Atlanta from the Ashes by Central Atlanta Progress

June 2011 CONSERVATION MAINTENANCE TREATMENT

Atlanta from the Ashes 1969, Relocated 1995 Gamba Quirino, Sculptor James Seigler, Designer Woodruff Park

Atlanta, GA

N ICOLAS F. V ELOZ, FAIC 5 W. Howell Ave. Alexandria, VA 22301

COVER â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Etienne Jackson buffing the sculpture from the Bil-Jax lift after it was washed, rinsed, had BTA and two coats of wax applied.

TABLE OF CONTENTS Description: 1 Condition and Appearance Prior to Treatment: 2 Treatment: 3 Washing: 5 Removal of Core Material Deposits: 6 Application of Benzotriazole (BTA): 7 Wax Application: 8 First Coat: 8 Second Coat: 9 Buffing: 10 Final Appearance After Treatment: 11 Additional Information: 11 Recommendations for Future Maintenance: 12

MATERIALS ILLUSTRATIONS DIGITAL IMAGES

June 2011 CONSERVATION TREATMENT of the

Atlanta from the Ashes Gamba Quirino, Sculptor James Seigler, Designer

Sculpture Before Conservation Treatment

Woodruff Park, Atlanta, GA

Sculpture After Conservation Treatment

Atlanta, GA

Description: This report documents the Conservation Maintenance Treatment of a heroic bronze sculpture, Atlanta from the Ashes, located in Woodruff Park. The information gathered during the SOS! Sculpture Survey for inclusion in the Inventory of American Sculpture (IAS) entry for the sculpture states: The sculpture depicts a female figure being lifted from flames by a phoenix, in reference to the phoenix of Egyptian mythology that was consumed by fire and rose from the ashes, just as Atlanta rose from the ashes and devastation of the Civil War to become an important international city. The female figure has long hair and is seen nude above the waist, looking upward. In her raised arms she holds the legs of the phoenix. On the front of the pedestal is a plaque which reads: THIS SCULPTURE, SYMBOLIZING

ATLANTA FROM THE ASHES WAS PRESENTED TO THE CITY OF ATLANTA BY THE RICH FOUNDATION

Beneath the original dedication plaque is a new “Rededication” plaque. The IAS further states it was, “Formerly located Martin Luther King Jr. Drive, S.W. & Spring Street, S.W., Atlanta, Georgia 1969–1995"

Condition and Although the sculpture received conservation treatment before it was relocated prior Appearance Prior to the Olympics, and again in 2004. At that time the sculpture was cleaned by washing to Treatment: with detergent and water followed by the application of Benzotriazole (BTA) followed by the application of two coats of wax and buffing. Since then, the sculpture had been examined in September 2009 and a condition report and proposal for conservation maintenance treatment was submitted. At that time, the sculpture was quite dirty overall with some corrosion on the upper surfaces, particularly in the more exposed areas such as the wings of the phoenix and the areas receiving direct sun. Current conditions are similar to those noted 2009, but the corrosion is somewhat more pronounced. than was noted in 2009. The surface continued to be quite dirty/dusty with a somewhat dull, and weathered appearance as a result of the light surface corrosion. For the most part, the sculpture had a darkish gray-green coloration overall with corrosion in the locations previously described. The casting is not of the best quality and there is some porosity in the bronze which was emphasized by the large streak of green corrosion down the chest/stomach of the female figure as a result of water dripping from the interior of the tail of the phoenix [which most probably, enters through the porosity in the upper surfaces of the bird but it is exacerbated by condensation on the interior surfaces of the sculpture]. This is very similar to, similar to its appearance when previously treated in 2004, however it was not quite as pronounced and for the most part rested on the wax coating. [Etienne Jackson had performed an interim treatment on this area removing the accretions and relaxing it in 2009 and the current deposits have accumulated since that treatment.]

The original dedication plaque appeared to be in a similar condition as the sculpture, with some light corrosion developing on upper surfaces and a generally dull appearance overall; the “Rededication” plaque appeared “shiny and new”as in bright, unpatinated “new” metal.

The pedestal was in generally good condition. Since the 2004 treatment the sealant (which had failed and was no longer effective at that time), in the quirked joints at the corners and between the stones of the pedestal had been replaced with mortar (the

corner joints which were quirked in 2004 are now chamfered mortar joints). Also, the area between the bronze and the stone had sealant installed between the sculpture and pedestal. However, the mortar in the mitered corner of the pedestal, in front , did not extend beneath the bronze of the plinth, and the sealant joint did not overlap the mortar thus leaving a gap of approximately 3/8" in diameter in the upper surface of each corner, These holes allows rainwater, or water from any other source, to enter the pedestal.

The mortar and sealant, if completed in an expected manner would seal the sculpture and pedestal, so that any moisture entering through the porosity of bronze, or other source, would be trapped sculpture and pedestal veneer abdto act somewhat as a terrarium causing very high humidity in the daytime, with condensation on the bronze running down the interior surfaces when the surfaces cooled at night. Such an enclosed area should be avoided to prevent repeated cyclical evaporation and condensation of water on a regular basis because it can result in corrosion and continued weeping of solubilized core material from the interior of the culpture and failure of any ties holding securing the veneer or facing of the pedestal. There should be vents/weeps to allow water to escape from beneath the sculpture and from the void between the concrete core and the stone veneer of the pedestal. In the case of sealant joints this can be done by cutting openings filled with cotton batting or other similar material to allow water to escape. In the case of mortar, one of the most common methods is the installation of wicks which allows water to seep through them and evaporate when it reaches the outside. In both instances, these openings/vents/drains should be at the lowest point so that a pond or puddle accumulate below them. Also, extreme caution must be exercised to be certain that placement is such that water drains from the interior, and is not directed into the interior of the sculpture â&#x20AC;&#x201C; thereby causing problems rather than correcting them. Treatment: Although the sculpture overall gave a somewhat poor or weathered appearance, it was essentially in good condition and generally the only need was to maintain the previous treatment, and return it to itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s condition and appearance at that time, and this became the goal of this treatment.

Completion of this goal would help the sculpture to 3

continue into the future with as little additional deterioration or corrosion as possible. The only specific or localized problem that was noted and which needed to be addressed was a continuation of the deposition of core accumulating on the stomach/chest area resultant from its being in solution and dripping from the center talon of the Proper Left (PL) 1 claw of the phoenix, and this would be specifically addressed in order to mitigate it as much as possible. This goal or philosophy is to a great extent reflected by the thoughts expressed by John Ruskin, in his Seven Lamps of Architecture, published in 1849. Take proper care of your monuments, and you will not need to restore them. A few sheets of lead put in time upon the roof, a few dead leaves and sticks swept in time out of a watercourse, will save both roof and walls from ruin. Watch an old building with an anxious care; guard it as best you may, and at any cost, from every influence of dilapidation. Count its stones as you would jewels of a crown; set watches about it as if at the gates of a besieged city; bind it together with iron where it loosens; stay it with timber where it declines; do not care about the unsightliness of the aid: better a crutch than a lost limb; and do this tenderly and reverently, and continually, and many a generation will still be born and pass away beneath its shadow. Its evil day must come at last; but let it come declaredly and openly, and 2 let no dishonouring and false substitute deprive it of the funeral offices of memory.

Because it was found to be in good “physical” condition, it was felt that it was only necessary to again wash the sculpture and give it another protective coating, as was done during the last full conservation treatment. Wax was felt to be the coating of choice as it can easily be maintained and does not have to be periodically removed using strong chemicals, as required by the use of lacquer. It is reversible and can be removed with little difficulty, should this be necessary at some time in the future. Work was completed in June 2011 by Nicolas F. Veloz, Alexandria, VA and Etienne Jackson, of Atlanta. Because of its location, and the “use” of the park particularly at night, it was decided that it would be unwise to use scaffolding which would provide access to the statue during non work hours; therefore, a hydraulic lift was used. Atlanta Downtown Improvement District, Inc. was kind enough provide a Bil-Jac, trailer mounted articulated lift. To keep it from being tampered with they delivered 1.

“PL” or “PR” is an abbreviation for proper right or proper left. This is to say, the side referenced is that side of the sculpture itself; as if the viewer/reader were to replace the sculpture and refer to their own “right” or “left” side.

J. Ruskin, THE SEVEN LAMPS OF ARCHITECTURE, (London: Smith, Elder, and Co., 1849), p. 181.

and removed it daily. The lift was located directly in front of the sculpture and access to the rear was gained by placing the boom on either side of the female figure and reaching out from the basket. This lift was battery powered and electric cord was run from the corner of the park, behind the PL side of the sculpture. Tools, supplies, and other equipment were stored in a truck which was parked adjacent to the sculpture, it was also removed on a daily basis.

Because of the heavy use/population of the park, a work area was delineated using barricades, cones, and yellow â&#x20AC;&#x153;caution tapeâ&#x20AC;?. This was done to prevent people from walking beneath the lift, and also to attempt to keep them from getting wet during the washing and rinsing. After the sculpture was washed, the size of the restricted area was reduced because several individuals ignored the tape and crossed the restricted area to go to, and from, the park. Washing: The initial step was to examine the sculpture up-close from the lift to determine if there were any potential problems which could require special attention during the completion of the treatment. Nothing of any significance was noted so work was begun. The first step was to rinse the sculpture with water using a pressure washer with approximately 2000 psig and a garden hose using a conventional hose nozzle. Water for the pressure washer was obtained from the tank that was mounted on the trailer with the pressure washer, and water for the hose was obtained from approximately 200' away at the public restroom. The goal of the initial rinse was to remove much of the surface dust as possible and also to either remove or somewhat soften the deposited core material and any bird droppings by pre-wetting them prior to the actual washing.

After the initial rinse the sculpture and pedestal were washed with Igepal CO-630, a non-ionic detergent, and water using a microfiber mitt to apply the detergent, and nylon bristled brushes to supplement the pressure washer. During washing sections were rinsed as they were washed, to prevent the detergent solution from drying on the surface of the bronze, and then the entire sculpture was rinsed after washing.

Removal of Core The core material on the surface of the sculpture was only minimally reduced by the Material Deposits:

pressure washer during washing. An attempt was made to remove the remainder of the material using nylon “scrubbing pads”, but this was not successful. Therefore, only the very tip of a knife blade was used to apply sufficient pressure to “fracture” the deposited minerals and “flick” them away. This removed most of the material, and because the remainder was fractured, much of it could then be removed with the nylon pads. After this, a small amount of material remained in the texture of the sculpture’s surface, but it was felt certain that it would not be harmful nor would it be visible from the ground, so it was allowed to remain because more aggressive efforts, or applications of chemicals to remove the final traces would have undoubtedly resulted in damage to the bronze.

After the material was removed from the surface, an attempt was made to remove some of the material contained inside the sculpture. A length of one-eighth inch plastic tubing, attached to the garden hose, was inserted into the weep hole in the talon and water controlled by valve was directed inside the sculpture. To the best of our ability we bent the tubing in as many directions as possible, controlling it with a thread attached to the free end. When the tubing was removed (on several occasions) a quantity of dirt and other material was washed out of the interior. It was noted that when a “stream” was flowing from the hole it completely missed the female figure and fell on the plinth and pedestal – only when the volume reduced to a drip did it strike the figure exactly at the point where the core material had been deposited when the water carrying the solubilized core material evaporated.

During the efforts to “clean” the interior of the sculpture it was noticed that there were a number of “spines” or “baffles” inside the talon resultant from the casting process and the interior not being “finished”. t was also felt that there is probably a raised burr around the margin of the weep, creating a tiny dam It is suggested that a battery operated grinder with a “ball” tip be used around the inner margin of the weep to chamfer or bevelt he edge of any burr around the weep, and to ream out or remove as much of the interior flash or excess bronze as possible. It is also recommended that

at least one additional weep be drilled in the lowest talon of the PR claw, and consideration should be given to drilling holes in all of the talons, keeping in mind that any holes drilled should be deburred on the interior. Application of After washing, the areas exhibiting light green corrosion were given an application of Benzotriazole:

Benzotriazole (BTA), a corrosion inhibitor for copper and copper alloys such as bronze, using a hand sprayer. The BTA was applied as an 1 ½ - 2% aqueous solution containing approximately a 1:12 mixture of isopropyl alcohol and water. Normally, the BTA is prepared as a volume to volume dilution of a 45% solution of BTA in isopropyl alcohol and water; however due to the heavy restrictions on shipping hazardous materials following “9-11". Te BTA solution for this project was prepared on a weight to weight basis using a dry form of BTA. A pre-weighed quantity of BTA power was dissolved in a pint of 90% Isopropyl alcohol, and this solution was then diluted to the 1 ½ - 2% solution with water. Alcohol was used as the initial solvent to dissolve the BTA powder because the solubility of BTA is much higher in alcohol than its solubility in water. Also the alcohol/water solution wets the surface better than water alone, and to further enhance this, approximately 1/4 teaspoon of Igepal was added to the solution to further act as a surfactant.

