Tag: AIC’s 39th Annual Meeting

39th Annual Meeting – Research and Technical Studies Morning Session, June 2, “Silver Nanoparticle Films as Sensors to Measure the Emission of Sulfur Gases from Wool Fabrics Degrading Under Ambient Conditions” by Rui Chen

Dr. Rui Chen has been developing optical sensors using silver nanoparticles for the detection and quantization of sulfurous gases. These sensors are meant to serve as an improvement over the metal coupons used in the Oddy test, as silver nanoparticles react faster and with higher sensitivity than bulk silver. Additionally, their reaction with hydrogen sulfide causes the nanoparticles to lose their color, so the kinetics of the reaction can be monitored spectrophotometrically with the decrease in the absorbance spectrum.

To make the sensors, spherical yellow nanoparticles are assembled as a monolayer on a glass surface with a polyethylenimine linker. When the monolayer films are exposed to hydrogen sulfide gas, the observed decrease in absorbance is faster when the concentration of hydrogen sulfide is higher. At concentrations of 10 ppm hydrogen sulfide, for example, the reaction is complete within about an hour, while completion occurs within 4 to 6 minutes at concentrations of 100 ppm.

Furthermore, Dr. Chen has found a linear relationship between the first-order rate constant for the reaction and the concentration of the gas. Thus, an unknown concentration of hydrogen sulfide gas can be calculated based on the reaction rate observed between the gas and the nanoparticle-based sensor.

The sensors have been applied to wool samples aged under UVB light. These samples exhibited the highest emissions within the first 400 hours of aging, with concentrations of hydrogen sulfide reaching nearly 600 ppb per gram of wool. The sensors have also been applied to photograph cases and a box containing naturally aged silk fibers; four of the five objects tested exhibited some emission of hydrogen sulfide to give concentrations that ranged from 33 ppb to about 150 ppb. Future work on this project will involve the development of a user-friendly protocol for the application of the sensors.

39th Annual Meeting – Research and Technical Studies Morning Session, June 2, “Measuring Changes in the Appearance of Surface Textures” by Paul Whitmore

The ability of conservators to accurately describe surfaces is integral to effective documentation and communication in the conservation field. While changes in color can be accurately described by the Munsell and CIELAB systems, changes in the appearance of a surface texture are often described by vague and indefinite terms. The work described by Dr. Whitmore arose from the desire for a new vocabulary for describing the surface texture and appearance of regularly-patterned surfaces such as canvas. His talk presented a background of how we perceive surface texture and some mathematical analyses that can be performed to yield qualitative metrics for describing certain textures.

Texture is not only an artifact of the topography of a surface, but also a result of the illumination of this topography; the appearance of a surface depends on the position and directionality of the light source as well as the distance of the light from the surface. As viewers, we perceive texture from the resulting distribution and contrast of light and dark areas.

The limitations of our perception can be mapped by a contrast sensitivity function, which relates our ability to perceive patterns of varying degrees of contrast with the size of the pattern and the distance at which it is viewed. Changes to texture are often accompanied by changes in contrast; a weathered surface, for example, exhibits decreased contrast between its light and dark areas. In periodic patterns, the contrast can be quantitatively measured by a gray-level correlation matrix analysis. Once this contrast value has been determined, the contrast sensitivity function can be used to calculate the maximum viewing distance at which a pattern of the given contrast can be perceived. This “maximum visibility distance” may serve as a useful metric with which to describe periodic surface textures.

The analysis has been successfully applied to canvases that had been subjected to extreme treatment, and further work will examine the degree of textural changes caused by common conservation treatments. Future work may also investigate other mathematical and image processing analyses for application to different surface textures.

39th Annual Meeting – OSG Morning Session, June 2, “The January 12, 2010 Earthquake in Haiti: Building a Conservation Foundation from the Ground Up” by Stephanie Hornbeck

Stephanie Hornbeck, Chief Conservator for the Smithsonian Institution Haiti Cultural Recovery Project (CRP), presented a paper on the conservation recovery efforts in Haiti in response to the January 12, 2010 earthquake. There was much information in the paper, requiring that the presentation keep a fast pace throughout. The slideshow itself primarily consisted of photographs of the work areas, conservation projects, and the many people who have been involved in the CRP. Stephanie Hornbeck prefaced the presentation by saying that many of the aspects of the Smithsonian Haitian response apply to any issue in conservation so that the impact of the project and resulting paper could extend beyond emergency response situations.

The cultural devastation response was dependant on several other factors, including the immediate human recovery response, the pillaging of art and objects, and salvage efforts. The severity of destruction and the restrictions on any recovery efforts based on logistics mandated that priorities be established, a task dependent on the Haitian officials. From this, it was determined that three sites in Port-au-Prince should receive immediate attention: the National Palace (see image below), the Holy Trinity Cathedral (Brief Look at the Holy Trinity Cathedral), and the Musée Nader (see also: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703837004575013022647688144.html). These three sites exemplify the cultural heritage of Haiti, both in their construction and in the works therein contained. Here, Stephanie Hornbeck briefly elaborated on the city in an art historical context, touching on the pre-colonial traditions, the effects of European contact, and the establishment of Port-au-Prince as the ‘Centre d’Art.’ It is this history and culture that the CRP was so interested in recovering and preserving to the best of their abilities. The original team of professionals involved in the efforts has since expanded, but some of the key names include Richard Kurin (Under Secretary for History, Art, and Culture), Corine Wegener, and Olsen Jean Julien (project manager and minister of culture). The AIC joined the partnership, facilitating the sending of several volunteers throughout the course of the project, running May 2010 to November 2011.

According to the Institut de Sauvegarde du Patrimoine National (ISPAN), over 50,000 works of art were damaged as a result of the earthquake. All of the conservation efforts must be undertaken in Haiti, a consequence of the colonial history of the country. The weight of this falls fully on the CRP; however, they must operate out of the central storage area and the availability of materials is severely limited. Equally challenging is that no one in Haiti was previously qualified in conservation. Thus, a large portion of the CRP has been training individuals in the practice so that educated efforts may continue following the project’s close. In 2010 the chief conservator was chosen, Stephanie Hornbeck having been selected. She established the project’s plan, which was to follow a course similar to: stocking, assessing, methods, oversight, stabilization, training, and treating works of art of a high cultural value. By first identifying colleagues and then training, the project would then be best equipped to respond.

At this point in the presentation, several examples of the damage were provided as well as a discussion of the ensuing challenges. These were as follows:

  1. The issue of education. Specifically, Stephanie Hornbeck said that many of the Haitians involved were expecting complete restoration and that the concepts of stabilization, prioritization, and the intensity of the time commitment were difficult to communicate.
  2. The absence of records and/or photos, as well as complete inventories.
  3. The environment, including the lack of screens, the instability of electricity, and the tropical climate.
  4. Antiquated restoration materials and methods.
  5. The necessity of importing 100% of the material supply.
  6. Recovery efforts could not begin until five months following the earthquake.

Attempting to respond to these challenges as best as they could, the CRP developed a local infrastructure consisting of both CRP staff as well as local associates. In order to achieve this, an ICCROM course was held during August and September of 2010. Professionals with an academic background in art or chemistry were selected for participation, resulting in twenty-four Haitian managers studying painting, object, and paper conservation. The next course will provide an introduction to collection databases. From here it is hoped that the individuals may continue on to received graduate training in conservation and maintain the execution of the practice in Haiti.

Developing the local infrastructure comprised only part of the ‘identifying colleagues’ task. The AIC volunteer conservators were another essential component, as well as the three contract conservators hired by the project. Over the course of the project to date, over thirty-two people have volunteered their time at an estimated value of $115,000. Aside from practicing conservators and assistants, another category of colleague needed was in supply acquisition. Approximately $45,000 worth of supplies were purchased and hand carried by various participants to Haiti. As none of the supplies could be purchased in Haiti, this was an essential step. The supply list itself has continued to develop throughout the course of the CRP as various conservators and participants help to refine it.

