art conservator spring 2011

Williamstown Art Conservation Center | 1

A P U B L I C A T I O N O f T h e W I L L I A m s T O W N A r T C O N s e r v A T I O N C e N T e r v O L U m e 6 , N U m B e r 1 • s P r I N G 2 0 11

Working Print, Museum PieceWorking Print, Museum Piece

2 | Art Conservator | Spring 2011 Williamstown Art Conservation Center | 3

Contents, Spring 2011

Art ConservatorVolume 6, Number 1 • Spring 2011

Director

T homas J. Branchick

Editor

Timothy Cahill

Art Direction and Production

Berg Design, Albany NY

Photographer

Matthew Hamilton

Contributors

Allison McCloskey

Kathleen Payne de Chavez

Allison Pappas

Sandra L. Webber

Proofreader

David Brickman

Office Manager

Rob Conzett

Accounts Manager

Teresa Haskins

Office Assistant

Amanda Turner

Printing

Snyder Printer, Troy, NY

Williamstown Art Conservation Center 227 South Street

Williamstown, MA 01267

www.williamstownart.org

T: 413-458-5741

f: 413-458-2314

Atlanta Art Conservation Center 6000 Peachtree Road

Atlanta, GA 30341

T: 404-733-4589

f: 678-547-1453

All rights reserved. Text and photographs

copyright © Williamstown Art Conservation

Center (WACC), unless otherwise noted.

Art Conservator is published twice yearly

by WACC, T homas J. Branchick, director.

Material may not be reproduced in any form

without written permission of William-

stown Art Conservation Center. WACC is a

nonprofit, multi-service conservation center

serving the needs of member museums,

nonprofit institutions and laboratories, and

the general public.

From the Director

As I write this in late April, the snow from what seemed like our endless winter is almost gone. T he glacier that slid off my front porch roof is still there and we have bets it will endure till sometime in May. Nevertheless, spring has arrived. Time for rebirth and looking to the future. T he Atlanta Art Conservation Center has an exciting project that took years to bring to fruition. T he African-American artist Hale Aspacio Woodruff’s renowned Talladega murals, Talladega College, Alabama, are at AACC for cleaning, consolidation, and lining. T he treatment will allow them to go on a two-year tour, first to Atlanta’s High Museum of Art. T he six monumental canvases, commissioned in 1938, are arranged in

three cycles of two, depicting the La Amistad slave ship uprising, the Underground Railroad, and the founding of Talladega College. T hese murals are considered Woodruff’s masterpieces, and will be featured in a future Art Conservator.

I am particularly pleased to feature the Judith M. Lenett Fellowship project on the cover of our current issue. Lenett fellow Allison Pappas is the first to work in the discipline of photography; her description of her project, beginning on page 4, is excellent. Photography conservation is a new service at the Center, made possible by the addition of paper and photo conservator Jennifer McGlinchey. Since joining the staff last September, Jennifer has been attracting new clients and establishing her reputation as a stellar practitioner. Hats off to Jen!

It took a couple of years, but the economic downturn finally caught up with the Center this winter. Workload fell off, but things look encouraging for our next fiscal year. For those who might have been putting off a treatment, conservators have been able to respond sooner to certain projects than during a typical cycle. We have a magnificent facility, and now is an ideal time to take advantage of it. —Tom Branchick

As Berkshire snows gave way to spring grass at Stone Hill Center, winter’s legacy lingered in the scrambled letters of the label for an outdoor installation of works by Japanese-American sculptor Isamu Noguchi. The sculptures, Kyoto-san (left) and Personage I (Ningen I), are on loan from the Isamu Noguchi Foundation and Garden Museum.

On the coverEliot Elisofon, Marcel Duchamp Descends

a Staircase (detail), 1952, treated working

print, Mead Art Museum, Amherst

College.

3 Director’s Letter

4 Let There Be Light

American Photojournalism and the Working Print By Allison Pappas

8 Degrees of Separation in Sixteenth-Century Antwerp

Restoration reveals workshop practices of a Mannerist Adoration By Sandra L. Webber

12 Upholstery Investigations

Unraveling the fiber clues of an Alma-Tadema piano stool By Kathleen Payne de Chavez

14 WACC News & Notes

Innes, early and already a master; Vermont insect art; Victorian tortoiseshell tea caddy; NEA grant for Norman Rockwell

17 Report from Atlanta

John Marin in Castorland, vibrantly

19 Tech Notes

Supports for Textile Display: Overview and Strategies for Flat Objects By Allison McCloskey


Cover Story

Let T here Be LightAmerican Photojournalism and the Working PrintBy Allison Pappas

P hotojournalism took many forms across the different eras and political tides of the American twentieth century. As the Williamstown Art Conservation

Center’s Judith M. Lenett Fellow, I had the opportunity to work on three photographic prints from the collection of the Mead Art Museum, Amherst College, that delineate some of the most significant shifts in journalistic practice. From January through March I treated these photographs, a process that included cleaning, filling losses, mending cracks, and addressing damage sustained from handling and housing. I examined the scars that accrued on the surfaces of the photos, marks that speak to their lived histories as working prints. T he photographs—Lewis Hine’s Lunch Time (1908), Robert Capa’s Allied Entry Into Paris (1944), and Eliot Elisofon’s Marcel

Duchamp Descends a Staircase (1952)—today hang on museum walls, but not so long ago, they were part of a different history. T heir stories—their use in different moments of our history, as different models of the photojournalistic purpose—can still be read today.

In this article, I describe the historic background and treatment procedure for one of the three prints, Elisofon’s Marcel Duchamp Descends a Staircase.

DUCHAMP DESCENDS STAIRCASE himself for a repetitive flash-picture and thereby makes a modern photograph as Dadaist as his 40-year-old Nude painting. 1

As its caption from the April 28, 1952 issue of LIFE magazine explains, Eliot Elisofon’s striking photograph was

made through the careful manipulation of light. T he photo shows a ghostly Marcel Duchamp descending a staircase in the manner of his famous 1912 painting, Nude Descending a Staircase. Elisofon captured Duchamp’s motion on a single frame of film by leaving the shutter of his lens open while he set off multiple flashes, each burst of light capturing one position of the body as it moved down the stairs. Although Elisofon and Robert Capa were contemporaries, this photograph represents a different kind of photojournalism than Capa’s war reportage. Elisofon’s image presages the prevalent coverage at LIFE that is credited with the magazine’s decline in the 1960s and ’70s, when a trend away from the political and towards softer feature stories did not reconcile with American readers’ interest in social revolution and the

war in Vietnam. Elisofon’s work ranged from war to glamour photography. He was also a watercolorist and African art aficionado, and this interest meant that Elisofon often ended up with arts and culture assignments.

T he print arrived from the Mead in a distressed state. A plethora of cracks and distortions on the surface and a barrage of marks on the back spoke to its long history of use. T he stamps and marks can be decoded to give a sense of not only how the image was used at LIFE, but subsequently as well.2 “36144” in the upper left corner is the set or project number LIFE assigned to record and file the story, negatives, contact sheet, and print. It does not list the number of the negative, which is unusual. When LIFE stopped weekly circulation and fell under the control of Time, Inc., the archiving system became more complex. At some point the barcode sticker, called a Merlin ID, was added to the print so that it could be scanned and identified in the digital database. T he blue check marks scattered throughout mean that the negatives were in their proper location during various inventories of the collection. T he caption information was typed directly onto the print, which is somewhat unusual, more often being typed onto a label affixed to the back. If you look carefully on the front you can actually see the impression of the letters! T he orange rectangle also shows through to the front, and indicates the cropping of the photograph used in the original LIFE article.

