assessment & treatment report for #442 chateau …

ASSESSMENT & TREATMENT REPORT FOR #442 CHATEAU ORANGE POLYCHROME A-FRAME MASON MONTEREY CHAIR,

OREGON CAVES NATIONAL MONUMENT

A-Frame Monterey Chair #442, before and after treatment, above, in the MPFC studio.

BACKGROUND DATA

1. This treatment proposal is prepared by MPF Conservation, hereafter

known as MPFC, by Mitchell R. Powell and Kate Powell.

2. Brian Pietrowski, woodworker, right, was a member of our team.

3. Our contacts for this project were Mary Merryman, Park Curator

and Vicki Snitzler, Superintendent for the Oregon Caves NM.

MPF Conservation www.mpfconservation.com 1 of 77

http://www.mpfconservation.com


TABLE OF CONTENTSPage Section

4 HISTORY OF THE MONTEREY LINE AT THE CHATEAU

6 NPS CONDITION REPORT

7 ASSESSMENT FOR #442 A-FRAME MASON MONTEREY CHAIR

Note: MPFC may have modified the Assessment for brevity and to stop repetition within this report. The images in the Assessment may have been reduced as they are repeated in the Treatment Resume at the end of this report. However, the original assessment “2010 11 5 442 AFRAME CHAIR TRTMNT PROP” will be in “9 Documentation” folder on the hard drive. Revisions may be noted within the Assessment; these were made due to

information discovered during treatment, and MPFC thought it was easier to note the changes within the assessment if misinformation was recorded in that area. We will note when a major decision was reversed.

This Treatment Report stands as our best accurate information or history.

8 GENERAL OBSERVATIONS

10 FINISH

12 LEGS

14 SEAT

15 BACK (STILES, CENTER SPLAT + CREST)

17 TREATMENT FOR #442 CHATEAU ORANGE POLYCHROME A-FRAME

MASON MONTEREY CHAIR

17 GENERAL ATTITUDE TOWARD TREATMENT

19 EXCAVATION

21 CLEANING

21 KERF EXCAVATION

22 REPARATION

39 KEY LOCKS

42 LAST MINUTE CHANGES IN REPARATION

AS THIS WAS THE FIRST CHAIR REPAIRED

46 NEW LAG BOLTS




Page Section

47 NEW LEGS

50 REASSEMBLY

50 SEAT + LEGS

52 BACK (STILES, CENTER SPLAT + CREST) ONTO SEAT

55 FINISH TREATMENT

55 GENERAL NOTES AND APPROACH

57 PRACTICE AND TESTING FOR REPRODUCTION

58 SANDING

58 GESSO OR UNDERCOAT

60 CHATEAU ORANGE

62 DECORATIVE SPLAT

69 SMOKEY MAPLE GLAZE TOPCOAT

73 WAX

77 RESUME BEFORE + AFTER TREATMENT




Images above taken from “Monterey 1,” page 70, left, and 85, right: A-frames with painted splats. The image on the right (Old Wood) is indicative of the probable design of several chairs MPFC will restore from the Chateau, as we also

see this design on the green chair shown below. Note color on the leg turnings on the Old Wood chair.Note the oddly flat seat on the chair on the left; no contours are visible in the seat.

HISTORY OF THE MONTEREY LINE IN THE CHATEAU

4. The furniture in the Chateau was designed and built by Frank Mason, who

founded the Mason Manufacturing Company of Los Angeles in the late

1920’s, and his son George Mason.

5. In our experience, they used alder wood from Oregon.

6. The style is derived from Spanish and Dutch Colonial, Pennsylvania Dutch,

California Mission architecture and furnishings, cowboy accoutrements

(such as might be found in a barn: lariats and branding irons), and simple

ranch furnishings.

7. The line was first marketed by the Barker Brothers; the Chateau purchased the line through Meier &

Frank in Portland.


1 “Monterey,” by Roger Renick and Michael Trotter, Schiffer Publishing LTD., 2000.



8. A word about historical accuracy, finish colors, and the book “Monterey”: while a good retrospective, it

gives the impression that the Mason company used a half dozen colors, and our research shows they

were inventive and experimental and the line of colors was much larger than the book indicates.

8.1. They also do not discuss the materials nor the manner in which the colors were created, other than

to say, “The finishes were oil-stained or base-stained by asphaltum and antiqued by paraffin and

rotten stone. . . Later we made a finish named ‘desert dust;’ here we bleached the wood with

peroxide and ammonia, then lacquered and rubbed out dry raw umber glazing with a rag until the

highlight effect was accomplished.”

8.2. Without testing, we believe the oil-stains were japan colors or earth-based oil paints.

9. Also, there were more styles than shown in the “Monterey” book, both in form and in decoration.

10. We say much more about color in the General Notes, below.

Other images from the internet, below: an image from www.about.com site with no credits, left, though the finish appears to be original. A poorly refinished A-Frame from The Bungalow Store in San Diego, California, right.


http://www.about.com

http://www.about.com



NPS SURVEY CONDITION REPORT

11. There was no scope of work for #442, just an image; we based our

initial estimate on #3572.

12. Our overview, to be detailed in this report: One split in the seat,

Loose kerf joints on all four legs, Loose stile joints, Loose splat joints,

Loose crest, and Stripped finish.

13. Regarding the latter, in 1964 there was a flood3, and we surmise this

A-Frame Chair was in the dining room, which was flooded.

13.1. Loss of finish from water damage apparently resulted in

choices to partially strip the chair, either chemically and/or

through the use of abrasives, or possibly the water itself did

the stripping and finish materials were added over the

existing historical materials.


2 Source: National Park Service Condition Survey dates May 2005 for #357, by Alan Levitan recommended to “Determine original appearance; Refinish to approximate original appearance.” Levitan notes: “Requires total refinishing, some have already been stripped of finish; Some may require minor structural work.” He speaks of “them” as a group..

3 “During the winter of 1964, after much snowfall followed by warm rain, a 17 foot wall of water flowed from the ravine behind the Chalet, through the archway and slammed into the Chateau causing $100,000 in damage.” www.nps.gov/orca/historyculture/timeline.htm



http://www.nps.gov/orca/historyculture/timeline.htm

http://www.nps.gov/orca/historyculture/timeline.htm

ASSESSMENT FOR #442 A-FRAME MASON MONTEREY CHAIR

Left-facing sides, above. Right-facing sides, center; note the open stile and splat connection to the crest.Bottom left, the seat and bottom splat and stile connection. Bottom right, the underside of the chair.




GENERAL OBSERVATIONS

14. The chair was assessed in our studio in

October 2010.

15. The A-Frame Chair was built of alder wood,

with a painted finish that appears to have

been Chateau Orange.

16. REVISION: CLARITY It consists of a seat

with four legs and no stretchers, and the back

is built of two square stiles, a center splat, all

crowned with a concave cupid’s bow crest.

