Reversibility and minimal intervention as the focus of lining

paintings: the mist-lining method

Andreja Ravnikar
Mentor: Ass.Prof. Lucija Monik Ramov, MA
Co-mentor: Ass.Prof. Barbka Gosar Hirci, MA
Academy of Fine Arts and Design of the University of Ljubljana, Department of
Restoration
andreja-r@hotmail.com




1. Introduction

New, innovative solutions considering modern principles of restoring artworks
have been developed recently in the field of conservation and restoration of
paintings. We are grateful that the remarkable progress of the profession encourages
the use of ethical principles in restoration, while the number of unsatisfactory
procedures is declining and the general publics awareness of the importance of
preserving artistic heritage is growing. Unfortunately, however, available resources
often dictate which materials will be used. This consequently affects the quality of
conservation and restoration procedures, which must be carried out professionally
and carefully to guarantee the physical, symbolic, historical and aesthetic integrity of
the artwork.


2. Guidelines

The main goal of the theoretical and practical parts of the thesis and the
subsequent intervention on the baroque painting of Jesus among Teachers
1
from the
St. Trinity Church in Ljubljana was to rescue and stabilize the weakened woven
support. The focus was on two basic principles: minimal intervention and reversibility.
The painting was in a relatively poor condition before the conservation-
restoration procedure. The supporting canvas was sewn together from two different
pieces of woven support, which caused considerable damage to the picture layer,
especially in the lower part of the painting. The canvas was wrinkled (Figure 1) and
damaged in several places, while the damage to the painting had been
inappropriately treated in the past (Figure 2).

1
Conservationrestoration work was carried out under the expert guidance of the Department of Easel
Painting of the Ljubljana ZVKDS Restoration Centre.

Reversibility and minimal intervention as the focus of lining paintings: the mist-lining method

2










Figure 1. Wrinkled canvas and widespread network of cracks in the lower part of the painting under
raking light (Andreja Ravnikar, February 2011)



Figure 2. Deformation of the canvas caused by improperly restored damage (Andreja Ravnikar,
February 2011)


3. Choosing an appropriate lining method

To find the most appropriate lining method for stabilization of the canvas, and
because the painting had been returned to a relatively unstable environment after its
restoration, a test was carried out on samples similar to the original painting. The
results
2
of the test and their evaluation were of great assistance in making a final
decision on the further treatment of the woven support.
Two lining methods were carried out on the samples: the mist-lining method
3

and the more classical, nap-bonding method
4
. Both were carried out following the

2
Prior to and after simulation of the lining, the weight of individual samples was measured (canvas,
fabric, adhesive), listed, the amount of used adhesive was calculated, and an attempt at removing the
lining canvas / non-woven fabric was made.
3
The method was developed and presented to the public in 2003 by Ren Hoppenbrouwers and J os
van Och, Dutch conservators and restorers. In order to stabilize the canvas support of large format
paintings, they proceeded from Mehra's cold lining method and the use of synthetic adhesives.
4
The nap-bonding method was developed by VishwaRay Mehra. In this method a thickened adhesive
is applied through a sieve in points evenly distributed on the surface of the canvas. Application
through a sieve ensures consistency and minimal application of the adhesive with no additional
moistening, and the lining canvas is easier to remove.

Andreja Ravnikar


3
basic principles of minimal intervention and reversibility. The two methods employ
little adhesive, creating less impact on the canvas, physically as well as chemically,
and also facilitate subsequent removal of the lining canvas. Both methods were
carried out on different materials - on a classic synthetic canvas and on a very thin,
non-woven fabric.



Figures 3 and 4. Two samples after removal of the lining fabric from the lined canvas. The mist-lining
method (right) leaves no residue of the adhesive (Andreja Ravnikar, February 2011).

Both methods proved satisfactory compared to the traditional methods and
adhesives used for lining. Adhesive consumption was extremely small, its quantity in
the mist-lining method being significantly reduced. The test proved the complete
removability of the lining, which is the main objective of the lining itself (Figures 3 and
4). The strength of the support to the painting and the adhesive bond can be
regulated using different fabrics. The threads of the synthetic canvas are in fact
stronger and more strength is required to remove it, which means that the adhesive
bond is stronger.



Figure 5. Fabric with upstanding nap before applying the adhesive (Andreja Ravnikar, May 2011)

Reversibility and minimal intervention as the focus of lining paintings: the mist-lining method

4

Figure 6. The cross-section of the sample shows how the adhesive envelopes the upstanding nap of
non-woven fabric (Andreja Ravnikar, May 2011)

A thin, semi-synthetic, non-woven fabric with the commercial name TNT 54 was
used in the mist-lining method conducted on the painting because of its composition
(34% cellulose and 66% polyester). The percentage of cellulose fibres of the
basically synthetic fabric in combination with polyester fibres forms a stronger, less
absorbent and more flexible fabric suitable for the volatile church environment.


