This amazing material is made up of 55% cellulose and 45% polyester. It is formed by the process of hydroentangling, so it is a non-woven material. It does not contain any binders and its pH is naturally at about 6. It resists solvents and does not leave behind any residues. It has amazing wet strength, unlike blotters, and is dimensionally stable, so it won’t stretch when wet either.
Tek-Wipe is absorbent, reusable, sustainable, and economical. It costs significantly less than blotters. It is available for purchase in either sheets or rolls and in both a lightweight and heavyweight form.
It can be used for many things such as in disaster salvage kits as an absorbent material, for Gore-tex humidification in place of blotters, for capillary washing, with the suction table in place of filter paper, and in phytate treatments for books written in iron gall ink because it is so thin it won’t put stress on the binding. Tek-Wipe can also be used as a support for transporting wet objects and can be used for dry cleaning glass plate negatives.
Kaslyne’s first case study example was the treatment of a print that had been coated in varnish. The Tek-Wipe was soaked in ethanol and placed on the face of the print along with a sheet of Mylar and even weight for 15 minutes. This was repeated twice to make sure all of the varnish was removed from the paper. From the images that were shown in the presentation it appeared that the varnish was solubilized by the ethanol and absorbed by the Tek-Wipe and thus removed from the print.
The second case study was about a hand colored Audubon engraving that had been trimmed and mounted to a pulp board. They determined that the adhesive was strong and mechanical removal was too time consuming so they used a combination of humidification and mechanical removal using Tek-Wipe. For this treatment, sheets of Tek-Wipe were soaked in water and laid out flat. The print was placed back down on the Tek-Wipe and a sheet of acrylic was placed on top with weight added to ensure even contact. Once the pulp board was humidified it was taken out of the stack and the board was removed mechanically with ease. After the board was removed the print could be washed and light bleached.
Since Tek-Wipe is very absorbent and good for washing and varnish removal it gets stained. Don’t worry though, it is washable! It can be washed by hand or in the washing machine and you can reuse it! Kaslyne did warn not to scrub it because it can break the fiber bonds and cause fibrillation. Tek-wipe can be dried on a rack, but it will dry in the shape of its support so Kaslyne recommended flattening it on a table with a brayer with no weight or restraint needed.
Tag: AIC’s 44th Annual Meeting
44th Annual Meeting – Paintings Session, 16 May 2016, “Bocour paints and Barnett Newman paintings: context and correlations,” by Dr. Corina Rogge and Bradford Epley
Barnett Newman was fairly private about his technique, and until recently, much less was known about his methods and materials than many other artists from the same era. Over the last few years, Dr. Corina Rogge and Bradford Epley have conducted an extensive study of Newman’s technique centered on the 2015 Menil Collection exhibit Barnett Newman: The Late Work, which included paintings drawn from the Menil and collections across the United States and Europe. By analyzing each of the paintings brought together for the show along with studio materials and Newman ephemera, the Menil team were able to learn a great deal about Newman’s working method, and Dr. Rogge’s presentation on the second day of the PSG sessions explored his loyal use of paints produced by Leonard Bocour.
Bocour began producing paint in the early 1930s, opening a storefront in Manhattan which quickly became a hang-out spot for AbEx artists. In 1947, Bocour Artist Colors introduced the solvent-borne acrylic Magna, and in 1963, the water-borne acrylic Aqua-Tec, which was a favorite of Newman’s. In addition to these and other lines, Bocour often produced bespoke colors for his artists, and Newman himself often hand-mixed pigments and other additives into Bocour paints, complicating the issue when trying to understand which paints are present on Newman’s various works.
Dr. Rogge highlighted some of the idiosyncrasies of Bocour’s paints, such as the fact that the names of colors don’t necessarily correspond to the actual colorants in the paint. For instance, she found that Bocour Hand Ground Oil Ultramarine Red was colored with manganese violet pigment, while his Bellini Oil Colors Cobalt Blue was actually ultramarine. Generally, these misleading names aren’t too much of an issue, but in certain colors synthetic organic dyes – which Bocour referred to as “toners” – were added, and this is where things get dicey. His so-called cadmium colors like red and yellow contained a mixture of (not necessarily cadmium-based) inorganic pigments and organic dyes, which causes them to be light-sensitive and susceptible to fading or color shifts. She also found that the paint formulas went through changes in their colorants, binders, and additives over their years of production, and offered this handy tip: the address listed on the tube will indicate the period from which it originates – Bocour tubes initially listed simply “New York City,” and then, in 1943, there’s the addition of a two-letter postal zone, and the addition of the newly created five-digit zip code in 1963-64.
The Menil team collaborated with the National Gallery to analyze the historic Bocour materials in their Art Materials Research and Study Center, and with Harvard Art Museum’s Center for the Technical Study of Modern Art to analyze the Newman studio paints in their collection. They also received a timely gift: sculptor Robert Murray, a friend and sometimes studio assistant of Newman’s, was an invited lecturer and guest at the Menil symposium accompanying the exhibition of Newman’s late works. Murray then donated to the Menil paints from Newman’s studio, including many Bocour products. By analyzing the pigment ratios of Newman’s hand-mixed additions to the standard Bocour colors, Dr. Rogge was able to group certain paintings together as having been created at the same time.
Rogge and Epley’s broad study of Barnett Newman’s work has benefitted from some excellent collaboration and has highlighted the great value of our national study centers for historic artists’ materials. Their study is allowing scholars to understand the chronology and evolution of his late works, many of which were simply found in his studio after his passing. Her presentation emphasized the fact that the apparent aesthetic simplicity of Newman’s canvases belies not only the surprising complexity of his working method but also his fervent commitment to technical excellence and the physical longevity of his work.
44th Annual Meeting- Textiles Session, May 16, "A Biological Disaster to Costume," by Cathy Zaret, Mary Ballard, and Carol Grissom
When we hear the word “disaster,” images of fire or flood and the subsequent damage might spring to mind, but what about the silent, tiny disaster that might be steadily digesting your collection? Cathy Zaret, presenting for Mary Ballard, provided a graphic example of just how damaging an infestation can be in her talk, “A Biological Disaster to Costume.”
The site of this infestation was a townhouse on Vermont Avenue in Washington, DC that housed the Black Fashion Museum. Founded in 1979 by Lois K. Alexander Lane, the museum’s collection is comprised of over 700 costumes, 300 accessories and 60 boxes of archival material; all designed, sewn or worn by African Americans. Notable highlights include the dress worn by Rosa Parks in 1955 when she refused to give up her seat on the bus in Montgomery, costumes designed by Geoffrey Holder for “The Wiz,” and the wedding dress, designed by Ann Lowe, worn Jacqueline Bouvier when she became Mrs. Kennedy.
The Black Fashion Museum was the life’s work and passion of Lane and after her death in 2007, the future of the collection was uncertain. Lane’s daughter, Joyce Bailey, ultimately donated the collection in its entirety to the National Museum of African American History and Culture, but while its fate was decided, the collection was sealed in a building without climate control and without monitoring. When the Smithsonian conservation team arrived to assess the collection, what they found was a dramatic example of the importance of good housekeeping. The collection was crawling with carpet beetles. Cathy offered the speculation that ground zero, a red dress surrounded by waves of red frass (a slight exaggeration on my part, cue horror movie soundtrack), was in a closet on the second floor, near a walled up fireplace. Left to run riot, what might have been a beetle or two became an infestation of epic proportions.
Carpet beetles (usually referencing genus Anthrenus and the various species including varied, museum and furniture carpet beetles) are ubiquitous throughout the United States (and beyond). The adults feed on pollen and nectar and are attracted to light, but females will seek dark and secluded places to lay their eggs. One female can lay 30-40 eggs on a food source. The developing larva can wreak havoc during their 3-36 month development as they feed on proteinaceous materials. As the infestation of the infamous red dress was undiscovered for some time, larva fed and matured into egg-laying adults, multiplying the hungry mouths with each generation.
In describing the way that Mary Ballard and her team addressed the infestation, Cathy stressed that an active infestation is a disaster that can come home with you. Carpet beetles, though they keep on giving, are not a gift you want to give to your friends (or museum). Quarantine is essential. Access to the site should be restricted and precautions taken to prevent the spread of the infestation. When working in the townhouse, team members were encouraged to wear clothing of cellulosic materials and to wash those clothes immediately after leaving the site. You can never say immediately too many times!
