|
The painting was taken to The McCrone Research Institute where Dr.Walter McCrone did a scientific analysis of the paint pigments. Dr. Walter McCrone concluded his study March 2, 2000 wherein he sent a letter stating that eleven samples were taken, mounted in Aroclor, a standard refractive index medium for characterization and identification of pigments by polarized light microscopy. A Scanning Electron Microscope with Energy Dispersive Detector (SEM/SDS) was used to obtain supplemental chemical analyses.
The pigments thus identified in this painting, with their dates of first use, were white (ancient), viridian (1825), chrome yellow (1818), lemon yellow (1809), ultramarine (ancient), cerulean blue (1805), burnt sienna (ancient), zinc white (ancient), and madder (ancient). All of these pigments were available to Monet; in fact, Monet in this painting used all of them. His palette is well known as a result of studies by Dr. Askok Ray at the National Gallery in London.
Click here to read the complete Paint
Analysis Chart.
Dr. McCrone concludes "Everything we have seen and done agree remarkably well with the known palette of Claude Monet. I see no reason to doubt the attribution to one of my favorite artists, Claude Monet."1
Click here to read the complete McCrone report.
In August 2000 the painting was taken to The International Center for Art Intelligence, Inc. where Dr. Duane R. Chartier began his testing utilizing Ultra Violet light. The resultant florescence was strongly green and this is characteristic of dammar, the most common picture varnish for several centuries.
One very interesting note is that the thickness of the paint on the facial area is much thinner than on the remainder of the painting, indicating the pronounced knowledge of the subject matter, in comparison to the flower vase on the window sill. Overall the paint is applied in fairly long bold strokes.
Another test where Dr. Chartier used a sterobinocular microscope to determine that the signature was applied some time after the original work had been completed.
Several uneventful facts were recorded by Dr. Chartier such as tacks were used to attach the material to the stretcher bars at approximately 3 inch intervals. In dealing with the fabric identification Dr. Chartier concluded that there are 52-53 threads per inch in the vertical and 47-48 threads per inch in the horizontal. Unfortunately it was not possible to determine the warp and weft directions because there were no selvage edges.
As Dr. Chartier stated that his report was a "DRAFT COPY-IN PROGRESS" labeled "Do not Copy" we do feel that his recommendation is relevant, "Strongly consider performing necessary conservation work to stabilize the work and increase presentability for sale. See the separate "Treatment Proposal" for the line-item specifications and estimate. In general, the author does not recommend conservation intervention in cases questioned attribution until all relevant historical and technical information can be gleaned from the work as received. This has been done at this point and there is no credible reason to delay the proper conservation of the work (i.e. to museum standards.)"
1McCrone Research Institute Chicago, Ill. March 2, 2000
|
