Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m42fx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T21:16:33.079Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Deterioration in Abstract Expressionist Paintings: Analysis of Zinc Oxide Paint Layers in Works from the Collection of the Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden, Smithsonian Institution

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2011

Christopher A. Maines ,
Dawn Rogala ,
Susan Lake  and
Marion Mecklenburg
Christopher A. Maines
Affiliation:
National Gallery of Art, Washington DC 20565, U.S.A.
Dawn Rogala
Affiliation:
Museum Conservation Institute, Smithsonian Institution, Landover MD 20785, U.S.A.
Susan Lake
Affiliation:
Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden, Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC 20560, U.S.A.
Marion Mecklenburg
Affiliation:
Museum Conservation Institute, Smithsonian Institution, Landover MD 20785, U.S.A.
Get access

Abstract

A recent visual survey of Abstract Expressionist-era paintings in the collection of the Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden (HMSG), Smithsonian Institution revealed a particular type of paint layer separation. Earlier work by the authors showed that zinc oxide in oil paint is a contributing factor to the problem. Ten samples from five Abstract Expressionist-era paintings as well as twenty-three samples eight years or older from the Smithsonian Institution’s (SI) Materials Study Collection were analyzed by pyrolysis – gas chromatography – mass spectrometry (Py-GC-MS), and unexpectedly significant amounts of oleic (cis-octadecenoic) acid were detected in samples containing high proportions of zinc oxide (25 % or greater by weight). In a typical fully cured oil paint, the oleic acid is oxidized to azelaic (nonanedioic) acid. Although the formation of zinc soaps in oil paints is well-known, the detection of zinc oleate in paints by Py-GC-MS has never been described. The close-packing of the oleate chains in the plate-like structure of zinc oleate prevents the oxidation of the cis-double bond, and therefore prevents the formation of azelaic acid. The detection of zinc oleate in paintings is an indication that the paint layers are at risk for future separation.

Keywords

artgas chromatographyZn
Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 1319: Symposium WW – Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology IX , 2011 , mrsf10-1319-ww04-01
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2011

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

REFERENCES

1. Rogala, D., Lake, S., Maines, C., and Mecklenburg, M., Journal of the American Institute for Conservation 49 (3), in press (2010).Google Scholar
2. van der Weerd, J., PhD Thesis, AMOLF/University of Amsterdam, 2002.Google Scholar
3. van der Weerd, J., Boon, J. J., Geldof, M., Heeren, R. M. A., and Noble, P., Zeitschrift fur Kunsttechnologie und Konservierung 16, 36–51 (2002).Google Scholar
4. Robinet, L. and Corbeil, M.-C., Studies in Conservation 48 (1), 23–40 (2003).Google Scholar
5. Shimadzu, Y., Keune, K., van den Berg, K. J., Townsend, J. H., and Boon, J. J., in 15th Triennial Meeting of the ICOM Committee for Conservation (Allied Publishers Pvt Ltd, New Delhi, 2008), pp. 626–632.Google Scholar
6. Goodnough, R., ARTnews 51 (8), 36–39 (1952).Google Scholar
7. de Kooning, E., ARTnews 48 (10), 58–59 (1950).Google Scholar
8. Petit, G. and Grant, D., The manufacture and comparative merits of white lead and zinc white paints (Scott, Greenwood and Son, London, 1907), p. 84.Google Scholar
9. Bailey, R. W. and Pass, A., Journal of the Oil and Colour Chemists’ Association 36 (April), 171–194 (1953).Google Scholar
10. Schmutz, F. C., Official Digest - Federation of Paint and Varnish Production Clubs 141, 355–357 (1935).Google Scholar
11. Mecklenburg, M. F. and Tumosa, C. S., in Art in transit: studies in the transport of paintings (National Gallery of Art, Washington DC, 1991), pp. 137–171.Google Scholar
12. Mecklenburg, M. F., Erlebacher, J. D., Brown, E., and Tumosa, C. S., in Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology VI, edited by Vandiver, P. B., Goodway, M., and Mass, J. L., (Materials Research Society 712, Boston, MA, 2002) pp. 359–370.Google Scholar
13. Jacobsen, A. E. and Gardner, W. H., Industrial and Engineering Chemistry 33 (10), 1254–1256 (1941).Google Scholar
14. Barman, S. and Vasudevan, S., Journal of Physical Chemistry B 111, 5212–5217 (2007).Google Scholar
15. Mecklenburg, M. F., Tumosa, C. S., and Erhardt, D. in Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology VII, edited by Vandiver, P. B., Mass, J. L., and Murray, A., (Materials Research Society 852, Boston, MA, 2005) pp. 13–31.Google Scholar
16. Maor, Y. and Murray, A. in Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology VIII, edited by Vandiver, P. B., McCarthy, B., Tykot, R. H., Ruvalcaba-Sil, J. L., and Casadio, F., (Materials Research Society 1047, Boston, MA, 2007) pp. 127–136.Google Scholar
17. Mills, J. S. and White, R., The Organic Chemistry of Museum Objects, 2nd ed. (Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd., Oxford, 1994), p. 33 and 171.Google Scholar
18. Plater, M. J., De Silva, B., Gelbrich, T., Hursthouse, M. B., Higgitt, C. L., and Saunders, D. R., Polyhedron 22, 3171–3179 (2003).Google Scholar