Restorations at a museum, on the other hand, are only conducted after thorough assessment of the ethics, possibility of success, planned treatment plan, and eventual intended use of the item. Restorers typically work with curators to determine the best course of action for an object.
Objects that are in poor condition but not beyond repair can sometimes be restored using modern materials. More extensive repairs may require fabrication of new components. Before beginning any restoration project it is important to consider how it will affect the value of the object. A for-profit business must decide whether to invest its time and resources in an effort that may not produce a financial return. Non-profit organizations may have limited funds available for maintenance and renovation projects so they must make the most of what they have. Objects that are considered to be irreparable may be donated to another institution where they can be kept intact with no harm coming to their appearance or functionality.
In conclusion, restorations at a museum are only conducted after thorough assessment of the ethics, possibility of success, planned treatment plan, and eventual intended use of the item.
The process of maintaining these artworks is contentious since some major restorations have resulted in the removal of crucial components of the original works or the complete painting over of them. Museums risk losing the original work and developing a whole new artwork as decades of repairs accumulate. Critics argue that many restorations are done simply to preserve the piece for its donor or the museum's collection rather than because of damage caused by time and weather.
Some restorations involve replacing lost parts of the picture. For example, in 1913, John Singer Sargent restored Edith Wharton's portrait of his friend Henry James to remove a stain from his shoulder. In 1984, Willem de Kooning was given permission by the owner of the painting to restore it to reveal more of the image.
Other restorations involve changing how the painting looks now. For example, Michael Jackson requested that David Hockney paint black lines on a white background across most of 'Victory Over The Sun' (1995) to make the picture look like a Polaroid photograph. And in 2006, Jeff Koons painted over part of Marcel Duchamp's Fountain (1923) in New York City because he thought it looked dated.
Restorations can also change how the painting sounds. For example, in order to hear the music better, Charles Ives covered up all but one note in his four-hand piano concerto.
The museum is open and honest about the history and development of the items, and it educates the public about them. At the end of the day, in order to transfer the value down to future generations, an item should be kept in the greatest possible condition across time, independent of museums, nations, or political opinions.
I believe that museums should keep artifacts because it teaches people about history and helps preserve our past for future generations. Also, by keeping these pieces of art in the museums, they are able to provide a better understanding about how people lived more than 500 years ago.
However, I don't think museums should keep artifacts that are not worth the effort or money needed to care for them. For example, if a piece of cloth is only valuable because it has been stained red or black, then it isn't worth preserving. The same thing can be said about objects made from precious metals or stones - they need to be kept in a dry, dark place with no humidity or heat to prevent damage from happening to them.
Finally, museums should not keep items that may be considered sacred or religious. For example, if a piece of cloth has images of Hindu gods on it, it shouldn't be kept in the museum because it would be disrespectful to the original owner.
In conclusion, museums should keep artifacts because it teaches people about history and helps preserve our past for future generations.
Defining an end point for restoration is an ethical as well as a technical issue, but it must be done scientifically. The earlier problem has mostly gone unnoticed by trained restorationists. I contend that proper restoration necessitates a broad perspective that takes into account historical, social, cultural, political, artistic, and moral considerations. Restoration should not be considered complete until all of these factors are taken into account.
The goal of restoration is to make objects accessible to audiences on whom they would otherwise be lost. This may require some modification of the object to make it acceptable to modern viewers. For example, if a painting is found to have been completed using artificial colors or materials, it should be restored to reveal the original coloration. Similarly, if part of the object contains writing or symbols whose meaning is unknown, it should be investigated before any further treatment is done to avoid altering aspects of the artwork that may have important historical or aesthetic significance.
Restoration requires expertise in many different fields. An art conservator will need knowledge of both fine arts and science to correctly assess what needs to be done with the object. A restorer must have an understanding of history and culture to know what modifications should be made to the object and how these changes affect later artists. They must also be aware of current techniques for reproducing images so that they are able to choose the best method for rendering visible details not readily seen by the naked eye.