Dalibando Margarita – restorer of the highest category, the State Historical Museum, Head of the restoration workshop.
E-mail: margodalibando@yandex.ru

Zolotarev Dmitry – restorer of the second category, the State Historical Museum, artist-restorer.
E-mail: macmicus@gmail.com

Among the available methods – chemical and physical – which are practiced now to reconstruct damaged images of photographic materials in archive and museum collection only the method of photographic reconstruction is completely noninvasive. It guarantees the stability of image material structure afterwards this method performing which means, in particular, no threat of thermal or photochemical degradation. Image reconstruction mentioned here does not mean the improving of digital image copy in photographic redactor computer programs but implies scientific techniques of light production and registration, especially in UV and IR spectrum. These techniques are generally accessible and have been frequently used in the heritage investigation projects, but till recent time photographic materials were underestimated as the objects of such projects. Unlike digital graphic reconstruction that gives nice iproved pictures but with the lack of authenticity in the case of scientific UV and IR image scanning we get reliable visual data so it can be declared truly documental reconstruction. Several technical advances were required to develop a scanning set proper for dealing especially with photographic objects. In this article we describe the experience of developing such a set, its properties and opportunities in archive and museum practice.

Photography, silver mirroring, photographic plate, silver sulfide, infrared photography, visualization, chemical degradation, contactless, optical radiation, 94 nanometers.

Malachevskaya Elena – The State Research Institute for Restoration, Head of the Laboratory of Chemical and Technological Research.
E-mail: elemal34@mail.ru

Gordyushina Valentina – The State Research Institute for Restoration, Senior researcher of Laboratory of Chemical and Technological Research.
E-mail: vgordiushina@mail.ru

Ivanova Anastasia – The State Research Institute for Restoration, Junior researcher of Laboratory of Chemical and Technological Research.
E-mail:

The purpose of the article is to familiarize conservators and researchers dealing with this problem with international experience in conservation of archaeological items made of air-dried clay. The authors study the experience of leading museums dealing with this problem. The main attention is paid to reports on the methods of preservation of artifacts made of air-dried clay used by various museums and conservation organizations when they received archaeological objects. The methods of preservation of Babylonian tablets used at the Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts, the Berlin Asian Art Museum and the Louvre are studied, as well as methods of conservation of loess objects used at the Hermitage, GOSNIIR, the A. Donish Institute of History of the Academy of Sciences of Tajikistan, the Iranian National Museum (Tehran) are reflected. The article presents comparative characteristics of the properties of all consolidants used to strengthen clay artifacts. Studies of both natural and synthetic materials are described. The experience of the condition study of clay objects that have undergone the consolidation process is described, and the consequences of the use of various consolidating compounds are revealed. The consolidating compositions, which are currently used by the leading museums and restoration centers of the world, are given. The properties necessary for preservation of artifacts have been determined. Based on the data obtained, the further direction of work at the chemical technology laboratory of the State Research Institute for Restoration was chosen.

archeology, artifact, air-dried clay, loess, firing, consolidant, physico-mechanical research.

Nikolaev Kirill – The State Research Institute for Restoration, Head of the Department of scientific expertise.
E-mail: kirill.pochta@mail.ru

The article considers the issue of the artistic and historical status of the “secondary” work on the example of a copy from the original painting by the workshop of the Dutch artist Jan Mostart. On the basis of this picture, the problem of the importance of studying a copy work, which allows us to judge individual moments of the existence of the original, is raised. The complex studies of the painting allowed us to obtain full-fledged data on the technical and technological features and artistic techniques of the copyist who worked in the late XVIII – early XIX centuries, apparently within the framework of the Russian painting tradition. This work deserves attention as a valuable historical artifact that records the state of the original before restoration. On the example of this work, an important theme of the significance of the old copy arises in connection with the history of the existence of the original monument. At the same time, the appearance of such a work in the field of view of an expert allows again to draw attention to the important role of the close interaction of various research methods – art criticism, technological and restoration-analytical. It is necessary to separately emphasize the importance of working with documentary sources, which in this case made it possible to reasonably explain the differences in the image of the copy and the ancient original. Thus, this work once again notes the important role of a multilateral study of a copy as a full-fledged work of art, which is at the same time a document of its time. Considering the unclear history of the existence of the museum painting until 1862, its long stay during the XIXth century in the walls of the temple, where it was used as an icon, a comparative analysis of the pictorial features of the copy and descriptions of multi-temporal renovation interventions recorded during the restoration of the painting in 1926 is of particular interest.

