One for the cigar Jar collectors

[99call]

Love this, The tarnished silver would clean up well.   Definitely on a whole other level to cheap ceramic stuff released these days. 

"Cuesta Rey Cigar Humidor

•  manufactured in 1949 in a limited edition of approximately 5000 

•  made by Benedict Can Compny

•  commemorated the official appointment of Cuesta Rey Cigar Company as official Purveyor of the Court of Spain of Tampa handmade cigars to the court of King Alfonso XIII"

[kalibratecuba]

If you are the owner of this, please don't clean and polish it. You will destroy any value it has.

Sent from my GM1917 using Tapatalk

[99call]

2 hours ago, kalibratecuba said:

If you are the owner of this, please don't clean and polish it. You will destroy any value it has.

Sent from my GM1917 using Tapatalk
 

Sorry to say but I'm a qualified conservator. And your statement just isn't correct. Polishing the brass with well developed protective patina sections would be ill advised. But removing tarnish from silver is both beneficial to the long-term condition of the item. And it's Intended aesthetic

[rcarlson]

If one were to purchase this piece, does it come with the kind bud in your third photo? 

Asking for a friend.   

[WABOOM]

Is that marijuana under the lid?

[99call]

4 minutes ago, WABOOM said:

Is that marijuana under the lid?

I would love it, if someone tried to light up this 80yr fragment of old sponge soaked in copper chloride.   or even better sell it to a gullible teenager.

[kalibratecuba]

Sorry to say but I'm a qualified conservator. And your statement just isn't correct. Polishing the brass with well developed protective patina sections would be ill advised. But removing tarnish from silver is both beneficial to the long-term condition of the item. And it's Intended aesthetic

Well, when am I ever correct?

Surely as a QUALIFIED CONSERVATOR you've come upon items cleaned by a non-QUALIFIED CONSERVATOR that damaged the value.



Sent from my GM1917 using Tapatalk

[99call]

24 minutes ago, kalibratecuba said:

Well, when am I ever correct?

Surely as a QUALIFIED CONSERVATOR you've come upon items cleaned by a non-QUALIFIED CONSERVATOR that damaged the value.



Sent from my GM1917 using Tapatalk
 

Sorry I didn't mean to come over as heavy handed.   You are correct, there has been a massive amount of damage caused by well meaning enthusiasts in the past. 

Apologies it was a knee jerk piece of frustration as, in being a conservator day in day out we often get lectured to by well meaning members of the public who yell into our work sites  "I don't think you should be doing that!!" or "do you know what you're doing?"   etc etc .           Again it all comes from a good place, and in a weird way it's actually good that many have become so concerned.    I think the problem is, it's actually gone too far the other way.  i.e insisting that artefacts should never be touched etc. 

 

[Fugu]

1 hour ago, 99call said:

Apologies it was a knee jerk piece of frustration as, in being a conservator day in day out we often get lectured to by well meaning members of the public who yell into our work sites  "I don't think you should be doing that!!" or "do you know what you're doing?"   etc etc .

To be fair, and let me just say that I am not qualified, even among conservators and restorers, art historians, that is to say, the experts, there is regular debating as to the appropriate approach. Oftentimes there isn't even a 'right' or 'wrong' way of doing it. It just depends... - contextual considerations, apart from the purely material-driven ones. And - looking retrospectively, it isn't an all too uncommon occurrance that history shows us that, what had been 'right' just a few decades ago would qualify as being 'wrong' today.

I for one wouldn't touch the patina (plus, that electroplated silver application is extremely thin), but what do I know, I am just a cigar smoker ... haha.

In cigar-terms that can would qualify as being a tin rather than a jar.

[99call]

2 hours ago, Fugu said:

patina

I get what you are saying, but there is a division in the term 'patina'. Certain metals develop a patina which actually acts a a protective layer.   For instance large bronze statuary will often be given a brown colour with an heated chemical application of liver of sulphur.   Is acts both an aesthetic finish, but it's also protective.  Some people think all green patina's are also stable and protective, this is often not the case,  some vibrant greens can either be active corrosion or worse bronze decease. 

The difference with sulphur tarnish on silver is, that it isn't protective, it's actually negatively affecting the surface.  Not many people know this, but silver tarnish can actually be easily removed with a simple pencil eraser.  This would have no deleterious effect of the substrate silver. The silver could then be treated with either a transparent renaissance wax, or more likely with a paraloid B72  lacquer. 

Ethically within the treatment of objects, largely decisions to treat or not to treat certain surfaces will be based on whether the that surface has some valuable physical sign of interaction.  I.e if something has historically been used or handled in a certain way. 

For this item, I would argue that patina developed on the copper alloy is of value, but the silver tarnish is not, and negatively effecting the object.   You are correct that silver layer will be incredibly thin, and thats exactly the point, if things are not cleaned and stabilised at certain points, in their history,  they get lost forever. 

Ultimately it's up to peoples personal preference, all i'm offering up, is how museum collections would process things through a ethical and treatment judgement 

 

 

2 hours ago, Fugu said:

looking retrospectively, it isn't an all too uncommon occurrance that history shows us that, what had been 'right' just a few decades ago would qualify as being 'wrong' today.

This has been huge in the conservation world, some of the stuff done in the 1970's was jawdropping, and the 'reversibility' of treatments has become the core focus. 

That said, when dealing with the longevity of any given object the goal is to ensure the object is able to survive, and that if improved treatments are available in 50yrs time, it will still be around to receive them. 

For example if a conservator felt as if a treatment was going to stabilise a given object for the next 50yrs, but the process of the treatment may damage the item by a percentage of 0.5%,  well,  as long as that 0.5% was less than the projected damage if left untreated for 50yrs etc.   thats how the ethics often gets worked out.    It's the largely futile fight against the sands of time 

[Colt45]

Just do not have your paintings "conserved" in Spain!

[BuzzArd]

It’s cool.  If i had it I’d glass bead it with a new batch of No. 12 beads and give it a nice clear lacquer coating
 

[kalibratecuba]

Just do not have your paintings "conserved" in Spain!

Hey, at least he tried.

Sent from my GM1917 using Tapatalk

[Fuzz]

3 hours ago, 99call said:

For example if a conservator felt as if a treatment was going to stabilise a given object for the next 50yrs, but the process of the treatment may damage the item by a percentage of 0.5%,  well,  as long as that 0.5% was less than the projected damage if left untreated for 50yrs etc.   thats how the ethics often gets worked out.    It's the largely futile fight against the sands of time 

I'm no conservator, but I call BS! There is only one product that will protect your collectibles for all eternity! Lucite!!

[99call]

7 hours ago, Colt45 said:

Just do not have your paintings "conserved" in Spain!

 

7 hours ago, kalibratecuba said:

Hey, at least he tried.

Sent from my GM1917 using Tapatalk
 

I think we all know this cartoon-like attempt at restoration?, was done by a local hobbyist 'painter'.    The real shocker in this is the senior staff at the church, who asked her to do this.  I wonder if they were also getting altarboys to re-lead the roof.....the church really is falling on hard times

 

[99call]

For anyone who's interested, here's a classic example of an object that got treated by a hobbyist, then subsequently conserved by a professional.