowed to bring their own camera equipment or cellular phones onto the property. All before treatment, during treatment, and after treatment photographs were reviewed by the Bureau before being approved and released to the conservation team. Not all the photos that were released to the team were approved to show during Beesley’s presentation.
For each case that was discussed – NASA’s Challenger and Columbia, the RMS Titanic, and World Trade Center – the materials conserved exhibit the physical evidence and effects of disaster. The conservation processes varied from one project to another, but all of them had some degree of secrecy, communication restrictions, and logistics challenges. These objects carry significant cultural value and evoke extreme reactions of fear, anger, sadness, and other emotions from the public. This is especially relevant for objects of recent tragedies and required the CSI team to be diligent about balancing the complex, varied, and changing relationships that stakeholders had with the artifacts.
Bibliography
1 Beesley, E., Sembrat, J., Rabinowitz, M., & Posluszny Bello, J. (2016). The Challenges of Conservation of Artifacts from Major Disasters: Titanic, Challenger, Columbia and the World Trade Center [Abstract]. American Institute for Conservation of Historic & Artistic Works 44(1) and Canadian Association for Conservation of Cultural Property 42(1), 11. Retrieved from http://www.conservation-us.org/docs/default-source/periodicals/am2016-abstractbook-web.pdf
2 (N/A). RMS Titanic Davit Base and Davit Arm Conservation and Mounting. Conservation Solutions, Inc. Retrieved from https://conservationsolutionsinc.com/projects/view/306/rms-titanic-davit-base-and-davit-arm-conservation-and-mounting/
3 Dunlap, D. (2010, September 8). Two ‘Trees’ Return to the World Trade Center. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/08/two-trees-return-to-the-world-trade-center/?_r=0
Pruitt, S. (2015, August 3). NASA Displays Challenger and Columbia Wreckage. A&E Television Networks, LLC. Retrieved from http://www.history.com/news/nasa-displays-challenger-and-columbia-wreckage
Excerpts of authors’ backgrounds as listed on Conservation Solutions, Inc.
Elizabeth Beesley, Conservator & Project Manager
Elizabeth is a conservator with a background in conservation science and experience in collections management and historic preservation. She holds an MEng in Materials Science (2004) from the University of Oxford where she researched Bronze Age metalwork. While a graduate student in conservation at University College London, she conserved archaeological material at English Heritage and worked on historic aircraft at the Science Museum in London. Subsequently, Elizabeth investigated excavated lacquerware using spectroscopy at the Freer Gallery of Art in Washington, DC. More recently she managed a digitization program at College Park Aviation Museum where she also assisted with collections care. Before joining Conservation Solutions in 2012, Elizabeth worked as an assistant conservator at Aeon Preservation on archival research, construction management and condition assessments. For more information about Elizabeth, please visit: https://conservationsolutionsinc.com/staff/view/152/elizabeth-beesley
Joseph Sembrat, Senior Executive Vice President & Senior Conservator
Joseph Sembrat has been immersed in the conservation field for over twenty years. In 1999, together with his wife Julya, he founded Conservation Solutions, which has since developed into a leading, nationwide, historic preservation firm focusing on art, artifacts and architecture. Conservation Solutions has been recognized for and won numerous awards for its work over recent years . . . Joe is also an accomplished author and presenter of topical industry relevant issues. He continuously conducts research and publishes papers on topics in the preservation field with special emphasis on technology-sharing among various areas of industrial research and its applicability to conservation treatments. Joe holds an MS in Historic Preservation from Columbia School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation (1993), and a BA in Art History from the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA (1990). For more information about Joe, please visit: https://conservationsolutionsinc.com/staff/view/79/joseph-sembrat
Mark Rabinowitz, Executive Vice President & Senior Conservator
Mark Rabinowitz is Executive Vice President, Senior Conservator. He has been part of the senior management team of Conservation Solutions since 2003. He brings over 25 years of experience as a conservator to the leadership team of the firm. Mark served as Deputy Chief of Operations for Preservation at the Central Park Conservancy throughout the 1990s, during which time he initiated and directed their monuments conservation and historic preservation programs. In 1997 Mark was named Chief Consulting Conservator for the New York City Parks Department where he started up a similar program to treat monuments throughout New York City . . . Mark has presented papers, published articles, lectured and taught at national and international conferences and institutions including APT, AIC, ICOMOS US, SFIIC (France), Tulane University, Columbia University, New York University Conservation Center, University of Texas at San Antonio, Long Island University, Penland School of Crafts, and the Lacoste School of the Arts in France. His art has been exhibited in galleries in New York, Brussels, and Paris, and is represented in public and private collections in the US and Europe. For more information about Mark, please visit: https://conservationsolutionsinc.com/staff/view/78/mark-j-rabinowitz
Justine Posluszny Bello, Vice President of Operations & Senior Conservator
Justine joined Conservation Solutions in 2007. She operates as a project lead and Senior Conservator, applying her strong expertise in all aspects of conservation, including condition assessments, conservation treatments, materials testing and analysis, and construction management . . . Justine holds a MS in Historic Preservation from Columbia University’s Graduate School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation, and a BA in Historic Preservation from the University of Mary Washington. For more information about Justine, please visit: https://conservationsolutionsinc.com/staff/view/76/justine-posluszny-bello
44th Annual Meeting – Book and Paper Session, May 16, “A Technical Exploration of a 19th century Qajar Artists’ Album”, by Penley Knipe
Attendees of the Book and Paper Business Meeting, and other early-morning risers, were rewarded with a technical investigation of a 19th century Persian album owned by the Harvard Art Museums, presented by Penley Knipe, the Philip and Lynn Straus Senior Conservator of Works of Art on Paper and Head of Paper Lab at the Straus Center for Conservation and Technical Studies.
An exhibition scheduled at the Harvard Art Museums in 2017 will feature the album and other Qajar period work, and Knipe used this opportunity to research and document the various papers, media and techniques. The album is a carefully arranged collection of 141 drawings on paper cut and adhered onto folios of colored paper. Included are, sketches, finished drawings, and design patterns. The album will be disassembled for the exhibition, and rebound after it comes off view, allowing Knipe to complete extensive documentation and research on each sheet. Thus far she has identified seventy-seven wove sheets and forty-seven laid sheets. Twenty-six sheets contained watermarks. Surprisingly, as the watermarks were identified, it was discovered that the majority were of European origin. Seventeen watermarks were Italian, including the Magnani paper mill (Cartiera Magnani, established in the early 15th-century), two were English, and seven watermarks were from the Islamic world. All the watermarks were documented using digital beta radiography. This imaging revealed matching partial watermarks, allowing certain sheets to be reassembled, and adding more clues to the use of the paper. The variety of papers in this album, and preponderance of European papers, provides evidence for the paper trade during this period, as well as the transfer of papermaking technologies between east and west. Knipe’s research will make significant contributions to future scholarship on the history and manufacture of these papers.
After Knipe presented her exploration of the paper in the album, she focused on the techniques employed on the sheets. Many of the drawings were used for transferring images to other objects, evidenced by their pounced or inscribed lines, rubbed media, and thin/transparent quality of the paper supports. As the album was examined, it became clear that the drawings were arranged according to degree of use, and many had not been used at all. Knipe linked some of the patterns to objects bearing very similar designs, and illustrated this by showing us a (transferred) drawing of a long floral pattern next to an image of a lacquered pen box.
Investigation of the various papers and transfer techniques became a teaching tool for a graduate seminar in the Materials Lab at Harvard Art Museums where, over multiple sessions, the materials’ fabrications and use were explored through hands-on activities. The author had an opportunity to visit the Materials Lab after the 44th Annual Meeting, which is stocked full of artists’ materials for a variety of techniques in all media: from screen printing, to ceramics, to gilding. The benefit of teaching with real materials, and practicing the methods firsthand, is clear; for example, sight nuances, such as the manner in which “red chalk” rubs into and stains thin paper is directly observed and becomes much more easily recognizable in actual drawings. Knipe expanded on these practical sessions by leading a graduate seminar later in the year that explored both the media and the papers comprising the album.
