The Art of Restoration
Art Restoration versus Art Conservation
Art restorers and art conservators work closely together to maintain the integrity of artwork, combining fields of art history and science in their overall work. However, their tasks differ in that art restorers are involved in the physical cleaning and retouching of art, while art conservators are mainly concerned with the examination and documentation of artwork, which includes minimal treatment and determining the next steps towards preventative care and slowing down degradation effects.
Art Restoration and Conservation from the 1920s to the Present
The field of art restoration is constantly changing, as new restoration methods are being constantly discovered and technology is rapidly advancing. In the United States, art conservation saw a big push during the years 1925 – 1975, during which most major museums established conservation departments and laboratories, art journals relating to conservation were being written and published, and professional training programs and degrees were established (Stoner). From then on and continuing into the present, art conservation and restoration has only expanded and improved in terms of techniques and process refinements. Restorers, conservators, and museum scientists work together to take steps towards the overall study and maintenance of artwork, using noninvasive methods as well as minimal sampling methods, of which I have described in previous posts. Results and evidence made by conservators through preliminary studies of paintings, as shown in the figure below, can reveal what surface work must be done to restore a piece, whether it is applying varnish or actual paint.
Theories and Applications of Art Restoration
The field of art restoration revolves around the material form of the artwork itself (Brandi). Art restorers must fully understand the medium of the work as well as what it is applied on, i.e. an oil painting on canvas deteriorates differently than an oil painting on a wooden panel. In the case of the latter, wood paneling may deteriorate and become porous and can therefore no longer provide proper support for the painting. A simple solution would be to just replace the wood, but doing so will change the way the painting looks – losing its readability and artistic intentions (Beck). Art restorers must keep unity in mind when approaching restoration methods for any type of artwork, especially unity of material and medium, structure and appearance (Brandi).
A section of an oil painting photographed in normal light and raking light, respectively.
Source: http://www.williamstownart.org/techbulletins/images/WACC%20Imaging%20of%20Paintings.pdf
Works Cited
Beck, James. “RESTORATION AND THE MYTH OF READABILITY.” Source: Notes in the History of Art, vol. 21, no. 1, 2001, pp. 1–3. www.jstor.org/stable/23206968.
Beck, James. “REVERSIBILITY, FACT OR FICTION?: THE DANGERS OF ART RESTORATION.” Source: Notes in the History of Art, vol. 18, no. 3, 1999, pp. 1–8. www.jstor.org/stable/23205061.
Brandi, Cesare. “Theory of Restoration, I.” The Emergence of Modern Conservation Theory, pp. 230–235.
Frances Starn. “Restoration.” The Threepenny Review, no. 28, 1987, pp. 23–25. www.jstor.org/stable/4383531.
Stoner, Joyce Hill. “Changing Approaches in Art Conservation: 1925 to the Present.” Scientific Examination of Art: Modern Techniques in Conservation and Analysis, 2005, pp. 40–57.
