Category: Specialty Sessions

Posts on talks that were presented as part of the specialty sessions at AIC’s Annual Meeting

39th Annual Meeting – Joint Paintings/Research and Technical Studies Session, Friday June 3, “Microclimate and Anoxic Frames” by Judith Bannerman

Judith Bannerman and a team of researchers at the Tate, London have been developing microclimate frames to reduce fading and preserve sensitive works of art, particularly photographs and works on paper.  While we know that light fades materials and low-oxygen environments can reduce this phenomenon, the research team set out to design a functional microclimate frame and then measure the impact of various environments on sensitive works of art.

First, the microclimate frames were introduced; the frames are designed to be versatile, compact, reusable, and fit into existing installations and frames.  Following a conference at the Tate in September, 2011, the frames should be commercially available through KeepSafe Microclimate Systems in 3 sizes: A1 (841 x 594 mm / 33.11″ x 23.39″), A2 (594 x 420 mm / 23.39″ x 16.54″), and A3 (420 x 297 mm / 16.54″ x 11.69″).  The frames allow for easy access to the gas valves and artwork for unframing while maintaining a good seal through a sandwich design with the use of elastomer “o” rings.  Questions were raised about the composition of the elastomer and adhesives used in the frames, and while they could not be disclosed at this point, Judith assured that more technical information would be available after the patents are finalized.

With their prototype frames, the Tate began to study the impact of various oxygen levels and relative humidities on the fading of various art materials.  Three oxygen levels were chosen: air at 21% oxygen, hypoxia at 4-6% oxygen, and anoxia at 0-1% oxygen.  Temperature and humidity (at 40% and 50% RH) were monitored inside the frames during testing, and a microfadeometer with a 0.4mm spot size was used to study the accelerated fading of various materials.  Generally, when the oxygen level was brought to 5%, the fading was halved for most materials at both 40% and 50% RH, but at 0% oxygen some materials improved slightly while others faded more.  The study determined that 5% oxygen at 40%RH was best for a work on paper with iron gall ink and a dyed basket, and 0% oxygen at 50% RH was best for the digital photographs tested.  Some composite objects, like the iron gall ink on paper, required a compromise since one set of conditions might reduce the fading of one component but increase the fading of another.  During the question period, someone mentioned that some pigments fade more rapidly in anoxic conditions, so it is important to remember that conditions should be carefully considered for each object.

Future topics of research include studying long-term display or storage in the microclimates and pressure-testing the frames.  They may also develop larger cases for objects, but at this time the three frame sizes are slated to be available in September.

39th Annual Meeting – Textiles Afternoon Session, Wednesday, June 1, 2:00-3:00PM, “Another Perspective: Voices from Outside Textile Conservation” Panel Discussion, Moderator: Kathy Francis, Participants: Stephanie Hornbeck, Nancy Pollak, Nancie Ravenel

Do conservators in different specialities think differently? Do they form different perceptions, goals and objectives based on their material specialization? Textiles are often one component of a composite object and how might treatment approach differ when being decided by an object or painting conservator rather than a textile conservator? These were the questions posed for this panel discussion. The moderator, Kathy Francis, (Francis Textile Conservation, NJ) introduced the panel topic with an object treatment she had encountered: a French chef automaton by Gustave Vichy. Rather than conserve the worn suit of clothing, a reproduction set of clothing was made. The treatment emphasized the object’s value as a performance piece that moved and performed and thus favored the object’s primary material with consequence for the textile material (replaced).  Kathy also referred the audience to a paper on factors that influence textile treatment decisions and, particularly, the role connoisseurship bias can play in treatment choices: The Role of Connoisseurship in Determining the Textile Conservator’s Treatment Options by Patsy Orlosfsky and Deborah Lee Trupin, published in the JAIC in 1993. Kathy’s introduction to the topic was followed by presentations from the three panelists:

Stephanie Hornbeck (Caryatid Conservation) drew from her experience treating composite objects at the National Museum of African Art, where she worked for twelve years. She described it as working at the nexus of ethnographic objects and textiles where collaboration was common. Often, work was undertaken after consulting specialists on the various materials composing the object. Furthermore, in this type of collection, wear, evidence of use and native repairs can be of greater influence on treatment.