As the insect activity had to be addressed before the collection could be processed, the contents of the townhouse were documented in situ, triage packed and moved by truck to the support center of the Smithsonian’s Museum Conservation Institute. At the MCI, the entire collection of the Black Fashion Museum underwent an anoxic treatment using argon gas. In an environment with less than 1000ppm of oxygen for 30 consecutive days (the time for treatment will vary based on gas used, temperature, RH, and species), all life-stages should be rendered unviable. At the MCI, two vapor impermeable bubbles, each 8’x11’x11’ were constructed and the ambient oxygen was slowly reduced.
The bubbles were monitored during treatment (safety first! Always have a partner and monitor the oxygen levels around the bubbles), and the argon was topped off to ensure that oxygen levels were kept below the necessary minimum.
After the completion of the anoxic treatment, a condition survey and surface cleaning was still required for the contents of the 273 boxes moved from the townhouse. Although the treatment should have rendered all life-stages unviable, cast off larval skins and insect remains can provide a food source for future insects. Every surface, every layer of tulle in a massive confection of nylon net, needed to be vacuumed. As at the townhouse, nozzles and brushes needed to be washed after each use.
This massive treatment was absolutely essential in incorporating the Black Fashion Museum into the collection of the National Museum of African American History and Culture. I’m looking forward to viewing some of the iconic and historic objects on display when the museum opens this fall!
If you haven’t checked it out, the NMAAHC webpage has a lot of material to explore and information about the upcoming grand opening.
For additional information, MuseumPests.net is the go-to site for identification and great fact sheets on different solutions.
44th Annual Meeting – General Session, May 15, “Preserving Trauma: Treatment Challenges at the 9/11 Memorial Museum” by John Childs and Maureen Merrigan
John Childs presented the treatment and installation challenges the conservation team faced at the 9/11 Memorial museum.
After 9/11, spontaneous memorials appeared, and the 9/11 Memorial Museum became the permanent memorial for this tragic event. It created a need to save and preserve physical evidence of the attacks, ranging from bits of paper to enormous steel girder and fire engines, not because of what it was but how it demonstrated in a physical way the trauma of that day. As conservators, we recognize where value lies in making treatment decisions, but poor condition itself is valued for the 9/11 Memorial Museum. Three treatments that posed philosophical challenges were explored in this talk.
The first was a Warner Bros. sign, which was saved from the store on the concourse level of the World Trade Center by some workers who found the material evocative. The object included letters as well as portions of the wall it was installed on. The question became how much of the sign to include in exhibition: the whole thing? The letters, cement tile, and mortar? Just the letters? Childs questioned whether this discussion was legitimate. Museums don’t usually select portions of an object but when extracting bits of wreckage, where are the boundaries between one object from another? There were so many layers that they distracted from the letters, so the decision was made to saw off wall board from the letters because that is where the value lies. It was then affixed to aluminum honeycomb and rendered legible as an object but also preserved the trauma it suffered. It takes its place among evocative objects from the site.
The second treatment involved the B2 parking level wall from the garage. The preservation of trauma is the primary conservation goal: the preservation of trauma of specific events, 9/11, but also of February 21, 1993, the truck bomb in the garage of the World Trade Center. Part of the B2 parking level wall, complete with scorch marks, was covered, wrapped, and transported to museum. It arrived during construction of the building and protections against flooding were not in place at this time. Hurricane Sandy flooded the area and seven feet of water went into the museum site, submerging large objects under water. It took five days to pump the water out and clean the objects. Vehicles or steel were primarily the large objects and medium pressure steam was used to clean these objects. The B2 slab was now covered with a layer of silt on its surface, on top of the soot from 9/11. The decision was made to completely remove evidence of Sandy, though Sandy was now another trauma suffered in NY. The value of the collection lies in its history and this would be hiding that history, but the mission of the museum was not to preserve the memory of Sandy. They had to remove the trauma of Sandy while preserving trauma of 9/11. They delayed treatment and found that as the silt dried, it could be brushed off without disturbing the 9/11 soot underneath. They waited until it was installed vertically in the exhibition and brushed the surface into a HEPA vacuum, revealing the soot.
