Art Daily has an interesting (although brief) article up today about some new approaches to long-term storage solutions for works of art that MFA-Houston and Rice University came up with together. Pictured above, the storage is transparent, which allows curators, registrars, etc., to view the work in question; it is modular (the pieces assemble like Tinkertoys); it is endlessly reusable; and it doesn't gas off in the way that wooden crates can, making it potentially better for the art it holds. The first thing that sprang to our mind, though, is that it won't serve for travel, for security reasons, and we asked some of our registrars and preparators for their views on its other advantages and disadvantages. Responses appear below:
It doesn't seem very weatherproof. It seems impossible to have any moisture barrier . . . but interesting to say the least.
What a great project for the students and how cool is the end product? Very. Cost would be my concern . . . wood is cheap. Those materials look expensive; however, in the long run it may be cost effective because they probably will last forever. As a registrar I have packed many a piece with the recent transition, but I think the preparators are really the folks who would either build them or order them and understand the logistics of fitting works into crates a bit more than I do. I'm certainly open to the idea if we can find the funds some day.
Interesting. The article never really said what materials they used. I like the idea for long-term storage, but not so much for transportation. I think for transportation you really don't want anyone to see what you're shipping. But I like the idea of tinker-toy-like parts that can be put together or taken apart and re-used. If the materials are appropriate for long-term storage it might be a nice idea for items that we box in storage. I wonder how heavy the materials are?
Very interesting article and research. My first thoughts are that the prototype is too large for the sculpture. It would take a lot of acid-free material to shore up the object to be used for shipping purposes and the waterproofing issues that Todd mentioned. The design seems more suited for long-term storage; however, size and weight may be an issue for space and shelving units. Reusable and flexible construction is a plus!
Any other thoughts, museum employees, patrons, readers, etc.?
Art Daily has an interesting (although brief) article up today about some new approaches to long-term storage solutions for works of art that MFA-Houston and Rice University came up with together. Pictured above, the storage is transparent, which allows curators, registrars, etc., to view the work in question; it is modular (the pieces assemble like Tinkertoys); it is endlessly reusable; and it doesn't gas off in the way that wooden crates can, making it potentially better for the art it holds. The first thing that sprang to our mind, though, is that it won't serve for travel, for security reasons, and we asked some of our registrars and preparators for their views on its other advantages and disadvantages. Responses appear below:
No comments:
Post a Comment