Nancy Pollak (Paintings Conservator, Art Care Associates) discussed paintings on canvas versus painted textiles. In the case of a painting, the canvas is the support. It is referred to as a canvas rather than a textile. In the case of a painted textile such as a banner, for example, the textile is viewed as more of an integral component of the aesthetic value or design. Nancy concluded by suggesting that the conservator evaluate an object by questioning which material is in the role of master and which in the role of servant. In the case of a traditional painting, servant is to master as canvas is to painting but when considering a trade banner, this relationship becomes harder to define.

Nancie Ravenel (Conservator, Shelburne Museum) discussed managing conservation and preservation of a large collection without a textile conservator on permanent staff. She relies on a combination of IMLS grant funded conservation surveys by textile conservators, dedicated volunteers to carry out basic textile conservation work, contract textile conservators and collaboration with textile conservators as guidance for complex treatments. She presented the treatment of pieces from a Tiffany-designed suite of upholstered furniture as an example of collaborative treatment with upholstery conservator Nancy Britton consulting.

It would have been nice to have more discussion time afterward as there were many questions and comments. A contemporary paintings conservator whose work often emphasized restoring work to a pristine condition, asked the panel how they arrived at their aesthetic and responses included: “Its fluid”, “It depends”, “subjective”, “case by case”, “determined by aesthetic of the curator”.

An art historian commented that replicas for display purposes should be used more often to resolve conservation issues and that museum visitors didn’t care about original material anyway, that was of interest only to scholars. Many in the audience, myself included, were wary of this suggestion. I think I mostly take issue with the suggestion that museum visitors don’t care if they are viewing a replica. There are, of course, appropriate uses of replicas in place of the original material, or displayed alongside original material to aid understanding of the object’s function- as another commented: “Seeing a flag fly”. The art historian was perhaps referring to contemporary art and installation art where the wishes of the creator are still known and the ideas conveyed have more significance or value than the media or material. In contrast, history collections or ethnographic/material culture collections often place significance on evidence of use, wear and repairs and the original material has cultural value. Another commented that in museums, objects have been removed from their original context anyway. As mentioned earlier, the JAIC article by Orlofsky and Trupin, offers multiple examples of the role, or current context, of the object influencing the conservation process. A fine art museum might value the aesthetics of an object while an history museum might value the same object for its cultural significance or original use.

Someone questioned whether the objects conservator was unique to North America as she hadn’t really encountered the term before. Nancie Ravenel confirmed the definition of objects conservator as a general specialist and emphasized that she is continually learning by taking workshops and through communication and collaboration with colleagues. The generosity of colleagues in sharing their expertise with each other was a recurring theme in the TSG sessions.

To summarize, the panelist presentations and the discussion afterward suggest that yes, conservators in different specializations do think differently and probably also think differently depending on the role, or context, ascribed to the object by a museum, curator or collector. The variety of factors that influence conservation treatment decisions really do call for a case by case approach. Often, collaboration and consultation between conservators from different specializations guides development of informed treatment goals and objectives.

 

39th Annual Meeting – Painting Session, June 2, “When You Come to a Fork in the Road, Take It: Two Directions for the Conservation of an Anselm Kiefer” by Per Knutas, Chief Conservator, Cincinnati Art Museum

This fascinating talk explored some of the challenges presented by contemporary artworks that embrace physical change over time.

ICA Art Conservation was contacted after a large scale mixed media Anselm Kiefer painting was severely damaged in transport. Director Al Albano had interviewed the artist previously and was familiar with his materials, which included acrylic paint, lead, straw and two large steel objects mounted with cleats. The artist’s working methods were described as follows: paint applied to the support, then covered with hot lead and more paint, then intentional tearing and scraping, with areas of lead pulled up to reveal the paint below.

On site examination of the work revealed a 25 x 15 inch lead fragment at the bottom of the travel crate. The relatively straightforward problem of how to reattach this fragment was complicated when photo details from two previous exhibition catalogs revealed discrepancies in the area of damage. Apparently, the artist’s assistants had made emergency repairs at each venue of a traveling exhibition. Four campaigns of staples and three different colored silicone adhesives attested to the alterations. To further complicate matters, the painting’s original state was undocumented, and the owner didn’t want the artist to be contacted.

Initial repositioning of the fragment no longer corresponded to its previous placement due to a ball-like lead distortion and to previously applied red silicone adhesive. After “endless discussion about how to move forward,” three different approaches for reattachment of the lead fragment were suggested:

1.  Attempt to return the lead fragment to its original appearance by rejoining it to form an unsupported fold as seen in the earliest photo documentation. This option was considered too invasive and thought to lack structural integrity.

