Martin,
>
> That terminology sounds different to me.
What we commonly do is to
> describe and somewhat quantify an object's,
artifact's, or artwork's
> condition.
>
> Often when doing a
condition assessment a conservator will break it
> down into categories
such as structural, physical, surface, chemical,
> and biological. We also
will give the condition an overall rating:
> often from 1 to 5 ,
that is a handy management tool for assessing the
> conservation needs for
a large collection or grouping of objects,
> artifacts, or
artworks.
>
> In the big picture we are seeking to determine which
objects are
> stable and which are not - as well as to note any apparent
aesthetic
> issues that may be more of a concern for an artwork that is to
be
> exhibited. We use that information to note how an object should
be
> stored or exhibited and also whether it is suitable for loan
and
> travel.
>
> Of course other professionals have different
perspectives in their
> view of damages. A curator and an appraiser will
"see" damages in a
> different way than a conservator as well as a
director or an
> administrator. Thus, the meaning of damages can be very
different
> between different people.
>
> Cheers!
>
Dave
>
> David Harvey
> Conservator
> Los Angeles,
California USA
>
>
> On 10/3/06, Dipl.-Rest. Univ
M.Pracher <
[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>>
>>
>> Good day
again,
>>
>> does anyone of this list has experience in using
the term "quality of
>> damage" for describing the "meaning of a damage
for an artwork".
>> Who can give me a correct definition for this
term?
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Martin
Pracher
>>
www.kunst-gutachter.de
=========================================================
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).