T he red “Used in LIFE April 28, 1952 P100,” records the image’s original date of use and page number. T he other date, “April 15 1952,” in black, might refer to the date the picture was filed or when it ran in an international issue of LIFE. Elisofon’s stamp falls towards the bottom of the page, identifying him as the photographer. “110 picas” refers to the width of the published photograph; a pica is a typographic unit

of measurement used in publishing that corresponds to 1/6 of an inch. “1st and 2nd print matte” means that two prints were originally requested, both on matte paper. In addition to this information about its use at LIFE, two labels speak to later uses of the print. T he first, a red stamp “USED RAYFIELD PHOTOG BOOK p. 26” refers to an unknown book project.

T he other, a paper label adhered to the back, shows that the print was borrowed in April 2000 by V. Porges. Vivette Porges had been a photo editor at LIFE, and used the image for a 2002 book project she worked on with Peter Jennings, In Search of America. At the bottom right corner, “2004.14” is the Mead’s accession number for cataloguing the print into its collection.

Such extensive use of the print, and all the filing and sending around that it entailed, dictated our conservation treatment plan. In addition to basic consolidation and cleaning, the print was so creased and distorted it needed serious overall flattening. I began by removing the three labels from the back, so they

would not press through to the emulsion layer on the front at any point during the treatment. To this same end, I filled a number of shallow skinned losses and deeper divots in the back of the print to even out the surface, using, as the case dictated, either a mixture of cotton paper fiber and Aquazol, a stable adhesive, or thin Japanese paper. After surface cleaning the print verso and recto, I tested the various inks and pencil marks on the back to see how they would hold up in response to both moisture and heat.

T he results were encouraging, so we were able to use a dry mount press to flatten the print. Both the removal of the labels and leveling of the back surface had been in preparation for this outcome. I also consolidated all of the cracks in the surface of the print, applying an additional layer of gelatin that spread into the cracks, forming a bandage of sorts with the

Each academic year, the Judith M. Lenett Memorial Fellowship is awarded to a second-year student in the Williams College Graduate Program in the History of Art. T he fellowship, which is jointly administered by Williams College, the Williamstown Art Conservation Center, and the Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute, allows recipients to explore issues of conservation in the field of American art. Working closely with WACC conservators, each fellow spends two semesters conserving and researching an American art object. T his year’s Lenett Fellow, Allison Pappas, focused on three twentieth-century gelatin-silver photographs from the Mead Art Museum, Amherst College, Amherst, Mass. Under the guidance of Leslie Paisley, Chief Paper Conservator, and Jennifer McGlinchey, Assistant Paper and Photograph Conservator, the project culminated in a public lecture at the Clark. Ms. Pappas will spend the next year as the graduate intern in the photography department at the J. Paul Getty Museum. T he article below is excerpted from Ms. Pappas’s Lenett lecture.

Lenett Fellow Allison Pappas at work in the WACC paper lab.

Eliot Elisofon, Marcel Duchamp Descends a Staircase, 1952: the working print, after treatment.


dry mount press. T he treatment used the heat and the high pressure of the press to relax the cracks and allow the new gelatin to penetrate and reinforce the emulsion. Since this is an aggressive treatment, it is only used for photographs with severe cracks that compromise the structural integrity of the surface. T he treatment must be done with extreme care because it manipulates moisture and heat—two of the most dangerous elements for photographs—to force the paper to reset. After quick pressing, the photograph is left to dry and rest under heavy weights to continue the flattening. T he exposure to heat is limited and performed in a carefully controlled environment, but unsettling nonetheless.

We chose this option because yet another set of scars embedded in the print—along with museum records to back them up—showed that it had had prior conservation treatment. T he image was relatively clean when I began treatment, and close inspection revealed a large area of inpainting in the middle of the print. Someone had been here before! As I surface cleaned, the careful concealing of a large white scar came off along with a significant amount of ink from surprising areas that had not seemed to have inpainting on first inspection. T his ink, called Spotone, covered dust spots and other flaws in the negative, and probably dated back to LIFE editors when the print was in use. Furthermore, the Mead’s files included conservation records that listed prior, less aggressive attempts to flatten the picture for better image visibility. Ultimately, the dry-mount-press flattening treatment was successful and improved the appearance and stability of the print.

T his nerve-wracking step over, I had to revisit the labored process of inpainting small spots as well as a relatively large loss in Duchamp’s pants. It took me a very long time to get it right. Inpainting is quite challenging; it is easy to go too dark too fast and be forced to start over entirely. Slowly building up thin layer upon layer of pigment, barely touching the tip of my brush to the paper, I finally succeeded in making the areas

of loss unobtrusive. I reattached the labels on the back with wheat starch paste. Looking back at my work, I could see subtle changes—old adhesive replaced by easily removable wheat starch paste; new watercolor inpainting in place of Spotone and older inpainting; and a print that now lay flat. I had left my own marks embedded in the surfaces of these photographs.

Future scholars and conservators looking closely or reading the records will be able to see these as reflections of this phase of the print’s history. T his photograph, and the others I treated, are no longer working photojournalistic prints; they are museum pieces and they work in new ways, garnering the marks of new circumstances.

T his, finally, speaks to the last phase of my project. In addition to treating the problems and deterioration of the past, conservation also incorporates preventive methods to protect for the future. For all three of the prints, the greatest problems were related to handling and housing conditions. T he prints were folded, creased, torn, and seemingly waved around before

being bent and stuffed into tight photo-mounting corners. It was necessary to rethink the housing for the prints. Since becoming museum artifacts, they had been mounted between mat boards to support them from the back while protecting their surfaces. But not all matting methods are created equal. Photo corners can be damaging if they are too small, and even delicate Japanese paper hinges can put undue stress on already-weak prints. Size, strength, and flexibility of individual prints need to be matched to their proper mounting format.

For the Capa and Elisofon, both relatively large prints with bad histories of cracking, we decided that Z-fold mounting would be the safest choice. Z-folds are made by folding strips of paper into slings that fit around all four sides of the photograph and are taped down to the backing board.3 T he print is held securely in place and no adhesive is used on the photograph.

(continued on page 18)Verso of the Elisofon working print, containing caption, cropping, filing and identification marks.

Oblique spectral photograph of the print surface, used to detect cracks and distortions.


Feature

E ven before the Greater Hudson Heritage Network awarded the grant funding for restoration, we knew The Hyde Collection’s Adoration of the Magi would not be

an ordinary treatment. Two dilemmas quickly emerged: how to place the Antwerp Mannerist painting in its art historical context, and how to properly re-restore the image to a closer semblance of its original state. T he two problems became entwined in such a way that answers to the first question offered the solution to the second.