2. Re-attach fragment as per photo detail in the 1987 catalog. Unfortunately, the ball-like lead distortion didn’t correspond to photo documentation, and a “tube” shape that was visible in the photo detail had gone missing.

3. Flatten the lead fragment and re-attach over existing ball-like shape. This option was ruled out as too free an interpretation.

Option 2 was considered to be the most viable course of action. In subsequent treatment, the ball-shaped lead component had to be removed from the work and repositioned to allow for a more precise fit of the lead fragment. Silicone adhesive was then custom formulated for color match, tensile strength and working time by a local Ohio manufacturer.  Happily, when the ball-shaped lead was unraveled, it turned out to be the missing tube shape as seen in photo details. The lead fragment was flattened and reattached with final results far exceeding expectations. The treatment was considered to be a great success.

Daisy Craddock

Craddock Painting Conservation

www.craddockpaintingconservation.com

39th Annual Meeting – Book and Paper Session, Library Collections Conservation Discussion Group, Education. Education! Education? Education. Models for Educating Library and Archives Conservators, Thursday, June 2

 

A big conference hall for a big topic: the education of book conservators.

The education of book conservators is a perennially debated topic, and has regained urgency with the demise of the Texas Program, previously the only program to grant an certificate of advanced studies in book and paper conservation. The current economic climate is tough for a generally perceived ‘luxury’ like conservation: many labs have suffered other budget cuts, hiring freezes, conservators with jobs are reluctant to leave them, conservators without jobs are having difficulty finding one. The funding for the training of Library and Archives conservators is one bright spot, having recently received a major boost from the Mellon Foundation by funding the establishment of pilot programs for the training of library and archives conservators in the three art conservation programs.

I was both excited and curious to see how much of this big topic could be covered in a short 1.5  hour panel discussion.

The panel discussion was lead by Marieka Kaye, Exhibits Conservator, Huntington Library, moderated by Ellen Cunningham-Kruppa, University of Delaware-Winterthur and the panel included representatives from the three art conservation programs:  Margaret Holben Ellis, New York University Institute of Fine Arts and the Morgan Library and Museum, Lois Price, the University of Delaware-Winterthur and Judy Walsh, Buffalo State.   Michelle V. Cloonan, Graduate School of Library and Information Science, Simmons College included some background information.  I was taking notes during the session as fast as I could, and these pilot programs are in flux, so I apologize in advance for any errors I have likely made.

Ellen Cunningham-Kruppa introduced the participants and gave an overview of the Mellon foundation funding that allowed these new pilot programs to be established. The NYU-IFA announcement is here. The numbers are not precise, but it appears there will be 1-2 students specializing in Library and Archives conservation at each of the three institutions. Each of the three program representatives then explained what they were intending to accomplish. All of the institutional representatives emphasized their desire for input from members from the book conservation community. Since there were only 15 minutes left for discussion (out the the 90 for the session) perhaps the comments section after this post will allow a bit more extended discussion, as well as involving those unable to attend in person. Then again, maybe the somewhat permanent nature of a publicly posted comment may tend to dampen the spirits of the more argumentatively inclined AIC members!

Lois Price began her session with a nod to the Columbia and Texas programs, and acknowledged the huge responsibility in establishing a conservation program.  She outlined five strengths of the Winterthur program: a strong, established materials science component including technical analysis, an integrated/ interdiciplinary approach, support for international study, the collections of the Winterthur library with existing staff expertise, and a preventitive conservation component.  She also indicated that there will be partnerships with Simmonds and North Bennett Street School (NBSS), a bench oriented craft school with a bookbinding program.  She ended with a charge to the audience to address some problems she perceived in the mentoring of pre-program students and critical thinking skills.

Buffalo State’s three year program was represented by Judy Walsh.  Their current curriculum will not change, books and library conservation will be part of paper conservation.  There will be additional opportunities for the study of books, visiting lecturers in books and digital technologies, intercession seminars, study opportunities at Simmonds and NBSS, stipends for independent study and a new book conservation lab.  She also emphasized the interdisciplinary advantages of being able to take advantage of the knowledge of leather, or metal conservation, for example. Their goal is to graduate skilled and competent entry level Library and Archives conservators. Her charge to the field was to create more jobs and paid internship opportunities.