Dust was an enormously significant part of the story, including silica, asbestos, and man-made vitreous fibers, creating a decidedly unhealthy environment. This really amounted to human remains. Dust was all that people had left of loved ones. Dust had a unique place in that story, as both a lethal and sacred substance. Childs stated that there is a palpable and justifiable fear of it in NY still today. Dust was donated to the museum, and one of the most significant donations is a display of Chelsea Jeans, a store on Broadway a couple of blocks from the site. The owner found the store under a thick layer of dust and left part of the store undisturbed, sealed behind glass to protect customers. He donated the storefront to the New York Historical Society, who used asbestos mitigation to deinstall and move it to NYHS. It was put on display in 2006 in a specially designed case and then donated to the 9/11 museum. To install it, the museum had to hire an environmental mitigation company to create an asbestos containment chamber in the galleries. Those working on the display took a course on asbestos training, had medical tests and a respirator fit testing. The containment chamber consisted of crates for objects, crates for glass sealing case, entry chamber (air lock), and a shower for decontamination after exiting enclosure. They all wore respirators and disposable coveralls. Given the situation, they had to make installation decisions as they were working, and they had a window so curators could be involved from the outside. The case was installed in a way that curators thought would best represent the original display. Glazers were installed and sealed the glass. Many people not used to standard museum procedures were very involved in this process, making cooperation and compromise absolutely necessary. This exhibition combines, in one setting, all of the disparate meanings of dust on 9/11 and is in the section on response and recovery of the museum.
For the 9/11 museum, damage and destruction is the story. For conservation, it is critical to appropriately save the evidence of damage that will tell the story effectively. Childs expressed how it can be emotionally charged with horror, sadness, and loss. The museum and experience have a profound meaning for a huge number of people, and Childs ended his talk by expressing what an absolute honor it was to participate.
44th Annual Meeting – General Session, May 15, “When disaster mitigation is a priority: Evidence from risk analysis of rare events” by Irene Karsten and Stefan Michalski
In this talk, Irene Karsten presented a method that CCI has established to quantitatively evaluate risk assessment for an institution. CCI has been using this method, called the ABC method, to conduct risk assessment for heritage institutions. The probability of a certain incident is estimated by answering the following questions:
- How often will the event occur?
- How much value will be lost?
- How much of the heritage asset will be affected?
A score of 5 points is generated for A, B, and C, for a total magnitude risk out of 15 points. A total of 5 points or lower is considered negligible risk and 15 points is catastrophic and unacceptable.
| Score | Risk | Loss to collection |
| 5 or lower | Negligible | |
| 9 or lower | Medium to negligible | Damage takes millennia. May agree that level of care is adequate and improvements possible but wait till higher risks are reduced. |
| 10-11 | Medium – high | Maybe negotiable. Standard of care may be okay but improvements highly recommended |
| 12-13 | High | Lost in 100 years, may be unacceptable |
| 15 | Catastrophic | Unacceptable. All value lost in decades. Such risks are rare. |
In this talk, Karsten is paying particularly attention to level 10-13 risks. Also, this is a logarithmic scale, which allows the authors to graph a lot of risks on each graph and compare them easily. Karsten went through a number of examples, including two historic houses, art gallery, provincial archives, and science and technology museum, highlighting the various risks and how they were evaluated. For all five institutions, disaster risks in high or extreme categories were fire. CCI did not just assess the risks, but also looked at mitigation of risk. For fire, CCI recommends an automatic fire suppression system. This does not eliminate fire risk but substantially reduces the risk of spread. In terms of cost-effectiveness, options that reduce large risks tend to have a better cost-effectiveness, too. When assessing if your collection is at a serious risk of loss, it has to impact storage.
Karsten then went through five types of weather disasters and explained how an institution would be assessed to be at an extreme or high risk for that threat.
For a flood, an institution is at extreme risk if storage is below flood grade or even below grade near the old water main or faulty storm sewers. An institution is at high risk if it is on grade on a flood plain or below grade.
For a fire, an institution is at extreme or high risk if it is a combustible building structure, there is lack of compartmentation, the region is at risk of wild fire, or there is a lack of automatic fire suppression. 1 in 5 fires is expected to spread to the whole structure.