16.1. REVISION: ADDITION While

Mason used mortise and tenon

joinery, kerfed tenons, lap joints, and

other compression joints, they

frequently added brads or nails to

these presumably stable joins.

16.2. This is not to be confused with the

introduction of screws for securing

structural members or lag screws,

which secured strapping brackets

placed over joinery.

16.3. Mitchell surmises the introduced brads and nails during the glue-up phase, penetrating mortice

walls and tenons, and often burying these nails into the wood substrate in an attempt to

circumvent the traditional activity of clamping joinery during glue cures, thereby saving

dollars in labor time, never realizing that their furniture would one day be collectible western

heritage pieces necessitating disassembly for restoration and preservation.

16.4. This singular practice caused many problems during reparation.

NOTE: image shown is of #439 not #442.




17. Overall dimensions4:

17.1. Overall Height = 36-inches;

17.2. Seat Height = 18-inches;

17.3. Seat Width = 15½-inches;

17.4. The width between stiles is 12¾-inches at the bottom of the crest.

17.5. The width between stiles is 17½-inches at the top of the seat.

17.6. The crest is 13⅜-inches at the widest point.

18. Note: During treatment when the chairs were disassembled, we were able to easily see and document

the lack of uniformity in dimensions; this will be noted in the section on “Reparation.”

19. The following assessment will cover both structure and finish on each area of the chair, as applicable.


4 Chair #439 was used to show dimensions; a large image of this is in each A-Frame file. However, the chairs were made by hand and so there are slight variations to the dimensions.



Chair #442, above, and samples of the color the chair should become, below in #437 Lamp + Table.

FINISH

20. REVISION: DISCOVERY The original painted finish color appears to have been japan paint, possibly

“Chateau Orange” (shown on #437 Lamp+Table, above), or possibly Spanish Red or Smokey Maple.

20.1. What little pigment left on the chair is inconclusive.

20.2. The original finish was stripped, shown previous page top, and

on previous pages; however, we have few clues as to the

original finish:

20.3. REVISION: DISCOVERY Unmistakably orange paint, or

possibly Smokey Maple, exist in the crevices and around the

top of the legs, and under the yellow glue, shown next page top

and center right.

20.4. REVISION: DISCOVERY If seen in person, you can see the

orange cast to the overall wood, bottom right; again, this could




be residue of orange or Smokey Maple.

20.5. Leftover bits of asphaltum in the grain, shown

previous page, top, and bottom.

20.6. The surface is not protected, and is dirty.

20.7. Remnants of what may be gesso buried down in

the grain still exist on the chair around turned

areas, shown top right, and on the seat.

20.8. The provenance of having the color Chateau

Orange elsewhere, such as on #437 Lamp +

Table.

21. REVISION: CLARITY MPFC in conjunction with

Mary Merryman and Vicki Snitzler, over several

weeks long after the Treatment Proposal, decided that

#442 had many conflicting elements, which could

have been interpreted as Smokey Maple or Chateau

Orange.

21.1. Because of the nature of the lack of conclusive

evidence, and due to the existence of #437,

shown previous page center, we decided to

paint the chair in the Chateau Orange, so that

the color could be represented on the floor for

visitors to use, while #437 Lamp + Table was

to be designated as part of the Museum

Collection.

22. MPFC topically tested several of the current pieces in

our studio for treatment, and understands the layering of the painted finish used on the chair, from both

this project and prior experience on similar pieces.




23. Wax was the final coat to protect the finish.

24. The resulting finish was not shiny, but of medium sheen.

25. REVISION: CLARITY In this unusual project, the NPS would like the

finish to be restored to “the original finish;” MPFC has proposed to do this

using similar paints and decorative elements as we determine what those

were, using historical evidence where ever possible, and previous research.

25.1. This piece is not intended for the Museum Collection but must

serve many years of life on the Chateau floor.

26. REVISION: CLARITY Originally we believe the center splat exhibited

the floral design pictured in #290A, a Chateau A-Frame with its original

finish still intact, shown right; and shown in the book “Monterey,” in this

report on page 4, top right.

26.1. Decorative paint colors may have been green, white, blue, red,

orange, yellow and black.

27. We do not believe the ball turnings were painted on this chair.

28. Unusual finish conditions outside this general finish assessment will be

noted on each area, below, as necessary.

LEGS

29. Legs will be designated as follows: Left-facing front leg, Right-

facing front leg, Left-facing rear leg, and Right-facing rear leg.

30. The legs were designed as compression joints, though it is our

understanding that the Mason company added glue to the joints.

30.1. REVISION: CLARITY Someone tried to stabilize the

legs by adding yellow glue, and nailing two brads in the

top of the kerf joint on each side of the wedge on all leg

tenons, further undermining the joinery, shown next page

center and bottom right.




30.2. The legs are extremely loose and rickety, and

skew to the sides easily, as shown previous

page bottom right.

31. Leg joinery consists of: Angled mortice in seat plank;

Turned upper leg stump tenon; Kerfed leg top (right);

and Wedge spreading leg top to snug joinery

(essentially acting as glue to hold the leg into place.)

32. REVISION: CLARITY The leg to seat kerfed mortice

and tenon joint (hereafter called “kerfed joint for

brevity) was constructed as follows: A kerf line was

cut through the center of the end of the leg stump; each

leg passed through the seat, and a hardwood wedge was

tamped into the kerf to secure the piece.

33. The leg is turned to include a ball flanked by oblongs,

and a rectangle near the foot, shown previous page

bottom right.

34. Bottom end grain on all legs is open, some desiccation,

and is an invitation to pest infestation.

34.1. Note what appears to be asphaltum buried

into the open grain on the foot.

35. REVISION: OMISSION.

36. Bottom end grain on all legs is open, some desiccation,

and is an invitation to pest infestation, right.

Left-facing Front Leg:

37. Leg is in visibly good structural condition; but has a

worn tenon and mortice.

Right-facing Front Leg:




38. Leg is as Left-facing Front Leg, but with accretions of yellow carpenter’s glue and possibly asphaltum

or dirt.

39. The tenon protrudes above the seat level.

Left-facing Rear Leg + Right-facing Rear Leg:

40. Leg is as Left-facing Front Leg.

41. The tenon protrudes above the seat level.

SEAT

42. The seat is made of three planks, page 7, and this page.

43. The join, center right, shows shrinkage and delamination

to the seat front extending back approximately 1-inch

into the seat, top right and center right.

43.1. The same join at the seat rear has a more

significant opening extending through the

splats mortice wall.

43.2. At this time the join appears to be stable but

must be treated along compromised areas to

prevent further delamination.

44. To left-facing front curved edge has a deep routed cut

as if made by a tool, possibly a saw, shown bottom

right.




45. The front of the seat, though unfinished, has a patina from years of use in its raw state.

46. The seat is dirty.

BACK (STILES, CENTER SPLAT + CREST)

47. The back is made of four separate pieces: Left-facing stile, Center

Splat, Right-facing stile, and Crest, shown bottom right.