When purchased by Louis and Charlotte Hyde in 1929 from E. & A. Milch of New York, the small oak panel had already been restored as well as backed with a second oak panel and cradled. A 1¼-inch extension had been added to the top edge and the original panel’s center join had been opened and re-glued slightly askew. As a result, the left half of the panel is now higher than the right, creating some awkwardness in the horizontal architectural elements. T he painting was treated cosmetically in the 1930s and again in 1958, and as time went on the restored areas moved further away from the original design. T he biggest challenge in this restoration lay in the large losses in the lower left quadrant, encompassing areas of the tiled floor and the stone structure in the lower center and, most importantly, the costume of King Balthazar. Conjecturally restored in 1958, his outer garment had become a heavy cloak spilling to the floor around him. Lacking a pre-damage photograph of the painting, my only hope was to find another

version as close as possible to the Hyde’s Adoration, to allow for a more accurate restoration. But who was the artist and were there surviving versions?

Once the old overpaint and multi-colored wax fills were removed and a new off-white fill was laid into the losses, I was able to see what remained of the original paint layer and compare any existing versions for the closest match. Fortunately, an Internet search of Antwerp Mannerist Adorations revealed at least eight other versions of this composition, and one particularly useful copy on the London-based Sphinx Gallery website, a painting now privately owned in Kiel, Germany.

T he term “Antwerp Mannerist” was first used by German art historian Max Friedländer in 1915 to describe a large group of prolific Antwerp artists from the early decades of the sixteenth century. T heir rapid development coincided with Antwerp’s emergence as the principal import-export city of Northern Europe, a market dealing largely in luxury goods such as spices, fine textiles, metals, furs, leather goods, and even diamonds. Antwerp, already known for its textiles, became famous for its brilliant dyeing, as well as some new lightweight fabrics. Devotional art, primarily based on the life of Mary, was nearly the sole oeuvre of the Antwerp Mannerists, with the Adoration of the Magi being the most popular subject.

According to recent scholarship, these small, affordable paintings also reflect a number of facets about the commercial world of Antwerp, making them even more popular among the

city’s merchant class. T he foreign kings bearing gifts, for instance, are a direct reference to the Portuguese shippers who brought the first spices and exotic goods from the Far East around

Degrees of Separation in Sixteenth-Century AntwerpRestoration reveals workshop practices of a Mannerist Adoration

By Sandra L. Webber

Opposite page, The Hyde Collection’s Adoration of the

Magi, after treatment. This page, far left, the painting before treatment, with old cosmetic fills, and during treatment, with the fills removed, revealing large areas of missing original paint.


panels, the size of the Adorations remains remarkably similar. Among those with recorded dimensions, the widths of many Adoration panels in this series range between 51 and 58 centimeters, the Hyde panel being 52.7cm. A few well-documented panels, including the Munich and the Sphinx-Kiel versions, have been examined using infrared reflectography, which has shown a variety of underdrawing styles. T he Munich drawing appears to be the result of tracing and transferring from another image, while the Hyde painting exhibits faint sketchy lines, more reminiscent of the freehand drawings found on the Sphinx-Kiel panel and two other Adorations.

In seeking a match for the Hyde painting, the distinctive compositional elements examined for comparison were the main figures, the background scene, and the architectural details, including the ruin, the floor pattern, and the crumbling stone structure in the lower front. Although the Munich and Sphinx-Kiel panels are arched, their background scenes are almost identical to the Hyde painting in the placement of trees, buildings, and the winding train of people and animals. Although both depict the Star of Bethlehem high in the sky, damages to the Hyde painting in that location precluded any evidence of the star, so it was not introduced. All three panels have square pilasters with the same intricate surface design and the Hyde floor tiles show the same pattern as Munich’s, although the Hyde artist lost the pattern midway across when he dropped a blue triangle to the wrong row. Because of the large loss in Balthazar’s costume, the verisimilitude of the figures on the other two examples was of paramount importance.

T he restoration of the Hyde painting first involved studying the floor pattern and Balthazar’s losses with Mylar overlay drawings. T his was followed with watercolor perspective lines for the floor and outlines for the missing folds of the drapery. T hin layers of translucent color, made with dry pigments ground in Paraloid B-67 varnish, were built up slowly to match the depth and luminosity of the original paint. Although the Munich image was the primary source for the restoration, the Sphinx-Kiel drapery was used for some folds on Balthazar’s blue-white textile.

It is unknown if the Munich and Hyde paintings come from the same workshop, nor do we know how many hands may have been involved in their production. One curious note is that the drapery folds on the Hyde painting are actually better articulated than most of the other versions, including the Munich triptych. Perhaps future scholarship will identify the individual artists involved with this mass-marketing effort in Antwerp. When that happens, the Hyde Collection’s Adoration of the Magi will hopefully stand with the best of the copies of the lost Jan de Beer masterpiece. For scholarly assistance on this article, the author gratefully acknowledges Erin Coe, Chief Curator, and Jayne Stokes, Associate Curator of T he

1501. T he background scenes depict various aspects of trading activity, from pack animals laden with bales and merchants opening trunks, to the inns where traders conducted business. T he main protagonists are all richly

dressed in colorful and elaborately trimmed textiles, referencing Antwerp’s proudest industry. Caspar’s ermine-lined, madder-dyed cloak is turned back to reveal a gold-threaded robe and exposed sleeves of changeant, the new two-color shot fabric. T he influence of the Magi story on the Antwerp mercantile community even took on a personal note, as merchant families named their sons Caspar, Melchior, and Balthazar.

T here are more than forty highly similar versions of this particular composition known in collections, reproductions, and sale catalogues. T he majority are framed triptychs with T he Adoration of the Magi as the center panel, flanked by other scenes from Mary’s life, such as the Annunciation and the Flight into Egypt. Another nineteen examples exist presently as single paintings like the Hyde panel, although all may once have been parts of triptychs. As the significant number of surviving versions indicates, these paintings were produced in large numbers and not individually commissioned. T hey were made principally for the art market, and dispersed throughout Northern Europe and exported farther afield. While Friedländer categorized these Antwerp Mannerists into groups, recent scholarship has focused on closely allied images based on identifiable artists’ work, such as this group of Adorations. Extensive research by Dr. Dan Ewing has shed new light on the probable source of these images. Although Friedländer suggested T he Adoration of the Magi in the Philadelphia Museum of Art as the progenitor of the series, Ewing believes they all stem from a lost Adoration of the Magi by Jan de Beer (c. 1475–c. 1536), one of a handful of known Antwerp artists of this period. While the Philadelphia painting is still used as the template describing this series, Ewing also cites a triptych in Munich’s Alte Pinakothek with a very close affiliation to the lost de Beer. With Ewing’s assistance we were able to locate a good color reproduction of Munich’s central panel, which answered our quest, as this painting shows the greatest similarity to the Hyde’s Adoration.

During the first three decades of the sixteenth century many new apprentices, assistants, and master painters enrolled in Antwerp’s St. Luke’s Guild. Jan de Beer himself was listed as an apprentice in 1490, and by 1504 had become a master painter. Less than ten years later several people were listed as his apprentices. Paintings of this period were rarely signed, and copying images was accepted practice. To keep up with the demand for pictures, streamlining of workshop techniques took place, including overt borrowing of compositions and drawings.

One way to expedite production was to make a series of paintings the same size. T he panels would all receive the same cartoon tracing or sketch to locate the composition onto the surface. Despite a variety of heights due to the shaped tops of some

Detail comparison of three Adorations, all based on a now-lost original by Jan de Beer. At top, the Hyde painting, after treatment; center, a version owned privately in Germany; and at bottom, the painting in Munich’s Alte Pinakothek. The lower two images are from printed reproductions used by the author as reference.

