Conservation Treatment of Photographs

Current Status of Treatment Practices in Photograph Conservation -Final Report

2010-01-14T12:43:00.000-05:00

View the Final Report - Click here

Interview with Lee Ann Daffner, February 19, 2009

2009-07-18T23:28:00.000-04:00

Password: Daffner

Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended

Password: Daffner

Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended

Interview with Debbie Hess Norris, February 17, 2009

2009-07-16T17:09:00.005-04:00

Password: Norris

Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended

Password: Norris
Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended

Interview with James Reilly, May 21, 2009

2009-07-15T05:59:00.003-04:00

Password: Reilly

Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended

Password: Reilly

Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended

Interview with Gary Albright, February 4, 2009

2009-07-08T17:04:00.000-04:00

Password: Albright

Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended

Password: Albright

Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended

Interview with Barbara Lemmen, March 9, 2009

2009-06-23T12:31:00.002-04:00

Password: Lemmen

Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended

Password: Lemmen

Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended

Interview with Monique Fischer, March 20, 2009

2009-06-23T11:45:00.004-04:00

Password: Fischer

Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended

Password: Fischer
Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended

Interview with Tom Edmondson, January 26, 2009

2009-06-18T17:58:00.007-04:00

Password: Edmondson

Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended

Password: Edmondson

Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended

Interview with Peter Mustardo, February 11, 2009

2009-06-17T17:31:00.006-04:00

Password: Mustardo

Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended

Password: Mustardo

Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended

Interview with Pau Maynés, April 16, 2009

2009-06-04T06:13:00.006-04:00

Password: Maynes

Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended

Password: Maynes

Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended

Interview with Brenda Bernier, March 19, 2009

2009-06-02T07:12:00.021-04:00

Password: Bernier

Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended

Password: Bernier

Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended.

Interviewing José Orraca

2009-05-22T09:28:00.004-04:00

José Orraca and Alejandra Mendoza, May 9, 2009, Sharon, Connecticut

Calendar of performed interviews

2009-05-21T10:38:00.023-04:00

Number, date, interviewee’s name, interviewee’s title, main institution name, institution location; (Interview location, if different from the first).

1) Monday January 26, 2009 - Tom Edmondson, Conservator in private practice, Heugh-Edmondson Conservation Services LLC, Kansas City, Missouri; (Tucson, Arizona).

2) Wednesday February 4, 2009 - Gary Albright, Conservator in private practice, Honeoye Falls, New York.

3) Saturday February 7, 2009 - Grant Romer, Director of the Advanced Residency Program in Photograph Conservation, George Eastman House, Rochester, New York.

4) Wednesday February 11, 2009 - Peter Mustardo, Conservator in private practice, The Better Image, New Jersey-New York City; (New York, New York).

5) Thursday February 12, 2009 - Nora Kennedy, Sherman Fairchild Conservator of Photographs, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, New York.

6) Tuesday February 17, 2009 - Debbie Hess Norris, Chair of the Art Conservation Department, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware; (New York, New York).

7) Thursday February 19, 2009 - Lee Ann Daffner, Andrew W. Mellon Foundation Conservator of Photographs, The Museum of Modern Art, New York, New York.

8) Monday March 9, 2009 - Barbara Lemmen, Senior Conservator of Photographs, Conservation Center for Art and Historic Artifacts, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

9) Wednesday March 11, 2009 - Martin Jürgens, Conservator in private practice, Hamburg, Germany; (Rochester, New York).

10) Wednesday March 18, 2009 - Paul Messier, Conservator in private practice, Paul Messier LLC, Conservation of Photographs and Works on Paper, Boston, Massachusetts.

11) Thursday March 19, 2009 - Brenda Bernier, Paul M. and Harriet L. Weissman Senior Photograph Conservator, Weissman Preservation Center, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

12) Friday March 20, 2009 - Monique Fischer, Senior Photograph Conservator, Northeast Document Conservation Center, Andover, Massachusetts.

13) Thursday April 16, 2009 - Pau Maynés, Conservator in private practice, Corebarna, Conservació I Restauració de Béns Culturals, Barcelona, Spain; (Rochester, New York).

14) Saturday May 9, 2009 - José Orraca, Conservator in private practice, Sharon, Connecticut.

15) Thursday May 21, 2009 - James Reilly, Director, Image Permanence Institute, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, New York.

Interview with José Orraca (Part I), May 9, 2009

2009-05-19T19:16:00.031-04:00

Password: Orraca
Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended.

Password: Orraca

Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended.

Interview with José Orraca (Part II), May 9, 2009

2009-05-18T13:11:00.015-04:00

Password: Orraca
Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended.

Interview with Paul Messier, March 18, 2009

2009-05-10T12:59:00.008-04:00

Password: Messier
Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended.

Interview with Grant Romer, February 7, 2009

2009-05-10T06:19:00.008-04:00

Password: Romer

Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended.

Password: Romer

Case-sensitive password. Videos are in hi resolution - please be patient for loading. Broadband connection recommended.

Final Interview questionnaire

2009-03-01T14:54:00.010-05:00

Current Status of Treatment Practices in Photograph Conservation

Interview questionnaire
a. Could you please tell me your name, job title and affiliation?
b. When was this conservation lab established and for how long have you been working here? (if applicable)
c. Could you describe your clientele? [for private practice]

Definition
1. How do you define treatment?
Need
2. How do you determine the need for treatment?
3. Would you propose the establishment of a regular treatment program for the collection? [for institutions]
Type & Aim
4. What is the scope of treatments that you perform and the types of photographs you treat most frequently?
5. What is the aim of the treatments?
6. Could you describe, as an example, the intervention of a photograph you treated (methodology followed)?
7. How do you evaluate treatment results?
Degree/Extent of intervention
8. What do you consider as a minor, moderate and major intervention?
9. Do you consider the creation and application of secondary housings as conservation treatments?
Transformation
10. What changes overtime do you perceive in the way treatments are approached and performed?
11. Do you perceive changes in the level of intervention?
12. Do you consider that the perception of how a photograph should look, in terms of its condition, has changed through time?
External interactions/influences
13. What is your observation of the work performed in other institutions and in private practice in relation to the work performed here?
Do use and context of photographs define their treatment approach?
14. Does market (value/trends) influence treatment decision-making and performance?
Specific treatment topics:
15. Daguerreotype cleaning
What is your opinion about daguerreotype cleaning?
16. “Chemical” intensification; To restore: Fading/Color shift
What is your opinion about chemical intensification of photographs?
17. Un-mounting/remounting of photographs (including disassembly of albums)
In what circumstances do you consider un-mounting photographs can be justified?
18. Modern and Contemporary photography
What has been your experience with treatment of contemporary photographs?
Final questions:
Treatment experience/training & future
19. Do you consider that treatment proficiency is central to the competences of a photograph conservator?
20. In terms of treatment, what are the major challenges that the field faces?

A little "research" into YouTube

2009-02-01T11:44:00.006-05:00

Defining a publishing system for interviews: YouTube?

The use of YouTube to make interviews accessible:
If you type the word interview in you tube: 853,000 videos available

Themes, titles, contents, lengths vary diametrically.
Although most interviews last less than 10min, there are some longer than 60min as well.

Examples of videos related to photographs:

Testing YouTube embedding

2009-01-18T16:12:00.005-05:00

This is a test from YouTube embedding, also a test for the use of titles and covers using i-movie.

YouTube is a possibility for publishing the interviews. It is an accessible diffusion tool, that has already been used by academic purposes.

Some of the inconveniences are that when a video is uploaded to YouTube, it loses context and that "similar" videos are related to it, which can be completely different and unrelated.

[In the original posting, the video was uploaded to you tube but it was removed after 2 months, since it was only a trial. During this time, 35 people viewed the video and none left a comment on it].

Rehearsal interviews with ARP Fellows

2009-01-14T16:57:00.003-05:00

Rehearsal interviews with ARP Fellows
Yesterday I interviewed two of my co-fellows at the Advanced Residency Program: Ania Michas and Hyejung Yum (separately).
The purpose of this was both to try the questionnaire (version 6) and potentially evaluate the answers, as well as to improve my interviewing skills.
I gave them the interview questionnaire 1 and 2 days before the interview (posted Jan 6, 2009) and used the version with notes and follow ups (posted Jan 5, 2009) as planned.

I think that both interviews went pretty well. Interestingly the answers from one interviewee to the other were very different, which somehow reinforces the value of collecting different points of view on the topic and the range of perspectives towards conservation treatments.
The length of each interview was 33 and 34 minutes.

The observations I made in terms of the structure and content of the questionnaire are:
- At the beginning, a deeper conversation about the interviewees previous experience was needed in order to contextualize the next questions/answers and also to gain confidence to speak both from interviewee and interviewer,
- The question of need [how do you determine the need for treatment?] sounded abrupt to begin with, although it is a straight forward question that I would like to ask.
I think I can try it further as it is and where it is, before reconsidering its place in the interview. (Perhaps a easier question to begin with would be #3).
- Considering the experience of my interviewees in terms of conservation treatment of photographs, the questions of type, aim, degree, transformation and external interactions went very well. Although the order in which I asked them varied considerably with the flow of the conversation (very much as expected).
The difficulty with this, was then to cover all the questions I wanted to ask (without forgetting some or not asking some because of the way the conversations evolved).
- The content that can be obtained by this part of the interview depends greatly on the interviewee's experience.
- The questions of the specific treatment topics went very well as well as the follow ups to them.
- I think both my interviewees were pleased to participate and happy to help.

Technical details:
I recorded the interviews using my computer. Both the image and audio were good.
I save the files as .mov and then converted one of them to .mp4 to see the difference.
The file size of the first format was around 160MB each while the second format was 89MB. Reduced size reduces quality significantly, but can be still be acceptable.

[In the original post the video was uploaded to blogger and it was retrievable, it was removed since it was only a rehearsal.]

Changes from version 4 to version 5

2009-01-07T11:00:00.005-05:00

In the template 5 I slightly reformulated some of the questions of the first part of the interview (trying to avoid tendencies or bias). Also, I developed the fourth treatment topic question -about modern and contemporary photography.

This version of the interview questionnaire is ready to be tested.

Interview questionnaire (from version 5)

2009-01-06T11:21:00.006-05:00

This is the questionnaire that I am sending to the interviewees prior to the interview. It derives directly from template 5, but it more direct and simple.

Current Status of Treatment Practices in Photograph Conservation

Interview questionnaire
a. Could you please tell me your name, job title and affiliation?
b. When was this conservation lab established and for how long have you been working here? (if applicable)
c. Could you describe your clientele? [for private practice]
Need
1. How do you determine the need for treatment?
2. Would you propose the establishment of a regular treatment program for the collection? [for institutions]
Type & Aim
3. What is the scope of treatments that you perform and the types of photographs you treat most frequently?
4. Could you describe, as an example, the intervention of a photograph you treated?
5. What is the aim of the treatments?
Degree/Extent of intervention
6. What do you consider as a minor, moderate and major intervention?
7. Do you consider the creation and application of secondary housings as conservation treatments?
Transformation
8. What changes overtime do you perceive in the way treatments are approached and performed?
9. Do you perceive changes in the level of intervention?
10. Do you consider that the perception of how a photograph should look, in terms of its condition, has changed through time?
External interactions
11. What is your observation of the work performed in other institutions and in private practice in relation to the work performed here?
Do use and context of photographs define their treatment approach?
12. Does market (value/trends) influence treatment decision-making and performance?
Issues in treatment
13. Daguerreotype cleaning
What is your opinion about daguerreotype cleaning?
14. “Chemical” intensification; To restore: Fading/Color shift
What is your opinion about chemical intensification of photographs?
15. Un-mounting/remounting of photographs (including dis-assemblage of albums)
In what circumstances do you consider un-mounting photographs can be justified?
16. Modern and Contemporary photography
What has been your experience with treatment of contemporary photographs?
Final questions:
Treatment experience/training & future
17. Do you consider that treatment proficiency is central to the competences of a photograph conservator?
18. In terms of treatment, what are the major challenges that the field faces?

Template for interviews, version 5

2009-01-05T15:13:00.005-05:00

Current Status of Treatment Practices in Photograph Conservation

Interview questionnaire (template 5)
a. Could you please tell me your name, job title and affiliation?
b. When was this conservation lab established and for how long have you been working here?

Need
1. Considering that in practice, not all deteriorated photographs (or not all photographs that present problems), can be treated or are treated, how do you select and prioritize the photographs that are going to be treated? What factors determine the need or request for treatment?
2. If you had more resources would you propose the establishment of a regular treatment program for the collection? (based on surveyed priorities?)
Type & Aim
3. Can you describe the scope of treatments that you perform and the types of photographs you treat most frequently?
4. Could you describe, as an example, the intervention of a photograph or group of photographs treated in this lab recently, to help me understand your work methodology? (A challenging treatment or a treatment you perform regularly).
5. In a general sense, what is the aim of the treatments performed, stabilization or restitution of the aesthetical qualities of the objects? (Or both, or other?)
6. How does your institution define mounting and rehousing relative to conservation treatments?
Extent
7. In terms of extent, could you define what you consider as a minor, moderate and major intervention? In which category (es) do the treatments performed in this institution fit?
Transformation
8. In your observation of the work that has been done and that is currently performed in this lab, what changes do you perceive in the way treatments are approached and performed?
9. Do you perceive changes in the level of intervention? (If so, can you comment on the factors that have led to these reduced/increased levels of intervention?)
10. Do you consider that the perception of how a photograph should look, in terms of its condition, has changed through time? Do you think users perceive or relate certain deterioration as inherent (natural, intrinsic) to photographs?
11. (If so) Do you think this is true in the private sector as well as within the museum/archive environment?
External interactions
12. What is your observation of the work performed in other institutions and in private practice in relation to the work performed here? Do you consider that the use and context of the photographs define their treatment approach (requirements and extents)?
13. Do you consider that market (value/trends) influence treatment decision-making and performance?
Issues in treatment
14. Daguerreotype cleaning
The chemical cleaning of daguerreotypes is one of the first restoration treatments performed on photographs. It was historically performed by photographers, dealers, collectors, curators and later by conservators. There has being a clear transformation in the methodologies and materials used for this treatment. What is your opinion on the performance of this treatment? Have you cleaned daguerreotypes? If so, could you explain your work methodology? How do you evaluate the potential risk and benefits of this treatment? How do you evaluate your results?
15. “Chemical” treatments. To restore: Fading/Color shift
The use of “chemical” treatments to restore or enhance the appearance of photographs (treatments that involve photographic chemistry, like bleach and redevelopment) has been used recurrently through time. A considerable amount of research has been developed in this subject to determine its viability and applicability in different materials like developed out gelatin silver prints and negatives and print out processes like salt prints.
What is your opinion of these types of chemical treatments; should they be performed, and if so under what circumstances? What are the limitations to this category of treatment? Do you consider material, technical implications and/or ethical and philosophical restraints?
Have you performed this type of treatments? If so, could you explain your work methodology? How do you evaluate the potential risk and benefits of this treatment? How do you evaluate your results?
16. Un-mounting/remounting of photographs (including dis-assemblage of albums)
The un-mounting and remounting of photographs has been considered a needed treatment in different contexts through time. For instance, it has been considered necessary to promote the stability of photographs, or required to allow their individual display in the case of photographs belonging to albums. In what circumstances do you consider these practices can be justified? What do you consider are the allowable reasons to proceed? Do you think they are still performed as regular procedures in certain institutions or private practice?
17. Modern and Contemporary photography
With modern and contemporary photographs, the tendency for bigger formats and the use of new materials -not only photographic but also materials from mounting methods like different rigid supports, plastic laminates and face-mounting systems- have challenged current treatment practices. What has been your experience with treatment of this type of photographs? What is your opinion about reprinting contemporary photographs that present ‘major’ damages? Do you consider we should adopt and/or adapt theory and practices from contemporary art conservation? If so, in what sense?
Final questions:
Treatment experience/training & future
18. Do you consider that treatment proficiency is central to the competences of a photograph conservator? Why? How do you think we can gain treatment proficiency?
19. In terms of treatment, what are the major challenges that the field faces?
I deeply appreciate your time and interest to perform this interview and to receive me here in [name of the place].

Description of the project

2008-12-15T16:01:00.015-05:00

After producing the first questionnaires and analyzing the project scope, it was decided that the interviews would only include North American Conservators (conservators working in US). After presenting the project at the George Eastman House in December 2008, the project description had evolved to the following:

Current Status of Treatment Practices in Photograph Conservation

Statement of Purpose
This research will create a basic reference resource (interviews-based) that describes and addresses the current status of treatment within the profession, its philosophies, history; and the criteria and methodologies used for its evaluation. The objective of this resource is to gather and make accessible the knowledge and experience of a group of key individuals in the field, answering fundamental questions that relate to our work.

Significance
Treatment is one of the activities that characterize and differentiate a photograph conservator from other closely related specialists. The possibilities for treating photographic materials depend on a series of complex case-based variables (not only considering the materiality of the object but its present and future context and use) and international accepted standards of practice. Therefore it is important to understand, document and communicate the way in which treatment is approached, conducted and evaluated, both within institutions and in private practice. As it is important to explain the factors that have influenced in the history and development of treatment practices and try to identify the future challenges for the field in the subject.

Background
The general history of the field of photograph conservation has been synthesized in some articles and orally compiled by a series of interviews conducted by Pau Maynés in 2001. However, the emphasis of these previous researches was not treatment practices, its status or history.

Description
Interviews with conservators will be conducted and video recorded, to describe the following:
-Definition of treatment
-Criteria/Need for treatment
-Type and Aim of treatment
-Treatments performed and frequencies
-Degree/Extent of intervention
-Evaluation of treatment
-Transformation of treatment practices
-External influences
-History of treatment practices
-Training and education
-Future challenges

The interviews will be video-recorded, and a complete transcript and abstract produced.
To increase the accessibility of the resource, the creation of a web-based application containing sections of the videos and transcripts will be assessed.
A set of interviews and transcripts will be delivered to the principal schools of Photograph Conservation.

List of interviewees: Conservators working in US, practicing conservators or current head of conservation departments or research/educational institutions.

Advisor
Grant Romer

Changes from version 3 to version 4

2008-11-23T14:19:00.003-05:00

In template 4 I incorporated new questions regarding treatment types and types of treated photographs, to complement the first part of the interview.

Also, I developed the third treatment topic question -about unmounting/remounting photographs.

Template for interviews, version 4

2008-11-21T15:46:00.004-05:00

Institutions
Could you please tell me your name, job title and affiliation?
When was this conservation lab established and for how long have you been working here?

I.
-My next question relates to need for treatment. Considering that in an institutional reality, not all deteriorated photographs or not all photographs that present problems, can be treated or are treated, how do you select and prioritize the photographs that are going to be treated? What factors determine the need for treatment? [Potential answers: Exhibition/loan; established treatment plan/program; specific projects]
-If you had more resources would you propose the establishment a regular treatment program for the collection? (based on priorities)
-Broadly speaking what types of photographs are treated most frequently?
[Paper based photographs (traditional processes: salt prints, albumen prints, silver gelatin, platinum prints, pigment processes, cyanotypes), daguerreotypes, other early cased photographs, modern and contemporary processes (color prints, digital prints), negatives, albums, other photographs]
-In a general sense, what is the aim of the treatments performed, stabilization or restitution of the aesthetical qualities of the objects? (Or both?)
-What treatments types are performed most commonly?
[Cleaning, consolidation, flattening, structural repair, compensation for loss (including inpainting)]
- Do you consider mounting and rehousing as conservation treatments as well?
- In terms of extent, do you consider that the treatments performed in this institution can be considered minor interventions, moderate or major interventions?
- In your observation of the work that has been done and that is currently performed in this lab, what are the major changes that you perceive in the way treatments are approached and performed?
- Do you consider that a greater understanding and recognition of the values and characteristics of a photograph has lead to less interventive treatment procedures?
- Do you consider that a greater awareness of the potential treatment risks or effects in the characteristics of a photograph has lead to less interventive treatment procedures?
- Do you consider that the perception of how a photograph should look, in terms of its condition, has changed through time? Do you think users perceive or relate certain deterioration as inherent to photographs?
-Do you think this happens outside of a museum environment?
-What is your observation of the work performed in other institutions and in private practice in relation to the work performed here? Do you consider that the use and context of the photographs define their treatment requirements (and extents)?
- Do you consider that market (value/trends) influence treatment decision-making and performance?
Issues in treatment,
-Daguerreotype cleaning. The cleaning of daguerreotypes is one of the first restoration treatments performed on photographs. It was historically performed by photographers, dealers, collectors, curators and later by conservators. There has being a clear transformation in the methodologies and materials used for this treatment. What is your stand on the performance of this treatment?
-Chemical treatment. The use of chemical treatments to restore or enhance the appearance of photographs (that involve photographic chemistry, like bleach and redevelopment) has also been recurrently used through time. A considerable amount of research has been developed in this subject to determine its viability and applicability in the different materials like developed out gelatin silver prints and negatives and print out processes like salt prints.
Do you consider the use of this type of chemical treatments should be performed?
What restricts its performance? Material or philosophical restrains?
Other ideas: Fading, color shift, tarnishing removal, silver mirroring removal
Reprocessing: re-fixing and washing
-Un-mounting/remounting of photographs (including dis-assemblage of albums). The un-mounting and remounting of photographs has been considered a needed treatment in different contexts through time. For instance, it has been considered necessary to promote the stability of photographs, or required to allow their individual display in the case of photographs belonging to albums. In what circumstances do you consider these practices can be justified? What do you consider are the allowable reasons to proceed? Do you think they are still performed as regular procedures in certain institutions or private practice?
-Contemporary photography. How do you foresee that
Digital photographs, tendency for bigger formats, new mounting systems
[in progress]
In the topic of treatment experience and training,
- Do you consider that treatment proficiency is central to the competences of a photograph conservator? Why?
- How do you think we can gain treatment proficiency?
- In terms of treatment, what are the major challenges that the field faces?

I deeply appreciate your time and interest to perform this interview and to receive me here in [name of the place].

Private practice
Could you please tell me your name, job title and affiliation?
When was this conservation lab established and for how long have you been working here?

II.
-My next question relates to need for treatment, but in order to understand the context of the treatments performed in this lab, could you tell me what type of institutions and individuals comprise your clientele? (request treatments)
-Considering that, in practice, not all deteriorated photographs or not all photographs that present problems, can be treated or are treated, in your observation, what determines the need or request for treatment?

Template for interviews, introduction version 4

2008-11-21T15:45:00.004-05:00

Template for interview
Today is Day, Date (month, day, year), Time.

My name is Alejandra Mendoza and I am with (name of the interviewee) to have a conversation about Treatment Practices in Photograph Conservation. This interview is/forms part of the series of interviews I am conducting to photograph conservators to investigate and describe the current status [state] of treatment practices in our field, the general characteristics and objectives of the interventions performed, and the variables that influence its performance, as well as briefly address the transformation of treatment standards and decision-making through time.

I would like to follow a format for the interview in which I will begin asking you questions about the approaches, characteristics and extents of the treatments performed in this institution, followed by questions addressing treatment issues that the field has faced through time.

Changes from version 2 to version 3

2008-11-19T17:36:00.005-05:00

I continued developing new questions and question structures for the beginning of the interview.
With this initial section, I am trying to contextualize what treatments are being performed, where, how often, to what degree.

I realized -after feedback with faculty members- that the idea of inquiring about difficult treatment study cases, may sound too rigid or violent for the interviewees. And therefore I decided to structure the questions by treatment topic.
Instead of asking, "what would you do if a client brings you an object with this problem?", asking "what is your opinion about this treatment? Do you think it can/should be performed? when, why? This approach gives more space for conversation and can be better understood.

Template for interviews, version 3

2008-11-17T16:58:00.004-05:00

Institutions
Could you please tell me your name, job title and affiliation?
When was this conservation lab established and for how long have you been working here?

I. My next question relates to need for treatment. Considering that in an institutional reality, not all deteriorated photographs or not all photographs that present problems, can be treated or are treated, how do you select and prioritize the photographs that are going to be treated? What factors determine the need for treatment? [Potential answers: Exhibition/loan established treatment plan/program specific projects]
If you had more resources would you propose the establishment a regular treatment program for the collection?
-In a general sense, what is the aim of the treatments performed, stabilization or restitution of the aesthetical qualities of the object? (Or both?)
[Cleaning, consolidation, flattening, structural repair, compensation for loss/inpainting]
- Do you consider mounting and rehousing as conservation treatments?
- In terms of extent, do you consider that the treatments performed in this institution can be considered minor interventions, moderate or major interventions?
- In your observation of the work that has been done and that is currently performed in this lab, what are the major changes that you perceive in the way treatments are approached and performed?
- Do you consider that a greater understanding and recognition of the values and characteristics of a photograph has lead to less interventive treatment procedures?
- Do you consider that a greater awareness of the potential treatment risks or effects in the characteristics of a photograph has lead to less interventive treatment procedures?
- Do you consider that the perception of how a photograph should look, in terms of its condition, has changed through time? Do you think users perceive or relate certain deterioration as inherent to photographs?
-Do you think this happens outside of a museum environment?
-What is your observation of the work performed in other institutions and in private practice in relation to the work performed here? Do you consider that the use and context of the photographs define their treatment requirements?
- Do you consider that market (value/trends) influence treatment decision-making and performance?

Issues in treatment,
Daguerreotype cleaning. The cleaning of daguerreotypes is one of the first restoration treatments performed on photographs. It was historically performed by photographers, dealers, collectors, curators and later by conservators. There has being a clear transformation in the methodologies and materials used for this treatment. What is your stand on the performance of this treatment?
Chemical treatment. The use of chemical treatments (that involve photographic chemistry) to restore or enhance the appearance of photographs has also been used recurrently through time. A considerable amount of research has been developed in this subject to determine its viability and applicability in the different materials like developed out gelatin silver prints and negatives and print out processes like salt prints. Do you consider the use of chemical treatments is allowed? [better construction of this question!]
Album
Contemporary photography

Private practice
Could you please tell me your name, job title and affiliation?
When was this conservation lab established and for how long have you been working here?

II. My next question relates to need for treatment, but in order to understand the context of the treatments performed in this lab, could you tell me what type of institutions and individuals comprise your clientele? (request treatments)
-Considering that, in practice, not all deteriorated photographs or not all photographs that present problems, can be treated or are treated, in your observation, what determines the need or request for treatment?

Bibliography review: treatment criteria

2008-11-14T13:26:00.001-05:00

"1. Treatment is the core of our profession. There are other fields; archivists, conservation scientists, collections management, researches, and curators. They each play their important and unique roll in the world of art and history. But it is entrusted to the professional Conservator the privilege to intervene, or not intervene, in the physical well being of the object.
2. In the conservation of artistic and historic works, not every treatment that is wanted is possible, not every treatment that is possible is necessary, and not every treatment that is necessary is advisable.
[...] But when it comes to a decision as to what treatment, if any, should be carried out, the the responsibility is strictly in your hands. It is you who must be true to your sense of ethics. Just because and object is brought to a conservator for treatment it is not itself sufficient reason to do treatment."

José Orraca, “Developing Treatment Criteria in the Conservation of Photographs”, OJO, Spring 1991.

Changes from version 1 to version 2

2008-11-07T14:08:00.003-05:00

I realized that the heading "Philosophy and Ethics" was hard to understand, and that the questions could be addressed differently and in a different order.
I introduced the idea of presenting specific case studies to talk about complicated treatment procedures. For example, intensification of prints or album dis-assemblage.
The shape or content of these questions are not definitive, just a trial.

Template for interviews, version 2

2008-11-06T10:24:00.004-05:00

Today is Day, Date (month, day, year), Time.

My name is Alejandra Mendoza and I am with (name of the interviewee), to have a conversation about Treatment Practices in Photograph Conservation as part of my project for the ARP in which I intend to describe the current status of treatment practices: its characteristics and objectives, and the variables that influence its performance; as well as briefly address the transformation of treatment standards and decision-making through time.
I would like to follow a pattern for the interview in which I will begin asking questions about the approaches to treatment in this institution, its characteristics and extents, followed by questions about the similarities and differences compared to the treatment practices performed in other types of institutions. After this, I will present to you some [3] hypothetical treatment cases to hear your opinion about them and end up with some questions about education.

To start, could you please tell me your name, your current job position, the institution or company that you work for, and for how long have you been working here?