Peggy Ellis recounted the earlier history of the Columbia Program, mentioning how at that time the paper conservation and conservation science aspects were taught at the IFA. There will be partnerships with Palmer Library School, to learn the basics of librarianship, Columbia University Libraries Conservation Lab, for single item and special collections conservation, and the Thaw Center of the Morgan Library and Museum, which employs two book and three paper conservators.

Michelle Cloonan delved a bit into the history of library schools, then noted a number of essential competencies for a conservator, including the history of the book, the organization of the collections, preservation management, archiving and digital media, digital duration and stewardship, Audio Visual materials, and more.

Beth Doyle’s excellent post covering this same session in the  Preservation & Conservation Administration News blog (PCAN) is well work reading. All of the presenters repeatedly emphasized that this was a pilot program, and that they welcome input and discussion on how to give students the best opportunities and training. And all three commented on the close working relationship that the Mellon funding and provided. After these presentations, there was a remarkably uncontroversial, far too short Q&A session. Some of the questions and comments ranged from perceived deficiencies in the study of conservation science, frank acknowledgments of the monetary pressures libraries are facing, if a MILS is a necessary credential for a library and archives conservator, problems with not enough entry level jobs in the field, and more.  Judy Walsh had the most tweetable quip, noting the “training programs are a learners permit” for future conservators, not an end in themselves.

Unfortunately, there were no practicing book conservators on the panel, which perhaps prevented some of the questions from becoming too specific.  I outlined some of my thoughts and opinions in the 2010 Mim Watson lecture at the University of Texas, School of Information as the final guest speaker at the Texas program in a speech, titled  “A Future for Book Conservation at the End of the Mechanical Age”. From the perspective of a member of the first class from the Columbia Program in 1981, John Townsend has written a must read personal history of book conservation education. I also recommend Chela Metzger’s lecture, “Rare Skills for Rare Books: Book Conservation Education“. For a little international perspective, I recorded some more of my observations on US and UK approaches to book conservation — the comments are perhaps more illuminating than my post.

The path to becoming a book conservator has never be straightforward: we all have to be very proactive in seeking out educational pathways and professional development opportunities. Elsewhere on this AIC site there is more information about how to become a conservator, although there are, I feel, more ways that people enter into the field than is indicated. Also note there are also two major programs in the UK which attract a number of students from the US: Camberwell (London) and  West Dean College (West Sussex). The session ended quietly and I was left feeling that these programs were well conceived, competently directed, and sincere in the desire to provide the best possible education for future book conservators. I would be interested in hearing more specifics about the differences between the intended programs, which would help prospective students choose the best fit.

I was also left wondering a bit about the role of the student. Most conservators I highly respect have come from a variety of training schemes — their commonalities may have more to do with their own autodidactic study and commitment to professional development, not to mention inherent ability and generally wide ranging interests– than from what corse of training they initially embarked upon. Will future students — perhaps ones who have grown up without books — be attracted to such a narrow field, if given a choice of dealing with wide ranging objects, for example?

If conservation is based on the tripartite skill set of  SCIENCE-CRAFT-HISTORY, I worry that we are relying too heavily on science, and there is not enough emphisis on the others. Let us not underestimate the importance of this divorcing of the book conservation and craft, from its long term home in the library. Book conservation has been a bit late to be invited to the table with other conservation disciplines for a variety of reasons, some to do with the functional nature (until recently!) of books, their ubiquitousness, and their closeness to bookbinding as a craft. And I would argue that this last aspect, the close relation of bookbinding to its craft origins, may be at risk.  The structure of the codex, because it is one of the most perfect technological inventions, has been remarkably stable for the past 2,000 years.  The history and techniques are reflected and embodied in the books, and also through the traditional methods of disseminating craft knowledge, generally by close personal contact with skilled practitioners.  I maintain that this living tradition of craft knowledge needs to be preserved just as the books themselves are preserved.

39th Annual Meeting – Architecture Student Session, 6/2/2011, 9:40AM-10:40AM

Following my own presentation in this session, I had the privilege of listening to my colleagues at Columbia University and the University of Texas-Austin discuss their research on architectural conservation material issues.