All of the light green areas were sprayed with the BTA solution and particular attention was paid to upper, more exposed surfaces, such as the wings of the phoenix and the more exposed surfaces of the female figure. After the BTA had reacted with the bronze sculpture a small amount of residual excess BTA was on the surface. This was rinsed off using the garden hose with a spray nozzle and the sculpture was dried prior to the application of the first coat of wax. After the application of the BTA, areas which had previously been light green, matte, and dull in appearance had darkened somewhat and had a slight metallic luster to them and the sculpture was more uniform in color overall. This uniformity and darkening of the color were further enhanced with the application of the first coat of wax to the areas where the wax previously applied in 2004 had weathered away.

Wax Application: First Coat:

The “first coat” of wax was applied to the areas which had been weathered and/or appeared light green before the treatment began. This involved heating the bronze to the melting point of the wax before applying the wax (approximately 175-190E F). An area of approximately six to eight inches square, or an individual design element or segment was heated, and a coat of wax was applied within that boundary. When the application of wax to one area was completed, another adjacent or separate area was heated and wax was then applied to that area, and the process was repeated. The wax for this “first”coat was prepared using mineral spirits as the solvent to make the wax with a thick paste consistency (somewhat the same consistency as lard). During application, the wax was “scrubbed” into the surface, using stencil brushes whenever possible, rather than being“painted” on tge surface. As stated, this was done well within the boundaries of the heated areas,. In more restricted, or more difficult to reach areas such as in the folds of the drapery, hair, foliage, inside the phoenix’s claws, etc. Also, along the lower margin of the plinth where it adjoined the stone specialized small, moderately long bristled, bent brushes were used to apply the wax.

The wax mixture for the first coat contained Barico Victory Brown which is normally used for the first, or base, coat in case there are any areas of porosity. With the use of brown wax in porous areas, any such areas filled with wax are not white in appearance and from a distance they do not appear to be blanched wax (whitish in color due to lack of adhesion or because of deterioration due to the elements).

When the light green areas became “saturated” with wax following its application to the heated surface they were significantly darkened virtually matching the surrounding darker areas. Consequently the overall color of the sculpture became much more uniform in appearance as the application of this first coat of wax was. In addition to improving the appearance of the sculpture the first coat also improved the ability to “read” the sculptural forms and texture because, in addition to lessening the camouflage effect of the irregular coloration, the uniformly more shiny surface reflected light better allowing these details to be seen.

Second Coat:

after the first coat of wax was applied to the weathered and light green areas a second coat was applied to the entire sculpture. This coat of wax used a clear or white wax containing Barico Victory White rather than Victory Brown. another significant difference in the application of the second coat is that it is plot it is applied at ambient temperature rather than to a heated surface. This wax was also formulated using xylene as the solvent, rather than mineral spirits, and it was mixed to a consistency someone like that of yoghurt. This thinner consistency allows application using an HVLP sprayer when conditions are conducive, and it can also be applied with a brush quite evenly.3 the last time the sculpture was treated there was a slight breeze and because of the very heavy population or usage of the park, it was felt that there could be a problem with any over spray if the second coat were sprayed, so it was applied with a brush. Since this method of application was so successful at that time it was decided for this treatment to apply the second coat of wax again using brushes. The second coat of wax was applied using 1" and 2 Â˝" natural bristle brushes. The second coat of wax was applied ambient temperature when the when it had somewhat equalized from the application of the first coat of wax to localized areas. Equalization of the temperature was necessary because if the bronze were too hot, then the second coat would almost immediately liquify, because it has a lower melting point due to the different solvent used in its formulation, and consequently it would not allow the additional application of wax to the surface of the bronze.

After the second coat of wax was applied to the entire sculpture the solvent was allowed to completely evaporate. When the wax had â&#x20AC;&#x153;completely driedâ&#x20AC;? the surface was uniform in color and somewhat matte with the entire surface having somewhat the same appearance. The newly waxed bronze was then systematically heated with a very large propane torch, hot enough to melt the wax to incorporate any brush marks into the wax and provide an initial shine to the surface, but it was not heated enough to 3

This xylene formulated wax mixture has been sprayed and brush applied in a number of previous treatments, and in all instances it has been found to be superior to a mineral spirits based wax for the application of the final coat. 9

significantly heat the bronze. The torch used for this heating this coat of wax was much larger than the ones used for the application of the first coat of wax. Consequently there was sufficient heat from this larger tip to almost immediately raise the temperature of the wax to its melting point when the torch passed over it, while the underlying bronze itself was heated very little. This essentially “flash-melted” the wax and it cooled again to a solid, almost immediately as soon as the torch was removed. After heating, the smooth surface of the wax made the sculpture appear relatively shiny and even overall.