Following ‘training,’ the task of adequately responding became the primary focus. It was immediately obvious that security was a big issue. As just one example, many of the stained glass elements had already been stolen from the National Cathedral. Thus, the team made a red-list of high priority items in September 2010. Though nine months since the original earthquake, time was of the essence as items continued to be stolen. The red-list communicated the objects that were at the greatest risk in terms of security and each was processed by priority according to the individual circumstances. In terms of the manner in which work has been approached, it is a three-part process. First, condition assessments must be completed so as to provide the data necessary for future work. Next, interventions occur in order to improve the current housing and storage environments in order to stabilize the works in question. Finally, the treatments occur, though the emphasis continues to be placed on stabilization above all else. One of the most common treatments being performed is the removal/treatment of mold and dirt accretions. Items of the highest cultural value have received the highest level of conservation treatment; however, the process is highly time consuming and limits the amount of work that can be done in other areas.

At this point, Stephanie Hornbeck provided specifics as to the processing and treatments that have occurred at the sites of the Holy Trinity Cathedral and the Centre d’Art. At Holy Trinity, there was a large mural cycle originally consisting of fourteen murals, though now only three remain. With two conservators and four assistants, the remaining murals were consolidated and successfully effaced and stored. They are now waiting for the cathedral to be rebuilt, at which point the murals will be reinstalled. At the Centre d’Art, individual works were recovered within the first month following the earthquake; however, the manner of recovery was not ideal. No inventory could be completed during the process based on time constraints and the lack of an inventory from which to base their identifications. Also, storage was difficult in the time of great turmoil so two large, metal containers had to be used to hold everything that could be recovered, which ended up being approximately 5,000 pieces. Once the metal containers were filled, they were guarded twenty-four hours a day; however, they also had to remain on the street from January until August, reaching approximately 80% rh. At this point, the works are being processed methodologically and being stored in more suitable means while they await any treatment.

From these experiences and others, two case studies are currently planned. One would focus on looking at an on-site recovery effort where bulldozers and shovels were used to help look for art, resulting in the recovery of approximately one hundred and fifty pieces. The second case study will examine the storage of the works in the metal container. These pieces underwent triage from the 3rd – 6th of September, where it was discovered that mold was the primary side effect of the storage, requiring that the processors where personal protective equipment.

To date, the CRP has stabilized over 5,000 works of art while the process has cost approximately $1.5 million. The team has greatly grown; however, they still need materials, funding, and assistance in training qualified associates. It is also becoming pressing that Haiti determine if they can build a local core with which to continue the preservation efforts. The CRP is currently a finalist for a global ambassador’s grant, which would provide the much needed funding if it is selected. Following the presentation, one question was asked regarding the possibility of training in the use of alternative, local materials and methods of conservation. Stephanie Hornbeck responded by saying that it really was not possible to use any local material of any sort as nothing as of close enough quality but that they are currently working on obtaining a local supplier of conservation-grade material.

 

See Also: http://newsdesk.si.edu/releases/smithsonian-develops-haitian-cultural-recovery-project

39th Annual Meeting – Book and Paper Session, Wednesday, June 1, “The Hours of Catherine of Cleves: Exhibition, Conservation and Analysis of an Illuminated Manuscript,” Francisco Trujillo, Morgan Library

Francisco Trujillo’s talk was an excellent addition to the overall conference theme of ethical considerations and critical thinking as it highlighted the impact a conservator’s assumptions and biases can have on the course of analysis and treatment. He described the treatment of a Dutch illuminated manuscript, The Hours of Catherine of Cleves, in preparation for exhibition at The Morgan Library and Museum.  The Book of Hours contains over 150 illuminated miniatures designed and painted by an artist known as the Master of Catherine of Cleves. The manuscript was originally bound as one volume, but was later split into two volumes and reordered. Treatment of the manuscript involved disbinding, consolidating the media on each page (with 1-2.5% isinglass in water and ethanol), and rebinding the folios in their original order.

As treatment progressed, Trujillo began noticing the presence of a non-copper based “smooth blue” pigment, possibly ultramarine. The “smooth blue” was found on pages that would have been facing each other in the original manuscript (before it was split and reordered) and was not found on surrounding pages. FCIR and XRF  analysis revealed that ultramarine was present in these “smooth blue” areas along with azurite. Trujillo began to wonder if the Master had selectively used ultramarine on a handful of leaves, possibly mixing it with azurite, or if the ultramarine had been painted on top of the azurite, a later “sleight of hand”? Since at this point Trujillo had no other evidence that the Master ever used ultramarine, he assumed that the presence of ultramarine was a result of 19th century “touching up” when the manuscript was split into two volumes.

Trujillo pursued the “sleight of hand” line of inquiry, but then came across evidence that perhaps the Master of Cleves had, in fact, used ultramarine as an aesthetic choice. This led him to once again question his beliefs about the Master’s working methods; though there was evidence that many of the leaves had been “doctored” when the manuscript was split, there was also evidence that the blue pigments were mixed, quite possibly by the Master. He also found cobalt mixed into to some of the blues, and now leans toward the belief that it was the Master himself who used ultramarine on a select number of folios.

Trujillo did a nice job of calling attention to the assumptions conservators make about the objects they’re working on and the impact this can have on treatment decisions. He acknowledged that pursuing the “sleight of hand” theory – while fascinating – diverted his attention for a while and kept him from seeing other important evidence in the manuscript.

39th Annual Meeting, Book and Paper Session, Wednesday, June 1, “The Watercolors Of Charles Russell: An Examination Of The Artists’ Materials And Techniques On The Montana Frontier,” Jodie Utter, Conservator of Works on Paper, Amon Carter Museum of American Art

In preparation for a 2012 exhibition of Charles M. Russell’s watercolor paintings, Jodie Utter, Conservator of Works on Paper at the Amon Carter Museum of American Art , undertook an investigation of the artist’s techniques and materials. I really enjoyed this presentation; I knew nothing about Russell or his work prior to the talk and Utter was successful in sharing her excitement about the artist by putting together an interesting narrative of his life, process, and development as a painter.

Russell was born in St. Louis in 1864, and moved to Montana as a young man to work on a sheep ranch and then as a night wrangler on a cattle ranch.A self-taught artist who began drawing and painting in his spare time on the ranch, he began painting full-time in 1893. A turning point in Russell’s career was a trip to New York in 1903-04, where he met and was influenced by the work of other painters and shifted from working in transparent watercolor to opaque watercolor. He produced over 1400 watercolors in his lifetime

Utter visited Russell’s still-intact studio to take samples of his paints, which she analyzed using polarizing light microscopy and x-ray fluorescence; as a point of comparison, she also analyzed samples of contemporaneous paints from unopened tubes.  Materials found in his studio reveal that Russell used the highest quality brushes, paints, and papers available to artists in the American West in the mid-19th century. He used red sable brushes, the handles of which he cut and whittled to points in order to shape paint layers (he also chewed on his brushes, as evidenced by all the teeth marks!). The most common paint found in Russell’s studio was Chinese White watercolor, introduced in 1834 as the first reliable opaque white. Utter also found many paint tubes in Russell’s studio; she highlighted how revolutionary paint tubes were for artists at that time (introduced in 1840), allowing them to purchase high quality paints in large quantities. Also, since tube paints have more body than pan paints, they could achieve different results.

Infrared examination of Russell’s paintings revealed that the underdrawings of his earliest paintings were “overdrawn” – he was drawing figures over and over again, including lots of details, trying to “get things right,” without erasing much. Later underdrawings were much more minimalist – confident sketches with little detail. His color palette evolved from very basic to more developed – in a 1897 painting, there were 17 different colors of transparent watercolor in use –  to a sophisticated use of complementary colors. Russell was introduced to color theory during his visit to New York; afterwards, he began using less black in the dark areas of his paintings – shadows were created with combinations of blues and greys. Russell used traditional watercolor techniques, like layered washes and  scrapping away paint layers to achieve highlights, but he incorporated many unconventional techniques as well. Russell was also an oil painter and a sculptor and he adapted techniques  – most notably, impasto – for his watercolor paintings.

39th Annual Meeting – Architecture Session, June 3, “Assessment and Characterization of the Architectural Metal Finishes at Fort Moultrie: A Successful Student-Scientist Collaboration” by Stéphanie A. Cretté, Lisa M. Nasanen and Néstor G. González-Pereyra, Clemson Conservation Center, Warren Lasch Laboratory; and Frances H. Ford, Clemson University/College of Charleston Graduate Program in Historic Preservation

Amelia Millar from the Clemson University/College of Charleston Program in Historic Preservation, and Stéphanie A. Cretté from the Clemson Conservation Center presented a two-part paper on a graduate-level project at Fort Moultrie National Monument near Charleston, SC.  Millar presented the student portion of the work, while Cretté presented the analytical research.

The project entailed a survey of metals in a portion of the Fort Moultrie site, owned by the National Park Service.  Students from the Clemson University/College of Charleston program performed a survey of all existing metals, both architectural metals and the metal objects on site, and assessed the condition of the metals.  They took paint samples to determine the chemical composition of the paint so that NPS can develop a strategy to safely remove any lead-containing paint while preserving the metal substrates.  The students did most of the field work and tested paint-removal methods, then collaborated with scientists from the Clemson Conservation Center on SEM-EDS and Raman analysis of the paints.  Most of the scientific portion of the presentation was about the analytical techniques and why they were used for this application.

The paper was interesting, but I would have liked to have learned more about the researchers’ findings and the various treatment recommendations put forward by the students.  It would have also been interesting to learn whether the NPS has implemented or plans to implement any of the student recommendations.  Nevertheless, it was a good collaborative project that seems to have benefited the students and scientists alike.

 

39th Annual Meeting – Paintings Session, Katlan Palettes of the Salamagundi Club, Cox The longterm relationship

I was incredibly lucky with the two talks that I chose to blog about. I had tried to find some talks that were not too technical as I felt that I would not have too much to comment upon if I did not understand the science of the talk. I was drawn to the topic of the Salamagundi club because I grew up around the corner from the present day Salamagundi club in New York City. Further I was interested in Ruth Cox’s talk about fostering a long-term relationship between private conservator and a museum collection, as I am a private conservator. But enough about me and on to the talks.
In his talk about the Salamagundi Club palette collection Alex Kaltan briefly described the history of the painters palette. He discussed the rarity of palette collections and described both the Salamagundi palette collection and the Grumbacher paint company palette collection. Katlan stressed the importance of artist materials in collections and the fact that they have been overlooked in the past but that they can be invaluable additions to study collections and provide insight into the working practices of artists. The Salamagundi club collection itself is made up of both working palettes and demonstration palettes. A working palette is an actual palette that the artist worked with over a period of time and differs from a demonstration palette, which is an unused palette with the artist paint colors in the manner in which they did when painting. Katlan describes the great variation in the arrangement of color on the palette and how this arrangement gives a lot of information about the thought process of the artist.
What struck me about Katlan’s talk is how well it tied in with an earlier talk in the PSG session by Narayan Khandedkar about the working habits and palette of Delacroix. Also I was touched by how these objects are a personal link to the artist workings methods.
The second talk by Ruth Baruch Cox outlined her long-term relationship with the Reynoldo House Museum. Cox explains that she functions as more than a treatment conservator at this institution where she has done 2 conservation surveys and created a disaster plan in addition to performing several conservation treatments.
The rest of the talk focused on the treatment of Spring Turning by Grant Wood. The treatment was complicated by Woods varnishing practices and former treatments. The museum has produced a video about the treatment and a brochure on the care of paintings.
I was disappointed that there was not more about the long-term relationship between the conservator and the museum. It seems that the talk about the treatment of the Grant wood is a separate topic from the long-term relationship with the museum. However that is just my personal view as I am a conservator in private practice and I also try to foster meaningful long-term relationships with my museum clients.
Overall I was very impressed with the quality of these two talks.

