Revista Brasileira de Arqueometria, Restauração e Conservação. Vol.1, No.3, pp.

086 - 091 Copyright © 2007 AERPA Editora

THE RESTORATION OF A PAINTING BY UMBERTO BOCCIONI

Marina Pugliese°; Paolo Cremonesi*; Barbara Ferriani°°; Antonio Iaccarino Idelson**; Carlo Serino**;
°Civiche Raccolte d’Arte - Castello Sforzesco - Milano; *Cesmar7; °°Ferriani Ltd; **Equilibrarte Ltd.

Fig.1 The painting after restoration

Introduction it's a precious document of the painting’s history

“Costruzione spiralica” an Umberto Boccioni oil
painting on canvas, 95 x 95 cm, dates between 1913-
1914 (Figure 1). The work, showing a seated female
figure, is a negation of the traditional portrait genre.
The composition focuses on the absence of face of the
subject, whose form, deconstructed in spiral patterns,
occupies the centre of the painting.
The colour fields are built up by superimposed thick
layers applied by brush or spatula, while the outlines
are realized “in negative“ - that is, leaving the
underlying white preparation uncovered.
The original stretcher is an oddity of this painting: with
its many labels, witnessing the rich history of the piece,
(Figure 2).
The work, owned by Civiche Raccolte d’Arte di
Milano since 1934, has presented conservation
problems over time. It was restored three times by the
same restorer, in 1960, 1966 and 1967, and during one
of these interventions the painting was relined. In 1971,
the restorer warned the about the fragility and the lack
of cohesion of the colours. Recently there has been
evidence of further deterioration (Figures 3 and 4) [1].
As with most of the twentieth-century industrial woven
canvases prepared with cold sizing and an absorbent
ground, relining with acqueous adhesives has caused
canvas shrinkage and detachment of the layers [2].

86

Fig. 2 The stretcher before restoration
Fig. 3 The painting before restoration - localized
facing applied to avoid paint layer losses
Restorations undertaken in the 1960s were invasive
and, besides the relining, the painted surface was
heavily retouched and even varnished (Figures 5).
The restoration
Preliminary investigation was limited to non-invasive
analyses: retro-illumination, infrared (IR)
reflectography and ultraviolet (UV) fluorescence.
Examination under UV light revealed a strong,
yellowish fluorescence: an intense, matt tone, which
led us to suspect a fluorescent dye added to render the
retouching "invisible".
Surface cleaning was accomplished with a 1% aqueous
solution of sodium citrate, buffered to pH 6 to prevent
any interference with the varnish layer. Hydrophilic
materials, mainly animal glue from the lining paste,
were also removed in this treatment. Some
fluorescence appeared on the cleaning swabs [3].
Next, the polarity of the varnish layers was determined
with a solubility test. Two different series of solvent
mixtures were used to explore a polarity range from Fd
97-47 and Fd 97-36. One series progressed from pure
ligroin, through nine different mixtures of ligroin and
acetone, ending with pure acetone; the other comprised
nine mixtures of ligroin and ethanol, ending with pure
ethanol.
Fig. 4 Flaking of the picture layers
Fig. 5 Overpaint on paint loss
It was found that some non-fluorescent material could
be dissolved Fd 82. Furthermore, it was possible to
distinguish two distinct varnish layers: an outer non-
fluorescent layer, only over blues and oranges, soluble
at low polarities (c. Fd 80), and a lower fluorescent
layer over the whole surface, becoming soluble at
increasing polarity. At a polarity of Fd 57, paint loss
occurred.
Some zones were highly sensitive even to low-polarity
solvents, due to lack of cohesion and rather severe
degradation of the binder.
Cleaning was confined to the removal of the uppermost
layer of varnish.
87