Knipe’s research will be incorporated into the upcoming exhibition, where the technical results will be shared online and through gallery talks. In the meantime, high-quality, digital images of the album pages are available to explore online: http://www.harvardartmuseums.org/search-results?q=1960.161.
44th Annual Meeting – General Session: Lead by Example, Models to Follow, Track E, May 16, “PRICE: Preparedness and Response in Collections Emergencies,” by Sarah Stauderman
The Smithsonian Institution in Washington, DC has long dealt with collection emergencies. One of the first major disasters in their history was a construction fire that broke out on January 24, 1865 in the Smithsonian Institution Building, lovingly known as the Castle. This fire started between the ceiling and the roof of the main hall when workmen accidentally inserted a stove pipe into the brick lining of the building, instead of into a flue. In another unfortunate twist of fate, Secretary Joseph Henry (1797-1878) had established a winter-time fuel conservation program throughout the building, causing the water-filled fire buckets located in the hallways to freeze in the frigid temperatures. The library and many early collections, including the papers of James Smithson, were largely destroyed.
Now, one hundred and fifty years later, colleagues at the Smithsonian Institution have come together to discuss the roles they play in the prevention, preparation, and response to collections-related emergencies. While the Smithsonian currently maintains a robust disaster management program, it focuses primarily on human safety, which no one would argue comes first in any emergency. However, recognizing the need for planning for collections, staff has recently developed a concept for the Institution called PRICE, or Preparation and Response In Collections Emergencies.
The Smithsonian Institution policy on emergencies is encoded in Directives. Two directives that pertain to stewardship for collections in emergencies are: Smithsonian Directive (SD) 109 and SD 600. SD 109 sets requirements at both an institutional- and unit-level for emergency management pans. SD 600 establishes policies and standards for all aspects of collections management, which includes emergency management.
Two recent and notable emergencies sparked this reevaluation of collections emergency preparedness – the collapse of the Garber Facility in 2010 due to the weight of snow on the roof, and an earthquake in the DC region in 2011. Several areas for improvement were identified from these events:
- Training for all staff. There is a need to effectively inform staff about proper lifesaving responses to specific emergencies (such as earthquakes), the Incident Command System, and procedures for access to affected facilities.
- Training for collection emergency response staff. There is a need for training on safety, related to collection-based hazards, post-damage assessment methods, and salvage techniques for specific media types.
- Quality control during installation and inspection of storage furniture.
- Design of storage housing and exhibit mounts to minimize damage in the event of a future seismic event.
- Collections spaces to tolerate risks, such as and earthquake or flood.
In the context of these recent emergencies, the Smithsonian has been approaching preventive conservation initiatives pan-institutionally. For example:
- “Strengthening collections” is listed as part of the Institution’s strategic plan, as is broadening access
- Through the National Collections Program (NCP), there are four leadership groups currently addressing collections stewardship: Collections Advisory Committee, Collections Space Committee, Digitization Program Office (DPO), and several media-specific initiatives.
- The Collections Emergency Working Group, which formulated the PRICE initiative, brought together collections managers, conservators, physical security specialists, NCP staff, and facilities professionals.
The Collections Emergency Working Group recommended that in the event an emergency involves collections, the Emergency Operation Center and National Collections Program will have the PRICE team of collections responders to assist and activate response and recovery. Since the Smithsonian uses the Incident Command System (ICS) for emergencies, the PRICE team would fit seamlessly into its structure as one of the reporting groups to the incident commander. For more information about ICS in libraries, archives, and museums, check out David Carmichael’s book on the topic.
The PRICE committee structure will be that of six members and a chair. (Samantha Snell joined the NCP in March 2016 as the PRICE chair.) The team will follow the emergency life-cycle of preparedness, response, and recovery, and consists of three concentrations that must be addressed throughout an emergency – policy and procedures, training, and logistics.