Expertise, attribution, artwork, Dutch painting, technical and technological research, art history, restoration.

Rebrikova Nataliya – candidate of Biological Sciences, The State Research Institute for Restoration, Head of the Biological Laboratory.
E-mail: nrebrikova@rambler.ru

A long-term monitoring of the protective effect of three soluble in organic solvents and one water-diluted hydrophobizer on limestones with different water absorption was carried out, it was shown that it depends on the degree of water absorption of the treated limestone. Funcosil SNL protected limestone with a small water absorption for a longer time than limestone with a large water absorption. On blocks of weathered limestone, MSN-7 was superior to all other tested hydrophobizers. The compatibility of biocides and hydrophobizers used to protect the stone was investigated. The use of biocides from the quaternary ammonium salts (QAC) group either did not affect the protective properties of hydrophobizers, or reduced the duration of protective action. The decrease in the protective effect is determined not only by the recolonization rate of test sites and samples with algae biofilms, but also by measuring the water absorption time and the sorption rate of surface contaminants. In the areas treated with QAC: catamine AB or Capatox and after Funcosil SNL it was higher than in the areas treated only with Funcosil SNL. Surfactant treatment reduced the hydrophobic effect of Funcosil SNL on limestone with low water absorption to the level of unprotected stone. The degree of impact that the biocidal treatment had before applying the hydrophobizer depended on the solvent in the case of hydrophobizers soluble in organic solvents and on the degree of weathering of limestone. The solvent for Funcosil SNL is white spirit, for MSN-7 – toluene. If, when applying a hydrophobizer, a previously applied biocide with surface-active properties dissolves, this prevents its polymerization process. Some QAC are dissolved in aliphatic hydrocarbons.

Stone monuments, limestone, water absorption algae biofilms, biocides, hydrophobizers, antifouling protection.

Лаврентьева Елена Валерьевна – кандидат искусствоведения, ФГБНИУ «ГОСНИИР», научный сотрудник отдела научной реставрации станковой темперной живописи.
E-mail: Lavrentyeva_Elena@mail.ru

В статье изложены результаты технико-технологического анализа невьянской иконы «Богоматерь Владимирская» из Челябинского государственного музея изобразительных искусств, на основании которых удалось подтвердить предложенную ранее историком Е. Ройзманом датировку иконы первой половиной XVIII в. В ходе исследования установлено, что «Богоматерь Владимирская» была написана в то же время и в той же старообрядческой мастерской горнозаводского Урала, что и «Богоматерь Египетская» 1734 г. (Музей «Невьянская икона», г. Екатеринбург), экспертиза которой была проведена нами ранее. В первую очередь об этом свидетельствует почти идентично исполненное личнόе письмо (прием чередования слоёв белил и охрений при построении карнации). В обоих случаях непосредственно по санкирю свинцовыми белилами наносилась первая живописная моделировка, которая впоследствии перекрывалась желтым охрением. Объем завершался второй белильной моделировкой. За счёт густо наплавленных белил лепка личного на обеих иконах рельефна, почти скульптурна, ощутима тактильно. Другие технологические особенности также подтверждают единовременность создания обеих икон и их принадлежность к одной мастерской: 1. «набор» пигментов (искусственный азурит, киноварь, свинцовые белила, красная органика, свинцовый сурик, охры), 2. применение одинаковых красочных смесей для написания доличного, 3. состав грунта (ангидрит), 4. идентичная обработка деревянной основы и проч.

Старообрядческая иконопись, изобразительное искусство Урала, атрибуция икон, пигменты иконописи, технико-технологический анализ произведений темперной живописи.