39th Annual Meeting – Tour, May 31, New Barnes Foundation Building: Hard-Hat Tour

The hard-hat tour of the new building of The Barnes Foundation on the Benjamin Franklin Parkway in Philadelphia was most definitely a treat. For those who are not familiar with The Barnes Foundation, this is an institution that is known for its fabulous collection of 18th and 19th century French paintings, unique gallery space designs, and devotion to education. The collection is currently housed in Merion, Pennsylvania. The new building is scheduled to open in May 2012.

The tour began in front of the building, where everyone was given a hard-hat and welcomed to the construction site. The tour was conducted by William W. McDowell, Senior Building Project Executive. When completed, the building, dressed in stone slabs from the Negev Desert in Israel, will be surrounded by a garden with tall trees and a pool. Attention was given to creating a serene environment that will allow visitors to enjoy the collection. Mr. McDowell stressed that this project is about the collection – particularly its preservation.

The tour proceeded into the building, where we were led through some of the gallery spaces, the lower level spaces, and the behind-the-scenes collections spaces, ending in the paintings conservation lab (the objects conservation lab will remain in Merion).

Having visited the Merion building, I found the empty gallery spaces interesting – the gallery space designs and dimensions are identical to those in the original building in Merion. This will allow the artwork and furniture to be placed in exactly the same locations within the galleries. Only one painting will be moved to a different location in order to be more accessible to visitors. Architectural features in the galleries, however, will not be duplicates of those at Merion, but simplified imitations. The basement level will have spaces for programming activities, including a 150-seat auditorium. The gift shop will also be located in the lower level.

The final stop of the tour was the conservation lab. Designed by Samuel Anderson Architects, this space aroused admiration from all tour attendees. Barbara Buckley, Head Conservator at The Barnes Foundation, was present on the tour and spoke about the future lab to us. She told us of the many visits that were made to conservation labs in various institutions during the designing process. The completed lab will have the greatest number of windows in the entire building. This will not only let plenty of natural light into the lab, but will also provide a great view. There will be space for an x-ray machine, analytical instrumentation, and art storage. Located in proximity to the curatorial and educational spaces, this arrangement will allow the departments to work closely together. A study room in this vicinity will promote the examination and study of the artwork for educational purposes.

Many thanks to William McDowell and Barbara Buckley for a great tour!

 

 

39th Annual Meeting – Objects Session, June 1st, “Archaeologists and Avocational Conservators: Compromising Principles or Increasing Awareness?” by Susanne Grieve

This year, a portion of the OSG sessions focused on archaeological conservation and the ethics and issues surrounding the conservation of these materials.  The paper presented by Susanne Grieve focused on avocational conservators and how much information do we give to non-conservators who are practicing conservation, something that was touched upon in the panel discussion organized by the Archaeological Discussion Group of the OSG on ethical issues in archaeological field conversation held earlier that day.

Avocational conservators were described as members of the general public who undertake conservation treatments as a hobby or out of interest for preserving something.  They have no formal training in conservation.  In her presentation, Susanne talked about working with a group of avocational conservators in Namibia who help preserve maritime sites and artifacts in the country.  The group is made up of members of the the Windhoek Underwater Club’s (WUC) Maritime Archaeology Division who come from varied background with no formal training in archaeology or conservation.

Susanne brought up some interesting questions and issues as she talked about her experiences working with the WUC.  Conservators have worked for 39 years to make conservation a profession.  We have formalized training, a code of ethics and protocols and standards that form the basis of the profession.  Her questions in regards to the conservation profession and avocational conservators is: Do we work with these groups? How much training do we give them? And do we compromise our profession by working with or training these people?

In regards to the situation in Namibia, there is only 1 conservator responsible for all the cultural material there.  This means that there is not enough staff and resources to get everything done.  The avocational conservators do the work they do because it is very important to them that this part of Nambian culture and history be preserved and they have an interest and passion in doing so.  And I’m sure they feel that because of the limited resources there, they can help fill that need.