Throughout all waxing procedures, caution was exercised to prevent getting any wax on the stone immediately bordering the sculpture or plaques. During the application of both coats of wax, extreme caution was taken to prevent the flame from the torches form being directed at the stone. If stone is heated sufficiently it will either crack, flake, or spall producing a roughened surface which when intentionally done is called a “flame finish”.

During the application of both coats of wax the upper portions, above mid-calf or the knee area were performed from the lift. The lower portion of the figure and the plinth was waxed from a stepladder adjacent to the pedestal, but not leading against the pedestal or the sculpture.4 Buffing After heating the second coat of wax there were a few areas where the surface sheen

was slightly different due to variations in the cooling rate, etc. To eliminate these, and

Actual temperatures of the bronze was not measured, however subsequent to work on the “Phoenix”, other sculptures and plaques treated in a similar manner have had their temperatures measured. These measurements were made with an infrared thermometer having an “advertized” accuracy of 2% with a high level of “repeatability.” After heating the bronze for the application of the first coat of wax, its temperature was measured 165-195° (with a good working temperature of approximately 190°). After application of the second coat, when reheated to remove the brush marks and provide an initial gloss, the bronze was measured to be approximately 95-105° maximum, however, the intense flame melted the wax almost instantly and it immediately cooled upon removal of the torch sufficiently to to only feel “warm” when a bare hand was held on the surface.

to provide an overall uniform gloss, the sculpture was buffed. After air-cooling, the bronze was further cooled either with a spray from the garden hose to as necessary, or in localized areas with ice water from spritz or spray bottles as it was being buffed. It was hand-buffed using damp microfiber towels, followed by the use of lamb’s wool mitts to provide the final luster and high-gloss. Textured areas were initially buffed using large, professional, soft horsehair shoe buffing brushes which were also followed by the lamb’s wool mitts. For the most part . all buffing was completed from the lift. Final Appearance After treatment, all of the sculpture and original plaque were darker and significantly After Treatment:

more uniform in color with virtually no indication that they had such wide variation

in color such as existed prior to treatment. The surface, overall, had a high gloss which reflected the sky, the nearby buildings, and even the buffing rags and mitts. Due to this shine the surface texture of the sculpture and the various sculptural elements such as hair and the feathers of the phoenix were easily visible. These details had not been visible when the surfaces were a mottled dark and light green before treatment. Additional It is important to recognize that this work was completed in the interest of Information:

conservation or preservation of the sculpture. Although there was some emphasis on the final appearance, such as buffing, this was secondary to the preservation or future

well being of the sculpture as a whole. In general the overall coloration and appearance were a result of the completion of what was felt to have been appropriate and beneficial conservation or preservation maintenance actions, and any general "improvement" in appearance was therefore somewhat coincidental.

Most

importantly, although the removal of the corrosion products, pollutants, and other materials which in combination with water accelerated corrosion and deterioration would have on their own helped prolong the “life” of the sculpture; the application of the wax should provide substantial protection from water in the form of rain or condensation in the future. The overall significance of this is that without water, there can be no galvanic corrosion of the bronze.

Recommendations Because of the sculpture’s location provides both favorable conditions, such as some for Future Maintenance: protection provided by the surrounding buildings, and unfavorable conditions such as

the close proximity of heavy traffic and virtually full exposure to the afternoon sun, the continued success or effectiveness of the treatment should be periodically evaluated. Considering it had been approximately 7 years since it was last treated (discounting the localized treatment of the area where the core material was deposited) it was felt that the earlier treatment had held up better than expected.

Specific procedures for future treatment or maintenance, under “normal” conditions include a recommendation that the sculpture be washed in 3 to 5 years with a non-ionic detergent (e.g., Igepal CO-630) in cold, or slightly warm, water using a pressure washer, soft brushes and mitts, followed by rewaxing such as the treatment herein described.

Depending on weathering, such rewaxing could again require the

application of a first coat in the weathered areas and an overall application of a second coat of was, such as the treatment carried out and described in this report. Or, if there were not any such areas, it could only require only the application of the “second” overall coat of wax. During the interim period, the sculpture should be rinsed using a garden hose with a “pressure or stream” nozzle on at least a biennial basis (Spring and Fall). This would prolong the “life expectancy” of the current wax coating and or those applied during any future treatments. Rising will remove significant quantities of particulate material from the surface. This material is usually hygroscopic and attracts water, thus

creating an electrolyte solution or slurry on the surface, with the

condensation of any dew, and this can then be corrosive.

It is doubtful, but after several rewaxings there may be sufficient-build-up to require removal of old wax coatings – however, this has not yet been required for any sculptures that have been maintained by this conservator, many for more than fifteen years. If, however it does occur, the old wax should be removed with either solvents (e.g., mineral spirits) or detergent and hot water or steam, or a combination of these but, extreme caution is necessary to prevent getting the wax, or any run off on the stone. If complete removal is required, the bronze should have a coat of BTA applied

as necessary. Any such treatment or any major maintenance effort should be completed either by a conservator, or under the specific direction of a conservator.

Tthe above recommendations above are somewhat specific, however, in reality any future treatment or maintenance should be dictated by need and condition rather than unerringly following these recommendations or other established procedure. With proper care and maintenance the sculpture should retain a current protective coating, and uniform color for an indefinite period.

Nicolas F. Veloz, FAIC 5 W. Howell Ave. Alexandria, VA 22301

ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure 1. Overall view of Atlanta from the Ashes, from rear, showing weathered wax in the most exposed areas, and the development of light green corrasion with the loss of the protective coating . [\EJ113_7964Cropped.JPG ]

Figure 2. Overall view of from the PR side. Overall appearance is dull and dirty, and upper surfaces are light green due to corrosion where the protective wax coating applied in 2004 weathered away. [40D_IMG _0745.JPG ]

Figure 3. Upper surface of plinth on PL side illustrates loss of wax due to

exposure, and resultant development of light green corrosion of exposed surfaces [40D_IMG _0754ADJ.JPG ]

Figure 4. The first step in the conservation maintenance of the sculpture was an overall rinsing of the sculpture to remove surface dirt and grime using a garden hose and pressure washer. [40D_IMG _0761ADJ.JPG ]

Figure 5. After the sculpture was rinsed it was moist with Igepal CO-630, a nonionic detergent. A microfiber mitt attached to a pole was used to apply the detergent in areas difficult to reach, and this was followed by washing/rinsing with the pressure washer. [40D_IMG _0752ADJ.JPG ]

Figure 6. Areas which could be reached were washed by hand using microfiber mitts and towels, followed by washing/rinsing with the pressure washer and/or garden hose nozzle. [40D_IMG _0773.JPG ]

Figure 7. The appearance of the sculpture was changed by washing, and after it was washed a coat of an aqueous solution of Benzotriazole (BTA) was applied to the light green areas. This darkened them considerably at the time of application. [40D_IMG_0786ADJ.JPG]

Figure 8. After the BTA was applied it was allowed to remain on the surface until it dried, giving it the maximum time to react with the bronze. The residual was then rinsed from the surface using the pressure stream of the hose nozzle. This lightened the green areas up, somewhat, but they were still significantly darker than before treatment. The sculpture was then allowed to dry before waxing. [10D_IMG_0214.JPG]

Figure 9. After the sculpture dried following rinsing after the application of BTA it was waxed. The green areas were given an initial coat of wax which was applied in paste form to a heated surface and it was â&#x20AC;&#x153;scrubbed in: using stencil brushes for the most part. As shown, the green areas were darker than they were prior to washing and the application of BTA, but they were considerably darkened by the application of the first coat of wax, applied here along the lower row of feathers on the PL wing of the phoenix.. [EJ113_7993Crop.JPG]

Figure 10. With the application of the first coat of wax the entire sculpture became darker and vary uniform in color and areas which had been green were no longer dicernable. [40D_IMG_0799ADJ.JPG]

Figure 11. After the first coat of wax was applied and the temperature of the sculpture was allowed to equalize, a second coat of wax was applied to all of the sculptureâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s surfaces using long bristled brushes. [40D_IMG _0838ADJ.JPG ]

Figure 12. After the second coat of wax was applied the solvents were allowed to evaporate completely. At that time the surface was somewhat matte in appearance overall and very uniform in all aspects of the parents. After this, the entire sculpture was heated very briefly using a very large torch tip which was passed over the surface with virtually no dwell time. This heated the wax, melting it incorporating any brush marks and giving it an initial shine to the surface.. As shown the knee has been heated but the area above in the region of the thigh has not been heated and is still matte in appearance.[140D_IMG_0841.JPG]

Figure 13. After heating following the application of the second coat of wax the surface of the sculpture was allowed to cool, or cooled and then buffed. It was buffed using damp microfiber cloths, long bristled horse hair brushes where necessary, and followed by a light buffing with a lamb’s wool mitt. After the final buffing the surface is very shiny and uniform in appearance. [40D_IMG _0863.JPG ]