Sarah Sher (Columbia) exposed the design theory behind soiling on Marcel Breuer’s buildings through conducting an elaborate study of his personal writings and lectures.  She challenged conservators that approach Breuer’s structures to view the soiling as significant to its overall design aesthetic, because it was intentional.  For Breuer, reinforced concrete was the ideal material- requiring little to no cleaning (as opposed to its glass/steel counterpart), and that soiling in fact enhanced the aesthetic of the architecture “to aid in the process of aging.”  In the section of her presentation entitled “Designing the Aging Process,” Sher focused her discussion on Breuer’s Cleveland Trust tower.  Breuer anticipated heavy soiling on the structure, quoting the effects of polluted Cleveland air.  He designed for this effect, which he believed allowed shadowing and depth of the surface.  Sher ended her talk with Riegl’s conception of age value, and the questions that modernist pose for conservation interventions.  With a fascinating talk, Sher introduced research into a field that will need to be expanded and better understood as we are increasingly working on modernist and Brutalist structures.

Sarah Caitlin von Hedemann (Columbia) presented her thesis research on current cleaning formulations for removing biogrowth on stone, utilizing a newly manufactured Prestor gel.  She utilized laboratory testing, as well as field tests on sites around the city of New York, including 1- Wallace limestone (facade of the Metropolitan Museum of Art), 2- Indiana limestone (exterior of The Cloisters museum), 3- Texas limestone (Bronx Victory Memorial), 4-Tuckahoe marble ( Lagrange Terrace, Delbarton School), and 5- Carrara marble (Portrait Bust, Delbarton School) –if I mislabeled or misunderstood any of these stone types, please comment to correct me!  Utilizing analytical tests ranging from XRD, SEM-EDS, FTIR and GC-MS, she tested the products’ effectiveness and the presence of residues left by the cleaners.  von Hedemann concluded with her recommendations:  Prestor gel should be used for less porous stone, as it had atendency remove porous stone surfaces, CB-4 requires more research but was overall ineffective and left larger residues, BioKlean was successful but this might be due to its 2-step process and it is considered very agressive and alkaline, and D-2 and BioWash had average cleaning capability.

Payal Vora (UT-Austin) studied as a Materials Science engineer in her undergraduate education, and became interested in preservation efforts following natural disasters.  Her thesis is an extension of this interest, as she conducted a study of masonry cleaners for Fort Livingston, LA following the 2010 Gulf coast oil spill.  The fort, located on Grand Terre island is the only occupied barrier island in Louisiana, and has been greatly affected by the spill due to erosion issues that allow parts of the fort to remain underwater.  The unprecedented contamination of the spill, required a technical study to guide conservation efforts, and this was spear-headed by NCPTT and UT’s Architectural Conservation Laboratory.  Unable to remove original material from the fort, NCPTT provided contemporaneous brick (from a demolished early 1900s home) as samples for Vora’s study.  Developing her experimental design,Vora prepared her samples according to ASTM C-67-09, she developed a method for soiling the samples, and conducted artificial weathering with an Atlas C-4000 Xenon Arc Weather-oMeter on the brick Q-series.  On the U-Series, samples were unweathered, but placed in an oven for 8-10 hours to ensure samples were dry prior to cleaning.  Cleaners were chosen from the National Remediation Plan’s list of approved cleaners for the Gulf Coast spill- the 6 final choices were Petro-Clean, Cytosol, SC-1000, Gold Crew, De-Solv-It Industrial Form and De-Solv-It APC.  Cleaning was evaluated using telecolorimetry and a visual inspection survey.  Responding to a national crisis, the project represents an important effort in disaster relief for historic structures.

It was a pleasure to hear about the incredible work being done by emerging professionals in this field!

39th Annual Meeting – Electronic Media Afternoon Session 6/3/11, Equipment Obsolescence, The Tree Decision Making Model for the Preservation of Technological Equipment for Time Based Media Art, a DOCAM Research Tool Outcome, Richard Gaigner

Richard Gaigner, Montreal Museum of Fine Arts
The Tree Decision Making Model for the Preservation of Technological Equipment for Time Based Media Art, a DOCAM (Documentation et Conservation du Patromoine des Arts Mediatiques) Research Tool Outcome

The goal of the project was to take a holistic approach to time based media, and to bring awareness to the format.  The research was done in French because DOCAM is located in Montreal, but also to augment the small amount of research in French in this field.  The research team was made up of 14 researchers from a variety of backgrounds and expertise.  Did the research by focusing on 7 case studies.  Established a topology of practice and approach to the issues at hand.