Left-facing stile:

48. The stile has two types of connections:

48.1. The top is doweled into the crest and a reparation was made

with yellow glue; it has separated from the crest 1/16-inch,

and is loose, shown top right.

48.2. REVISION: DISCOVERY The dowel tenons

were often wrapped with cotton scrim muslin

used as a shim.

48.3. The bottom stile connection intersecting the

seat plank contains a full dado housing or

notched connection which is shrunken and

bruised, and is secured to the seat plank with a

lag screw and washer screwed into the side of

the seat plank, shown center right.

48.4. Screws and washer are original and are

patinated: it is evident they have been exposed

to moisture, shown center right.

Right-facing stile:

49. The stile has two types of connections:

49.1. The top is doweled into the crest and a




reparation was made with yellow glue; it has

separated from the crest 1/16-inch, and is loose,

shown top right.

49.2. REVISION: DISCOVERY The dowel tenons were

often wrapped with cotton scrim muslin used as a

shim.

49.3. The bottom stile connection intersecting the seat plank

contains a full dado housing or notched connection secured

to the seat plank with a lag screw and washer screwed into

the side of the seat plank, shown previous page bottom

right.

49.4. Screws and washer are original and are patinated: it is

evident they have been through water, shown previous

page bottom right.

49.5. The right-facing stile has a cut by a tool, possibly a saw,

shown top right.

Center Splat:

50. The center splat is created from one piece of alder,

shown right, and forms a tenon at the top and bottom of

the splat.

50.1. REVISION: DISCOVERY This is one of the

few splats where the tenons were not shimmed

with muslin. REVISION: DISCOVERY The

tenons were wrapped with cotton scrim muslin and glued into the crest and seat base mortice

with hide glue.

50.2. The base is dirty.




Crest:

51. The crest is fashioned from a single piece of alder wood,

routed and shaped slightly concave toward the inside

shoulder and slightly convex toward the outside

shoulder, shown bottom left and next page.

51.1. The crest is loose from the splat and the stiles

on the left-facing side, though glue from a

previous repair holds the crest onto the chair.

51.2. A gouge or crushed area with missing material exists on the right-facing side of the crest,

bottom right.




TREATMENT FOR #442 CHATEAU ORANGE POLYCHROME A-FRAME MASON MONTEREY CHAIR

GENERAL ATTITUDE TOWARD TREATMENT

Note: Images may be borrowed from other A-Frames, as not all aspects of the treatment were photographed on each chair; they will be noted.

52. The report was organized by areas of treatment, not the order the treatment was performed.

53. Treatment was performed in the following order:

53.1. Excavation,

53.2. Cleaning the frame, reusable innards, and show cover,

53.3. Structural reparation,

53.4. Finish reparation.

54. We based all protocol on the following parameters:

54.1. NPS guidelines for museum protocol;

54.2. our own protocol for historic items, in keeping with the AIC;

54.3. the unique nature and appearance of the Mason Monterey furniture line, including historic

materials and methods used;

54.4. the unusual intended use of these historic pieces;

54.5. precedence within these parameters.

55. Regarding the chair’s daily use as a working piece in the Chateau, this parameter took precedence over

all others as a matter of preservation; after deliberation on each issue that arose with both Mary

Merryman and Vicki Snitzler, MPFC recommended leniency in application of reversible methods, and

deviations from certain procedures typically used on objects intended for museum life.

55.1. Reversible methods and barriers typically used in finish repairs were minimized, both due to

the need for durability and preservation of the item, and because the chair’s finish was

extremely damaged; the curator was notified of deviations from reversibility.




55.2. Commentary on specific finish protocol choices is made in “2010 NPS OREGON CAVES

MASON MONTEREY PAINTED FINISHES REPORT”; however, it was determined that we

deviate from museum protocol and, as Al Levitan suggested, “Refinish.”

55.3. However, Al Levitan also gave direction on similar pieces to “Determine original

appearance.”

55.4. MPFC favored the latter as a general instruction and to this end, it became our intention to

reproduce the original painted finish on terribly degraded pieces, using similar paints and

techniques, with the exception of non-toxic pigment substitutions for highly toxic pigments

within the spirit of historical accuracy.

55.5. Detailed finish treatment for all finish colors is noted in the report “2010 NPS OREGON

CAVES PAINTED FINISHES MASON MONTEREY.”

56. MPFC reused all existing original parts, unless it was detrimental to the overall life of the piece.

57. In other areas of treatment, such as reparation of structure or materials used, normal protocol was

used, with one other exception: where the viability of a structural part was compromised to the

detriment of the structural whole, that part was replaced with a replica using the same materials.

57.1. Leg tenons (and lost stiles) broken beyond repair: in a museum setting, where the chair would

not be used, possibly the tenon could be repaired, however, again, the protocol of daily use in the

Chateau required that the leg be replaced.

57.2. However, all historic legs not used were returned to the NPS, thereby allowing for potential

reuse in future if the NPS so desired.

57.3. Insertion of key locks to sustain weight on properly repaired breaks is not reversible.

Note: #442 was one of the first chairs treated, and often images

of the processes were forgotten in head scratching and discover.




EXCAVATION5

58. All compromised and loose parts of the chair were disassembled; in the process of excavation several

new hidden conditions were uncovered.

59. Mitchell began by removing the original back stile lag bolts.

59.1. The lag bolt bores in the stile were in working condition.

59.2. The lag bolt bores on the seat were in working condition, and would be conserved.

60. The splat was loosened from the seat.

60.1. Original hide glue was dissolved by injecting undiluted hot vinegar into the seat mortice.

60.2. The splat was gently tamped from the seat.

61. The crest was loosened from the splat and stiles.

61.1. Second generation yellow carpenter glue and original hide glue were dissolved by injecting

undiluted hot vinegar into the crest mortice and stile mortice.

61.2. The left facing stile dowel released with no damage.

61.3. The right-facing stile dowel broke due to yellow glue and a nail placed deep into the back.

61.4. The splat was gently tamped from the crest.

62. On the back splat tenons, thin cotton muslin scrim was used as a shim top and bottom.

63. The legs and seat were excavated.


5 Most images of the excavation were out of focus.



64. Kerfed joinery, being a compression joint, normally

exhibits play over time; however, compromised joints

(screws, nails, kerf tenon splits) or loose joints that are

likely to fail were repaired.

64.1. Occasionally the compromises caused legs to

be replaced.

65. All legs were removed from their mortise.

65.1. All leg tenons were badly damaged, beyond repair, top right.

65.2. The nails split the tenons, top right.

66. All parts were disassembled and ready for cleaning, shown bottom.




CLEANING

67. The chair, devoid of finish, was extremely dirty.

68. MPFC knew that this chair was to be fully restored: we chose to

clean the chair with a 20% solution of vulpex to remove the

grease, top right.

68.1. Sponges and occasionally cotton swabs were used to scrub

stubborn grease.

69. Proud drops of paint were removed with a chisel, below.

69.1. In the course of removing paint, we found a

tangential split in the back stile, center right.

Bottom, the chair seat half cleaned with vulpex.

KERF EXCAVATION70. No kerf excavation was performed as no legs were reused.




STRUCTURAL REPARATION

REPAIR BACK: SPLAT, CREST, STILES

71. Mitchell cleaned seat mortice of thick glue using chisels

and plane after using hot vinegar to soften glue.

72. The splat tenon was cleaned of thick glue using chisels

and plane after using hot vinegar to soften glue as

necessary, shown below.

73. The splat tenon was removed after hot vinegar was injected into the mortice, next page top.




73.1. Mitchell cleaned the crest mortice of thick glue

using chisels and plane after using hot vinegar

to soften glue as necessary, right.

74. The crest had several condition issues

74.1. Hot vinegar was injected to soften the glue

around, center left, and the glue was scooped

with a curved chisel, center right below.




74.2. Glue on the crest was removed with a straight chisel, previous page bottom left

74.3. A chip was reglued onto the surface, above, using warm hide glue on both the crest and the chip.

74.4. A jig was created, and the chip was cauled, jigged, clamped, and allowed to cure, shown page ??.

74.5. A gouged split with extensive grain loss on the top of the crest lifted; warm hide glue was

injected under the split, center.

74.6. Wax paper wrapped the split to insure no glue stuck to the bandage, and a stretch bandage was

used to hold the split while it cured, bottom.




75. The left-facing crest had a tangential split, next page

top left.

75.1. Warm hide glue was injected into the crack,

next page top left.

75.2. The crack was cauled, jigged and clamped,

next page top right, and allowed to cure.

76. Mitchell cleaned the crest of glue around the stile

mortice using chisels.

77. The right-facing stile mortice was cleaned of hide glue after hot

vinegar softened the yellow glue.

77.1. A crack in the stile base was repaired using warm hide

glue injected into the crack, center left.

77.2. A second tangential split was repaired in the same

manner, center.

77.3. Both were cauled and clamped to cure, center right.




77.4. The dowel was cleaned of hide glue using a file,

top, and sanded using coarse paper to smooth

and clean, center.

78. The left-facing stile was cleaned of hide glue on the

surface and in to dowel mortice, shown center bottom

and bottom right, as described above.

79. Mitchell cleaned stile lag bolt bores of old hide glue.




Notice the bowing of the stiles, above, and the twist, center left.

80. The back (stile, crest and splat) were ready to reassemble.

REPAIR SEAT: RIGHT-FACING LAG BORE

81. The right-facing lag bolt connection was conserved,

bottom right:

81.1. Glue was cleaned off the full house dado wall

around the lag bore, right.

81.2. Hot hide glue was inserted into the hole, next

page top left, and onto a soft shim.

81.3. The shim was tapped into the hole, next page

top left.

81.4. After curing, the dowel was cut flush with the

surface, next page center left, and ready for

reassembly, next page center right.




Right-facing lag bore conserved, above; below, a chip repair on the left-facing stile dado.




REPAIR SEAT: LEFT-FACING LAG BORE

82. The left-facing lag bolt connection was conserved, top

right, as described above.

82.1. A chip from the bottom of the stile was repaired

by placing warm hide glue on both chip and seat,

previous page bottom center,

82.2. Chip was reset, and cauled, then clamped to

cure, previous page bottom.

REPAIR SEAT: LEG MORTICE

83. Mitchell cleaned old glue from around the leg mortice

collars with chisels, next page right.

84. 1-2 Nails were left in all four leg mortice, right.

84.1. Nails were pulled with needle nose pliers,

bottom right.

84.2. Splintered edges were smoothed with a file,

next page top left.

84.3. Holes were drilled to the proper size using a

small drill bit.

84.4. Warm hide glue was injected into the holes,

next page top right, and brushed onto the

dowels.

84.5. Small hardwood dowels were tamped into the holes, next page second row left.

84.6. The dowels were clipped at the surface, next page second row right, and finished smooth with a

curved chisel, next page third row left

84.7. Repaired hole, next page third row right.

84.8. Araldyte® was used to fill areas such as small dings in the mortice and around the collar, next

page bottom.




Nail hole repair, above, on all four leg mortice; Bottom, Araldyte® infill.




REPAIR SEAT: PATTERN KEY LOCKS

85. The underside of the seat was patterned to determine the best

location for key locks to preserve the unification of the planked

seat, shown right and page 35, by the small chalk “x.”

86. Four routings and key locks of the larger size were used.

87. In the process of patterning, it became apparent to us that

the seat was not symmetrical and the leg mortices were in

varying positions; a mini view of measuring is shown next

page on #444 to illustrate.

87.1. Next page bottom is an image of the trapezium

shape in chalk showing the inconsistent design or

execution and workmanship

88. All other seats were reviewed, and most have some or all of the same characteristics.

88.1. #442 was not as misaligned as #444, shown next page.




The A-Frames in #444 were inconsistent in their design and execution. We found the square from top and

bottom, and worked the T-Square up the sides and along the bottom, in order to show you how absolutely nothing lines up. If not for the proper trajectory of the bore one might be tempted to conclude that Mason bored the seat mortice willy-nilly, where the drill bit just happened to land. If you look at the seat below, we have drawn lines from the center point of each leg to the next. We surmise their goal was to make primitive, "cowboy" furniture,

and this may have been part of their plan; it is true that the legs sat square on the floor, after all.




REPAIR SEAT: BUILD JIG + GLUE SPLITS6

89. Custom contoured glue jigs were created, next page top right.

90. A number of condition issues were present in the seat planks: Broken joins, delaminated joins,

splintering radial grain within some of the delaminating joins, shrinkage within the join walls,

occasional tangential splits and lifts on planking tops adjacent to joins.7

91. Further, lumber sizes for the seats were random widths and placed in a random pattern.

91.1. We assume that Mason “batch” joined many pieces of alder in random widths, glued the

boards and clamped them as one large slab.

91.2. They then traced out multiple seats on the slab and did not pay attention to the join

positions on the seats, which by example accounts for seats where a 2-inch wide board was

positioned at the edge of the seat.

92. The above issues interfered with regluing, making it difficult to keep boards under even pressure

during glue cure.

93. Additionally, it was necessary to install inset butterfly key locks into the seat bottoms in order to

secure already broken or delaminated joins, prevent future breakage or delamination of

compromised joins.

94. These were the factors considered in when designing our jigs.

95. Kiln dry clear vertical grain fir lumber was ultimately selected for the project, because milling

specifications, along with inherent qualities of fir, insured certainty of strong, flexible, straight,

level, non-distorted surfaces which would withstand a great deal of clamping pressure without

splitting or bruising the historic wood.

96. Each seat was cut a bit different, one from the other, by Mason.

96.1. Therefore individual jigs had to be cut in order to maintain even contact with the seat

planking side walls and maintain proper contour.


6 This section applies to all the glue jigs, and to all the seats that needed glue jigs to a lesser or greater extent.Images of the glue jigs are from #444.

7 All the seats exhibited these issues to a lesser or greater extent, which could be seen by a knowing eye.



97. A tracing of the contour of each seat was drawn onto

2x8 fir KD/CVG.

98. The seat plank at its rear terminus was cut at an

angle, center right, just behind the full dado housing

which holds the back stile supports.

98.1. The angle varied slightly from chair to chair.

98.2. Additional forces nearing the back

termination line of this angle were the

rear leg mortice and the back splat

mortice, bottom right.

98.3. Because of the nature of the exposed end

grain, the planing on the angle, the

random placing of the seat board joins,

and the competing forces associated with

the backward and downward thrust of leg

tenons + splat tenons + back stiles created

a dynamic which necessitated the

wrapping of the angled edges with the jig

in order to gain traction and compaction

during clamping (note the edges, top right).

98.4. Additionally, the front seat wall coved or chamfered, and was contoured to accommodate

human legs, giving way to multiple termination points of joinery, adding to the necessity

of a wide single board which would house the entire seat during the glue-up.

98.5. The jig openings, front and rear, allowed access into the seat planking surface for

stabilization through the installation of clamps and cauls.

98.6. Deep jawed clamps were installed strategically as necessary along join lines over cauls,

and held join lines for two boards.




98.7. This mitigated warping or twisting board joining toward the seat terminus, where the end

grains absorbed moisture over decades.

98.8. It also acted in tandem with the jigging to place the seat in stasis.

99. Traced fir lumber was cut into individual lengths and then contour cut using a band saw.

100. Jig walls were sanded then padded with dense, self

adhesive, furniture leg padding in order to assure

that bruising would not occur during clamping, top

right.

101. Glue was installed into cracks, fissures, and open

surfaces of the seat.

102. The seat was split at the back of the seat, right;

shrinking had occurred along radial crack walls

necessitating a veneer shim.

102.1. Warm hide glue was applied to both sides

of the alder veneer shim, bottom right.

102.2. The split was opened slightly using a

wedge, next page top left.

102.3. Warm hide glue was injected into the split,

next page top left.

102.4. Alder veneer was tamped deep, next page

top right.




102.5. A second piece of alder veneer was needed

to fill the split, center left.

102.6. The shims were cut to level with a razor,

center right.

102.7. Wax paper lined the area where the glue

was laid, along the split, and the seat was

placed into the jig.

102.8. The entire jig apparatus and seat plank were put under pressure using screw type pony

clamps until all surfaces joined, shown bottom left on #441..

102.9. The clamps were used until the 1x2’s were screwed to the jig, shown on #441, next page

top left.

102.10. The shims were allowed to cure, next page top right.




Below, the jig attached shown on #444.

103. Shown above, 1x2 and 1x3 fir KD/CVG were selected as structural stretchers, cut to width and

screwed to the jig surface using a flange headed, non tapered, cabinet installation screw.

103.1. This screw style was selected to minimize the risk for splitting the 1x during multiple re-

installations of the stretchers.

103.2. The primary function of the stretchers were to hold the jigs together under constant

pressure after the clamps were removed and during the mortising process and the creation

of the key locks; therefore, the stretchers were placed to allow for the eventually routing of

the key lock mortice.

104. The stretchers served two purposes:

104.1. First was to assure that the jigs kept the seat plank under constant pressure equal to

clamping pressure.

104.2. Second was to assure that the warped top and bottom of the seat planking could not cup or

distort during re-gluing.




104.3. The stretchers surfaces where they met the seat surfaces were also padded with large,

dense leg pads in order to act as internal jig pressure points and eliminate any risk for

bruising of the historic seat surfaces.

104.4. Wax paper was slipped between the pads and the seat surface to insure that any residual

hide glue would not adhere the stretcher and pads to the historic surfaces.

105. Because of the severity of join degradation and the atrophy of grain surfaces we did not want to

minimize pressure within the glue jig during the mortise procedure thereby risking failure of

repairs gained during the jigging, clamping gluing process.

105.1. Therefore we determined that individual stretchers could be removed selectively if

necessary during the mortise/routing process while at the same time decreasing the

pressure to the jigging walls only slightly overall.

105.2. To mitigate the loss of pressure during the temporary removal of stretchers we secured a

commercial quick clamp in the stretchers place while still allowing access to the seat plank

bottom and still making adequate space for the router.

106. Seat planks were ultimately left in the jigs under

pressure for 4 weeks in a room with a medium low

RH in order to assure the complete curing of glue

and the redirecting of formerly warped or twisted

grain channels.

106.1. NOTE: Detailed key lock information will

follow, page 40-41; the following is a

summary.

106.2. Routing of key lock mortice was performed at the end of the 3-4 week stasis, followed by

the gluing of the inset key locks with warm hide glue.

106.3. Again the stretchers were selectively removed as necessary while keeping pressure on the

jig walls with commercial quick clamps.




106.4. Key locks were set into mortise and stretchers were placed back over the curing keys with

leg pads between the keys and stretchers, to shim and add downward pressure during cure.

106.5. Stretchers were resecured to jigs and allowed to cure at least one week.

107. Finally the stretchers were removed and the jigs released from the seat plank surface.

108. Ultimately the jigs performed exactly as they were designed, redirecting competing malign forces,

(warps, misalignments, twists, shrinkage, etc.), much like dental braces do on a badly misaligned

palate, but in a much shorter period of time!

KEY LOCKSCREATE KEY LOCKS

109. Key locks were cut from Oregon alder in two sizes,

however, the large one alone was used on #442.

110. There is a reasoning behind coving the corners on

the butterfly key locks.

110.1. Because of the inherent design limitations of

a plunge router jig base apparatus applied to the

creation of sharp corners, plus the inherent roundness

of bits and plunger collars, the plank routing

butterfly corners were routed as coves rather than

sharp corners.

110.2. Rather than risking chipping during a hand-chiseling

process in the morticed corners, which would cause

imprecise wall edges and possibly future splits in the

historic seat plank, Mitchell opted to allow the coved

corners.




110.3. The offset of the tension long the key wall

from the cove was minimal and considering

the primary sheer along the mortice wall

was asserted primarily along the lateral

walls rather than the corners.

111. Coarse sandpaper was glued to a board, previous

page bottom right, and the key lock corners were

sanded to accommodate the routed mortice.

ROUTE + INSERT KEY LOCKS8

112. The jigged seat with chalk pattern marks, right, was turned

upside down and secured to the work table.

113. Four large key locks were patterned for installment, shown

page 42.

114. Butterfly insets were routed into the seat bottoms using a

router to the pattern edges, shown bottom.

114.1. Chisels were used to remove excess material and give

it the final clean depth and shape, shown next page; key locks were loosely set into the

inset for gluing.