Just remember that the PRICE initiative does NOT replace or duplicate emergency command centers (ECCs) or replace unit plans. However, it DOES enable ECCs, synthesize planning efforts, develop capacity, foster Smithsonian sharing, and take as models, the Alliance for Response and Cultural Recovery Center.
This concept is now in its initial implementation phase at the Smithsonian, so stay tuned for more exciting news about this initiative!
44th Annual Meeting – Paintings Session, 15 May 2016, "The Mellow Pad in layers, colors, and time: investigating the materials and technique of Stuart Davis," by Jessica Ford
For the last talk of the first PSG session, Jessica Ford (Andrew W. Mellon Fellow in paintings conservation, Brooklyn Museum) presented an in-depth look at the technique and legacy of Stuart Davis (1892-1964). This talk is timely considering the renewed interest in Davis – the retrospective Stuart Davis: In Full Swing is currently on view at the Whitney Museum of Art through September 25. A loan request prompted Jessica’s study of The Mellow Pad (1945-51), and a subsequent grant from the Bank of America Conservation Fund supported not only the pre-exhibition treatment, but also a technical study of the painting and some envy-inducing technology upgrades for the BKM conservation department.
Davis’s art centers on his interaction with color and space, and was heavily influenced by American jazz. He approached his compositions in the same way jazz musicians of the time approached theirs, often riffing on a past theme to arrive at a new result. The Mellow Pad is a riff on a work he began more than a decade before – 1931’s House and Street. In her talk, Jessica illustrated the work’s origin and evolution, even finding old studio photos that showed previous iterations of the work, manipulating and overlaying them to understand how the layers were built up over the long period that Davis worked on this painting.
Jessica took the non-destructive technical study to new heights with the help of the BoA grant, acquiring for the museum a multi-spectral imaging (MSI) setup, reflectance transformation imaging (RTI) equipment, and a fiber optic reflectance spectroscopy (FORS) system. She also collaborated with Nottingham Trent University to bring optical coherence tomography (OCT) to the museum to elucidate questions of layering in the paint without removing a sample. The graphics showing a moving optical cross-section and the feature where you can essentially fall into the paint layer were especially enthralling to this OCT newbie.
The wax-lined painting in its pre-treatment state had significant interlayer cleavage with resulting lifting, due to interlayer chalk from the artist’s technique, zinc-containing pigments, interlayer dirt from the long period of creation, or unstable binding media – or, more likely, some fearsome combination thereof. Jessica performed an admirable feat of BEVA consolidation, captured in this time-lapse video, which I highly recommend you watch because it’s weirdly satisfying to see an immense consolidation job vanquished in 43 seconds. Another condition concern was the discoloration that seemed to only affect paints that were layered in a certain way – a magenta stripe fading only where layered over a certain type of black. This problem is still under study and Jessica included a call-for-commiseration to anyone who might have seen this phenomenon on another Davis painting.
Davis’s work has gone through cycles of interest, and it’s nice to see it’s on the uptick, though there is still significantly less known about his working method than many other American artists of his era. Jessica’s presentation contributed to the aim of increasing our knowledge of Davis’s technique while simultaneously serving as a reminder that there is a lot left to be learned from this artist. I hope this fascinating study spurs more interesting collaborations among the author, the BKM, and other conservators and art historians studying his work.
44th Annual Meeting – Research and Technical Studies, May 17, "Out of the rain: Uncovering artistic process in Gustave Caillebotte’s 'Paris Street; Rainy Day'"
From 2013 to 2014, Kelly Keegan, John Delaney, and Pablo Garcia from the Art Institute of Chicago closely examined Gustave Caillebotte’s 1877 painting, Paris Street; Rainy Day along with multiple preparatory drawings also in the institute’s collection. Kelly Keegan, the assistant paintings conservator at the Art Institute presented their findings Tuesday at AIC’s annual meeting.