Case one involved a very specific installation, and a complicated production of the image.  The artist took parts from multiple films to create a complex layered image.  Used a Barco projector to show the image.  Over time these machines essentially self destruct, so migration had to be considered.  Looked at the complexities of creating a suitable substitute.

Case two was an early Jenny Holzer sign made by the American Sign Company (which only existed for a short time), which predates her LED work.  The sign took a lot of wear due it’s design, which uses an electric arm to turn tiny RGB beads to create the image.  The sign had stopped working so the artist’s suggestion was to recreate the technology, but it was an expensive project.  The other option was to recreate the sign in LED.

Case three is a computer based design program, which makes “blob architecture”.

Caase four is a Nam June Paik from 1989, ten monitors making up a sculpture.  The issue was the CRT monitors undergoing expected degradation.

Case five is a Sony video Walkman, a mini tv essentially.  This piece was acquired unable to produce an image, and they were unable to fix it.  After contacting the artist the solution was to use a Casio mini monitor as a replacement.  They have been trolling eBay now looking for replacements for the original monitor.

Case six is a monitor with a piece of paper held on the screen by static to make the image look more grainy.

***I seem to be missing the seventh case from the DOCAM project here, if anyone has notes on it please contact me so I can add the missing information (mmw356@nyu.edu).  My apologies!

Out of the project they developed a three part guide: common problems, recommendations, etc.  They also thought critically about integrity and authenticity of art (Brandi), and the significance of the work, its behavior, the viewers experience, and aesthetics.

The decision making tree was made in Free Mind, an open source program, which asks you a series of question like, can it be repaired?  Do you want to repair it?  The steps help you to make an informed decision as to whether to fix or replace the equipment.  More questions include is the equipment visible?  Does it have any other significance to the work?  Is the equipment stable or obsolete?  Is it easy or hard to replace the equipment?  The tree is only available in French, but it can be accessed online on the DOCAM website.

Question: how can we apply Brandi’s theories to time based media more specifically?  Brandi is a good starting point to think about the significance of original material, particularly with TBM

39th Annual Meeting – Electronic Media Afternoon Session 6/3/11, Equipment Obsolescence, The Preservation of Display and Playback Equipment for Audiovisual Art, Emanuel Lorraine

Emanuel LoRraine, PACKED, Brussels
Joint project with Netherlands Institute for Media Art, supported by the Ministry of the Flemish Community.

Goals of this project include the identification of people who could help with the equipment, find spare equipment, create inventory of people who could transfer old media, collect guidelines and make a useful model for dealing with electronic equipment in art collections.  Interviewed manufacturers, technicians and transfer services, AV archives, TV channels, conservators, media art centers, and computer gaming associations.  Found that literature was limited and hard to access.  Gathered a lot of info from the interviews, found an overall importance placed on common sense.

The most important first step is to achieve the best possible storage conditions.  Storage should have good piping and controlled atmosphere, and protection against fire and theft.  These points may seem elementary, but they are the first defense in avoidable damage.  Generally found that the professionals interviewed recommend 0-40 degree temperature (Celsius) for storage, and they often recommended different temperatures for storage than for exhibition.  Some said store below 18 degrees to slow chemical deterioration.  If the temp is over 40ish deterioration will accelerate, weaken spot welds, and deform many plastics.  Humidity is also a factor in these processes.  20-80% RH is the range recommended by the people interviewed, but best if below 45%.  If the humidity is low it can also encourage static discharge in the equipment.  Cabinets can be used to control the RH.  Sunlight should be strictly limited because it effects temperature, and fading and yellowing of plastic parts.  Storage space should be regularly cleaned because dust and dirt will clog equipment.  Smoke also has an adverse effect.  Equipment should not be stored on the ground, but on raised shelves.  Metal shelves are better than wood, and they should be quite stable.  Equipment should not be stacked on shelves, not left plugged in, cables should be properly wound and stored.  Batteries should be removed because they can leak acids and bases into the rest of the equipment.  Batteries have about a one year life, any equipment that requires batteries and stores information should have the info backed up before the batteries are removed.  Metal and plastic boxes are a good solution for storage.  Sealing in a plastic bag is also an option.  Dormancy is a problem so techs recommend turning the equipment on regularly to prevent breakdown.  Range from once a month to once a year for about an hour, depending on the machine.  Once a year or once every six months seems acceptable.

Misuse of equipment can be a serious problem, such a wrong voltage, dust exposure, use of spoiled cables, etc., and can ead to serious damage.  Angle of tilt is also an important factor to be aware of.  Strong contrast should not be used in CRT technology because it can cause image burn in.  CRT monitors usually have failure of the tube, which can be replaced but replacement supplies are decreasing quickly.

The results of these interviews will be published in a forthcoming publication.

Questions: one useful source is the standards on the care of large and industrial collections written in 1994

39th Annual Meeting – Electronic Media Afternoon Session 6/3/11, Equipment Obsolescence, Collection Complexities of the Goodwill Computer Museum, Virginia Luerhsen

Karen Pavelka (lecturer, University of Texas at Austin, School of Information)
Virginia Luehrsen (phD student, University of Texas at Austin, School of Information) *presenter
Collection Complexities of the Goodwill Computer Museum

The Goodwill Computer Museum in Austin, TX, was opened in 2005 and presents educational exhibits in computer technology.  The museum also provides information and support on the appropriate disposal and recycling of computers.  The museum is staffed by a director and twelve volunteers from UTexas, a collaboration that started in 2009, which now supports students doing surveys, creating databases, restoration, and cataloging.  Trying to gain better intellectual control over materials.  Challenges include building and facilities at the GCM.  The museum is split into four main areas, with an additional resale shop.  Computers in the museum are not kept plugged in and running because of the cost.  The archive contains manuals, documentation, and relative software.  Computer materials are processed in the same space as the rest of goodwill donations, which causes problems.  Moving between the four storage areas is difficult, which is an issue they are trying to address in grant applications.  Major donations have come in but space for storage is limited.  Light is fluorescent so visible and UV light levels are high.  Biggest problem is the generation of dust that accumulates on al, the equipment.  Loading bays introduce a high RH, pests, and dirt into the space.  There are no clear guidelines yet for storage and handling of the electronics, implementation is problematic, staff is inadequate, and there is yet to be a clear development plan.

The museum is a functioning museum, conservation is important and has been incorporated from the beginning.  Conservation at the GCM is about preserving the artifact, and the experience of using the machine.  The current museum director is an important resource to the museum, and has a background in software engineering.  Cleaning of the electronics is performed but mainly concerns dusting exteriors.

The preservation team is developing a machine called the “ditto”, which saves information from discs on bit stream.  They are also recreating an early computer.

The paper collection has conservation needs mainly in the area of rehousing, but in some cases greater intervention is needed.  They are currently using distance education tools to learn about appropriate conservation practices, often using Skype in a setup time frame for each project.  They were surprised by how effective the Skpye system is, and how much time is saved.  The technicians are working on site at the GCM, and Skyping with conservator Karen Pavelka at UT, which about 10 miles away.  They are exploring the applications of this remote training technique for situations such as emergency response after disasters.  Considering use of telephone lines rather than wifi in areas where that service is more reliable (ie Haiti).  Also transferring images via smart phones.  Looking forward to developing these projects with the UT partnership.

Questions: has Skype technique gone to CERT?  Yes, in coordination.  How do you get people interested in the collection if the machines don’t run?  Do scheduled demonstrations now, in the future want to employ docents to monitor the systems so people can use the machines.  Did have a problem with vandalism, so require more employees.  Suggestion to set up a calendar for different days spent on particular and popular technology, which may help draw interest and visitors.  Suggestion about dust accumulation to tent the area with plastic and pressurize it.  How is the software being dealt with?  One problem is law against retaining machines with personal information, which includes systems that have been modified.  Have a store of software they can reinstall on good machines, but most info is on the original carrier.  What would the ideal storage conditions be?  Address biggest concerns such as dust, reallocating space, increasing security in the galleries, possibly move to a new space.  Ideal would be 45-50% RH and 65 degrees.  Hard to define ideal because so many different media, so really need separate storage spaces.  What is the community around the museum?  Lots of retired engineers and currently working engineers, recent engineering and IT grads, and current students in the same disciplines.

39th Annual Meeting – Textiles Afternoon Session, Wednesday, June 1, A Versatile Mannequin Design, Gwen Spicer, Spicer Art Conservation, LLC

Gwen presented a step-by-step instructional guide to a mannequin design she created with the help of Small Corp Inc.  Small Corp created custom internal metal armatures onto which Gwen built custom Ethafoam torsos. The “sideways ladder” design of the armature ensures straightness of form on the base.