Hyde Collection; Dr. Dan Ewing, Professor of Art History, Barry University, Miami Shores, FL; and the Greater Hudson Heritage Network.

s o u r c e s —Dan Ewing, PhD, T he Paintings and Drawings of Jan de Beer, Michigan

University, 1978, 2 vols.

—Dan Ewing, unpublished draft “Jan de Beer: Gothic Renewal in Renaissance Antwerp,” 2010, and e-mail correspondence with the author and Hyde curators.

— Extravagant! A forgotten chapter of Antwerp Painting 1500–1530 (essays on the exhibition), Antwerp Royal Museum and Bonnefantenmuseum, Maastricht, published as the Antwerp Royal Museum Annual, 2004–05. Especially: Annick Born “Antwerp Mannerism: a Fashionable Style?”; Dan Ewing “Magi and Merchants: the Force behind the Antwerp Mannerists’ Adoration Pictures”; and Yao-Fen You “Antwerp Mannerism and the Fabricating of Fashion.”

—Max J. Friedländer. Early Netherlandish Painting, Vol XI: “T he Antwerp Mannerists: Adrian Isenbrandt,” Leiden and Brussels, 1974.

—T he Hyde Collection, Glens Falls, New York, curatorial and archival files

—Sphinx Gallery, London, England, website: http://www.sphinxfineart.com/

—Van den Brink, Peter (editor) Breughel Enterprises, Bonnefantenmuseum, Maastricht and Musées Royaux des Beaux Arts de Belgique, Brussels, Ludion Ghent-Amsterdam, 2001, especially Van den Brink “T he Art of the Copy” (discussion of the underdrawings).

Top, conservator’s study of the tile pattern in the Hyde’s Adoration, drawn on a clear plastic overlay. Above, detail of the restoration during treatment.


T he Williamstown Art Conservation Center has worked closely with the curatorial staff of the Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute in treating works

from their collection and in the analysis of original materials found on their objects. In the case of a piano stool designed by Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema for Henry G. Marquand, close examination and analysis have yielded fascinating information about the original upholstery scheme. T he Clark’s Kathy Morris, Curator of Decorative Arts, and Assistant Curator Alexis Goodin, came to the WACC Furniture and Wood Objects Department with certain questions about what the piano stool could reveal about its original upholstery. Beginning with evidence supplied by the Clark, including a

period photograph of the music room in Marquand’s home and thorough research into other pieces from the same suite of furniture, Hugh Glover, head furniture conservator, and I conducted an investigation into how the object may have originally appeared.

T he investigation began with the piano stool itself, which goes with the opulent Alma-Tadema piano that is a centerpiece of the Clark’s collection. We also obtained a remnant of original upholstery from a companion chair now in the National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne, Australia, on loan from the files of London dealer Blairman & Sons, as well as a report from the Metropolitan Museum of Art on an Alma-Tadema settee also from the Marquand music room.

We needed to address certain specific queries: What was the weave structure of the remnant textile from the Victoria chair? Was this remnant woven in silk, cotton, or wool? Did its structure and fiber composition correspond with the findings of the Met report documenting its settee? What could the piano stool itself tell us about the upholstery visible in the original photograph? And was there any evidence left on the stool suggesting similar show fabric to the Victoria chair and/or the Metropolitan settee?

Hugh began by removing two layers of restoration upholstery, revealing not only the original burlap-covered foundation but also the graphite signature of the upholsterer, “W. H. Ember.” A slight zigzag pattern could be seen impressed into the burlap cover, which corresponded to decorative trimmings apparent in the photograph. On the underside of the stool’s seat frame, precious original upholstery fibers from these trimmings were trapped beneath upholstery tacks. T his revealed two colors, green and coral pink, for the trimmings’ composition. Near some of the tacks we could also see impressions left in the wood where the original showcover had been secured; this gave us a way to compare the physical evidence with that of the chair and settee.

From the underside of the stool, I took fiber samples from the trapped trimmings fragments and made silicone casts of the textile showcover impressions left in the wood, carefully documenting the location of each sample and position of the silicone casts for future reference. Using a binocular microscope, I examined the fine weave structure of the chair remnant, conducting a thread count and comparing it to the textile casts from the stool. T he finely woven warp-faced rep-weave structure of the Victoria chair’s showcover had approximately 336 threads per one-inch section in the warp direction and eighty threads per one-inch section in the weft. T he eighty threads in the weft direction created forty ribs

or ridges per inch, which neatly corresponded to the ribs-per-inch count in the silicone casts.1 T his thread count also loosely corresponded with the documented thread count in the Metropolitan’s report.

Having connected the showcover weave structure of all three pieces, we proceeded a step further. I took fiber

samples from the warp and weft directions of the chair remnant to compare thread composition. I also looked at the fibers from the piano stool trimmings. By looking at the basic morphological characteristics of the fibers under high magnification, I was able to identify the natural fibers used to create the upholstery. T he National Gallery of Victoria’s original fabric proved to be silk fibers in both the warp and weft directions. T his corresponded exactly with the Metropolitan’s report of their settee’s show fabric. In addition to establishing this showcover correlation, I was also able to characterize the piano stool’s trimmings. Green fibers from the stool’s faux-binding had the characteristic helical convolutions of cotton, while the pink fibers had longitudinal striations and cross-over marks characteristic of silk.

Close object examination, judicious sampling coupled with detailed analysis, and the invaluable collaboration of conservators and curators has yielded additional information about the Alma-Tadema suite of furniture from the Marquand music room. T his new information, used in conjunction with previous analysis, continues to shed light on the rich decorative scheme of the upholstery chosen for these elaborate art objects. T his is valuable information as the Clark endeavors to reconstruct the upholstery of the piano stool, and mount an exhibition of the music room reunited and reupholstered after decades of being separated in far-reaching collections of the world.

n o t e s1 Each cast gave just a 1/8-inch section from which the forty ribs-per-inch could be extrapolated.

Upholstery Investigations Unraveling the fiber clues of an Alma-Tadema piano stool

By Kathleen Payne de Chavez

Feature

Lavish Pianoforte and Pair of Stools, designed by Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema, at the Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute. Fibers from one of the stools were used in analysis to help determine the original upholstery.

Top, the underside of the stool cushion, with original burlap covering. Above, green and pink fragments of original fibers found beneath an upholstery tack.

Cou

rtes

y St

erlin

g an

d Fr

anci

ne C

lark

Art

Inst

itute


Early Inness, already a masterA powerful sense of place pervades George Inness’s landscapes,

a sense that depicts spiritual states as much as actual locales.

T he more than 1,500 paintings and sketches by the painter in the

catalogue raisonné constitute a travelogue through an empyrean

of Inness, a place where natural science and metaphysics are

reconciled in perfect composure. T heir reality is visionary, not

literal.

In 1849, Inness was not long out of classes at the National

Academy of Design when he created A Nook Near Our Village.

His distinct vision and technical acuity are already evident in

the picture, which is owned by the Everson Museum of Art

in Syracuse, New York. T he painting is part of an extremely

exclusive club—one of only thirty-five finished oils by Inness that

exist from the decade of the 1840s. It shows him in full stride, as

it were, fully engaged in absorbing differing influences on the

way to his mature voice.