The first important revelation came when x-ray and infrared images revealed that the under-drawing outlining the perspective done by Caillebotte extends passed the tacking margins with no interference from the stretcher bars. This led conservators to believe that Caillebotte originally painted Paris Street; Rainy Day un-stretched and tacked to a wall. Okay, so the painting started off its stretcher, but how exactly was the under-drawing constructed?
1877
Caillebotte’s preparatory drawing, Study for “Paris Street; Rainy Day” proved to be an invaluable resource for understanding how the final painting was made. Most viewers of 19th century paintings are aware of the connection between impressionism and photography. It was a widely held belief that many painters traced from photographs, but conservators at the Art Institute were skeptical that Paris Street; Rainy Day was based on a photograph. Photography would have caused lens distortion that should have been visible around the perimeter of the drawing but wasn’t. In addition, the paper was very thick which would have made tracing nearly impossible.
Could Caillebotte have projected the city scene onto his paper to create the drawing? A camera obscura is the projection device most well known to art historians and conservators, but this too would have caused lens distortions and bowing edges. Conservators did some digging and eventually discovered the camera lucida. At this point in the lecture, Kelly Keegan played us a video of Pable Garcia, the Assistant Professor of Contemporary Practices at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago. The video showed Garcia in Paris standing in the exact intersection Paris Street; Rainy Day was based on. He explained that a camera lucida is made of a small prism connected to a rod that was most likely attached to a portable table. When someone looks through the prism, a ghost image of the scene in front of the view is projected onto the page. Garcia used his own camera lucida to reconstruct Caillebotte’s drawing exactly.
Garcia brought his version back to the lab where he worked with the research team to figure out the next steps in reconstructing this 9-foot wide masterpiece. The painting was about seven times the scale of Caillebotte’s original drawing. Conservators noticed small indentations on the horizon where the vanishing points would be, and pinholes were visible in the infared image denoting where he could have placed tacks. They guessed that Caillebotte probably used calipers or a proportional compass to scale up his drawing. Garcia and the team tacked a large, primed canvas to the wall, and got to work reconstructing Paris Street; Rainy Day from his own drawing.
Kelly Keegan gave a great talk presenting how the team uncovered secrets of impressionist painters and reconstructed Caillebotte’s painting accurately. A much more detailed account of the analysis can be found on the art institute’s website. I also highly recommend checking out Garcia’s website where him and a other professors sell a contemporary version of the cameral lucida which I plan on getting as soon as I submit this blog post.
Joint 44th AIC Annual Meeting and 42nd CAC-ACCR Annual Conference–Workshops, Saturday May 14, 2016, "Identification of East Asian Papers for Conservation" by Nancy Jacobi and Megumi Mizumura
When I saw the “Identification of East Asian Paper for Conservation” workshop, I began to review what I knew about the subject and decided I could benefit from further education on the matter. I signed up for the workshop hoping to become more confident in my understanding of East Asian papers and I was not disappointed. Besides, what is more exciting than dedicating three hours to talking about paper?
The aim of this workshop was to help participants recognize the characteristics that denote paper quality to aid them in selecting good quality East Asian papers that meet conservation standards.
Presentations
Megumi Mizumura, a paper conservator at The British Museum, presented first. In addition to providing historical context for Japanese, Chinese, and Korean papermaking, she went into great detail about the Japanese papermaking process. Mizumura’s presentation illustrated how different steps of the papermaking process may affect paper quality.
She revealed that some papers thought to be of good quality by conservators may actually be poor quality due to changes in fiber furnish and manufacturing processes. The fiber furnish may be a blend of low grade, cheap kozo from Thailand, wood pulp, or other plant fibers. (Thai kozo is the lowest grade kozo because it grows quickly causing the fibers to be less flexible and contain oils that are difficult to remove during the cooking process.) Aggressive chemical steps to quickly cook fibers and bleach pulp are also detrimental to papers, decreasing stability of the fibers after aging. Mizumura highlighted some important details for conservators to be cognizant of when selecting papers:
- the source of the kozo fiber–Japan, China, Thailand, or Paraguay
- preparation of the fibers–the degree of detail used to separate bark layers when preparing the fibers, hand-beaten or machine-beaten
- alkaline cooking processes used to prepare the fibers–wood ash, slaked lime, soda ash, or caustic soda
- bleaching processes–no bleaching, natural bleaching with sunlight, or chemical bleaching with chlorine based bleaches or hydrogen peroxide
- method of manufacture–handmade or machine made
- drying methods–wooden boards, stainless steel plates, or metal rollers
- Possible additives–sizing, fillers, dyes
Mizumura’s presentation provided conservators with a foundation for making better informed selections of papers for treatment.