This mannequin design was initially created for the exhibit America by Air at the National Air and Space Museum but Gwen has since used the design for several other diverse projects.  Gwen illustrated the adaptability and versatility by showing images of the design being employed for clothing from various fashion periods and ethnic groups. You can also view some of these images on the Spicer Art Conservation Website.

Gwen’s presentation was clear and comprehensive with discussion of each step of the process including measurement taking (a measurement sheet is available), tools and materials used. Discussion afterward clarified the approximate cost of armature for a mannequin (about $600 though it probably varies depending on amount ordered) and approximate time estimate for creating the Ethafoam torso (about 4 hours with experience). As the metal armature components can be mixed and matched and potentially re-used with a new Ethafoam torso, this mannequin design seems like a viable option for mannequin display system that could be adapted for multiple uses over time.

 

 

39th Annual Meeting – Paintings Session, June 2, 2011, “Giovanni Antonio Boltraffio’s Madonna and Child in the context of Leonardo da Vinci’s Studio Practice” by Sue Ann Chui

Ms. Chui presented a truly gorgeous Renaissance painting that came from the Budapest Museum of Fine Arts to the J. Paul Getty Museum for a collaborative research and conservation project. Immediately it was clear that the style was recognizable as influenced by Leonardo da Vinci. This was probably the reason for the misattribution in the 18th century and earlier. With an array of beautiful photography comparing various paintings art historically, the very convincing case was made for the current attribution to Giovanni Antonio Boltraffio, a student of Leonardo in his workshop in Milan at the turn of the 16th century.

 

Mother and Child by Giovanni Antonio Boltraffio
BC: Giovanni Antonio Boltraffio (Italian, 1467 - 1516) Madonna and Child, about 1508 Italian Oil on panel Szépmüvészeti Múzeum
Previous restoration of cradling
Before Conservation: Back of Panel, Giovanni Antonio Boltraffio (Italian, 1467 - 1516), Madonna and Child, about 1508 Italian Oil on panel, Szépmüvészeti Múzeum

 

Extensively but not expertly previously restored, Ms. Chui unraveled the condition of the panel painting layer by layer with excellent documentation from the international team that worked on this project. Each layer of discovery added further proof to Boltraffio’s authorship.

 

In fact, it seemed to me that the research and documentation discovery process on this painting must add to the collective knowledge on Leonardo’s techniques and teachings. Adding to that body of knowledge is always an exciting prospect. It was wonderful to see the evidence that Ms. Chui presented of the master’s hand in the manufacturing process and the design work. Specifically, I found the discussion on original fingerprints left behind in the imprimatura layers interesting, though no conclusion was insinuated that they were definitely by Leonardo.

 

While none of the conservation treatments were innovative, they were most interesting, well photographed and pleasantly presented. As you might expect, the quality of the conservation work resulted in maximizing the original beauty of a truly unique and beautiful image of this holy mother and child. It made for excellent technical entertainment much the way I found myself eagerly awaiting, back in the day, the arrival of the latest National Gallery Bulletin. Detailed, colorful cross sections, exceptional and easy to understand diagrams to clarify, photographic references and ties to other works of art and the fluid manner of Ms. Chui made this a 1st class presentation.

 

After Conservation, Mother and Child, Boltraffio
After Conservation: Giovanni Antonio Boltraffio (Italian, 1467 - 1516), Madonna and Child, about 1508 Italian Oil on panel, Szépmüvészeti Múzeum
After conservation, verso, Boltraffio
After Conservation: Checkerboard pattern "stains" from removed cradling, note interesting support system, Giovanni Antonio Boltraffio (Italian, 1467 - 1516), Madonna and Child, about 1508 Italian Oil on panel, Szépmüvészeti Múzeum

 

If you missed this presentation, then I’m sorry but it is impossible to do the material presented justice in this blog post. We can only hope that Ms. Chui publishes her material accompanied by all of the slides of her powerpoint (doubtful). Visually, it’s a great presentation but, in addition, the info needs to be searchable and referenced by others.

 

Contact Ms. Sue Ann Chui at schui@getty.edu and (310) 440 7023

 

Express yourself and reach out: “Like” this article by clicking on the thumbs up below, refer this posting to others you connect with via Facebook, Twitter etc.

 

Scott M. Haskins

Fine Art Conservation Laboratories (FACL, Inc.)

www.fineartconservationlab.com

best_artdoc@yahoo.com

(805) 564 3438