Key lock inset was cleaned and detail using a chisel.


8 Routing images are all the same; tornado shortened the time for photographing in effort to move the process along.



115. Four large key locks were to be installed on #442.

115.1. Both key locks and key lock mortice were covered in

warm hide glue.

115.2. Key locks were gently tamped into place with a rubber

mallet.

115.3. The seat was again placed into the jig.

115.4. Wax paper covered the key locks to keep seeping glue

from adhering to the 1x2 wood caul, which was placed

on top of the key locks and clamped to cure

116. After curing, the cauls and jig were removed.

116.1. The key locks sat proud of the seat plank bottoms, as

seat depths differed slightly from chair to chair; they

were planed level with the historic seat plank bottom.

116.2. Excess glue accretions were removed by light

scraping with a chisel.

117. A butterfly key lock repair effectively lowers the possibility

for future shrinking or breaking of the join or crack; key locks

installed shown right and bottom.




LAST MINUTE CHANGES IN REPARATION AS THIS WAS THE FIRST CHAIR REPAIRED

118. This was the first chair repaired, and as we went we made decisions as to the longevity of the

structure of the chair as we began to fully understand the unusual stresses placed on these chairs,

some of which were due to poor workmanship and/or inherent design flaws and/or successive

design flaws and/or successive poor or ineffective repairs.

118.1. Examples of poor workmanship are the skewed seat mortice and unsymmetrical leg

mortice; for this reason several small repairs were made before reassembly that later were

applied to other chairs in sequence.

119. Dowels that Mitchell believed not up to the life of the chair were repaired; in the case that follows,

we replaced the stile dowels on both sides due to the skewed back, to ensure the strength was

present.

120. The dowel on top of the right-facing stile was replaced.

120.1. The dowel was cut, left; and a small drill bit shattered the remaining dowel, middle.

120.2. Hot vinegar softened the hide glue around the dowel, right, and a curved chisel removed

the all hide glue and bits of dowel.

121. The left-facing stile dowel stuck in the crest was removed in a similar manner, shown next page.

122. Stiles and crest were ready for reassembly with new dowels.




Replacement of a crest-to-stile dowel for added strength for use in the Chateau, above, stuck in the crest.

The dowel is cut flush with the surface, top right. Hot vinegar is placed into the dowel mortice, and a chisel is used to

remove the softened dowel, center right and bottom left. A drill bit finishes the bore to the proper size, bottom right.




Araldyte® was used as filler for the deep saw marks on the stile, this page (described next page.)

It was applied wet, above, and allowed to cure; after curing it was shaped for finish.

123. Araldyte® was used as filler for the deep saw marks on stile and seat, as they could snag clothing,

shown this page and next.




124. In each case:

124.1. The areas were masked off with tape;

124.2. Wet Araldyte® was applied, and shaped;

124.3. The tape was removed;

124.4. After curing the Araldyte® was either

shaped by chisel or sanded to the proper finish

shape.

125. The same treatment was performed for the infill

around the jagged losses on the crest, below.




NEW LAG BOLTS

126. Vintage square headed lags were found from one of

our sources in the proper diameter shank, but longer

than the historic Mason lags used for the A-Frame

chairs.

127. The new lags were cut to length, top right, and their

tips and threading modified to be accurate and

usable, center right.

128. Two lags were necessary to complete the project due the loss

of one prior to MPFC accepting the pieces, and another broken

during treatment; both were on other chairs.

129. MPFC chose an arbitrary chair with the parameters that it

had been stripped of its original finish as the donor chair of

historic lag bolts to the two chairs missing one; that chair was

#442

130. The two new lags, one shown bottom right, were placed on

this chair.




Two new alder legs below: the top leg was distressed as per the manner Mason abused their freshly turned new legs.

NEW LEGS, TURNED AND DISTRESSED

131. Four new legs were turned by Jim Root, Abbaroot Co.

132. The legs had crisp edges and symmetrical shape shown on the

bottom of the image above; we distressed them.

133. The legs were run across a sand belt to remove parts of the

turns, and to put deep 1/4 to 1/2-inch ruts in the sides, right.

134. Coarse sandpaper was glued to a board and the new legs were

dragged across the sandpaper, causing scratches,

right.

135. Various rasps added deeper marks, next page top.

136. The crisp edges of the turnings were softened, next

page top right.

137. The legs looked like they had been run over by a

herd of horses; they were ready for reassembly!




138. Kerfs were cut into the tenon of the new legs, right, with a

Japanese tenon saw (Dozuki) and Mid-panel saw (Azebiki,

and the wedge was removed, next page top left.

139. A fine file was used to clean the bottom of the kerf, next page

top center.

140. Clamps were used to insert the leg tenons into the leg mortice,

next page top right.

141. New wedges were created from alder, top right.

142. Rough cut kerf wedges were sanded to a fine point, next page

top right.

143. New legs were created a bit longer in both the foot

and the tenon, so they could be custom fit, as each

chair’s leg bores were a bit different, one from

another, necessitating variable leg lengths, shown

next page bottom left.

143.1. Custom fit meant setting the leg into the

mortice in the seat, next page bottom left, to trim the leg to the top of the seat, next page

bottom right.




143.2. Next the foot was trimmed to the proper

length, at a slight angle, on the leveled seat.

144. The new legs are ready to be glued into place.




REASSEMBLY

REASSEMBLY: SEAT + LEGS

145. All parts were ready for reassembly.

146. The legs were initially refitted to the seat mortice.

147. Kerf wedges were slipped into the kerfs to test the

number needed to spread each kerf, as each kerf had

twisted and displayed varying kerf widths and

configuration, shown top on #444.

148. The tenon collars were leveled, and all vestiges of

hide glue were removed with chisels to allow for a

snug fit, shown right on #444.

149. Legs tenons were covered with warm hide glue,

right.

149.1. Leg mortice was covered in warm hide

glue, bottom right.

149.2. Each leg was reinserted into the mortice

which was pre-fitted, and excess glue was

wiped from underneath.

149.3. Kerf joints were lined up as before.

149.4. Seat and legs were secured on a level work

surface, and legs were positioned as they

were to be in future when used at the

Chateau.




150. Glue was inserted into the kerf joint, top right.

150.1. Hot hide glue was brushed all over the kerf

wedges, center right.

150.2. Kerf wedges were inserted and tamped into

place, bottom left.

150.3. Excess glue was wiped clean.

150.4. Seat and wedges were allowed to cure on a

level surface.

150.5. Mitchell used a Japanese tenon saw to

level the kerf wedges after curing, bottom

left.

150.6. Proud areas were carefully hand planed

creating a finish quality surface, bottom

right.

150.7. The seat was additionally sanded, due to the nature of the repairs.

151. The seat was reassembled.




REASSEMBLY:

BACK (CREST + SPLAT + STILES) ONTO SEAT

MUSLIN SHIMS

152. Strips of cotton muslin were cut to form shims for splats and

dowel connections, stile to crest, as was originally done by

Mason, shown top right during reassembly.

