{"id":778,"date":"2011-06-09T22:23:36","date_gmt":"2011-06-09T22:23:36","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.conservators-converse.org\/?p=778"},"modified":"2011-06-09T22:23:36","modified_gmt":"2011-06-09T22:23:36","slug":"aic-2011-annual-meeting-book-and-paper-group-afternoon-sessions-june-3","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/resources.culturalheritage.org\/conservators-converse\/2011\/06\/09\/aic-2011-annual-meeting-book-and-paper-group-afternoon-sessions-june-3\/","title":{"rendered":"AIC’s 39th Annual Meeting, Book and Paper Group afternoon sessions, June 3"},"content":{"rendered":"

Investigating Crayon Removal from Paper Based Japanese Prints<\/span><\/p>\n

Hsin-Chen Tsai<\/strong>, Andrew W. Mellon Conservation Fellow, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston<\/a><\/p>\n

Problem<\/span>: Crayon \u201cgraffiti\u201d on 20th<\/sup> century Japanese prints by Munakata Shiko. The prints were mounted to screens, and the graffiti appeared at about 4 ft. from the ground\u2014around the same height as a child. Unlike graffiti on a painted wall, however, crayon does not come off of printed paper quite as easily.<\/p>\n

Experiment<\/span>: Mock-ups were created with Japanese paper, printed with black sumi ink, then colored over with both waxed-based and water soluble crayons. Possible solvents were chosen from the wax section on the Teas diagram and included petroleum ether, mineral spirits, toluene and xylene. These solvents were tested in three situations:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Solvent on a swab<\/li>\n
  2. A bath of water and solvent, followed by blotting of the stain<\/li>\n
  3. Damp blotter surface with local application of moisture and solvent, followed by blotting of the stain<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Results<\/span>:<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. Solvents alone did not reduce crayon to a satisfactory level; mineral spirits created a transparent stain visible through the paper<\/li>\n
    2. With the bath, it was impossible to control the amount of solvent used, but the overall result was positive<\/li>\n
    3. Crayon was lifted locally, but also migrated along with solvents to form tidelines<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      The ultimate solution was the use of a water-based treatment with toluene and xylene, such as that used in Experiment 2. For best results, Hsin-Chen suggested first manually reducing the graffiti with a kneaded eraser and scalpel.<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      \"\"<\/a>
      Lynn Brostoff, Library of Congress<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

      The Relationship Between Inherent Material Evidence in Cultural Heritage and Preservation Treatment Planning<\/span><\/p>\n

      Lynn Brostoff<\/strong>, PhD and Fenella France, PhD, Preservation Research and Testing Division, Preservation Directorate, Library of Congress<\/a><\/p>\n

      Problem<\/span>: A 1513 edition of Ptolemy\u2019s Geographia<\/em> was in poor condition, and puzzled conservators as to its history. Lynn set out to answer many questions, including: what was causing seven of the forty-seven maps to deteriorate?<\/p>\n

      Experiment<\/span>: Using XRF, the pigments and paper were analyzed on maps of both good and poor condition, and in various areas of the sheet.<\/p>\n

      Results<\/span>:\u00a0Maps in poor condition contained Fe and Cu\u2014two elements that cause the degradation of cellulose\u2014as wells as K, S and Al\u2014elements that together form potash alum. The pulp repairs and gutters of these pages, however, did not contain such elements and remained in good condition. It was decided that the paper quality used in these cases was poor, requiring a past restorer to \u201cstrengthen\u201d the bound papers with a potash alum solution; gutters were not coated, and mends were made with untreated pulp.<\/p>\n

      This information, along with the result that one of the green pigments contains copper, answers the question about the differing quality in the maps, and also informs conservators for treatment planning.<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      Light Bleaching: Scientific Investigation of Various Effects on Different Properties of Several Old Papers<\/span><\/p>\n

      Marion Verborg<\/strong>, Paper Conservation Fellow, Conservation Center for Art and Historic Artifacts<\/a><\/p>\n

      Problem<\/span>: As part of her graduate conservation program at the Sorbonne, Marion carried out research on the history and effects of light bleaching.<\/p>\n

      Experiment<\/span>: Using an array of papers of varying quality (wood pulp and rag paper) and age (from late 19th<\/sup> c. to present day), Marion created test strips and subjected them to different conditions:<\/p>\n

        \n
      1. A 25 min. wash in condition water<\/li>\n
      2. A 4 hr. wash in conditioned water<\/li>\n
      3. Washed in conditioned water, dried, then exposed to light<\/li>\n
      4. Washed in conditioned water for 4 hrs, then exposed to light while still immersed in the bath<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        The paper samples were aged in an oven before undergoing a serious of tests including pH, tensile strength, color, and degree of polymerization.<\/p>\n

        Results<\/span>: Light exposure in dry conditions can be extremely damaging to paper, all wood pulp papers become weak and yellow over time no matter what the level of treatment, and light bleaching is generally an efficient treatment for rag papers because it produced an aesthetically pleasing result without harming the paper extensively.<\/p>\n

        **Comments\/questions from the audience:<\/p>\n