Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-xtgtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T16:52:29.526Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Binders in Paintings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2013

Richard Newman
Get access

Extract

Many naturally occurring adhesive materials have been used throughout history to bind pigments in paintings. A number of synthetic materials have been added to these during the twentieth century.

Availability and tradition can influence the choice of binders made by artists. Probably the most widely used medium throughout history, animal glue, is also the most easily obtained. Glues made from the connective tissues or skins of local animals were major media in ancient Egyptian painting and in Chinese and Japanese painting, as well as in many other cultures throughout world history. In many cases, a variety of natural binders were available, and additional factors influenced the choice of binder by a culture. Different media have highly variable properties that affect how they are used in painting. Among these properties are solubility, the transparency or depth of color that is obtainable with a given pigment, and handling properties–how the paint flows, how quickly it dries, whether it can be applied in very thick and very thin layers, etc. Knowledge of the media utilized in paintings can help us understand the intentions of artists. Medieval European painting can be used as an example.

Type
The Science of Art
Information
MRS Bulletin , Volume 21 , Issue 12 , December 1996 , pp. 24 - 31
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Johnson, M. and Packard, E., Studies in Conservation 16 (1971) p. 145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Wolbers, R., Sterman, R.N., and Stavroudis, C., Notes for Workshop on New Methods in the Cleaning of Paintings (The Getty Conservation Institute, Marina del Rey, CA) p. 49.Google Scholar
3.Kockaert, L., Gausset, P., and Dubi-Rucquoy, M., Studies in Conservation 34 (1989) p. 183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Derrick, M., in Practical Guide to Infrared Microspectroscopy, edited by Humecki, H. (Marcel Dekker, New York, 1995) p. 287.Google Scholar
5.Derrick, M., Souza, L., Kieslich, T., Florsheim, H., and Stulik, D., J. Am. Inst. Conservation 33 (1994) p. 227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Pile, J. and White, R., Natl. Gallery Tech. Bull. 16 (1995) p. 73.Google Scholar
7.Boon, J., in Turner's Painting Techniques in Context 1995, edited by Townsend, J. (UKIC, London, 1995) p. 35.Google Scholar
8.Shedrinsky, A. and Baer, N., in Applied Pyrolysis Handbook, edited by Wampler, T. (Marcel Dekker, New York, 1995) p. 125.Google Scholar
9.Derrick, M. and Stulik, D., in ICOM Committee for Conservation 9th Triennial Meeting, Dresden, German Democratic Republic, 26-31 August 1990 Preprints (ICOM Committee for Conservation, Los Angeles, 1990) p. 9.Google Scholar
10.Chiavari, G., Galletti, G., Lanterna, G., and Mazzeo, R., J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 24 (1993) p. 227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Challinor, J., in Applied Pyrolysis Handbook, edited by Wampler, T. (Marcel Dekker, New York, 1995) p. 207.Google Scholar
12.Mills, J. and White, R., Natl. Gallery Tech. Bull. 4 (1980) p. 65.Google Scholar
13.Mills, J. and White, R., Natl. Gallery Tech. Bull. 6 (1982) p. 3.Google Scholar
14.Schilling, M. and Khanjian, H., “Gas Chromatographic Determination of the Fatty Acid and Glycerol Content of Lipids. I. The Effects of Pigments and Aging on the Composition of Oil Paints” (unpublished manuscript).Google Scholar
15.Mills, J. and White, R., Natl. Gallery Tech. Bull. 9 (1985) p. 60.Google Scholar
16.White, R. and Pilc, J., Natl. Gallery Tech. Bull. 17 (1996) p. 95.Google Scholar
17.Schilling, M., Khanjian, H., and Souza, L., J. Am. Inst. Conservation 35 (1996) p. 45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.Halpine, S., Studies in Conservation 37 (1992) p. 22.Google Scholar
19.Wolbers, R., in The American Institute for Conservation Preprints of Papers Presented at the Sixteenth Annual Meeting, New Orleans, LA, June 1–5, 1988 (American Institute for Conservation, Washington, DC, 1988) p. 245.Google Scholar
20.Erhardt, D., Hopwood, W., Baker, M., and von Endt, D., The American Institute for Conservation Preprints of Papers Presented at the Sixteenth Annual Meeting, New Orleans, LA, June 1–5, 1988 (American Institute for Conservation, Washington, DC, 1988) p. 67.Google Scholar
21.Masschelein-Kleiner, L., Heylen, J., and Tricot-Marckx, F., Studies in Conservation 13 (1968) p. 105.Google Scholar
22.Bleton, J., Coupry, C., and Sansoulet, J., Studies in Conservation 41 (1996) p. 95.Google Scholar
23.Mills, J. and White, R., The Chemistry of Museum Objects, 2nd ed. (Butterworths, London, 1994).Google Scholar
24.White, R., Natl. Gallery Tech. Bull. 10 (1986) p. 58.Google Scholar
25.Serpico, M., “The Identification and Use of Varnish on New Kingdom Funerary Equipment” (unpublished manuscript).Google Scholar
26.White, R., Studies in Conservation 23 (1978) p. 57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27.Stringari, C. and Pratt, E., in Saving the Twentieth Century: The Conservation of Modern Materials, edited by Grattan, D. (The Canadian Conservation Institute, Ottawa, 1993) p. 411.Google Scholar
28.Sonoda, N. and Rioux, J-P., Studies in Conservation 35 (1990) p. 189.Google Scholar
29.Sonoda, N., Rioux, J-P., and Duval, A., Studies in Conservation 39 (1993) p. 99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30.Challinor, J., J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 18 (1991) p. 233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar