|
|
“Methods and materials of the Amsterdam sunflowers”. Geldof M, Monico L, Johnson DH, Miliani C, Romani A, Grazia C, Buti D, Brunetti BG, Janssens K, Van der Snickt G, Vanmeert F page 85 (2019).
Abstract: This chapter explains the materials and techniques employed in the Amsterdam Sunflowers, enabling a comparison with the London version described in chapter 3. Building upon the 2016 article published in the National Gallery Technical Bulletin, it incorporates the latest findings gained by computer-assisted methods used to characterize the canvas support, as well as in-situ campaigns of non-invasive investigation together with further analysis of microscopic paint samples. The chapter sequence follows the steps in Van Gogh's working practice. Starting with the canvas, automated analysis of the weave enables the provenance of the canvas to be traced back to a particular roll of linen ordered by Van Gogh. Combining technical evidence with knowledge of historical manufacturing techniques further allows us to reconstruct the way in which Van Gogh divided his canvas roll into pieces used for Sunflowers and other paintings. We go on to consider how, with the original painting at hand, he used charcoal to transfer the motif of the London Sunflowers onto his blank canvas. Despite careful planning of the composition, an adjustment was required late in the working process, when Van Gogh added a painted wooden strip to extend the background above the flower at the top edge of the canvas. The artist's process of working up the composition in paint is described, paying special attention to his use of colour. The pigments and pigment mixtures used in the Amsterdam Sunflowers have been comprehensively mapped and are compared with the London picture, with discussion of some similarities and differences that account for the distinctive colour scheme of each painting. This understanding of colour application in the Amsterdam Sunflowers lays the foundation for subsequent chapters that will go on to consider the impact of light-induced colour changes that have taken place over time, and the related need to define appropriate lighting guidelines for the future safe preservation of this painting and others made with similar materials (chapters 5 and 7).
Keywords: H1 Book chapter; Art; AXES (Antwerp X-ray Analysis, Electrochemistry and Speciation); Antwerp Cultural Heritage Sciences (ARCHES)
DOI: 10.1017/9789048550531.005
|
|
|
|
“Visualization of As(III) and As(V) distributions in degraded paint micro-samples from Baroque- and Rococo-era paintings”. Vermeulen M, Nuyts G, Sanyova J, Vila A, Buti D, Suuronen J-P, Janssens K, Journal of analytical atomic spectrometry 31, 1913 (2016). http://doi.org/10.1039/C6JA00134C
Abstract: Orpiment and realgar, both arsenic sulfide pigments respectively used for their vivid yellow and red-orange hues, are two of many artists' pigments that appear not to be stable upon light exposure, quickly degrading to arsenic trioxide and arsenate. This often results in whitening or transparency in the painted surfaces. While conventional techniques such as microscopic Raman (mu-RS) and microscopic Fourier transform infrared (mu-FTIR) spectroscopies can allow a quick and relatively easy identification of the orpiment, realgar, artificial arsenic sulfide glass and, to some extent, arsenic oxide, the identification and visualization of distributions of the degradation products – and especially arsenate compounds – in the paint micro-samples is generally more challenging. This challenge is due to the rather unfavorable limit of detection and low spectral resolution of such conventional spectroscopic techniques. This restricts the conclusions that can be drawn regarding the conservation state of valuable works of art. In this paper, we present how synchrotron radiation (SR) based techniques can overcome this challenge while working on painting cross-sections taken from a 17th-century painting by the Flemish artist Daniel Seghers (oil on canvas, Statens Museum for Kunst, Denmark) and an 18th-century French Chinoiserie (private collection, France). SR micro-X-ray fluorescence (m-XRF) mapping analysis performed on a visually degraded orpiment-containing paint stratigraphy reveals that arsenic is distributed throughout the entire cross-section, while X-ray absorption near edge structure (mu-XANES) demonstrated that the arsenic is present in both arsenite (As-III) and arsenate (As-V) forms. The latter compound(s), despite being barely identifiable by means of FTIR, were not only located at the surface of large and partially altered grains of arsenic sulfide but also spread throughout the entire paint stratigraphy. Their presence and distribution are attributed either to the complete degradation of smaller arsenic sulfide grains or to migration of the arsenates within the paint layer away from their original location of formation. The combination of mu-XRF and mu-XANES was very useful for the characterization of the advanced degradation state of the arsenic-containing pigments in paint systems; this type of information could not be obtained by means of conventional spectroscopic methods of microanalysis.
Keywords: A1 Journal article; AXES (Antwerp X-ray Analysis, Electrochemistry and Speciation)
Impact Factor: 3.379
Times cited: 20
DOI: 10.1039/C6JA00134C
|
|