I deeply appreciate your time and interest to perform this interview and to receive me here in [name of the place]. I would like to begin asking you,
1. [In your institution] What determines the need for treatment, or in other words, how do you do the selection and prioritization of the photographs that are going to be treated?
2. What is the nature of the treatments performed?
3. How is the extent of treatment decided and by whom?
4. Do you consider that the treatments performed here at [x] can be considered minor interventions [or major interventions]? why?
5. In your observation of the work that has been done here at [your institution] in the last decades, what are the major changes, if any, that you perceive?
6. Do you consider that the perception of how a fine art photograph or a historical photograph should look has changed through time?
7. Do you think that treatment approaches and extents in a fine art museum differ from treatment approaches and extents in other types of institutions, like archives and historical societies? why?
8. Do you think they differ from treatment approaches and extents performed in private practice? why?
I would like to present to you 3-5? hypothetical treatment cases to hear your opinion about them,
9. Chemical treatment. If a private owner brings you a faded silver gelatin developed out print of high personal value and asks you to chemically restore it, and he, as the owner, is willing to accept the related risks of the treatment, what would you respond and do?
10. Album. If a private owner brings you a nineteenth century album, like the Bicknell Album by Hill & Adamson, and asks you to unmount and remount the prints because he would like to display them individually, what would you respond and do?
11. Cleaning of a tarnished daguerreotype.
In the topic of education (it is not really education, I need another word),
- Do you consider that treatment proficiency is central to the competences of a photograph conservator? Why?
- How do you think we can gain treatment proficiency?
- In terms of treatment, what are the major challenges that the field faces?

Template for interview, version 2.1
Today is Day, Date (month, day, year), Time.
My name is Alejandra Mendoza and I am with (name of the interviewee) to have a conversation about Treatment Practices in Photograph Conservation. This interview is/forms part of the series of interviews I am conducting to photograph conservators to investigate and describe the current status [state] of treatment practices in our field, the general characteristics and objectives of the interventions performed, and the variables that influence its performance, as well as briefly address the transformation of treatment standards and decision-making through time.
I would like to follow a format for the interview in which I will begin asking you questions about the approaches, characteristics and extents of the treatments performed in this institution, followed by questions about the similarities and differences compared to the treatment practices performed in other institutions. After this, I would like to know your opinion about some hypothetical treatment cases that I will present to you. Ending up with some questions about training and treatment experience.

Transformation of Treatment Practices

2008-10-31T13:19:00.000-04:00

I created a chart illustrating the transformation of treatment practices
It is a draft, I will refine it gradually.

Progress: Statements

2008-10-29T17:45:00.004-04:00

After the last weeks I came up with some "statements" that I would like to prove (wrong or right) through my project

Current Status,
- Treatment is performed in different “places” responding to different needs:
* Private Practice (for museums, private owners, galleries, auction houses)
* Art Museums
* Archives
* Regional Centers
* Historical Societies
Therefore,
- Treatments performed are different
- Treatment(s) goals/specific objectives are different
- Allowable/suitable/appropriate treatment and treatment extents are different

Statements:
- Treatment is not performed on all photographs
- A greater recognition/understanding of the values of a photograph and its subtleties, has lead to less intervention
- Treatment is driven by other activities and social phenomena such as:
*Exhibition
*Market
*Fashion/Perception of how a photograph should look
- Treatment decision-making is performed by a group of people

From the meeting (with Grant), we concluded I should define hypothetical cases of conservation treatments to present to the interviewees and ask for their opinion. I will further develop this idea.

Feedback: Pau Maynés

2008-10-27T18:49:00.003-04:00

Today I spoke with Pau Mayés about my project.
I think I still can not explain it in simple ordered ideas. Somehow, the fact that I want to focus in understanding and describing the current treatment practice got lost in the conversation and I couldn't bring it back.

When he read my proposal he centered his attention in the evolution of treatment criteria. He suggested me to narrow the topic into one concrete theme, like that one. He shortly referred to his project (Oral History of Photograph Conservation) and his experience. He said that now he knows he would have done things differently, but didn't say how.

When he read the topics for the question he said "philosophy" is an abstract big word, that nobody understands. When he read my questions (posted Oct.26) he said they were too theoretical and felt like an exam. He suggested me to use concrete examples as ground for discussion.

He gave me some suggestions of bibliography to look for (some of which I have already consulted, but I will review again).

He was very nice and said I can contact him again. That we can talk by skype. I think the feedback was useful and new.

Template for introduction of interviews- version 1

2008-10-26T18:26:00.003-04:00

Today is Day, Date (month, day, year), Time.
My name is Alejandra Mendoza and I am with (name of the interviewee), to have a conversation about the Current Status of Treatment Practices in Photograph Conservation.

I would like to follow a pattern for the interview that includes questions about the philosophy and ethics of conservation treatment, following a discussion about the current status of treatment practice, treatment evaluation and education, continuing with aspects about the progress and transformation... [order to be defined]

To start, could you please tell me your name, your current job position, the institution or company that you work for, and for how long have you being working here?

I would like to begin with..

Template for interviews, version 1

2008-10-26T13:53:00.005-04:00

These are the topics of the questions that I want to ask, and a first draft of questions:

Philosophy and ethics
1. How do you define conservation treatment of photographs?
2. In a general sense, what is the goal of treatment?
3. What are the general principles that guide treatment practice?
4. Do you consider that these general principles are applicable to all types of treatment?
Current Status
5. What determines the need for treatment? (in a museum, a private lab, an archive)
6. Are there other factors that influence in the selection of treatments that are proposed/requested and then performed?
7. How does the value of a photograph affect treatment?
8. How does market affect treatment?
--How do you assess the treatment risk against its potential benefit?
Progress and Transformation (History)
9. What is your observation of the field in terms of treatment? How has it progressed or transformed?
--What is your opinion about "chemical treatments" of photographs? Can they be performed, or why shouldn't they be performed?
Education
10. How did you learn treatment?
11. Do you consider that treatment proficiency is central to the competences of a photograph conservator? Why?
12. How can we gain/assure treatment proficiency?
Future
13. In terms of treatment, what are the major challenges that the field faces?

Project Proposal: Current Status of Treatment Practices in Photograph Conservation

2008-10-26T13:40:00.007-04:00

Project proposal - September 2008

Statement of Purpose
This research will create a basic reference resource (interviews-based) that describes and addresses the current status of treatment within the profession, its philosophies, history; and the criteria and methodologies used for its evaluation. The objective of this resource is to gather and make accessible the knowledge and experience of a group of key individuals in the field, answering fundamental questions that relate to our work.
Significance
Treatment is one of the activities that characterize and differentiate a photograph conservator from other closely related specialists. The possibilities for treating photographic materials depend on a series of complex case-based variables (not only considering the materiality of the object but its present and future context and use) and international accepted standards of practice. Therefore it is important to understand, document and communicate the way in which treatment is approached, conducted and evaluated, both within institutions and in private practice. As it is important to explain the factors that have influenced in the history and development of treatment practices and try to identify the future challenges for the field in the subject.
Background
The general history of the field of photograph conservation has been synthesized in some articles and orally compiled by a series of interviews conducted by Pau Maynés in 2001. However, the emphasis of these previous researches was not treatment practices, its status or history.
Description (Methodology)
I) Interviews with conservators, curators, collectors and conservation scientists will be conducted and video recorded, to describe the following:
Philosophies Guiding Treatment:
- What is conservation treatment of photographs?
-Treatment importance
-Persons that request treatment
-Criteria for treatment
- Standards of practice and code of ethics
Current practice:
-Needs and expectations of people requesting the treatments
-Treatments performed and frequencies
-Factors that determine treatment success or failure
-Treatment solutions and possibilities in response to the existing needs
Evaluation:
-Ways in which treatment results are being observed, considered, documented and measured
-Reasons and importance of treatment evaluation
-Viability of treatment evaluation
History:
-Treatments that were practiced in the past and are no longer practiced
-New treatments practiced
-History and origin of treatment practices
-Reasons for these changes in practice
Future:
-General needs
-Ways and requisites to achieve these needs
The interviews will be recorded, and a complete transcript and abstract produced.

II) A survey –addressing current practice and evaluation- will be designed and sent to photograph conservators.
III) The treatment records from the GEH will be reviewed to identify changes in:
- Treatments performed,
- Treatment evaluation methodologies used or presented.

Deliverables:
-Illustrated essay contextualizing the current status of treatment within the field;
-Set of digitally recorded interviews and transcripts.

Future steps:
-To increase the accessibility of the resource, the creation of a web-based application containing sections of the videos and transcripts will be assessed. This could work linked to the GEHwiki (user:password requested).
-A set of interviews and transcripts will be delivered to the principal schools of Photograph Conservation.

Advisor
Grant Romer

Consultants
Paul Messier
Nora Kennedy

Reviewed bibliography

2008-10-25T17:17:00.027-04:00

Books

ASHLEY-SMITH, Jonathan. Risk Assessment for Object Conservation. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford-Boston, 1999, 358 pp.

APPELBAUM, Barbara. Conservation Treatment Methodology. Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, Great Britain, 2007, 437 pp.

AVRAMI, Erica, Randall Mason, and Marta de la Torre. Values and Heritage Conservation. Research Report, The Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles, 2000, 96 pp. http://www.getty.edu/conservation/publications/pdf_publications/valuesrpt.pdf

BARGER, M. Susan, and William B. White. The Daguerreotype: nineteenth-century technology and modern science. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, 1991, 252 pp.

BRÜCKLE, Irene, and F. Christopher Tahk, editors. North American Graduate Programs in the Conservation of Cultural Property. Association of North American Graduate Programs in the Conservation of Cultural Property, Buffalo, 2000, 170 pp.

CAPLE, Chris. Conservation skills: judgment, method, and decision making. Routledge, New York, 2000, 232 pp.

CLAVIR, Miriam. Preserving what it is valued. Museums, conservation and first nations. UBCPress, Vancouver, 2002, 295 pp.

COURAGE, Catherine, and Kathy Baxter. Understanding your users. A practical guide to user requirements: Methods, Tools and Technique. Morgan Kaufmann Elsevier, San Francisco, 2005, 781 pp.

FINK, Arlene. How to ask survey questions. Thousand Oaks, SAGE Publications, 1995, 105 pp.

HENDRIKS, Klaus. Fundamentals of Photographic Conservation, A Study Guide. National Archives of Canada, Lugus Publication, Toronto, 1991, 560 pp.

KOCH S., Mogens, editor. Klaus B. Hendriks, A life Remembered. The Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts, Denmark, 2002, 158 pp.

MUÑOZ Viñas, Salvador. Contemporary Theory of Conservation. Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, 2005, 239 pp.

REEDY, Terry J., and Chandra L. Reedy. Statistical Analysis in Art Conservation Research. The Getty Conservation Institute, California, 1988, 106 pp. http://www.getty.edu/conservation/publications/pdf_publications/statistics.pdf

________. Principles of Experimental Design for Art Conservation Research. GCI Scientific Program Report, The Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles, 1992, 123 pp. http://www.getty.edu/conservation/publications/pdf_publications/principles_experiment.pdf

STANLEY-PRICE, Nicholas, M. Kirby Talley Jr., and Alessandra Melucco Vaccaro, editors. Historical and Philosophical Issues in the Conservation of Cultural Heritage. Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles, 1996, 500 pp.

The Imperfect Image: Photographs their Past, Present and Future. The Center for Photographic Conservation, London, 1992, 379 pp.

Articles

AMMANN, Jean-Christophe. “On the Ageing of Works of Art.” In Modern Art: Who Cares?, Foundation for the Conservation of Modern Art/ Netherlands Institute for Cultural Heritage, Amsterdam, 1999, 282-283, http://www.incca.org/theory-and-ethics/267-ammannarticle1999

ASHLEY-SMITH, Jonathan. “Definitions of Damage.” Unpublished talk given in the session “When conservator and collections meet” at the Annual Meeting of the Association of Art Historians, London, April 7-8, 1995, http://cool-palimpsest.stanford.edu/byauth/ashley-smith/damage.html

AVRAMI, Erica, Kathleen Dardes, Marta de la Torre, Samuel Y. Harris, Michael Henry, and Wendy Claire Jessup, contributors. “The Conservation Assessment: A Proposed Model for Evaluating Museum Environmental Management Needs.” The Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles, 1999, 39 pp. http://www.getty.edu/conservation/publications/pdf_publications/assessmodeleng.pdf

BAAS, Valerie, J. J. Bischoff and L. Stodulski. “The Effects of Sodium Borohydride Solutions on Silver-Based Photographic Materials: An Update.” Topics in Photographic Preservation, vol. 4, Compiled by Robin E. Siegel, American Institute for Conservation, Washington D.C., 1991, 156-160.

______________. “Ongoing Investigation into Chemical Image Enhancement of Faded Vintage Printing-out Photographic Prints.” Topics in Photographic Preservation, vol. 5, Compiled by Robin E. Siegel, American Institute for Conservation, Washington D.C., 1993, 95-116.

BLACKMAN, Christabel. “Salvador Muñoz Viñas, New Horizons for Conservation Thinking.” e_conservation, the online magazine, no. 6, September 2008, 20-27, http://www.e-conservationline.com/content/view/627

BOGARDUS, Abraham. “Trials and Tribulations of a Photographer.” British Journal of Photography 36, 1889, 184.

CARRIER, David. “Restoration as Interpretation.” In Altered States: Conservation, Analysis, and Interpretation of Works of Art, Mount Holyoke College, Massachusetts, 1994, 19-27.

“Code of Ethics.” International Council of Archives, 1996, http://www.ica.org/sites/default/files/Ethics-EN.pdf

“Code of Ethics and Guidance for Practice.” The Canadian Association for Conservation of Cultural Property (CAC) and The Canadian Association of Professional Conservators (CAPC), Ottawa, 2000, 20 pp. http://www.cac-accr.ca/pdf/ecode.pdf

“Code of Ethics and Guidelines for Practice of the American Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works.” Revised August 1994, Dan Kushel, Member, Ethics and Standards Committee, http://www.conservation-us.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.viewPage&pageID=858&nodeID=1

“Código de ética y normas prácticas para la profesión de restauración del patrimonio cultural de México.” Coordinación Nacional de Restauración del Patrimonio Cultural (CNRPC), México, CNRPC-INAH-CONACULTA, 1998, 26 pp.

“Código de Ética,” Associacao Catarinense de Conservadores e Restauradores de Bens Culturais, 2006, http://www.accr.org.br/noticia_full.php?idnot=16

DAFFNER, Lee Ann, and Christopher McGlinchey. “The Big Picture: Conservation Research Program for Contemporary Color Photographs.” Modern Art, New Museums, Contributions to the Bilbao Congress, 13-17 September 2004, Edited by Ashok Roy and Perry Smith, The International Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works, London, 2004, 109-113.

DAVANNE, Louis Alphonse, and Jules Girard. “On the Revivification of Faded Positives.” Journal of the Photographic Society 2, no. 32, 21 July 1855, 199-200.

“Defining the Conservator: Essential Competencies.” American Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works, Washington D.C., 2003, 19 pp. http://www.conservation-us.org/_data/n_0001/resources/live/definingcon.pdf

“E.C.C.O. Professional Guidelines,” European Confederation of Conservator-Restorers’ Organisations, 2002, http://www.ecco-eu.org/about-e.c.c.o./professional-guidelines.html>, also available at http://www.icon.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=121&Itemid

HERNÁNDEZ, Claudio, Pilar Hernández, and Alejandra Mendoza. “Conservadores de Fotografía, Hacia un Código de Ética.” Unpublished, talk given at the XIV Coloquio del Seminario de Estudio y Conservación del Patrimonio, La fotografía: imagen y materia, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Oaxaca, Mexico, May 30th, 2006.

HENDRIKS, Klaus B., and Lincoln Ross. “The Restoration of Discolored Black-and-white Photographic Images in Chemical Solutions.” Preprints of papers presented at the sixteenth annual meeting New Orleans, Louisiana, June 1-5, 1988, American Institute for Conservation, Washington D.C., 99-117.

HENDRIKS, Klaus B. “The Evaluation of Conservation Treatments.” Research Techniques in Photographic Conservation, Proceedings of the Conference in Copenhagen 14-19 May 1995, The Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts, Denmark, 1996, 47-50.

HILL, Gregory. “The Conservation of a Photographic Album at the National Archives of Canada,” Journal of the American Institute for Conservation, vol. 30, no. 1, Spring 1991, pp. 75-88.

“ICOM Code of Ethics for Museums 2006.” International Council of Museums, http://icom.museum/ethics.html

IRACI, Joe, and Paul Begin. “Theory Guides, Experiment Decides: Working with Klaus.” In Klaus B. Hendriks, A life Remembered, ed. Mogens S. Koch, The Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts, Denmark, 2002, 25-30.

KENNEDY, Nora. “The coming age of Photograph Conservation.” ICOM Committee for Conservation 11th Triennial Meeting, Edinburgh, 1-6 September 1996, 101-107.

______________. “Practical Application of Klaus B. Hendriks’ Research.” In Klaus B. Hendriks, A life Remembered, ed. Mogens S. Koch, The Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts, Denmark, 2002, 31-36.

KENNEDY, Nora, and Peter Mustardo. “Contemporary Photography from a Conservation Perspective.” In The Imperfect Image: Photographs their Past, Present and Future, The Center for Photographic Conservation, London, 1992, 367-375.

______________. “Changing perspectives on color photography.” In Diversity in Heritage Conservation: Tradition, Innovation and Participation, 15th Triennial Conference, 22-26 September 2008 New Delhi, vol. II, ICOM-CC, 2008, 689-694.

KOCH S., Mogens, et al. “Conservation problems of contemporary photography.” In Modern Art: Who cares?, The Foundation for the Conservation of Modern Art and the Netherlands Institute for Cultural Heritage, Amsterdam, 1999, 349-355.

KUNIAVSKY, Mike. “Universal Tools: Recruiting and Interviewing.” In Observing the user experience, A practitioner’s guide to user research. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco, 2003, 83-127.

MAVER, Ian. “Some Research into Methods of Mounting, Lining or Repairing Albumen Prints.” In The Imperfect Image: Photographs their Past, Present and Future, The Center for Photographic Conservation, London, 1992, 311-315.

MAYNES, Pau, and Grant B. Romer. “A Research into the History of Photograph Conservation: George Eastman’s Legacy.” Past Practice, Future Prospects, British Museum Occasional Papers 145, September 2001, 151-158.

______________. “Documenting Conservation through Oral History: A Case Study.” ICOM-Conservation Committee Meeting, Brazil, 2002.

MELUCCO Vaccaro, Alessandra. “The idea of Patina. Introduction to Part VII.” In Historical and Philosophical Issues in the Conservation of Cultural Heritage, Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles, 1996, 366-371.

MCQUAID, James, David Tait, and Steven Lewis. “Oral History Material on Photography.” Image, vol. 18, no. 2, 1975, 1-12.

MOOR, Ian L., and Angela H. Moor. “The Effects of Aqueous Treatments on Photographs.” In The Imperfect Image: Photographs their Past, Present and Future, The Center for Photographic Conservation, London, 1992, 236-244.

MURPHY, Erin. “Basic Care of Face-Mounted Photographs at the Museum of Modern Art.” Topics in Photographic Preservation, vol. 12, Compiled by Brenda Bernier, American Institute for Conservation, Washington, D.C., 2007, 160-174.

MUSTARDO, Peter. “Approaches to Treating Contemporary Photographs.” Topics in Photographic Preservation, vol. 12, Compiled by Brenda Bernier, American Institute for Conservation, Washington, D.C., 2007, 126-130.

NISHIMURA, Douglas. “Report on the Chemical Treatment of Photographic Materials Workshop: a Chemist’s Perspective.” Topics in Photographic Preservation, vol. 9, Compiled by Sarah S. Wagner, American Institute for Conservation, Washington D.C., 2001, 1-43.

NORRIS, Debbie Hess. “The Conservation Treatment of Deteriorated Photographic Print Materials.” In The Imperfect Image: Photographs their Past, Present and Future, The Center for Photographic Conservation, London, 1992, 361-366.

______________. “The Unmounting of Historic Photographic Prints: Factors to consider.” Typescript, unpublished, 1993, 4 pp.

______________. “Current Research Needs in the Conservation Treatment of Deteriorated Photographic Print Materials.” Research Techniques in Photographic Conservation, Proceedings of the Conference in Copenhagen 14-19 May 1995, The Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts, Denmark, 1996, 101-105.

______________. “Contributions of Klaus B. Hendriks to the Field of Conservation.” In Klaus B. Hendriks, A life Remembered, ed. Mogens S. Koch, The Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts, Denmark, 2002, 19-21.

O’KEEFE, Georgia. “Rules for use of the Alfred Stieglitz Photographs and Photogravures.” Typescript, unpublished, 1951, 1 p.

ORRACA, José. “The Conservation of Photographic Materials.” AIC Annual Meeting l973, Kansas City, Missouri, American Institute for Conservation, Washington D.C., 1973, 32-38.

______________. “Philosophy of Conservation.” Society of American Archivists, Toronto Canada, October 1, 1974, 6 pp.

______________. “Developing treatment criteria in the conservation of Photographs.” Topics in Photographic Preservation, vol. 4, Compiled by Robin E. Siegel, American Institute for Conservation, Washington D.C., 1991, 151-155. Also available in the periodical OJO, Spring 1991.

