Fiddle with this Vincenzo Loria watercolor? Or let well enough alone?

I showed this on the finds thread about a month ago. It's a watercolor by Neapolitan artist Vincenzo Loria (1849-1939) and shows the Second Temple of Hera at Paestum. The painting measures 6" by 14 1/8" and is thoroughly glued to a heavy card that measures about 9” x 16 5/16”.

Here's the painting on its card:


And here's the back of the card:


I'm just itching to remove the card, which I think I can manage without damaging the painting, but should I do that or just leave well enough alone? I think the browning to this paper is not from the card itself, but has been picked up from the backing that was on the frame. Easy enough to replace that with acid free material.

You can see acid burn on the front of the painting. Here's a detail from the left side:


I'm guessing that, because this is a watercolor, removing the mat burn will be more involved than if it was a print. Is there a straight forward process for doing that? I think the window in the original mat was cut about 3/4" too short and I think that extra bit does make a difference to the symmetry of the image. I'm also guessing that removing the mat burn will also involve removing the card.

I have cut a new mat from acid free material, but made the window the same size as the original. I don't think it is aesthetically acceptable to re-mat it with that strip of burn showing.

So... Leave it as it? Try to restore it myself, or at least remove the card? Have it professionally restored? (Any notion as to what that might cost?) What do you think?

 

I don't know if it can be deacidified after being glued to a board...?

 

Cost of restoring and conserving: $300 - $500 if not a bit more.

Cost of letting well enough alone: $0.00

If you plan on keeping it, then by all means, restore and conserve. If you plan on re-selling it, leave it alone and let the buyer/new owner determine what he or she would like to do. JMHO

 

That's very expensive. At that cost, it's leave-it-alone. Thanks for looking.

 

You are most welcome.

Yes it is. That was the quote we received approx. 5 - 6 yrs. ago on a smaller (9x7 in.) English work on paper dating to the early-19th C. It was watercolor and graphite on paper laid down on board. Just below the paper, written on board in brown ink was the title and artist signature.

If I recall correctly, there's much more testing of the paper and medium and how they each react to the solvents vs restoring an oil painting. Then there's the ol' debate of restoring a work on paper and/or just conserving. If I'm not mistaken, most collectors and museums prefer just conserving, while some will fully restore and conserve.

 

I suppose removing mat burn is a bit of both. Obviously with a watercolor you don't want half the pigments dissolving or floating away, and you don't want to leach the sizing from the paper.

I know that to qualify for the art restoration program at McGill University, a bachelor's degree in chemistry is a prerequisite (used to be anyhow).

 

Yes and no...

The burns from the original matting aren't going to cause any further damage to the piece other than what's already visible so long as the original matting is not reused in the re-framing process. But what will continue to aid in your painting's deterioration is the acidic board in which the painting is laid down on.

Conserving this painting means to totally remove it from its original acidic framing materials, re-mat using acid-free materials, re-frame and set behind a plate of Tru Vue museum glass.

Restoring means to remove it totally from its original framing materials, clean and remove burns, staining, foxing and any other damage that may be associated with the piece.

I'm sure poster Alec Sutton or another poster can articulate the above a hell-of-a-lot better than I just did, but that's my basic understanding.

 

Notwithstanding the expense, and the possibility of Really destroying the painting, when you finish all that, you will end up with a very expensive, but rather characterless painting (no offense, V. Loria).

So, as Nuff said, if you are selling it, leave it alone. If you are keeping it, and have pots of money to possibly lose, go to it. Otherwise, if you are keeping it, I suggest that you free float it, scars and all. A rather wider than usual space on all sides of the mat, and an elegant but not rococo gold frame will make it very appealing.

 

I think the key to this discussion is this part:

I would say that if you think you can remove this from the card fairly easily, you should do so. All the other stuff would be nice, probably expensive, but not necessary. Removing this from the card would go a long way toward conservation without expense.

 

I agree, but if the OP's plan is to re-sell this item, then all of the above is irrelevant.

I did read where he states the piece is "thoroughly glued". If the plan is to keep for self then be careful when striving to lift the paper, as some parts of that old glue may be much more thoroughly adhered than others causing the paper to tear. Once this happens, you have yet another costly issue.

Using a hairdryer to heat the adhesive before slowly lifting the paper has worked for us in the past, but this is a slow process (not recommended) and only helps if the adhesive has not harden to the point of pykrete.

Whatever you decide to do with the piece, I wish you much luck and/or many bids.

 

I have this watercolor (no longer framed) by a local artist, signed and dated ’57. The painting is 18” by 22 ¼” with no significant borders. It was totally glued, wallpapered, to a hardboard backing that measured 19 ¾” by 28”. The mat was glued to the backing and the use of glue on mat and backing was very generous.







I removed the matting and removed the backing and thought the result was pretty good.



My approach was not to remove the painting from the backing, but to remove the backing from the painting – essentially by peeling it off layer by layer. All the stress and strain went into the backing, which was destroyed in the process, but was garbage anyhow. Sorry, I didn’t take photos of the work in progress, but it took a couple of hours a day over a period of about 4 days.

The Loria painting is much smaller, but I would take the same approach in removing the backing from it.

 

Cool! Do what works for you.

The hairdryer trick worked for us a couple of times in the past. We also once used a small handheld steamer to remove a much of T-209 tobacco baseball cards that someone adhered to a board and framed back-in-the-day. Worked like a charm.