This has nothing to do with my original comments which were about the use
of acrylic *sizing.* The study was by James Hamm et al, Art Conservation
Dept, Buffalo State College, Buffalo NY and is published, I repeat, in:
_Saving the Twentieth Century: The Conservation of Modern Materials_
Proceedings of a Conference Symposium '91, Ottawa, Canada, 15-20 Sept.
1991, Edited by David W. Grattan and published by the Canadian Conservation
Institute, Ottawa, 1993 (pp. 381-392)
While respectful of the Copyright, I quote from the abstract:
"An uncharacteristic yellow/brown discoloration in the background of a
color-field painting (1970) by Robert Goodnough initiated the present
investigation of acrylic dispersion media. The owner recalls that the
yellowing had become objectionable as early as the mid 1970s... the
artist... would coat his cotton duck canvas overall with Liquitex matte
medium before applying any paint...
Evidence obtained from mock-ups created to duplicate discoloration caused
by natural aging is discussed. Remarkably, this discoloration occurs over a
relatively brief period of time under ordinary environmental conditions of
temperature, relative humidity, and light. The discoloration can occur in
any brand of acrylic media or gel, but is most noticeable in the
unpigmented gels, matte, and gloss media. It is the results of a
detrimental interaction between the support and the media."
Elsewhere:
"...since the composition of acrylic dispersion media is quite complex, and
some of the individual components may not age well on their own. Besides
the acrylic resin itself, we may find residual (unpolymerized) monomer,
surface active agent (emulsifier), protective colloid (thickener),
water-soluble initiator, plasticizer, pH buffer, anti-foaming agent,
coalescing agent (film former), preservative, drying retarder, freeze-thaw
stabilizer, UV inhibitor, optical brightener, matting agent, and water."
Notice that it stops short of saying anything about the stuff being
cholesterol free:-)
>I haven't seen that info, though I've learned in my old age to be
I have. I also take this opportunity to deny the nasty rumors to the effect
that I have written more books than I have ever read:-)
>skeptical of anything I haven't "proved" myself & then I'm wrong at
>least 50%. I've sure watched a lot of "science" go poof, as have you.
>And let us note in passing that a lot of linen and rag covered with
>acrylic is being purchased in the high 7 figures by a lot of collectors &
>museums -- and that's 100%, not 1/12th!
What does that prove? Some people have more money than brains and some
people will collect items they know are fugitive (e.g., chromogenic prints)
because they are important and after all, with a good low temperature
storage area you can make anything last nearly forever.
BTW, on the Conservation DistList there is at least one conservator whose
specialty is the conservation of items made of chocolate. (A sweet job if
there ever was one;-))
>Which brings me to the point that archivality somehow seems to be either
>ignored entirely (as in the Iris prints you cite) or carried to excess,
>as I believe photographers tend to do. (Maybe it's to compensate for
>using machines, or making prints or.......?) Anyway, it's one thing
>if the work is going to die by sundown, another if in 100 years it will
>have color changes, or edge deterioration.
>
>In fact I find the effects of aging in a photograph USUALLY enhance its
>charms (though not fading, can't stand fading). Don't we try to imitate
In the 70s a wellknown NY gallery owner was not interested in archivally
processed prints because they were not a good long term investment. He made
a lot more money selling old faded prints and in fact prints that looked
like new were very hard to sell...
..
>My point was, and I think I'll stick with it, that if you went on a
>rampage about the acrylic you might at least have said boo about the
>Polaroid (tho better late than never). ( ;->)
Polaroid? How about the other ones? That is a bit much to expect from
someone who has already researched, written and published about at least
1500 inventions and products. The result of this, btw, has been RSI
(Repeated Stress Injury) and I have to keep typing, among other things, to
a minimum. Hence don't expect more than one post from me every few days.
Best, etc.
Luis Nadeau
NADEAUL@NBNET.NB.CA
Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada