During the restoration of the Tours Fine Art Museum, doctor Langston was requested toevaluate the factors liable to contribute to the deterioration of the principal works. It was also suggested, if the worst had already occurred and certain works had already fallen victim to the ravages of time, that Langston determine the exact causes. In spite of his advanced years, Langston buckled down to the job and a year later, he produced a detailed report on the question.
The subject-matter of certain pictures provokes more comment from visitors than others; this, in turn, exposes them to the risk of serious alteration because of the exceptionally high rate of carbon dioxide (sea-oh-two) released in front of the paintings by each visitor.
Certain insects, like Sirtonis, think that they are camouflaging themselves by eating part of the surface below them. When their presence is detected on a painting, the insects need merely be crushed onto it to put the colours back in place.
Certain artists, over-conscious of their appearance, soak themselves in so much perfume that the most sensitive colours of their paintings, exposed to the almost permanent proximity of these exhalations, react by producing little whitish emulsions.
Certain particularly hot colours, when applied to canvases made of a flax rich in humus, can revive the flax to the point of making it develope young shoots capable of piercing the crust of paint.
The flourish of certain master painters is so energetic that their brush sometimes loses its bristles. Stuck onto the canvas at an angle other than that which nature intended for them, these bristles tend, with time, to straighten up. The process, which can take up to thirty years to complete, usually leads to light cracks on the surface of the painting.
The protective glass which frames certain works emits reflections of other works to the extent that all those who want to inspect the glass- (en) framed works from close up experience a feeling of deja' vu
When it appeared, the Langston report was followed by such an outcry that a second expert's report was immediately called for. The second report, noting with relief that the works studied were in an excellent state of preservation, came to the following conclusion: by dint of looking at the same picture for one whole month at a time, the stains and other parasites which James Langston thought he saw on the surface of the works, and whose presence he was determined to explain, were, in fact, to be found on the inside of his eye, which had been too greatly strained by such a degree of observation.
During the restoration of the Tours Fine Art Museum, doctor Langston was requested toevaluate the factors liable to contribute to the deterioration of the principal works. It was also suggested, if the worst had already occurred and certain works had already fallen victim to the ravages of time, that Langston determine the exact causes. In spite of his advanced years, Langston buckled down to the job and a year later, he produced a detailed report on the question.
The subject-matter of certain pictures provokes more comment from visitors than others; this, in turn, exposes them to the risk of serious alteration because of the exceptionally high rate of carbon dioxide (sea-oh-two) released in front of the paintings by each visitor.
Certain insects, like Sirtonis, think that they are camouflaging themselves by eating part of the surface below them. When their presence is detected on a painting, the insects need merely be crushed onto it to put the colours back in place.
Certain artists, over-conscious of their appearance, soak themselves in so much perfume that the most sensitive colours of their paintings, exposed to the almost permanent proximity of these exhalations, react by producing little whitish emulsions.
Certain particularly hot colours, when applied to canvases made of a flax rich in humus, can revive the flax to the point of making it develope young shoots capable of piercing the crust of paint.
The flourish of certain master painters is so energetic that their brush sometimes loses its bristles. Stuck onto the canvas at an angle other than that which nature intended for them, these bristles tend, with time, to straighten up. The process, which can take up to thirty years to complete, usually leads to light cracks on the surface of the painting.
The protective glass which frames certain works emits reflections of other works to the extent that all those who want to inspect the glass- (en) framed works from close up experience a feeling of deja' vu
When it appeared, the Langston report was followed by such an outcry that a second expert's report was immediately called for. The second report, noting with relief that the works studied were in an excellent state of preservation, came to the following conclusion: by dint of looking at the same picture for one whole month at a time, the stains and other parasites which James Langston thought he saw on the surface of the works, and whose presence he was determined to explain, were, in fact, to be found on the inside of his eye, which had been too greatly strained by such a degree of observation.