Topic: Glass Restoration Topic

[antonizz]

!! I have no idea where to place this topic. !!


Hi everybody,

I would like to learn about professional glass restoration, and I find it quite
hard to gather information about this.

Does anybody have any good links/sources to start with?


I can image there must be more people interested about this topic.
(The reason I use the term 'professional', of course is to avoid people
messing up their valuable items themselves.)

For instance, I would like to try to practice 'restoring' some gilding,
on a couple of low-value items. (See pictures).

I want to start with restoring the gilding, then breaking it, and try gluing.

Even on this glass for example, I believe it's gilded with gold-leaf.
Not gold-paint. But I have no idea how to restore this.


So how was it made?  Maybe the goldsize was applied by brush, on a spinning table?


I'm curious to see if this restoration-topic will gain some interest.


Thanks anyway!

[Ekimp]

Remember reading a topic on a restoration a while ago which was interesting, see: http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,70185.msg

Good website from that with more examples of restoration projects: http://www.sarahpeek.co.uk/

[flying free]

I have a weird view on this topic.  I never had my vase I mentioned in that linked thread above repaired.  It might be more valuable to resell if I did perhaps.  It would certainly look 'whole' with a repair to the rim bite and it's a large showy piece so for display it might be worth it.  So I can understand why people would like a piece in their collection to look complete.  New methods of glass repair are reversible and the few I've seen look really good.
 
 However, generally for my collection I prefer to have the pure item.  That is, I like it with it's history.  Perhaps that's really why I've never had the vase repaired.   I have seen many glass items in museum collections that are damaged.

I own some damaged pieces because I've bought them over the last twenty years just to learn about glass i.e. how it was layered/made or the colours etc. and they cost very little for the learning I gained from them.  In fact  they hold value for me because they cost little and I can look at them more closely than I could if they were whole.

I also have a few, not many, damaged pieces that are old and rare and I bought those because that glass will never be made again.  Some of them were made from coloured glass specifically mixed from recipes only the maker knew about (before glass colours were commercially supplied).  The damage they have is their story, their history of usage and ownership carried with them, ending up with my ownership.

Obviously if they were perfect they would be valued at much more than in their damaged state.  However 'restoring' a piece of glass isn't going to make it of the same value  as an undamaged piece.  And why restore something that isn't going to degrade (glass) because it's damaged? 

Having said that, the perspex (or similar? not entirely sure what it is but it looked like clear perspex to me)  repairs I've seen added into damaged items are really good in that the whole shape can be seen but also the replacement parts are clearly visible. So I can understand that others might want to use that reversible method to repair a piece of glass.

Conservation views and methods have changed over the years I think. What was practised a 100 even 30 years ago might now be considered too invasive a technique on many artworks.  Acceptable views and the techniques and methods of repair may change again in the future. I wouldn't want to repair anything unless it was reversible.  I certainly would never add gilding or enamelling to any glass item.  That's taking away it's history and the DNA it carries with it. 

[glassobsessed]

Interesting outlook, I have often wondered about this but have never had any work done apart from polishing out a chip on an already cut and polished rim. Is there a comparison to be made in say cleaning and restoring an oil painting, for sake of argument?

John

[flying free]

In the case of items made from materials that will degrade, isn't it about conservation of the material of the piece for the knowledge of future generations rather than  restoring the picture/piece to it's original look? 
There are ethics involved in what is restored in a painting or items made of degradable materials, around what parts are absolutely key to conservation and which parts are to be left.  And around how that restoration is done, i.e. totally reversible and without damaging the original artwork.  Those ethics, and methods and techniques of repair have changed over time.

 In the case of glass it won't degrade but a comparison might be about how to conserve what original gilding or enamelling remains on the piece using reversible or non invasive techniques.  That's about conservation of original materials though not about adding 'touch up' gilding to it which makes it appear to be whole again. 
I mean I can't imagine touching up any gilding or enamelling on my pieces.  Why would I do that?  it's been handled and has the DNA of two hundred years on it's surface and with it's history.  Where it's worn, it's worn because it's been looked at, picked up, used in that same way for decades.  Like patina on a bronze or a wooden item or a carved item that's been worn and handled for centuries.  That's the piece of art with it's history.

I have a few pieces that appear to have enamelling gilding all still there.  In reality air, breath, smoke from open fires and humidity and moisture degrades those anyway so they just are not how they left the makers hands regardless of the fact they look intact. 

[flying free]

I thought this was interesting:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m001rlfm/fake-or-fortune-series-11-4-arshile-gorky

[glassobsessed]

Not that this bears much relevance - I recondition furniture be it antique or more modern, many antique pieces of furniture have been repaired at some stage in their lives. Occasionally an older piece will have several repairs that appear to date from different eras, usually showing levels of skill and attention to detail that are often beyond me. I find this history of repair fascinating and bringing an item back 'from the dead' or more accurately saving it from landfill very satisfying. Some old repairs are seamless and very hard to spot while others although of high quality make no attempt to pretend they are anything other than they are.

Anyway, back to glass, I have this Victorian jug at present which has a repaired handle. It has been reattached with two brass pins and I am in awe of the work. Not sure when it was done but drilling the holes and securing the pins would not have been easy, plenty of risk involved and to my eye an 'honest' repair.

[chopin-liszt]

The odd bit of damage doesn't bother me on something with age, especially for anything that is unique.

I have had two pieces "repaired". One in which an extremely ugly manufacturing flaw - an excess lump in a wrong colour (it looked as if a lump of mustard was stuck onto it) which spoiled the whole thing, was something I had removed.
There is photographic evidence of before and after with my full confession here somewhere. I later sold it, with the history shown and known to the buyer, who was happy about it and said they would have done exactly the same thing.

The other item was a charger. Some previous owner had scratched their own name on the bottom. It was absolutely not an artist's signature and the piece itself has been positively identified by somebody who was there when it was made and remembered it distinctly.

But the sort of damage that comes from an accident or general wear and tear is just part of its history. You can either tolerate a damaged thing, or go without.

I really do not know what I think about the notion of trying to repair gilding. I don't even know if it can be done.
If it were done, and the repair was made subtly obvious to remain honest, would it be any more attractive than just leaving it? 


 

[flying free]

...
I really do not know what I think about the notion of trying to repair gilding. I don't even know if it can be done.
If it were done, and the repair was made subtly obvious to remain honest, would it be any more attractive than just leaving it? 


 

Just my view of course but I see any addition to gilding or enamel in the manner of 'touching up' as deliberate damage.

I do, very occasionally, buy damaged glass - glass that is otherwise unlikely to come into my collection because of rarity (unlikely to see one again) or because of the rarity v cost equation of purchasing an undamaged piece (items might be found in top auction sales that I will never afford).  They carry the damage of history and use in my opinion.

m

[chopin-liszt]

  I think that's where my thoughts were heading about touching up gilding. It could well look worse and having been tampered with, it would be damage.

I suppose what it comes down to is the precise history of the individual item in question and the area to which it belongs.
Good restoration work on furniture is well-accepted.
Bad restoration on important paintings is very carefully removed and nowadays redone to clarify the original intentions.
Restoration and repairs have a very important place.

As John showed, with the amount of work that goes into a repair with metal staples  demonstrates the respect for and value the item originally held for its owner, they are not only attractive, they are part of its history.