When photography conservation is detective work | CONSERVATION STORIES

Watch a video about conservators and scientists trying to save an artwork from itself.
Rosângela Rennó’s Wedding Landscape (1996) is made up of layers of large sheets of plexiglass, to which the artist glued strips of negatives she retrieved from a wedding photography studio in Havana in 1994. Before the work went on view in Chosen Memories, a survey of Latin American contemporary art currently on view at MoMA, our photography conservators made a routine assessment of the work’s condition. What they found-and the best way to treat it-turned out to be anything but routine.
“Materials of film are generally held in an archive. So they’re typically not put on display,” explains Craig Kamrath, a photography conservation fellow, “But in this instance, the film is what you’re there to look at, these strips of negatives.”
Photography conservator Lee Ann Daffner was baffled: “When I first saw this work, I didn’t know what to think, because we had so many questions.” For one, there was a white, powdery substance appearing throughout the layers of plexiglass. Was it mold, or the dreaded “plexi disease” that can occur when a piece of plexiglass abrades, or something else? Daffner and Kamrath worked with conservation scientist Catherine H. Stephens and conservation science fellow Kyna Biggs to take samples and analyze them. But then another problem presented itself: these negatives, made of cellulose acetate, have a limited shelf life before they begin degrading. Thorough detective work needed to be done to determine the age of the negatives and how much acetic acid they were off-gassing, a sign of their decay. And was the plexiglass helping or hurting their condition?
“We’re right on the doorstep with this artwork,” Kamrath said. The discoveries are constantly unfolding in our latest episode of Conservation Stories.
Subscribe for our latest videos, and invitations to live events: mo.ma/subscribe
Explore our collection online: mo.ma/art
Plan your visit in-person: mo.ma/visit
Commit to art and ideas. Support MoMA by becoming a member today: moma.org/join
The comments and opinions expressed in this video are those of the speaker alone, and do not represent the views of The Museum of Modern Art, its personnel, or any artist.
#photography #conservation #behindthescenes #latinamericanart #museumofmodernart #moma #museum #modernart

[@votedean1335]

This was awesome. Please do more conservation videos!

[@woody4779]

Incredibly interesting, would love more of this

[@Crispy_Bee]

One huge issue with high-volume negative development (like as a wedding photographer) is that there's often insufficient washing at then end - so a lot of the fixer doesn't get removed due to time constraints. That fixer is pretty acidic with a PH as low as 4 and if that is allowed to remain it causes the negatives to deteriorate - or rather speed up their deterioration. The older film emulsions were a lot thicker than the modern ones, so they required an even longer period of washing with multiple water changes and when a negative is insufficiently washed it may show some faint (or not so faint) coloration of the base and/or develop a brown coloration over time. That could be another factor that could explain why some negative strips show a brown coloration and look much worse than others (like at 6:39). But either way, it's good to see those negatives are part of an exhibition, they only have a comparatively short lifespan (as opposed to sculptures, paintings, prints etc) so showing them in this artwork really is a "once-in-a-lifetime" opportunity.

[@h.sinclair]

yeah and there was no hypo-clearing "agent" in those thick emulsion days :/

[@sandramosley2801]

Very, very interesting. Thanks much.

[@Cactuspo12]

Love the conservation videos

[@mohamedhendy_photo_conservator]

loved the idea of introducing our work to the public, concerning the white spots, i had the same issue and i was thinking that the white spots are the plasticizer from the cellulose support or the anti curling layer wich due to the plexiglass cover which trap heat (the greenhouse effect) which caused an increase of temperature and led to melt the plasticizer .

[@chat-arina]

Loved this video. Very interesting to see the process.

[@complexgrafix]

Thank you!

[@BlackChannelBr]

Please, Part II !!! 🇧🇷

[@morriganwitch]

Fascinating xxx

[@justrelaxing1501]

I don't understand why the negatives weren't processed into photos? I get it, it's art, but I'd be more interested in seeing what the subjects were unjumbled. Put that by the side of the negative art for a more fascinating look at what's there.

[@thelordvega]

This is the kind of work i want to do... but because of not having a BA i cant. tho i have done 2 huge catalogs 1 for a small town and another one for the miami herald

[@JJONNYREPP]

When photography conservation is detective work | CONSERVATION STORIES 1952pm 19.5.23 i was trynna discover if the mighty kodak in a fit of pique re: retro nostalgia still had room for churning out the 126 film for old kodak cameras - as used in the 70's and 80's..? as lomo type image creation is now a niche market and has it's own select cliques of avid users.. it could be time for kodak to corner a decent demographic and supply reasonably priced 126 film for old kodak cameras... it is possible. they have a duty to aid appreciators of such image creation... the digital scanners and the market that use and abuse the digital medium are catered for without end... therein lies the rub. they are quiet a turn off... as is evinced by these guys trynna collate and preserve old negs etc etc etc (ironically via digital means)...

[@JJONNYREPP]

When photography conservation is detective work | CONSERVATION STORIES 2005pm 19.5.23 i think i and many many many many others deemed it necessary for fuji and kodak (kodak's still an excellent company by my standards re: history of image creation - kiss ass time ahahahahha) to create a vegetable-based emulsion to which one would add the obligatory silver salts to aid in the development of image creation... digital isn't that eco friendly. it is just more convenient a process.

[@Crispy_Bee]

Whether digital is more eco-friendly mostly depends on how long it's being used and how reliable it is. I think after a few tens of thousands of images it's probably more ecofriendly when you compare it to analog. Analog isn't just about the stuff the film rolls are made from but also about the logistics behind transporting them, the waste that is left behind and the chemicals and their logistics and waste. That too should be considered.