Nancy Jacobi, head of The Japanese Paper Place (http://www.japanesepaperplace.com/), followed Mizumura’s presentation expanding upon Japanese papermaking. She emphasized the beauty of a well made sheet of paper and the endangered nature of the papermaking profession in Japan. Jacobi then discussed the introduction of East Asian papers to the West and their uses by artists and, later, conservators. She shared two recurring degradation issues observed during her work at Cape Dorset, Canada in identifying Japanese papers used for relief prints by the Inuit since the 1950s. Jacobi noted oil stains in the supports caused by oils leaching out of the fibers which is characteristic of Thai kozo. She also observed pervasive, small foxing spots in papers caused by the use of uncoated metal dryers to quickly dry finished sheets of paper. Jacobi’s observations reiterated the dangers of not knowing materials, and manufacturing processes of East Asian papers used for conservation. The changes in paper quality may be a reflection of the pressure on the dwindling number of papermakers to meet high demands for East Asian papers. Takao Moriki, third generation president of the Moriki Paper Company (http://morikipaper.co.jp/), was also present and supported the workshop material with knowledge of the subject gained from personal experience and research of these materials.
Paper Identification Exercise
During the hands-on portion of the workshop, we put our knowledge of East Asian papers and observation skills to the test. Using the sample books received for the workshop, we examined several samples at a time. Jacobi prompted our observations with questions requiring us to differentiate between some of the following characteristics:
- quality
- fiber furnishes
- fiber preparation
- cooking or bleaching processes used
- drying methods used
- handmade or machine made papers
- additives
Once we had done our best to distinguish the various characteristics of our samples, we checked our answers against the key provided. The answer key contained a detailed break down of the papers listing the name, the region it was from, fiber furnish with fiber origin and percentages for fiber blends, machine made or handmade, fiber preparation, cooking process, bleaching, drying methods, additives, weight, and original sheet dimensions. The workshop organizers also brought their study collection with many other samples of East Asian papers for us to examine in addition to those in our sample books. Additionally, discussions related to experiences in using East Asian papers were cultivated amongst workshop participants.
Below are images of some of the papers in our sample books that I find really interesting.
5-B Okawara from Ehime handmade with Thai kozo, bleached
8-D Matsuo Kozo from Fukuoka handmade with kozo and synthetic dye
11-C Xuan paper made at Red Star with tan tree and rice straw fiber
11-A Hanji made in Korea with kozo fibers
Conclusion
This workshop raises awareness for the necessity of thoroughly understanding the materials used for conservation treatments. The hands-on exercise was a good challenge and essential for learning the characteristics that mark good quality paper. The workshop provided a good foundation and clear direction for conservators to work towards mastering the identification of East Asian papers.
The information I learned through this workshop will be very useful for guiding my decisions when selecting papers in the future. I truly appreciated the organizers’ passion for East Asian papers. It was a pleasure to peruse the additional samples in the study collection while talking about paper with all workshop participants.
44th Annual Meeting – Book and Paper Wiki Session, May 15th
The chairs of the Book and Paper Wiki group, Evan Knight, Katherine Kelly, and Denise Stockman, first spoke about the group and its progress on the wiki up to this point. They stressed how valuable the AIC Meeting wiki sessions have been, as they have allowed the wiki coordinators to touch base with their colleagues at least once a year. The group expressed gratitude for our interest and attendance.