152.1. Round muslin shims were cut using an upholstery

button cutting die.

STILES

153. The stiles were attached to the seat.

153.1. New dowels were set into the top of the stiles using the muslin shims and warm hide glue,

top right.

153.2. NOTE: The historic lag bolts from this chair were split up and placed on chairs with one

good lag bolt, and this chair, had two new lag bolts substituted.

153.3. The seat back stiles were set into place as a mock up and held on temporarily by clamps,

bottom left.

153.4. A drill bored fresh holes into the conserved seat for the lag bolts, bottom left.

153.5. New lag bolts were attached through the stile into the seat and secured loosely until final

truing and tightening, bottom right.




154. The splat was attached to the seat.

154.1. Warm hide glue was applied to the seat

mortice.

154.2. A muslin strip was laid across the seat

mortice.

154.3. Warm hide glue was applied to the bottom

splat tenon.

154.4. The splat tenon was set into the shimmed

mortice, and tamped gently but securely

into place, top right, and clamped to cure,

right.

154.5. The shim was trimmed.

154.6. Excess glue was cleaned from the seat.

CREST-TO-SPLAT+STILE

155. The crest was attached to the splat and stiles.

155.1. Warm hide glue was applied in the crest

mortice, including dowel holes.

155.2. Warm hide glue was placed onto the top of

the splat tenon; muslin was laid over the

glue; additional glue was brushed over the

surface of the muslin, right.

155.3. The muslin was set over the top of the

glue saturated dowel holes, and the dowels

were inserted, bottom right.

155.4. The crest was attached to splat and stile

dowels.

155.5. The shim was trimmed, and excess glue was wiped clean.




156. The chair was again set onto a level surface and trued, top left and middle, then clamped for 48

hours.

157. The chair was tied, clamps removed, and allowed to cure for several weeks, top right.

GLIDES (AFTER FINISH WORK)

158. Leg bottoms on the original legs had open end grain; Mitchell embedded the ends with

paraffin to completely seal off the open end grain.

159. New glides were placed on the bottom of the chair legs (shown on chair #354 after finish).

159.1. Leg bottoms were bored with a small bit to accommodate a leg glide shank.

159.2. Glide was carefully tamped into position.




FINISH TREATMENTGENERAL NOTES AND APPROACH

160. The finish information is as stands, with revisions, in the Assessment Report, pages 10-12.

161. As noted in our GENERAL ATTITUDE TOWARD TREATMENT, protocol choices outside

standard museum protocol were made in the finish treatment, and is detailed in “2010 NPS

OREGON CAVES MASON MONTEREY PAINTED FINISHES REPORT.”

161.1. However, it was determined that we deviate from museum protocol and, as Al Levitan

suggested, “Refinish;” Al Levitan also gave direction to “Determine original appearance.”

161.2. MPFC favored the latter instruction and to this end, it became our intention to reproduce

the original painted finish to the best of our ability based on clues from the remaining

pigment on the chair, and historical clues as to how it might have been done when images

were not forthcoming, therefore, in the case of #442, we chose the color based upon small

indications it might have been in the warm hued family, and precedence in #437, Lamp +

Table.

161.3. MPFC thought it might be historically interesting to show the color on the floor with the

other A-Frames.

161.4. We based our use of a gesso undercoat on the traces of white pigment found in the grain.

161.5. We based the splat on the the combination of the original Chateau A-Frame #290A.

161.6. We took our cues on the ball turnings based on the paint on #290A.

161.7. We took our clues as to the topcoat of Smokey maple glaze from #437, Lamp + Table.

161.8. We used similar paints and techniques, with the exception of non-toxic pigment

substitutions for highly toxic pigments.

162. MPFC and Mary Merryman chose Gamblin Oil Paints, known for their conservation work and

for their commitment to non-toxic paints to create a match for the original oil painted finish.




163. We created the following paints: Chateau Orange,

top right, a Smokey Maple Glaze, and the decorative

colors, all from matches we made to current pieces or

past pieces we have treated.

163.1. Our finish information on all pigments and

colors is included in the “2010 NPS

OREGON CAVES MASON MONTEREY PAINTED FINISHES REPORT.”

164. MPFC mixed paints, and placed them in labeled tubes, then modified the paint as necessary.

164.1. This base was modified by the addition of either pigments and/or diluents.

165. Unless described differently, brushes of various hair (bristle, synthetic) were used in flats

(size 8, 16, + 20).

166. There is evidence that Chateau Orange may not have always had the matte finish assumed by

many due to pieces seen in a degraded condition; we believe these A-Frames were medium gloss.

166.1. It may be that because these were marketed as dining chairs, they allowed the topcoat to be

glossier, so that the chairs could be wiped down with a damp rag.

167. #442 has all new legs; Mitchell had several legs with anomalies like the ones shown above, and

chose to place them all on a chair which was slated for a white undercoat.

167.1. The dings would make the asphaltum “antiquing” interesting.




FINISH: PRACTICE AND TESTING FOR REPRODUCTION

168. The Oregon Caves allowed several chairs and a table to be used as

practice and tests for the Gamblin Paints.

169. Durability and wear and drying times were all part of the testing

process, as well as giving Kate a “canvas” on which to practice the

strokes and layering used on the Mason pieces.

169.1. Each side of the table was tested with varying mixtures

and techniques; all were evaluated and cauled

into the method used for reproduction of

finishes: brushing, wiping, scrubbing paints!

169.2. Consistency and movement were noted, such

as the dripping paint shown in the center, right;

the failures were as informative as the

successes, and were noted.

169.3. Finally recipes were finalized and methods perfected.

170. Kate’s observations regarding the decorative painting:

170.1. Brush strokes are quite easy to reproduce, but finger-

painting is like a signature, and very hard to reproduce.

170.2. Kate practiced on children's’ chairs for the NPS (shown

bottom), feeling for the right finger pressure to make the

images look like the original on #290A; nevertheless, the

first chair splat (#439 Chateau Green) she had

to redo: sanded and repainted.

171. Having studied the images while reproducing the floral

patterns, she can now recognize various artisans who

painted specific decorative images; unfortunately, we

probably will never know their names.




FINISH: SANDING

172. The chair was sanded of all surface dirt to receive a new finish

and to remove any splinters.

173. We did not attempt to remove or smooth over dings and other

anomalies that might be used in conjunction with the

asphaltum to produce an antiqued look during the final

finishing coats, shown right after sanding.

FINISH: GESSO OR UNDERCOAT

174. The entire chair was painted in and undercoat of Titanium

White paint.

175. A medium flat was used for the entire process.

176. Painting was done methodically so that gradually the piece

was upright, the paint would still move and not drag in the

time taken to complete, and the chair would need minimal

handling.

176.1. With the chair on its back, Kate started with the

inside of the new legs, shown center right.