Figure 14. During the buffing process the surface was repeatedly “spritzed” with ice water to ease and enhance the laughing of the wax.. [40D_IMG_667JPG]

Figure 15. Corner joints in the pedestal were previously quirked with a small bead of sealant on the inner corner, they have been filled with mortar since the 2004 treatment and rather than being quirked, they are now filled and chamfered. There is some problem with adhesion to the stone, and a crack has developed across the vertical corner joint at the joint with horizontal joint near the top of the pedestal, and also there has been some loss of mortar from the side the PL horizontal joint. [40D_IMG _0847ADJA2w..JPG ]

Figure 16. Both of the joints on the upper diagonal mortar joints in the front corners do not extend beneath the sculpture and end at the edge of the plinth. The sealant joint applied between the bronze and the stone has a â&#x20AC;&#x153;faultâ&#x20AC;? at this junction and leaves a hole which allows water to enter into the pedestal where it can cause problems with redeposition of core material from the bronze, and also accelerate the deterioration of the ties between the core of the pedestal and the veneer. In the past it has been noted that similar damage has been caused by ants either eating or cutting off pieces of sealant and carrying them to their nest. [40D_IMG _0840ADJA2w..JPG ]

Water carrying solubilized core material from interior of talon of PL claw of phoenix drips onto chest of figure. When the water evaporates core material is deposited. Most of this deposition was removed mechanically, by flaking it off, followed by scrubbing with scrubbing with a nylon pad. After application of BTA and wax the residual traces were no longer visible and the surface was very uniform in color and appearance. Deposition of core material from interior of sculpture. [40D_IMG_0775.JPG]

After the removal of core material by mechanical methods. [40D_IMG_0906.JPG]

Application of first coat of wax to area of core material deposition. [40D_IMG_0808.JPG]

After removal of material and application of BTA and Waxing [40D_IMG_0864ADJ.JPG] Water Carrying dissolved core material dripping from talon on PL claw of phoenix. [40D_IMG_0774.JPG]