T he influence in this case, as observed by Michael Quick,

author of the Inness catalogue raisonné, is the “rugged,”

“disorderly,” “energetic” realism of Dutch landscape painting

typified by Jacob van Ruisdael. T his aesthetic is in sharp contrast

to the paintings Inness had been producing for two years prior,

models of the repose and idealism of the French classicist

Claude Lorrain. In the space between these Old Masters are

the painter’s American influences: the bark-rough naturalism of

Asher B. Durand and Thomas Cole’s allegorical idealism. Inness

was a lifelong student of Emanuel Swedenborg, the Swedish

philosopher-scientist who maintained that there are “two worlds,

a spiritual world where angels and spirits are, and a natural

world where men are.” The painter himself is famous for his

declaration that a work of art “does not appeal to the intellect. It

does not appeal to the moral sense. Its aim is not to instruct, not

to edify, but to awaken an emotion.” Inness was the synthesis of

all these inspirations and aspirations, equal parts rugged energy,

soulful introspection, and awakened feeling.

Typical of Inness’s early oils, the scene is a studio invention

derived from field drawings, painted sketches, and an

imagination honed by metaphysics and poetry. T he largish

canvas (2½ by 3½ feet), which Quick characterizes as “a study

in masses and voids, superimposed forms,

and . . . textures,” was commissioned by

the American Art-Union. T he AA-U was a

membership organization that supported

American art through subscriptions

of prints, and by purchasing original

paintings its members could win via

an annual lottery. Between 1845 and

1851, the Union purchased twenty-four

paintings by Inness, becoming for a time

his principle patron.

A Nook Near Our Village came to the

Williamstown Art Conservation Center

with the canvas slack on its stretcher,

and both paint and ground cupping and

cleaving. T he surface of the picture had

planar distortions and was flaking friable

paint. T he varnish had oxidized beneath a

film of dirt and grime.

When the painting was released from

its stretcher, it was discovered it had been

glue-lined during a previous treatment

and covered at the edges with paper

tape. With the tape and lining removed, it

became evident the old lining had caused the surface distortions

and was likely contributing to paint loss. A dilute of BEVA

acrylic adhesive was washed over the original canvas reverse

and infused on the vacuum hot table to secure the loose paint

layer. Relining was done with Belgian linen, and the painting

restretched onto the existing stretcher. T he grime layer was

removed and losses inpainted, after which a corrugated plastic

panel was added to the reverse for increased rigidity and

protection.

WACC News & Notes

A collage of butterflies, moths, and beetles by John Hampson, at the Fairbanks Museum and Planetarium.

George Inness, A Nook Near Our Viliage, 1849, after treatment.

Objects Department inspects unique collection of insect art

T he Fairbanks Museum and Planetarium recently commissioned the

Williamstown Art Conservation Center’s Objects Department to consult

on its unique collection of images and collages created from mounted

insects. T he museum owns nine pieces of so-called “Bug Art” by John

Hampson, an English-born draftsman and machinist who came to the US

in the 1860s. After his retirement, Hampson settled into a life as an avid

amateur entomologist and insect artist, creating portraits of Washington,

Lincoln and other prominent Americans, as well as kaleidoscopic

collages made from butterflies, moths, and beetles he collected in his

backyard and environs around Newark, New Jersey.

Hampson died in 1922 and his family kept his work until the 1970s,

when his daughter sought a museum that would accept the collection

for care and exhibition. T he Fairbanks, located in St. Johnsbury, Vermont,

was the only museum to accept the gift. Founded by Franklin Fairbanks

as a Victorian “cabinet of curiosities,” the museum houses a natural

history collection of animal, vegetable, and mineral specimens from

around the world.

T he WACC assessment, performed by Head Objects Conservator

Hélène Gillette-Woodard, found some of Hampton works suffering

from deterioration due to environmental factors and outmoded display

procedures. She recommended a three-pronged remedial approach

that would involve construction of archival storage boxes, improvement

of display procedure and environment, and treatment of the three

most deteriorated artworks. WACC is currently assisting the Fairbanks

Museum in securing grant funding to implement this program.

T his privately owned, English

Regency tea caddy is constructed

of wood with a tortoiseshell veneer and

touches of ivory and silver. It came to WACC

showing typical signs of age and wear,

with much of the tortoiseshell detached

or lifting. Hide glue was used to reattach

the veneer, which was held in place with

a series of micro-clamps. Hide glue was

traditionally used for adhering veneer, and

was selected in this treatment because it

is compatible with existing materials and

could activate the old adhesive, resulting

in optimal adhesion. T he clamps are Berna

Assembleurs, high-density carbon rods

with polycarbonate jaws and soft silicon

pads. Pressure is exerted when the jaws are

squeezed together, allowing for a great deal

of flexibility and finesse when clamping

delicate works.

Cou

rtes

y Fa

irba

nks

Mus

eum

and

Pla

neta

rium


WACC News & Notes

NEA to fund conservation of Rockwell work drawingsT hirty-six drawings, posters, and photographs from the Norman

Rockwell Museum will be treated by the Williamstown Art

Conservation Center’s Paper Department under a grant from the

National Endowment for the Arts. T he $144,240 “Save America’s

Treasures” grant will be used to stabilize and conserve artwork

and archival materials that provide insight into the working

process of Norman Rockwell and other American illustrators.

Among the objects to be treated are work drawings found

rolled and in pieces in Rockwell’s studio.

“T hese are process drawings from all phases of Rockwell’s

working method,” said Leslie Paisley, WACC’s chief paper

conservator. “Some are preliminary sketches, some are more

fully developed.” Among them are two studies for the Rockwell

painting Casey at Bat (c. 1950); a detailed charcoal-and-graphite

study for T he Soda Jerk (1953); two portraits of astronaut John

Glenn (c. 1972); and a reference drawing for Rockwell’s last

unfinished painting, John Sergeant and Chief Konkapot (1975).

T he grant work also contains an ink-and-pencil sketch by

illustrator Charles Dana Gibson, creator of the “Gibson Girl,” and

an ink-and-gouache illustration by William T homas Smedley, part

of Rockwell’s personal study collection.

T he Rockwell work drawings present several challenges,

Paisley noted. Most dramatic, perhaps, is a full-size charcoal

rendering of the final Casey composition, constructed from nine

pieces of paper joined with rubber cement. T he adhesive, applied

in the 1950s, has released, allowing the large puzzle pieces to

separate and curl. T hree sections are missing, including a section

from the center of the drawing. In addition, the charcoal is

unfixed and will not stand up to certain wet cleaning processes.

“Rockwell never meant these to last,” said Paisley of the work

drawings. “We’re fighting time and the nature of the materials

inherent in their construction.”

T he drawings have been unavailable for exhibit because the

Stockbridge, Massachusetts museum could not afford to repair

them. T he treatment process will take place over two years.

Also part of the grant is a set of four posters of Rockwell’s

1943 Four Freedoms, used to sell war bonds, and a rare World

War I Navy recruiting poster illustrated by Howard Chandler

Christy, featuring his iconic “Christy Girl.” T he photographs

include a recently discovered 1925 photo of Rockwell with

fellow illustrator and role model J.C. Leyendecker, one of the few

photographs of Leyendecker known to exist.

Report from Atlanta

John Marin in Castorland, vibrantlyBy Larry Shutts

“Castorland, land of imagination,” John Marin wrote to Alfred

Stieglitz in July 1913. “T he wind blows all day, a perfect gale, from

the West.” T he American modernist spent the summer of 1913 in

that windy northern New York village, sandwiched between Lake

Ontario and the Adirondack Mountains.

Trees and Hillside, one of the works Marin created there, is

important as a transitional piece between his watercolor work

and his oils. T he oil painting is approximately fifty percent

unpainted white ground with bright splashes of oil color. It was

brought to the Atlanta Art Conservation Center by its owner in

preparation for exhibition at the High Museum of Art. T he owner

never though it looked quite right, but could not say why.

T he work had been previously treated in the early 1980s. It

had suffered from micro-flaking of the ground that showed the

tops of the weave of the raw canvas. T his gave the work a dingy

look overall; you could see brown canvas where you should have

seen bright white ground. T he problem appeared as tiny brown

dots over the entire painting. Why so much loss of paint? Possibly

environmental causes, but not being the

first to treat the picture, I don’t know its full

history.

About forty percent of the old losses had

been retouched, so it appeared passable but

not vibrant, as Marin’s works typically are. In

addition, varnish applied during the previous

restoration had saturated the ground, making

it even darker, which I discovered only after

the treatment began. We started with a grime

cleaning and light spray varnish to see if we

could make improvements without removing

the extensive retouching. T his was only mildly

successful. After much testing and looking at

other Marins, I determined that the varnish

was the enemy and that the painting was dirty

underneath it. T he previous treatment had not

addressed underlying grime, which along with

the exposed canvas really made the work look

dull and lifeless.

T he owner agreed to a full cleaning,

meaning all the old varnish and retouching

would have to be removed. T hat completed,

I set about to remove the grime embedded

in the unpainted ground, a tricky task, as the

ground was extremely sensitive to cleaning

and threatened to dissolve. When the cleaning was complete,

the ground looked white when unsaturated by varnish, so it was

decided to hand-varnish only the oil-paint passages. I traced

every brush stroke with a small brush to keep from getting

varnish on the ground. T he varnish saturated the colors so they

now pop from the matte finish background.

It took hours of inpainting to conceal the exposed canvas and

address losses in the colored passages. To get the proper effect

in the colored areas, I had to first paint the ground color, then

the final color, which meant inpainting every small loss twice.

T he inpainting of the ground had to be matte in finish while the

colored passages needed to be glossy to retain the overall effect

of an unvarnished painting with splashes of color.

T he signature, which was originally painted in green, at some

point was abraded and repainted in black. T he black overpaint

was removed as far as possible without damaging the very

sensitive green letters underneath. Further research will be done

to determine if additional restoration is required on the signature.

John Marin, Trees and Hillside, 1913

Working drawing by Norman Rockwell for his c. 1950 painting Casey at Bat. The drawing, owned by the Norman Rockwell Museum, is constructed from nine pieces of paper joined with rubber cement. Pieces are loose, curled, and missing.

Williamstown Art Conservation Center | 1918 | Art Conservator | Spring 2011

Tech Notes, Spring 2011

For the Hine, a smaller print, this mounting method would have been overbearing; additionally, the photograph did not have a white border on all sides that could be covered. T he solution was Japanese paper hinges. T his was how the print had been previously matted, but we decided to take a stronger approach. Putting hinges only on the top of the print allowed it to be lifted to view the back, but also put pressure on the top edge of the print or even allowed rips or folds to occur. We decided to put hinges on the top and bottom, evening the distribution of weight and securing the print from both sides.

Our mounting solutions mean that the backs of the prints will not be viewable without taking apart the mounts. While this is simple to do, it is not something to be done often, as it then requires another trip to the conservator for re-mounting.

T he backs of the prints contain important material, so this choice presented a serious change as a result of our ministrations. Before- and after-treatment photographs of the verso will be included in the folder with the prints for easy reference. T he mounting decisions are entirely reversible, but they mark a different use, a different purpose, for the images. Robert

Capa never saw his photographs hanging on a wall in his lifetime, and yet this is primarily how we engage with his photographs today. He shot his pictures for glossy magazine paper or newsprint, but we rarely see even these old issues unless in a museum as well. T he treatment I have done, visible marks and all, serves to aid in the new identity of these

prints. T he repair, care, housing, and preventive measures all aspire to ensure the longevity of the prints, to continue their lives as objects of scholarly contemplation and aesthetic appreciation.

T he moment when a photograph moves from the working materials of photojournalism to museum artifact is elusive. T he working prints of

photojournalism today do not usually hang on the walls of museums. When will they make the transformation? I suppose this is the old question of when history is made. When do the value of the stories embedded on the surfaces of a photograph, and what they tell about the histories of photojournalism and art, printing and technological advances, outweigh its original use? As the Lenett Fellow, these photographs have reminded me of the importance of this question, illustrating their own dynamic progression from working prints to museum treasures.n o t e s1. Winthrop Sargeant, “Dada’s Daddy,” LIFE Vol. 32, no. 17 (April 28, 1952), p.100.

2. All of the following information came from conversations with Karen Mullarkey, photo editor and former LIFE employee, and Bobbi Baker Burrows, Picture Editor at LIFE Magazine.

3. For a complete description of Z-fold mounting, see “Tech Notes,” Art Conservator, Vol. 5, No. 2 (Fall 2010), p.19.

WACC Staff

T homas BranchickDirector; Conservator of Paintings/Dept. Head

Mary Catherine BetzAssociate Conservator of Paintings

Mary BroadwayT hird-year Intern/Paper

John ConzettOffice Manager

Hugh GloverConservator of Furniture and Wood Objects/Dept. Head

Matthew HamiltonPhotography Technician

Teresa HaskinsAccounts Manager

Hélène Gillette-WoodardConservator of Objects/Dept. Head

Rebecca JohnstonConservator of Paper

Henry KleinConservation Technician

Lauren LaFlamAssistant Conservator of Objects

Montserrat Le MenseConservator of Paintings

Cynthia LukConservator of Paintings; International Projects

Allison McCloskeyAssistant Conservator of Objects and Textiles

Jennifer McGlincheyAssistant Conservator of Paper and Photographs

Leslie PaisleyConservator of Paper/Dept. Head

Kathleen Payne de ChavezAssistant Conservator of Furniture and Wood Objects

Michelle SavantAssociate Conservator of Objects/Atlanta

Larry ShuttsAssociate Conservator of Paintings/Atlanta

Amanda TurnerOffice Assistant

Sandra L. WebberConservator of Paintings

Ultraviolet image used to inspect for optical brighteners in the photographic paper. T he small bright chip at bottom left indicates a fill used to patch the edge of the print; otherwise, lack of flourescence confirms the paper’s vintage prior to the inclusion of brighteners in manufacture.

Supports for Textile Display: Overview and Strategies for Flat Objects

By Allison McCloskeyAssistant Conservator of Objects and Textiles

Most textiles and many other three-dimensional objects made from organic materials require support for safe storage and display, both to slow down the damage gravity exacts and to allow for optimal viewing of the object. Mounts and supports are an important part of the object’s preservation; if well-designed, they can serve for both storage and display, thereby reducing unnecessary handling of an object and the associated risks. Display supports also aid in the viewer’s interpretation of the object, preserving the intended form or shape in as inconspicuous a manner as possible. As part of an exhibition, the manner of display can complement the interpretation of the object. A good mount design provides the necessary support while presenting the object to its full advantage, and allows for a safe, minimally invasive, and re-treatable method of attachment.

Considerations for mount design

Mount design begins with examination and assessment of the object’s stability. The degradation and oxidation of organic materials is accelerated by use, light exposure, and poor environmental conditions. Areas of the object that have been handled heavily in the past, or carried a significant amount of weight, are often weakened and required support to prevent further damage [Fig.1]. Components may not be as flexible and supple as they once were, so manipulation may be limited and modifications to the support may be require. Soiling or staining may also embrittle components that were intended to be flexible. Storage without adequate support or padding between folds often results in creases that can weaken and even break. Stabilization of tears, weak areas, and losses may be necessary in order for the object to be displayed in the desired orientation, particularly if the flaws compromise the appropriate distribution of weight necessary for safe display.

Material choice is integral to mount design. Materials are selected to provide the desired physical properties, such as rigidity and firm support where necessary, along with a balance of cushioning and gentle support in more vulnerable areas. The original form that supported the object must essentially be re-created, taking into account the changes that the object has undergone with age and use. The surfaces of the mount materials that directly contact the object also contribute to the success of a mount. A preferred surface texture will protect fragile object surfaces from abrasion and aid in safe removal of the object; a surface can also be selected for a slightly toothed texture to help secure the object on the mount. Often a combination of these contrary properties is desired, and materials are used in an unusual assemblage that makes best use of their properties in a selective manner to contribute to the support and safe handling of the object.

A mount can compensate for cosmetic issues that are not desirable to the curator. In some cases a well-designed mount can serve in place of a treatment that actively manipulates or modifies an object. A mount cover with an appropriate color and texture can visually minimize small losses that do not require stabilization. Design elements within a loss can be recreated on the mount cover, as a form of passive fill or “inpainting,” without affecting the artifact. A mount

(continued from page 7)

20 | Art Conservator | Fall 2010 Williamstown Art Conservation Center | 21

Tech Notes, Spring 2011

maker can also utilize color theory to show the object to its best advantage; certain colors can de-emphasize the yellow discoloration and darkening that often occurs with aged organic materials. Carefully placed padding can gently coax an object back to its original form (taking care not to create any damaging stresses).

Materials for mounts and supports

Mounts generally consist of a firm, internal support or armature, padding material to soften the form and achieve the desired shape, and a cover that comes into direct contact with the object and may be partially visible. The placement of these layers is dictated by the object’s needs. Metals, wood products, and some stable plastics can serve as the firm internal support of the mount. Stable polyethylene foams of high quality can provide both support and cushioning within a mount. Synthetic polyester fiber products and fabrics serve as the outermost cushioning and cover, and their chemical stability is critical due to their close proximity to the object.

Mount materials are selected, tested, and treated if necessary to be non-reactive with the object and to perform for an extended period of time. Poor mount materials can accelerate the degradation of the organic components of the object, affect dyes or other applied surface treatments, and corrode metal components. If the mount fails because it has aged poorly, it can put the object at risk for damage. Custom-designed mounts represent a significant investment in time and effort, and as such should use materials and construction techniques that are stable and durable over a period of time. Using mount materials that can perform as intended and remain stable through both anticipated handling and environmental fluctuations, even water damage and other emergency situations, best allows for the preservation of the artifact.

Certain stainless steel and brass alloys are suitable for mount applications, and can provide lightweight strength when used as an armature or internal component of the support. Panels made of aluminum honeycomb or aluminum laminated onto a polyethylene core are also useful as a rigid and lightweight base for a support. The latter can be custom cut to follow the contours of the object [Fig. 2]. Metals that may corrode are treated with age-tested resin coatings to prevent any corrosion that may occur through normal exposure to the elements or in the event of an environmental control failure. Dissimilar metals should not be placed in contact with one another because it could lead to galvanic corrosion, where the less noble metal corrodes preferentially in contact with the more noble metal. Barrier layers provide protection and cushioning where needed.

Wood products are readily available, easy to work, and strong; as such, they can seem like an obvious choice to give form and structure to a mount. However, wood products have various levels of acidity, and manufactured wood products have adhesives which may contain formaldehydes and acids. Issues such as the wood’s acidity, the sensitivity of the object, and the amount of airflow around the mount are considered when including a wood product in a mount design. Impermeable barrier layers such as laminated aluminum foil sheeting are incorporated if there is little tolerance for any acid migration, such as with cotton

and other plant materials, and in enclosed cases. Many applied coatings do not sufficiently block acid migration from the wood and cannot provide enough protection against the acidic products of the wood to be suitable for use in direct contact with an object or in an enclosed space.

Padding materials used within a mount can provide cushioning and gentle support in a wide range of densities. Polyethylene foam in plank form is available in a range of densities up to 9 lb/ft3; the most commonly encountered is approximately 2.2 lb/ft3. This is a closed-cell foam that will not absorb and hold moisture and can retain its shape under considerable, extended stress. While the polyethylene polymer is chemically inert and stable, the blowing agents used in its manufacture may off-gas and become brittle or react with materials in direct contact. Therefore it is important to purchase materials from established manufacturers whose products are regularly tested for such issues. Polyethylene foam is also available in sheet form.

Other padding materials often used in mounts are polyester batting and polyester fiberfill. Batting is available in a wide range of thicknesses. Many battings sold for quilting retain their form because they are resin-bonded; the resins used in this process can off-gas and be damaging to historic artifacts. Only heat-bonded battings, where the extruded polyester fibers are locked to one another in the desired lofty format, are recommended for use in mounts. Similarly, polyester fiberfills can be treated with coatings such as polysiloxanes to increase their slickness for a softer padded feel; these coatings may interact with sensitive artifacts and should be used with appropriate barrier materials.

Fabrics often cover the surface of the artifact mount. This direct contact introduces a great deal of opportunity for physical and chemical interaction with the object. A stable fiber with good aging properties, spun and made into a dimensionally stable fabric will best serve this purpose. Dyes are tested to ensure that they will not crock, or rub off, on the artifact. Other surface treatments that may be applied, such as fire retardants and stain-preventive coatings, have proven to be unstable in close contact with artifacts. In addition to woven and knitted materials, nonwoven fabrics such as DuPont Tyvek (a spun-bond material made of polyolefin, a stable polymer) can serve as covers for mounts. Texture and color (or ease of dyeing or painting) are key properties considered when choosing a fabric for a mount. After testing, fabrics are scoured to remove sizings and oils from manufacture. If necessary, the fabrics can then be dyed or painted with stable, tested materials and techniques to achieve the desired colors or patterns.

Strategies for display

“Flat” textiles such as quilts, samplers, and embroidered panels are often intended to be viewed from a single side. While there is emphasis on the two-dimensionality of the works, their structure includes a depth which must be considered for proper support. Padded fabric-covered panels made of archivally sound materials conform to any irregularities of the surface. Fabric for the panel is selected to provide a friction nap-bond, which contributes to the support that the panel provides. An appropriate color choice can mask losses and de-emphasize any

Figure 1: Thomas Willis, Hiram Emery; silk, painting, and embroidery. The silk back panel shattered in transit due to lack of support.

Figure 3: Hanging hooks, not original to this tapestry, unevenly distribute weight and may cause tears and distortions along the top edge.

Figure 2: Katy Schimert, A Woman’s Brain; aluminum mesh, wool, steel pins, and electrical sockets. The textile sculpture is supported for flat display by a custom panel of laminated aluminum and polyethylene.

Williamstown Art Conservation Center | 2322 | Art Conservator | Fall 2010

Members of the Consortium

Williamstown

Art Conservation Center

227 South Street, Williamstown,

MA 01267

Addison Gallery of American Art,

Phillips Academy

—Andover, MA

Albany Institute of History and Art

—Albany, NY

Alice T. Miner Colonial Collection

—Chazy, NY

T he Arkell Museum

—Canajoharie, NY

Arnot Art Museum

—Elmira, NY

Art Complex Museum

—Duxbury, MA

Atlanta Historical Society, Inc.

—Atlanta, GA

Bennington Museum

—Bennington, VT

Berkshire Museum

—Pittsfield, MA

Bowdoin College Museum of Art

—Brunswick, ME

Charles P. Russell Gallery,

Deerfield Academy

—Deerfield, MA

T he Cheney Homestead of the

Manchester Historical Society

—Manchester, CT

Colby College Museum of Art

—Waterville, ME

Connecticut Historical Society

—Hartford, CT

T he Daura Gallery at Lynchburg

College

—Lynchburg, VA

Eric Carle Museum of Picture

Book Art

—Amherst, MA

Fort Ticonderoga

—Ticonderoga, NY

Frances Lehman Loeb Art Center

Vassar College

—Poughkeepsie, NY

Frederic Remington Art Museum

—Ogdensburg, NY

Gershon Benjamin Foundation,

—Clayton, GA

Herbert F. Johnson Museum of Art,

Cornell University

—Ithaca, NY

Historic Deerfield, Inc.

—Deerfield, MA

Hood Museum of Art,

Dartmouth College

—Hanover, NH

T he Hyde Collection

—Glens Falls, NY

T he Lawrenceville School

—Lawrenceville, NJ

Mead Art Museum,

Amherst College

—Amherst, MA

Memorial Art Gallery,

University of Rochester

—Rochester, NY

Middlebury College Museum of Art

—Middlebury, VT

Mount Holyoke College Art Museum

—South Hadley, MA

Munson Williams Proctor Arts

Institute

—Utica, NY

Museum of Connecticut History

—Hartford, CT

Neuberger Museum,

Purchase College, State University

of New York

—Purchase, NY

New Hampshire Historical Society

—Concord, NH

New York State Office of General

Services, Empire State Plaza Art

Collection

—Albany, NY

Norman Rockwell Museum at

Stockbridge

—Stockbridge, MA

Picker Art Gallery,

Colgate University

—Hamilton, NY

Portland Museum of Art

—Portland, ME

Preservation Society of Newport

County

—Newport, RI

Rhode Island School of Design

Museum of Art

—Providence, RI

T he Rockwell Museum of

Western Art

—Corning, NY

Roland Gibson Gallery, State

University of New York

—Potsdam, NY

St. Johnsbury Athenaeum

—St. Johnsbury, VT

Smith College Museum of Art,

—Northampton, MA

Springfield Library and Museums

Association

—Springfield, MA

Sterling and Francine Clark Art

Institute

—Williamstown, MA

Suzy Frelinghuysen and George L.K.

Morris Foundation

—Lenox, MA

Union College

—Schenectady, NY

Vermont Historical Society

—Montpelier, VT

Vermont Museum and Gallery

Alliance

—Shelburne, VT

Williams College Museum of Art

—Williamstown, MA

Atlanta Art Conservation Center

6000 Peachtree Road

Atlanta, GA 30341

Alabama Historical Commission

—Montgomery, AL

Booth Western Art Museum

—Cartersville, GA

Brenau University

—Gainesville, GA

Columbia Museum of Art

—Columbia, SC

T he Columbus museum

—Columbus, GA

High Museum of Art

—Atlanta, GA

Montgomery Museum of Fine Arts

—Montgomery, AL

Telfair Museum of Art

—Savannah, GA

Mission Statement

T he mission of the Williamstown

Art Conservation Center, a

non-profit institution, is to protect,

conserve and maintain the objects

of our cultural heritage; to provide

examination, treatment, consultation

and related conservation services

for member institutions, and for

other non-profit organizations,

corporations and individuals; to

conduct educational programs with

respect to the care and conserva-

tion of works of art and objects of

cultural interest; to participate in the

training of conservators; to promote

the importance of conservation

and increase the awareness of the

issues pertinent to collections care;

and to conduct research and dis-

seminate knowledge to advance the

profession.

discoloration of the object. Methods of attachment that secure the object to the

support are critical to a system’s success. When displayed vertically, the weight of the object transfers stress to the point of attachment. Spreading that stress over a broad and stable area is a primary goal in preparing these objects for display. Fabric-covered supports allow for minimally interventive stitching to provide such attachment. Stitching is chosen only when a textile is strong enough to withstand conservation stitching and can support its weight from these carefully chosen points of attachment. Threads are chosen for several qualities including visual appearance, chemical stability, and balance of strength and breaking point to prevent damage. Thread must not react with the object or degrade quickly. The ideal thread will provide adequate and gentle support without damaging the object, in a diameter that safely passes through existing stitch holes and/or interstices of the weave. If the thread matches the object in color and gloss, and is of a fine-enough diameter to be visually inconspicuous, larger stitches may be used, which will better distribute the weight of the object and reduce the potential for damage. Stitch placement is critical, since each

stitch affects how stresses are transferred through the object; a misplaced stitch can result in distortion or tearing, in particular on an aged textile.

As the dimensions of a “flat” textile increase, the weight increases and the planar irregularities/unevenness compound over a greater distance. Improper hanging can cause tears and distortions[Fig. 3]. If the object is stable enough, a hanging system of wide cotton twill tape and hook-and-loop tape can be attached to the top edge. For a large textile to hang safely and squarely, the hanging system should be perpendicular to the direction of vertical stress in the center of the artifact (usually the warp yarns of the fabric). This isolates and prevents any unevenness and undue stresses from being transferred through the object. A safe method of hanging will distribute the weight of the object over a broad and stable area to prevent damage from hanging. When executed correctly, these hanging systems are also removable with minimal change to the object.

Costumes and three-dimensional objects pose similar concerns, compounded by their more complex structure and range of use. These will be addressed in a second installment.

Allison McCloskey, Assistant

Conservator of Objects and Textiles,

has been at WACC since 2007,

treating artwork and working

with clients to help preserve their

collections. She studied Art History

and Museum Studies at Rutgers

University (1998), followed by the MA

programs in Art History and Museum

Studies at Syracuse University

(2001). She specialized in textiles

with a concentration in preventive

conservation at the Winterthur/

University of Delaware Program in Art

Conservation (2006) and completed

internships at the National Museum

of the American Indian and with the

New York State Bureau of Historic

Sites at Peebles Island Resource

Center (PIRC). She is a Professional

Associate of the American Institute

for Conservation.

AR

T C

ON

SE

Rv

AT

OR

WIL

LIA

ms

TO

WN

Ar

T C

ON

se

rv

AT

ION

Ce

NT

er

22

7 s

OU

Th

sT

re

eT

WIL

LIA

ms

TO

WN

, m

A 0

12

67

Ch

AN

gE

SE

Rv

ICE

RE

qU

ES

TE

D

vIs

IT U

s O

NL

INe

:

WW

W.W

ILL

IAm

sT

OW

NA

rT.

Or

G

NO

N-P

rO

fIT

Or

G.

U.s

. P

Os

TAG

e

PA

ID

AL

BA

NY

NY

Pe

rm

IT #

37

0

art conservator spring 2011

Documents