Fig.6 The removal of the lining canvas
After removing the lining (Figure 6), we concentrated
on thinning down the discontinuous layer of paste
residues covering the back (Figure 7).
Considering the fragility and susceptibility to water of
the crystallized canvas and the ground, we refrained
from traditional procedures relying on mechanical
means or swab applications of warm water.
Fig.7 Magnified detail of glue-paste residues on
on the original canvas
Fig.8 The removal of glue-paste residues -
Test: laser
Our first attempt, based on previous experience, was
the use of laser, but these trials were unsuccessful as
they caused excessive warming of the treated area
(Figure 8).
Having ruled out mechanical and physical means, we
reconsidered an aqueous medium to dissolve, or at
least swell, the hydrophilic material.
The strategy was to control the diffusion of water
modifying its viscosity by means of gelling agents, and
to try to speed up the action by means of water-soluble
active principles.
Accordingly, we tested aqueous gels containing
surfactants (sodium dodecyl sulfate), acidic and
alkaline buffers, and enzymes (pepsin at pH 5.5, papain
at pH 7.2, trypsin at pH 8.2) (Figure 9).
To thicken the solutions we preferred polyacrylic acid
(Carbopol®) to cellulose ethers, since much greater
viscosity could be obtained at a lower relative amount
of solid gelling agent.
All the formulations tested were effective but the most
homogeneous results were obtained with a simple
acidic gel (100 ml deionized water, 1.5 g Carbopol
Ultrez 10, triethanolamine to pH 5.5-6.0) (Figures 10
and 11).
Fig. 9 The removal of glue-paste residues -
Test: trypsin pH 8,2
Fig. 10 The removal of glue-paste residues -
Selected test: carbopol gel pH 5,5 - 6,0
After cleaning the canvas, the correct adhesion
between canvas, ground and paint layers was restored,
using a non-aqueous consolidant, since aqueous lining
had been the cause of the damage.
After carrying out tests, BEVA 371 solution was
applied on the canvas and activated on a heated low-
pressure table. Relining of the painting was not
necessary: it was sufficient to mount it on the stretcher
using strip lining, provided that continuous gradual
tension was maintained (Figure 12).
88
 Fig. 11 The original canvas after cleaning treatment
The new tensioning system
Structural conservation of the painting involved its
interaction with the stretcher, as overstretching of the
unlined canvas had to be avoided [4].
We chose to preserve the original stretcher [5, 6, 7].
Since tensioning systems based on corner expansion
may cause dangerous local concentrations of forces,
especially when the canvas is fixed on a continuous
profile, the original stretcher was kept as a rigid
reference structure, while the painting was provided
with elastic tension from an independent system.
Flowing Teflon profiles were added to the external
profile, where the canvas is normally nailed, and the
canvas is kept under tension from the rear by spring-
loaded mechanisms.
Fig. 12 The polyester strip lining applied with Beva
film on heated low pressure table
A thin but resistant frame in laminated oak was added
in the inner span of the stretcher, held at a fixed
distance with brass bolts. This frame houses the
patented elastic tensioning system. Applied force is
now evenly distributed on the strip-lining canvas, wich
has an inserted steel rod (Figures 13, 15 and 16). The
natural movement of the painting is continuously under
gentle control, free to move along the profile of the
stretcher. Tension can be finely regulated and a value
of 2,5 N/cm has been chosen (Figure 14).
Fig. 13 The new tensioning system
during installation
Fig. 14 Ratio between spring elongation
and tension on painting perimeter
Marina Pugliese directed the works.
Barbara Ferriani performed the painting restoration.
Carlo Serino and Antonio Iaccarino Idelson carried out
the tensioning system.
Paolo Cremonesi, chemist, made the scientific
investigations and gave advice on cleaning.
References
(1) Cremonesi Paolo, Ferriani Barbara, Iaccarino
Antonio, Serino Carlo, Pugliese Marina,
“Derestoration and Mechanical Conservation of a
CanvasPainting by Boccioni”, IIC Congress Preprints,
Bilbao, 2004, p. 222
(2) Ackroyd Paul, “The Structural Conservation of
Canvas Paintinsg: Changes in Attutude and Practice
sincerthe Early 1970s , Rewiews in Conservation, IIC,
London, 2002
(3) Cremonesi, Paolo; "L'uso degli enzimi nella
pulitura di opere policrome", Il Prato, Padova, 1999
(4) Capriotti Giorgio, Antonio Iaccarino Idelson,
“Tensionamento dei dipinti su tela”, Nardini Editore,
Firenze, 2004
(5) Iaccarino Antonio, “Dipinti su tela, una proposta
per conservare i telai originali”, Materiali e Strutture,
year VI n.2, 1996
89
Fig. 15 The tensioning system: description of the main elements

90
 Fig. 16 The back of the painting after installation of the internal frame with the tensioning system;
the lid is open and the spring-loaded mechanisms can easily be seen

(6) Iaccarino Idelson Antonio, Serino Carlo, “Il Authors’ E-mails

tensionamento e la rifunzionalizzazione del telaio Marina Pugliese - marina.pugliese@comune.milano.it
originario” in “Il pastello bianco di Giovanni Boldini. Paolo Cremonesi - plcremon@inwind.it
Tecnica esecutiva e restauro di un pastello su tela” Barbara Ferriani - barbaraferriani@virgilio.it
edited by Borghese Paola, Ferriani Barbara, Kermes Antonio Iaccarino Idelson - a.iaccarino@inwind.it
n.57, Nardini Editore, Firenze, 2005, pp. 41-56 Carlo Serino - c.serino@infinito.it
(7) Rava Antonio, Serino Carlo, Iaccarino Antonio,
“Restauro del grande dipinto di J.Miel nel soffitto
della Sala del Trono della Regina del Palazzo Reale di
Torino”, II Congress of IICG Preprints, Genova, 2004,
pp. 196-205

91