4. Mist-lining procedure

The non-woven fabric was stretched onto a temporary wedge stretcher that was
slightly larger than the size of the painting. The stretched fabric was gently
roughened on one side with sand paper in three different directions to increase the
nap surface. This created a layer with greater surface area to which the adhesive
was later applied (Figures 5 and 6).


Figure 7. Applying adhesive with a high-transfer efficiency spray gun (Andreja Ravnikar, J anuary
2012)

In the next stage, a mixture of acrylic adhesives (Plextol D 540 and Dispersion K
360) was applied on the fabric. The pH value was adjusted to neutral by adding
Andreja Ravnikar


5
sodium hydroxide to the mixture. The adhesive was evenly distributed on the
upstanding nap in three layers using a high-transfer efficiency spray gun (Figure 7).
Each layer was left to dry before the next layer was applied. The adhesive thus
enveloped individual fibres, making the fabric maintain an open structure allowing
successful reactivation of the adhesive from the back side as well as its elasticity,
because the adhesive is kept on the surface only and does not penetrate deeper into
the structure.


Figures 8 and 9. Installing a moistened cloth with solvent and preparing an airtight chamber for
reactivation of the adhesive (Andreja Ravnikar, J anuary 2012)

The adhesive was reactivated with ethanol vapour (through a cloth moistened
with solvent) from the backing of the non-woven fabric (Figure 8) in an improvised,
airtight chamber (Figure 9). When the adhesive layer became sticky enough, the
moistened cloth was removed from the chamber, as well as the lower layer of
Melinex which allowed for free air flow whilst pressing the layers together.
Consequent resealing of the low-pressure vacuum table and the regulation of
pressure enabled the two canvases to merge, and established adhesion. The sealing
was removed after 45 minutes, and the painting was left in place until it stabilized and
the solvent fully evaporated (Figure 10).

Figure 10. Mist-lining with front side up (Andreja Ravnikar, April 2012)




Reversibility and minimal intervention as the focus of lining paintings: the mist-lining method

6
5. Evaluation

After the mist-lining procedure was completed, the original canvas of the
painting, along with the structural damage, was stabilized in a rather non-invasive
manner. The joint between the two fabrics was extremely light, but nevertheless
strong enough to provide sufficient support for the damaged painting. The input of the
adhesive was limited to a minimum, ensuring high, if not complete, removability of
the lining fabric from the original canvas.
The adhesive-spraying method respects the physical properties of the original
canvas and maintains its open structure, providing the elasticity needed to keep the
canvas breathing. The reactivation of the adhesive does not require an increased
temperature, which, in some cases, presents a great burden to the picture layer. The
selection of the lining fabric or canvas also defines the final weight of the lined
painting, which, in our case, was just slightly increased.


6. Conclusion

Even though lining is a procedure that will not be fully visible to the subsequent
viewer, it needs to be carried out in the most precise and quality/professional manner,
taking into account the compatibility of materials used and certain precautionary
actions before the beginning of the actual procedure.
The lining canvas should not in any way affect the adhesion and cohesion
forces between the picture layer and its original support. Larger amounts of adhesive
between the original and the lining canvas can affect the elasticity of the painting,
which may become rigid and unresponsive to the natural forces within.
All these factors are crucial when choosing the appropriate lining method. We
should be aware that our decisions may be of significance to our descendants, who
will be tackling similar problems and seeking appropriate solutions with the same
desire to preserve artwork. Our job, when it comes to the lining canvas, is to provide
for the easier removal of added materials, which the mist-lining method certainly
allows.

Andreja Ravnikar


7

Figures 11 and 12. Front and back side of the
painting after the conservation restoration works (Andreja Ravnikar, February 2011)

Despite numerous positive features of mist-lining, it is necessary to also
mention some disadvantages or characteristics which require special attention.
Reactivation of the adhesive with polar solvents could affect the paint layer or only
specific pigments. Before the reactivation the adequacy of solvent in all colour areas
must be examined. In case of over-sensitivity a different method not involving
solvents must be chosen.
Mist-lining method was developed specifically for the purpose of cold lining of
large-format paintings in combination with vacuum envelope, but it is necessary to be
an experienced professional for its successful execution. Independent manipulation
to large format paintings is almost impossible and it is often necessary to seek other
people's assistance as well as thoughtfully select the needed tools before the
procedure as the phases of the restoration follow very quickly.



References

OCH, J os van, HOPPENBROUWERS, Rene 'Mist-lining' and low pressure
envelopes: an alternative lining method for the reinforcement of canvas paintings:
Zeitschrift fr Kunsttechnologie und Konservierung(ZKK), vol. 17, nr. 1, 2003.