The group has focused on making the wiki more useful and accessible to members of the conservation community. Our wiki is only as good as the engagement of its volunteers, and they recognize that one of their chief roles as coordinators was to reduce any barriers to entry for potential contributors. They pointed specifically to the centralization of instructions within the wiki in the form of the new contributors toolbox, which nicely consolidates hints, guidelines and suggestions.
The Book and Paper Wiki Group also aims to move away from the model of the Paper Conservation Catalog (PCC), and towards a wiki model. They expect to change the structure and tone of the wiki to make it a more collaborative document. Knight, Kelly, and Stockman emphasized this idea of an evolving resource in their first major question to the larger community of conservators: how much do we alter the PCC as the profession moves forward and makes it out-of-date? They expressed a great respect for the PCC and its many knowledgeable authors, and knew that it was a key reference for many in our profession.
The audience had a lively discussion about this question. They hoped, as one might expect in our field, that the PCC should be preserved in its original form, as it remains a useful record of past practice in our profession. Others offered the opinion that the Wiki should be a current document, and that it would be frustrating to find an entry for a particular technique, only to discover that approach had fallen out of practice. Several solutions were proposed that might allow the wiki to be up-to-date, while still keeping the old PCC intact. The first was to offer the PCC as a pdf on the wiki for anyone to download. Another suggestion was to include a section in the wiki on techniques that had been superseded by more effective measures, complete with references to papers that signaled the change in approach.
The other major question the coordinators had for the community concerned standardizing the language of bookbinding and conservation. Several sources for controlled vocabulary were suggested, and there was discussion about whether they could be adapted to suit our purposes. Audience members thought that any reasonable source would do, because what the field needed was a lively discussion about vocabulary, and it was agreed that starting from scratch would be counter-productive. Doing something, in short, was better than doing nothing, and the coordinators concurred.
Ultimately, the wiki is making great progress, but needs more contributors. It is moving away from the model of the various conservation catalogues, and towards a more collaborative model of professional information sharing. The wiki offers us the option to begin to standardize our language within our narrow group, but also the possibility to help standardize the way we communicate within our entire profession. Finally, there are a number of things the chairs would like the larger community to send in if possible, including: links for bibliographic references, book and paper conservation tips (for example from AIC tips sessions), and information on materials and tools.
44th Annual Meeting—Gap Filling for Ceramics Workshop
The Gap Filling for Ceramics workshop brought together conservators from various backgrounds to experiment while learning practical tips from Rachael Perkins Arenstein, Conservator at the Bible Lands Museum, and Elisheva Kamaisky, Head Ceramics Conservator at the Israel Antiquities Authority in Jerusalem. The day passed quickly as the workshop was packed with PowerPoint presentations and hands-on activities with spackles, plaster, epoxy techniques suited to archaeological and fine arts contexts. Like many participants I took the class as an opportunity to learn from others and practice without the pressure of working on a museum object. Having focused on ceramics this year, I am familiar with the materials and techniques discussed, but I found it an opportune chance to break out of my familiar habits, review the properties and different reasons for choosing plaster versus bulked Paraloid B-72, for example, or ways of manipulating Milliput and refining plaster.
The program moved through the various stages of the filling process beginning with discussions of how to protect the surrounding surface from ghosting. For porous unglazed surfaces, common in archaeological contexts, Elisheva often uses masking tape or low-tack painter’s tape, pinching around the edges of fills to prevent the infiltration of plaster. Using tape is always evaluated on a case by case basis depending on the stability of the surface and its ability to withstand tape. Elisheva also showed different strategies she uses for backing of plaster fills, such as layering masking tape to conform to the shape of the ceramic, heated wax, and balloons.