176.2. The inside stiles, bottom right, then with its crest on a

stand, the inside back splat edges and face of the splat

were covered with very viscous Titanium White +

Galkyd.

176.3. The face of the crest was painted, and then lifted and

held while the crest top was painted.

176.4. The chair stood on its legs and back of the crest was

painted.

176.5. The stiles were painted.




176.6. The new screws and washers, shown top right, were painted, then distressed slightly so the

metal would show through the paint in some areas, center.

176.7. The outside back splat was painted similarly to the inside splat, with a viscous Titanium

White + Galkyd, bottom center.

176.8. The outside new legs were painted, bottom right.

176.9. The seat was painted, and set to dry.

177. The Titanium White was allowed to dry for 5 days.

Washer + screw painting and distressing, above;

below, inside back + stiles, bottom left, outside back splat, bottom center, and legs, bottom right.




FINISH: CHATEAU ORANGE

178. The Chateau Orange paint was medium thick, and Kate

occasionally used diluent to make the paint more viscous.

179. Testing for opacity was performed on the underside of both the

seat and inside of the new legs, top right.

180. Painting was done in similar order to the white undercoat

described above.

180.1. We intended to create distressing by rubbing,

however, the Chateau Orange dried to the touch

much faster than other paints, and so we were

unable to distress the paint by rubbing without

ripping the finish.

180.2. We are not sure why the paint dried to the touch

so fast, but it may be the nature of the raw

pigments in the paint, especially the Titanium

White.

181. The chair was allowed to cure for a week; it was dry to the touch within 24 hours before we laid it

on its back to paint the decorative splat.




Bottom: #442 A-Frame chair before painting, left; after Titanium White undercoat; center

after one coat of Chateau Orange, below.




FINISH: DECORATIVE SPLAT

182. The decorative design was taken from the only existing original

A-Frame, #290A, shown right during tracing.

183. From the original tracing a pattern was determined, shown

center left.

184. A transfer was made to the splat, center.

185. The transfer was made with an erasable pencil, shown bottom

right (hard to see in the image but it is there!)

186. The method of laying in color and colors were determined,

shown page 66.

187. Synthetic brushes were used in flats (size 6 + 8) and

liners of varying lengths.

188. Six paint colors were applied.

188.1. Techniques are shown over the next four

pages.

188.2. Descriptions and curing time was given

between each, page 66.




Above, Pale Decorative Yellow created leaves, painted using a small flat.

Below, Decorative Red created petals made by finger-painting.




Above and right, decorative green created leaves (painted with a small flat) and stems (painted with a 3/4 liner).




Above, Straw Ivory base created the center of the flowers with finger-painting. Below, Decorative Black created

leaves (painted using a small flat) and parts of the flower (made by finger-painting).




Below, Decorative Yellow created the tips of the flowers (made by finger-painting).

189. Six paint colors were applied, shown next page on #442; curing time was given between each.

189.1. Pale Decorative Yellow was mixed on a palette; it created leaves (painted using a small

flat) and petal on the center flower (made by finger-painting.)

189.2. The chair was allowed to cure for 7 days, though it was dry to the touch within 72 hours.

189.3. Decorative green was mixed and placed into a tube; it created leaves (painted with a small

flat) and stems (painted with a liner.)


189.5. Decorative Red base color was mixed and placed into a tube; it created petals (made by

finger-painting.)


189.7. Decorative Black was mixed and placed into a tube; it created leaves (painted using a

small flat) and parts of the flower (made by finger-painting.)

189.8. Straw Ivory base color was mixed and placed into a tube; it created the center of the

flowers (made by finger-painting.)

189.9. The chair was allowed to cure for three weeks, though it was dry to the touch within 48

hours to two weeks.

189.10. Decorative yellow was mixed and placed into a tube; it created the tips of the flowers

(made by finger-painting.)




The stages of the color applications:

Above: 1) Tracing, left, and color palette decided; 2) Pale DecorativeYellow and Decorative Red, center; 3)Green, right; Below 4) Straw Ivory, left; 5) Decorative Black, center, and 6) Decorative Yellow, right.

190. The chair was allowed to cure for close to three weeks before Kate applied Smokey Maple Glaze,

shown next.




Finished decorative splat before glaze and wax, above.




FINISH: SMOKEY MAPLE TOPCOAT

191. A thinned coat of Smokey Maple glaze was applied to

the entire chair with both soft and stiff bristle flat size

8 and 16.

191.1. Stiff bristle brushes were cut to create an

uneven scouring instrument, shown top right.

192. Testing for opacity was performed on the inside legs.

193. In additionally to the Smokey Maple container, a

container of diluent and Asphaltum pigment were

open during treatment, right, as Kate needed to be able

to dip into each as needed to artfully apply the new

Smokey Maple finish.

194. Painting was done methodically as described in prior

pages, so that gradually the piece was upright, the paint would still move and not drag in the time

taken to complete, and the chair would need minimal handling.

195. Diluent, Asphaltum, and Smokey Maple glaze were used simultaneously on the chair to create the

appearance desired.

195.1. Diluent was applied in the center to allow for a brightness, bottom right.

195.2. An additional diluent held brush marks.

Next page, a visual example of mixing diluent and Smokey Maple to achieve the desired effect.




Diluent in the center, Smokey Maple around the edges, above. Below, the blending begins.

196. Smokey Maple glaze was applied around the edges.

197. Asphaltum was blended into some of the glaze to darken artfully (shown next page center on the

legs.)

198. The Smokey Maple was dragged through the center splat diluent to blend, above; brush marks held.

199. The glaze was allowed to dry for a few minutes, then the scrub brush was used to pull off material,

leaving further streaks as were present in the original finish on Chair #290A and Lamp+Table

#437.




Above, diluent in the center, Smokey Maple at the edges.

Above, an example of adding Asphaltum artfully to the Smokey Maple glaze, left; blended initially, center; and after allowing it is dry just a bit, scrubbed off, right.

The seat began with the back edging at the splat and along the edges of the seat proper.

Next page, the seat painted.




The Smokey Maple paint applied, above, and after scrubbing off with the cut bristle brush, bottom right.




FINISH: WAX

200. The finish on the entire chair was scuffed using

abrasive pads in fine and medium grit, shown

above.

200.1. Below, the sheen before and after scuffing

on a leg.




201. Pigmented wax with a high amount of carnauba was applied

and worked into all the crevices all over the chair, center left,

then artfully removed to allow accretions of color.

202. After allowing the wax to set, the chair was polished with a

soft diaper cloth to a warm sheen, bottom left.

203. The chair was completed, shown page 77.

The seat before steel wool and wax, above left, and after, above right.




#442 before paint, top left; with Titanium White, center; and with Chateau Orange, right.

Center, after decorative splat, left; after scuffing, center; and after waxing, right.

A match was made to the original Chateau Orange, bottom left. Bottom right, waxed finished A-Frame.




#442 is completed!




assessment & treatment report for #442 chateau …

Documents