CCI2014050732

-5B-

ZOhout-i _8o, „_0i. Ąlartlu*- !3_

Con. r»i. no.:    w om Ą/v_hu...,. -o.-. tte    _s_t.n..<=    $fn-85

ObJ«ct: %irt waA. -4- /deaJ yu^s dm-ayi nłeJ m:    cćLoimhoI yrt, wop! ceCfon

Condltlon of obi.cl:    , S^U- j ^oUi_

Photo: ^^y^y/^/y_PMUUick:    X    (tl/rfi**')_Sg.pl. Ł.h.n: POhZ-

Trootoont:    _P».p-fr..łIng:    X_Handl.d by:

We noticed cracks, crumples, dust, insecticides, insect attacks etc. Furthermore we registered hcw many hours we needed for conservation, and most important, the degree of need for conservation: We invented four degrees:

degree 3 = cannot be handled without further demolition, must be conservated.

degree 2 = must be conservated if exhibited - can endure storage without conservation treatment. degree 1 = can be exhibited without conservation, but a little treatment would be advantageous. degree o = excellent condition.

Soon we found out that a Computer registration would be appropriate, so we started registration using a pogram frcm IBM called "The Assistent", which is comparatively simple and easy to handle for beginners. It is too smali for our purpose in futurę, as it does not have a database.

We then used a Computer registration system with a database from Unilog, called 'i - 7'.

Of the all in all 725 fur and skin costumes we registered 20% of the sealskin, 20% of the caribou, all the birdskins (25 items) and all the seal gut skins (50 items). With our Computer registration forms we were now able to calculate and thus could oonfirm what we had expected conceming the prevailing problems of the respective skin types.

I shall not go into details but just mention a few obser-vations. At the same time I have to emphasize that our schemes are to be used with some reservation. Our observa-tions are madę by sight and thus are subjective, though we believe them to be important, useful, and relevant. We have

only been two persons on the job estiraating the skins and furs, which means that we gradually eąualized our view on stiffness, fragility etc.

Here you have a survey over the yarious skintypes.

It seems that Caribou skin is in a better condition than sealskin. 54% of the sealskin objects are stiff against only 9% of the caribou objects. 35% of the caribou have loose hairs. There is a surprizingly high percentage of the sealskin with loss of hairs (19%).

As for remains of insecticides before and after treatment in the fume-cupboard, it is striking that the dehaired skins hołd a higher percentage after treatment than the haired ones. As remains of insecticides are much morę difficult to see in haired skins, this observation clearly shows the weakness of our scheme. Consequently, laboratory analyses on the amount of DOT and other insecticides in the objects before and after treatment in the fume-cupboard show that we could not remove the insecticides 100%. That means that you have to be very cautious while treating skins, even when insecticides are invisible.