The class then discussed tips for mixing and refining plaster, such as how to use a rasp appropriately, when to begin shaving down a fill, and when to stop working it and allow it to dry for wiping down and sanding. Rachael talked about different uses for ready-made spackles and their different properties, pros and cons of using Modostuc, Flugger and PolyFilla. She also referred to different uses of Milliput and gave tips for how to refine it with water before it is dry. This I found particularly useful because refining as much as possible while it is still pliable saves an immense amount of time wasted with sanding or grinding excess material afterwards. I also found the discussion of problems related to B-72 fills helpful as Paraloid is not always easy to work with, and can be difficult to compact. At the end of the day I was very glad to have taken the workshop, and could tell that other participants felt the same as it was a great opportunity to discuss strategies, problems and challenges with conservators with a breadth of experience, and other conservators ranging from those in private practice, to museum conservators who brought expertise with other materials such as wood or stone. It was also a fun way to prepare for the conference, reminiscent of being in graduate school, and getting your hands dirty.
44th Annual Meeting – Objects-Wooden Artifacts Session, Monday 16 May 2016, "Decoys X-rayed: What Volume rad tomography and computed tomography contribute to technical study” by Nancy Ravenel
The Shelburne Museum in Vermont is home to a renowned collection of American wildfowl and fish decoys. During renovation of the Dorset House where the decoys are usually on display, Nancy Ravenel, Objects Conservator, had the opportunity to examine some decoys more in depth. In the process, she explored the pros and cons of two type of three-dimensional x-radiography: computed tomography (CT) and volume rad tomosynthesis (VolumeRAD – a GE Healthcare trademark). Since the museum does not have its own radiography capabilities and is located in rural Vermont, there was no access to industrial imaging resources. Instead, Ravenel explored how best to maximize the capabilities from the local medical community through collaboration with the University of Vermont Medical Center.
For this exploration of radiographic techniques, the decoys proved to be excellent patients since they are somewhat simple in construction, yet personalized between makers and specific when used for hunting versus collecting. As an added bonus, they are easy to transport to the medical center. Ravenel used the Barnes swan as a case study while she looked for a maker’s mark at the head / neck joint.
Samuel Barnes,
Swan Decoy, c. 1890
Collection of Shelburne Museum, 1952-192.4
With the CT scan, Ravenel found that the metal elements cause flares, which can be distracting. Beam hardening on the image was also apparent. Since CT scanning requires specialized equipment, it is harder to schedule causing limited availability. On the other hand, CT data offers 360 degree data with options for viewing in a variety of ways. Examples of CT imaging on two ducks in the Shelburne collection can be viewed here https://youtu.be/FFjRmEat5xE and here https://youtu.be/bH3zEtzKRWs.
In contrast, the VolumeRAD technique captures data with the same equipment as standard radiography offering better accessibility. It also requires less radiation so there is less impact on the image from beam hardening. Cons to the technique include that the data is non-isotropic, the edges are not distinct, and there are fewer options for how the data is viewed. Ravenel also pointed out that it collects data of a short depth, so she has to identify where the imaging should take place, otherwise the results can be fuzzy. This can require some trial and error.
This image was taken at the University of Vermont Medical Center department of diagnostic radiology was part of a volume rad study of the joint between the neck and body of the decoy in order to locate a maker’s mark thought to be within the joint. The technique takes a series of images at set angles, thus avoiding the effect of the fasteners in the joint between the head and neck. The numeral “III” scratched into the joint is easier to see in this technique than it was in a standard posterior-anterior view radiograph.
Samuel Barnes,
Swan Decoy, c. 1890
Collection of Shelburne Museum, 1952-192.4
In the end, Ravenel felt that the VolumeRAD technique shows considerable promise and felt that she was better able to visualize the hollowing bit marks, dowels, and saw marks, which were all more distinct than in the CT scans. VolumeRAD, as a new technique, has considerable room for development and refinement.
An additional note beyond the presentation, there was some follow up discussion on viewing software. Ravenel noted in her presentation that she uses OsiriX, a DICOM viewer, for working with the data once back at the museum. An audience member pointed out that ImageJ is being widely used. Ravenel confirmed that she feels most comfortable with OsiriX and finds it to be more user friendly, while the audience member was quite happy with ImageJ and felt that it had deeper capabilities for the conservation community.
For more images of Shelburne decoys with radiographic images, visit their Flickr page here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/shelburnemuseum/albums/72157650406031226.