DIGITAL IMAGES

All Images 07-26-2011

09-23-2009

BeforeTreatment

40D_IMG_0382adj

40D_IMG_0383adj

09-23-2009

40D_IMG_0384adj

40D_IMG_0385adj

40D_IMG_0386adj

09-23-2009

40D_IMG_0387adj

40D_IMG_0388

40D_IMG_0389

09-23-2009

40D_IMG_0390

40D_IMG_0391adj

40D_IMG_0392adj

All Images 09-23-2009

09-23-2009

40D_IMG_0393adj

40D_IMG_0394

40D_IMG_0395

09-23-2009

40D_IMG_0396adj

40D_IMG_0397adj

40D_IMG_0398adj

09-23-2009

40D_IMG_0399adj

40D_IMG_0400adj

40D_IMG_0401adj

09-23-2009

40D_IMG_0402adj

40D_IMG_0403adj

40D_IMG_0404adj

All Images 09-23-2009

09-23-2009

40D_IMG_0405adj

40D_IMG_0406adj

40D_IMG_0407adj

09-23-2009

40D_IMG_0408

40D_IMG_0409adj

40D_IMG_0410

09-23-2009

40D_IMG_0411adj

40D_IMG_0412adj

40D_IMG_0413adj

09-23-2009

40D_IMG_0414adj

40D_IMG_0415adj

40D_IMG_0416adj

All Images 09-23-2009

09-23-2009

40D_IMG_0417

40D_IMG_0418adj

40D_IMG_0419adj

09-23-2009

40D_IMG_0420adj

40D_IMG_0421adj

40D_IMG_0422adj

06-20-2011

40D_IMG_0745

40D_IMG_0746

40D_IMG_0747

06-20-2011

40D_IMG_0748

40D_IMG_0749

40D_IMG_0750

All Images 06-20-2011

06-20-2011

40D_IMG_0751

40D_IMG_0752

40D_IMG_0753

06-20-2011

40D_IMG_0754

40D_IMG_0755

40D_IMG_0756

06-20-2011

07-21-2011

40D_IMG_0757

40D_IMG_0758

EJ113_7964

07-21-2011

07-26-2011

06-20-2011

EJ113_7985

RinsingBefore

40D_IMG_0759

All Images 06-20-2011

06-20-2011

07-26-2011

40D_IMG_0760

40D_IMG_0761

Washing

06-20-2011

40D_IMG_0762

40D_IMG_0763

40D_IMG_0764

06-20-2011

40D_IMG_0765

40D_IMG_0766

40D_IMG_0767

06-20-2011

40D_IMG_0768

40D_IMG_0769

40D_IMG_0770

All Images 06-20-2011

06-20-2011

40D_IMG_0771

40D_IMG_0772

40D_IMG_0773

06-20-2011

40D_IMG_0774

40D_IMG_0775

40D_IMG_0776

06-20-2011

07-26-2011

40D_IMG_0777

40D_IMG_0778

BTA

06-20-2011

40D_IMG_0779

40D_IMG_0780

40D_IMG_0781

All Images 06-20-2011

06-20-2011

40D_IMG_0782

40D_IMG_0783

40D_IMG_0784

06-20-2011

07-26-2011

40D_IMG_0785

40D_IMG_0786

Rinsing

06-20-2011

40D_IMG_0787

40D_IMG_0788

40D_IMG_0789

06-20-2011

40D_IMG_0790

40D_IMG_0791

40D_IMG_0792

All Images 07-26-2011

06-20-2011

FirstWax

40D_IMG_0793

40D_IMG_0794

06-20-2011

40D_IMG_0795

40D_IMG_0795B

40D_IMG_0796

06-21-2011

40D_IMG_0797

40D_IMG_0798

40D_IMG_0799

06-21-2011

40D_IMG_0800

40D_IMG_0801

40D_IMG_0802

All Images 06-22-2011

06-22-2011

40D_IMG_0811

40D_IMG_0812

40D_IMG_0813

06-22-2011

40D_IMG_0814

40D_IMG_0815

40D_IMG_0816

06-22-2011

40D_IMG_0817

40D_IMG_0818

40D_IMG_0819

06-22-2011

06-23-2011

40D_IMG_0820

40D_IMG_0821

40D_IMG_0822

All Images 06-23-2011

06-23-2011

40D_IMG_0823

40D_IMG_0824

40D_IMG_0825

06-23-2011

40D_IMG_0826

40D_IMG_0827

40D_IMG_0828

06-23-2011

07-21-2011

40D_IMG_0829

40D_IMG_0830

EJ113_7990

07-21-2011

07-26-2011

06-23-2011

EJ113_7993

SecondWax

40D_IMG_0831

All Images 06-23-2011

06-23-2011

40D_IMG_0832

40D_IMG_0833

40D_IMG_0834

06-23-2011

40D_IMG_0835

40D_IMG_0836

40D_IMG_0837

06-23-2011

40D_IMG_0838

40D_IMG_0839

40D_IMG_0840

07-26-2011

06-23-2011

Heating

40D_IMG_0841

40D_IMG_0842

All Images 06-23-2011

07-26-2011

06-23-2011

40D_IMG_0843

Buffing

40D_IMG_0844

06-23-2011

40D_IMG_0845

40D_IMG_0846

40D_IMG_0847

06-23-2011

40D_IMG_0848

40D_IMG_0849

40D_IMG_0850

06-23-2011

40D_IMG_0851

40D_IMG_0852

40D_IMG_0853

All Images 06-23-2011

06-23-2011

40D_IMG_0854

40D_IMG_0855

40D_IMG_0856

06-23-2011

40D_IMG_0857

40D_IMG_0858

40D_IMG_0859

06-23-2011

40D_IMG_0861

40D_IMG_0862

40D_IMG_0863

06-23-2011

40D_IMG_0864

40D_IMG_0865

40D_IMG_0866

All Images 06-23-2011

06-23-2011

07-21-2011

40D_IMG_0867

40D_IMG_0868

EJ113_7996

07-21-2011

07-26-2011

06-22-2011

EJ113_7998

TextTemplate

40D_IMG_0803

06-22-2011

40D_IMG_0804

40D_IMG_0805

40D_IMG_0806

06-22-2011

40D_IMG_0807

40D_IMG_0808

40D_IMG_0809

All Images 06-22-2011

07-23-2011

40D_IMG_0810

googleStatue

googleStatue1

07-26-2011

googleStatueCrop

APPENDIX I Inventory of American Sculpture Entry from the Save Outdoor Sculpture! (SOS!) Survey

Atlanta from the Ashes, (sculpture).

Page 1 of 3

Search Images Images

My List - 0

Help

About About

Keyword Browse Combined Highlights Search History All Catalogs

Search:

General Keyword

GA000564

> You are only searching: Art Inventories

Refine Search