Susanne’s work with the WUC involved working with them on the excavation of a mining camp site and the conservation of material found there.  The club felt the site was important for them to preserve because the government was not interested in preserving it.  The camp site was from a German mining operation and places like these are not preserved because it is a part of Namibia’s past people want to forget.  Susanne worked on site with them and taught them about excavation and lifting techniques. They then took artifacts back to the lab where she taught them some basic methods for preserving books and ledgers collected from the site.  She also looked at some previously treated artifacts that had been conserved using outdated methods and  shared information on other approaches.  Before leaving she left some conservation materials with the group.

Susanne’s paper touched upon issues that many conservators deal with when having to work with non-conservators in resource poor institutions.  These kinds of questions often come up in working with archaeologists as well.  In the case of the conservation of maritime sites and artifacts in Namibia, it seems that the WUC are the only group at the moment who can preserve this material.  The infrastructure and resources don’t seem to exist to allow for conservation professionals to do this kind of work.  There is too much to preserve and not enough trained people to do it.  So does that mean that we, as conservators, don’t do anything because working with avocational conservators would compromise our profession?  It doesn’t seem like these questions could be easily answered, but this talk does bring up important questions that as a profession should be discussed because many of us have to deal with issues such as these.

Susanne summed up her talk with what I think is a good approach to these questions and something as an archaeological conservator, I agree with.  She felt that the answer to the questions she posed should be considered on a case by case basis.  If the person you may be working with is interested in selling artifacts, then you shouldn’t share your knowledge.  However if the purpose is to educate people, especially in countries with no resources or professionals, then perhaps we should share our knowledge and skills.  In regards to working with archaeologists, it is important for them to see archaeological conservation as a profession.  They need to value the knowledge and skills we can contribute.  Susanne’s suggestion is to continue to work with archaeologists so that this type of thinking starts to change.  And I couldn’t agree more with this idea.

39th Annual Meeting – Architecture Session, June 3, “Comparative Study of Commercially Available Rust Converters” by Jason Church, Anna Muto and Mary F. Striegel, National Center for Preservation Technology and Training

Jason Church from NCPTT presented a useful paper on commercially available rust converters.  He explained that rust converters are a chemical treatment that converts iron oxide into a more stable product, though this product varies depending on the chemical composition of the rust converter.  Church and his colleagues started with the 1995 Canadian Conservation Institute study of rust converters, but found most of the products to have been discontinued or available in new formulations. This led the team to perform their own experiment.

Church et al., selected four commercial products of varying chemical composition: Ospho (phosphoric acid base), Rust-oleum Rust Reformer (tannic acid base), Corroseal (gallic acid base) and RCx427 (oxalic acid base).  The four commercial products were selected on the grounds that these products were readily available, were top sellers, and could be purchased in sufficiently small quantities so as to be accessible to homeowners or for small conservation projects.  Church and his colleagues also tested the CCI-recommended custom formulation of tannic and phosphoric acid, which several objects conservators they polled still claim to use.  NCPTT staff tested the five rust converters on new A36 carbon steel that was naturally weathered.  They subjected each of the test samples to artificial weathering and measured the samples for color changes and active corrosion every 250 hours for 1000 hours total.  They found that the Rust-oleum product had the least color change and most stable surface of the five products tested, though the efficacy of each product tested was quite varied.  Church mentioned that their testing is not complete.  They continue to push the Rust-oleum product to metal failure through extended artificial weathering, and will also test the new aerosol version of that product.  They also plan to perform outdoor accelerated weathering tests on the five products.

The presentation was interesting and informative, as is characteristic of studies done by NCPTT.  I like that their experiments are developed for conservators, but the results are accessible to anyone.  The information presented in this talk will surely broaden the body of knowledge for architecture and objects conservators and will be useful for homeowners and maintenance workers.  Following the talk, moderator Patty Miller recommended that they eventually expand their testing scope to include conservation-grade products and less readily available materials.  I concur, and I would encourage Church and his colleagues to publish their findings.