______________. “Unmounting is easy… not.” Typescript, unpublished, 1993, 3 pp.

PÉNICHON Sylvie, and Martin Jürgens. “Two Finishing Techniques for Contemporary Photographs.” Topics in Photographic Preservation, vol. 9, Compiled by Sarah S. Wagner, American Institute for Conservation, Washington, D.C., 2001, 85-96. Also available at http://www.martinjuergens.net/Assets/download/Penichon_Juergens_Topics_9.pdf

______________. “Issues in the Conservation of Contemporary Photographs: the Case of Diasec or Face-mounting.” AIC News, vol. 27, no. 2, 2002, 1, 3-4, 7-8. Also available at http://www.martinjuergens.net/Assets/download/AIC_News_March_2002.pdf

______________. “Plastic Lamination and Face Mounting of Contemporary Photographs.” In Coatings on photographs: materials, techniques, and conservation. Edited by Constance McCabe, Photographic Materials Group of the American Institute for Conservation, Washington, D.C., 2005, 218-235.

POLLMEIER, Klaus. “Photograph Restoration: a Question of responsibility.” In FIAF-Symposium Restoration Works of Art as a Common Theme between Film Archives and other Cultural Institutions. Ethical problems of Restoration of Different Art Forms, Prague, April 26, 1998, 1-6.

“Principles and Standards of the Oral History Association.” Oral History Evaluation Guidelines, Oral History Association, Pamphlet Number 3, Adopted 1989, Revised Sept. 2000, http://www.oralhistory.org/do-oral-history/oral-history-evaluation-guidelines/

ROMER, Grant. “Some Notes on the Past, Present and Future of Photographic Preservation.” Image, vol. 27, no 4, December 1984, 16-23.

SCHAAF Larry J. “Introduction.” In Sun Pictures, Catalogue Three, The Harold White Collection of Works by William Henry Fox Talbot, Hans P. Kraus Jr. Inc., New York, 1987, 5-24.

SHADBOLT, George. “Restoration of Fading Proofs.” Photographic Journal 6, no. 85, 1 January 1859, 11.

STRETCH, Bonnie Barrett. “The State of the Art: Photo Intensification.” American Photographer, vol. XV, no. 1, July 1985, 22-24.

STONER, Joyce Hill. “Documenting Ourselves: The History of Twentieth-Century Conservation.” IIC Bulletin 2, April 1998, 1-4.

SWAN, Alice. “Conservation Treatments for Photographs: A Review of Some of the Problems, Literature and Practices.” Image, vol. 21, no. 2, June 1978, 24-31.

_____________. “The Preservation of Daguerreotypes.” AIC Preprints of papers presented at the ninth annual meeting, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 27-31 May 1981, American Institute for Conservation, Washington, 1981, 164-172.

“Terminology to characterize the conservation of tangible cultural heritage.” Resolution to be submitted to the ICOM-CC membership on the occasion of the XVth Triennial Conference, New Delhi, 22-26 September 2008, http://www.ecco-eu.org/documents/ecco-documentation/index.php

The Analects of Confucius, Book 13, Verse 3, translated by James R. Ware, 1980, http://www.analects-ink.com/mission/Confucius_Rectification.html

“The Conservator-Restorer: a Definition of the Profession.” ICOM Code of Ethics Copenhagen 1984. ICOM Committee for Conservation, Copenhagen, September 1984, http://www.encore-edu.org/encore/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabindex=1&tabid=191

“Tipos de Entrevista.” Universidad Francisco de Vitoria, Departamento de Orientación e Información al Empleo, Madrid, 2009.

VAN DE VALL, Renée. “Painful Decisions: Philosophical Considerations on a Decision-making Model.” In Modern Art: Who Cares?, Foundation for the Conservation of Modern Art/ Netherlands Institute for Cultural Heritage, Amsterdam, 1999, 196-200.

VAN DE WETERING, Ernst. “Conservation-Restoration Ethics and the Problem of Modern Art.” In Modern Art: Who Cares?, Foundation for the Conservation of Modern Art/ Netherlands Institute for Cultural Heritage, Amsterdam, 1999, 247-249.

“Victoria & Albert Museum Conservation Department Ethics Checklist.” 2nd Edition, Conservation Department, Victoria and Albert Museum, London, December 2004 (1st edition by Jonathan Ashley-Smith, 1994) http://www.vam.ac.uk/files/file_upload/27931_file.pdf

WAGNER, Sarah S. “Conservation Tip: A modified Dacron lining Technique for Photographs.” Topics in Photographic Preservation, vol. 4, Compiled by Robin E. Siegel, American Institute for Conservation, Washington D.C., 1991, 31-33.

WAGNER, Sarah, and Barbara Lemmen. “The Use of Solvent- and Heat-Activated, Pressure-sensitive, and Remoistenable Systems in the Mounting of Photographic Materials.” Typed notes for the Mellon Workshop in Photograph Conservation: Unmounting and mounting Photographs, unpublished, March 13-17, 2000, 8 pp.

WATKINS, Stephanie. “Origins and Development of Dry Mounting.” The Book and Paper Group Annual, vol. 12, 1993, 66-73.

WEI, William. “International Research on the Conservation and Restoration of Face-Mounted Photographs.” In Diversity in Heritage Conservation: Tradition, Innovation and Participation, 15th Triennial Conference, 22-26 September 2008 New Delhi, vol. II, ICOM-CC, 2008, 702-708.

WHITE, Minor. “Care and Preservation of the Old Photographs and Negatives.” Image, vol. 4, no. 8, November 1955, 59-60.

Websites and web articles

Blogger, Google, http://www.blogger.com

“Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License.” Creative Commons, http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/

“Documents on Conservation-Restoration.” European Network for Conservation-Restoration Education (ENCORE), http://www.encore-edu.org/encore/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabindex=17&tabid=284

“Ethics.” Encyclopædia Britannica Online, Encyclopædia Britannica, 2009, http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/194023/ethics

“Google Analytics.” Google, 2009, http://www.google.com/analytics/

“H.264: Stunning clarity from 3G to HD.” Apple Inc., http://www.apple.com/quicktime/technologies/h264/

Internet Content Syndication Council, http://internetsyndication.org/about/index.html

KIRKPATRICK, Marshall. “Vimeo Offering HD Video Option.” Red Write Web, October 16, 2007, http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/vimeo_hd.php

“MPEG-4: The container for digital media.” Apple Inc., http://www.apple.com/quicktime/technologies/mpeg4/

MOYER, Judith. “Step-by-Step Guide to Oral History.” Do History Website, created by Film Study Center, Harvard University and hosted by Center for History and New Media, George Mason University, 1993, Revised 1999, http://dohistory.org/on_your_own/toolkit/oralHistory.html#WHATIS

STEUP, Matthias. “Epistemology.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2005, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology/

STREIGHT, Steven. “18 Characteristics of Good Blog Content.” April 30, 2005, http://blogcorevalues.blogspot.com/2005/04/18-characteristics-of-good-blog.html

TROCHIM, William M.K. “Interviews.” Research Methods Knowledge Base Website, 2006, http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/intrview.php

The International Oral History Association, http://iohanet.org/

The Oral History Association, http://www.oralhistory.org/

Theory and Ethics, articles. International Network for the Conservation of Contemporary Art, Netherlands Institute for Cultural Heritage, http://www.incca.org/theory-and-ethics

“Vimeo guidelines.” Vimeo, http://vimeo.com/guidelines

“What is CC?” Creative Commons, http://creativecommons.org/about/what-is-cc

Wikipedia, The free encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org

Word Reference Online Language Dictionaries, http://www.wordreference.com

“13 Characteristics of Outstanding Blog Design.” Webdesigner Depot, http://www.webdesignerdepot.com/2008/12/13-characteristics-of-outstanding-blog-design/