For an earthquake, an institution is at extreme risk if the building is lacking seismic protection and there is a risk of violent earthquakes (7 or higher on the Richter scale). An institution is at high risk if storage is lacking seismic protection and there is a risk of very strong to violent earthquakes (6.5 or higher on the Richter scale).
For a tornado, an extreme risk is EF4 or EF5 tornados in US and high risk of EF4-5 in Canada, depending on the frequency of tornados in the area.
For a hurricane, an extreme risk is if the building is in a region at risk of major hurricanes (category 3-5) and the building is not designed to resist high winds. In Canada, only category 2 hurricanes really occur, and the damage is rarely extensive to be high or extreme risk.
44th Annual Meeting – Electronic Media Group Session, May 15, "Matters in Media Art III: Sustaining Digital Video Art" by Martina Haidvogl and Peter Oleksik
This talk announced the completion of the latest phase of the Matters in Media Art project focusing on digital preservation and assessment of digital video, and marked the official re-launch of the project’s website, mattersinmediaart.org. The website is the product of a collaborative effort over many years by teams of staff members from Tate, the Museum of Modern Art in New York, the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, and the New Art Trust. In this talk, Peter Oleksik and Martina Haidvogl, media conservators at MoMA and SFMOMA respectively, provided a background and history of the Matters in Media Art project and walked the audience through the new website.
The New Art Trust was founded in 1997 by Pamela and Richard Kramlich, pioneering collectors of media art. In 2003 they approached the three museums with some funds to gather the four institutions together to discuss emerging practices in the care of media art, and the “Matters in Media Art” project was born. The first phase focused on lending and was launched in 2005. The second phase launched in 2008 and focused on acquisitions, and the third phase began in 2011. The scope of the third phase was originally going to be sustaining digital art; however, this proved too broad, as it could have included all digital art (software-based art, web-based/net art, graphics, and more). The effort was instead fine-tuned to focus on digital preservation and assessment of digital video. The speakers explained that the length of the third phase exceeded the other two not only because the original scope was too broad, but because the field was evolving so rapidly that material they were creating ended up in a constant state of revision. To address this, the group made two decisions: first, to launch a new website encompassing all phases of the project at this AIC Annual Meeting (to provide a much-needed deadline), and second, to create a dynamic resource that could evolve with ongoing input from the wider conservation community. They felt that the project should be a resource for multiple audiences and provide a framework for ongoing collaboration, rather than represent a single perspective and a static endpoint.
The new Matters in Media Art website is hosted on Github, situating the content in an open-source environment where anyone can make suggestions for revisions and additions. The group felt that moving away from closed platforms and static white papers would enable these resources to stay current despite the dynamic pace of change in the field generally. The text of the website was written by teams at the partner institutions and collaboratively edited during bi-weekly virtual meetings. The design team created mock-ups and design tests, coordinated user trials, and solicited and consolidated pre-launch feedback from users within and outside the conservation community. All the work on the third phase was done as a volunteer staff effort with no grant or other project-specific funding.
The speakers then walked the audience through the site in real time. They explained that materials from the first two phases required only minimal updates. The teams worked to ensure there is no outdated information from the first two phases on the site. The new “Documentation” section includes cataloging, condition reports, and assessing digital video. The new section on “Sustaining Digital Art” describes how to store digital works successfully. This section is framed by a survey as a first step that guides the reader through the rest of the section, enabling the reader to develop a plan specific to their needs.
The new material speaks to all audiences: individual, collector, and institution. Some in the audience remarked that this made the recommendations less focused and the site text-heavy. The speakers agreed that it was ambitious and emphasized that the teams want, invite, and need feedback to make refinements and speak to multiple audiences even more effectively.
Contribution guidelines were recently finalized on the website and include ways for users to provide feedback via Github or in a simple online survey. The speakers urged the audience to visit the site and provide their opinions. The project was also announced with a flyer provided to all conference attendees, to encourage anyone dealing with media conservation at their institution to consult this valuable new resource.
44th Annual Meeting – Electronic Media Group Session, May 15, "Videotape Deterioration Mechanisms and Conservation Remedies: A Primer" by Erik Piil
Erik’s talk provided a survey of deterioration mechanisms and the evolution of corresponding treatment literature, as well as some novel approaches to condition assessment and treatment.
He opened with a discussion of “sticky shed” syndrome, in which a hydrolysis reaction in an environment with high RH causes the binder layer on magnetic tape to become unstable. During playback, this softened binder leaves a residue on the playback heads, which can damage the tape and clog the heads. While waveform monitors and vectorscopes can’t help diagnose this condition, a less common scope, tracking RF (the unmodulated RF signal put into waveform) can give a kind of “EKG” of the video signal. Erik showed normal vs. abnormal RF envelopes — the abnormal one indicates head-clogging due to sticky shed. This causes loss of signal and eventually complete loss of image. RF monitoring can help differentiate between sticky shed and other issues, such as a transfer done with an overstretched tape, poor head alignment, and deterioration due to tape wear. For instance, abrasive wear (such as that caused by a particulate scraped down the tape) can cause a ripple in the RF but looks very different on the scope from the abnormal RF envelope caused by sticky shed.
Erik also described the damage that could be caused by abrasive wear. He described various surface cleaning methods that can be employed to remove particles that could cause abrasive damage during playback. These include cleaning open-reel videotape by wrapping dusting paper around the playback heads; however, some tapes have a carbon black back-coating that is susceptible to sticky shed, so it is important to verify that neither the magnetic binder nor the back coating are compromised before cleaning. Other cleaning methods have included using isopropyl alcohol to clean the tape during playback, and using Pellon on both the oxide layer and carbon black back-coating to trap loose oxide particles, along with a vacuum to draw those particles away. Surface cleaning machines integrating these methods can be purchased off-the-shelf (such as Bow Systems 432 open-reel videotape cleaner for enterprise-level use). Alternatively, Erik showed a prototype for a cleaning machine that he is presently testing with Video Data Bank (VDB). It uses open-source circuitry (Arduino-based), approximately $1,200 in parts, and custom spindles. The design is available on GitHub: epiil open-cleaner.
Erik discussed the history of thinking on the baking of tapes exhibiting sticky shed. While this may temporarily restore binder integrity to enable transfer of the content, it does not cure the condition, and is controversial. Some maintain that baking damages the behavior of oxide particles, as well as the mechanical behavior of the pack, while others see it as necessary in order to rescue content from deteriorating sources.
In terms of condition assessment, several research projects are underway to advance scientific understanding of deterioration mechanisms. Among these is the University of South Carolina’s development of a non-invasive test for sticky shed using ATR-FTIR. Not only does this kind of scientific research enable the field to develop best practices based on data rather than anecdotal evidence, it also gives practitioners much-needed tools for non-invasive condition assessment. Presently, condition assessment is largely accomplished through observation of playback, which can cause damage before vulnerability can be ascertained.
Throughout the presentation, Erik shared resources to consult that show the evolution of approaches to condition assessment and treatment of magnetic tapes:
- Bharat Bhutan, “Mechanics and Reliability of Flexible Magnetic Media” Springer; 2nd edition (May 31, 2000)
- Walter Forsberg & Erik Piil, “Tune In, Turn On, Drop Out: Section 108(c) and Evaluating Deterioration in Commercially Produced VHS Collections” Annual Review of Cultural Heritage Informatics 2012-2013, Facet Publishing (July 2014)
- Tony Conrad, “Open Reel Videotape Restoration” The Independent, AIVF, Volume 10, Issue 8, Number 8 (1987) – describes what was a pioneering treatment at the time for sticky shed
- Charles Richardson, “The New “Non-Baking” Cure for Sticky Shed Tapes” ARSC Journal, Vol. 44, No. 2 (Fall 2013) – makes a case against baking; advocates for adoption of the cleaning machine developed by the author
Erik invited the audience to visit GitHub to follow the progress of his affordable, open-source open-reel videotape cleaner, and to contribute or comment. This is an exciting project that will make a quality cleaning machine feasible for institutions on limited budgets. The novel use of the tracking RF scope and the look at historic as well as contemporary treatment literature for videotape conservation were two other highlights of this talk.
44th Annual Meeting-General Session: Emergency Preparedness, May 16th, "Through Hell or High Water: Disaster Recovery Three Years after Alberta's Floods," by Emily Turgeon-Brunet and Amanda Oliver
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/
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.