Lisa, You have to be extremely cautious about using those cotton gloves with the "grip" dots. As a conservator I (and many colleagues) have seen metal tarnish and transfer marks on other museum objects from using those type gloves. A conservation scientist from CCI (The Canadian Conservation Institute) heard about this and did a test on those gloves and found that they contained a plasticizer that transferred to the objects. I did a feature on the use of gloves in conservation and museums for the New Materials and Research Column that I edit for the AIC News (American Institute for Conservation) last year. The text of that column follows my signature line. Cheers! Dave David Harvey Objects Specialty Group Chair Emeritus, AIC Conservator Los Angeles, California USA _________________________________________________ Cotton Gloves: An interesting discussion recently arose on the ConsDist List in regard to a query about dotted cotton gloves by an English colleague. Several respondents noted observable problems with the use of these gloves – that tarnish and corrosion had occurred in the pattern of the dots in metals and also on gilded frames. Some had observed transfers of the dot pattern to glass and ceramics objects as well. Scott Williams, Senior Conservation Scientist at The Canadian Conservation Institute (CCI) conducted some analysis and posted his response about the composition of these gloves, widely used in the museum and preservation community. “During a recent IR spectroscopic analysis site visit I was handling glass microscope slides with gloves having knobby fingergrips and I noticed the creation of a spotted pattern on the glass. I pressed one of these nodules against the ATR crystal of my TravelIR spectrometer and obtained a spectrum of phthalate plasticized poly(vinyl chloride). When I removed the glove from the crystal a residue was left which produced a spectrum of phthalate plasticizer. As a result of recent notices on the Conservation DistList I decided to repeat the analysis for confirmation. I obtained three gloves of this type from staff at CCI. These three gloves look identical to each other and had been previous used. Unfortunately their containers have been lost and their source is unknown. They are made of four separate pieces of fabric--two pieces with nodules, two without. The palm and palm side of four fingers are made from one piece of knobby fabric and the palm side of the thumb from a second. The back of the hand is made of a single piece of fabric without nodules and the back of the thumb is made from another piece of the same fabric. There are three gathers about 2.5 inches long along the top of the knuckles parallel to the fingers. One glove has a label bearing the inscription--"84%Cotton 16%PVC Made in China RN#65739". Nodules of all three were analyzed as described above and have the same composition. The nodules are made of phthalate plasticized poly(vinyl chloride). All leave a residue of dioctyl phthalate on the ATR crystal after being pressed against it. In some cases the residue also seems to contain particles of plasticized poly(vinyl chloride), presumably fragments of the nodules that have broken off and deposited on the crystal. Stock suggests that grip marks on silver indicate the presence of sulfur. This may be true if the nodules are made of something that contains sulfur, such as sulfur vulcanized rubber, perhaps the "rubber compound" cited by Harvey. However, in the case of the gloves I analyzed, sulfur tarnishing is unlikely. A much more likely scenario is corrosion by acidic products from hydrolysis of the phthalate ester plasticizer (perhaps catalyzed by the metal). Yvonne Shashoua described the production of phthalic acid from hydrolysis of phthalate plasticizers in her PhD thesis entitled "Inhibiting the deterioration of plasticized poly(vinyl chloride)", pp 36-37. Whether a product is likely to transfer material to an object can be assessed by using the technique of pressing the product against a freshly cleaned microscope slide or polished metal surface (or any other polished surface of interest) then observing the polished surface by holding it so that the specular reflection from a broad light source such as a window can be seen. If material is transferred it will be revealed by imperfections in the reflection. This will show transfer by simple contact. A different test where the product is dragged across the polished surface will show if material can be transferred by rubbing, which might happen with soft materials, such as the nodules on the gloves. Neither test shows if material can be transferred to rough surfaces by abrasion.” R. Scott Williams Senior Conservation Scientist (Chemist) Conservation Processes and Materials Research Canadian Conservation Institute 613-998-3721 Fax: 613-998-4721 Other issues where research may prove helpful in regard to the use of gloves in the museum and preservation communities may be the wicking of perspiration and moisture from skin to fabric to object, a determination of the transfer of surface dirt and chemicals from gloves to objects, and the proper cleaning protocol for cotton gloves to avoid the presence of detergents and chemicals from washings so that they can be safely reused. A wide array of people beyond conservators use cotton gloves when handling art, objects, and artifacts in personal and institutional collections so it is important for us all to be aware of potential problems with the materials that comprise the gloves and also the practices in their use. - David Harvey - editor ========================================================= Important Subscriber Information: The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes). If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).