Examining Conrad Martens’s Brisbane: UV and infra-red reveal more Modern conservation techniques have allowed us to take a much closer look at two watercolours and intimately scrutinise their histories. The Queensland Art Gallery work Brisbane was originally on display at the Queensland Museum until 1910. It is without doubt an original Conrad Martens. The other watercolour, (Brisbane) was discovered in a private collection during research for the exhibition. Due to their obvious likenesses, further analysis was undertaken to establish how the two watercolours relate to each other. Martens, Conrad England/Australia 1801–78 Brisbane c.1852 Watercolour and gouache over pencil Collection: Queensland Art Gallery Gift of the Queensland Museum 1910 Visible light image Attrib. to Conrad Martens (Brisbane) n.d. Watercolour over pencil Collection: Private Visible light image There are two possible scenarios. One is that the second work is an original Conrad Martens sketch (he sold some of his sketches late in life) which another artist has painted over. Alternatively, the second painting may be a copy made by a Brisbane artist while the original was on display in the Queensland Museum prior to 1910. If this is the case, then it also gives us an indication of how the Queensland Art Gallery work may have looked in 1910: the old windmill, a Brisbane landmark, and other details are quite clear in (Brisbane), but very faded in Brisbane by Martens. Martens, Conrad England/Australia 1801–78 Brisbane c.1852 Watercolour and gouache over pencil Collection: Queensland Art Gallery Gift of the Queensland Museum 1910 Infrared details showing drawing – view of river bend (left) and windmill (right) Attrib. to Conrad Martens (Brisbane) n.d. Watercolour over pencil Collection: Private Infrared details showing drawing – view of river bend (left) and windmill (right) What does conservation analysis tell us about the physical make-up of the works? The second, disputed, work is in better condition than the original. Differences in paper quality – (Brisbane) is on better quality paper – are visible to the naked eye, and further research into the watermark may allow the work to be conclusively dated. Infra-red examination enabled a comparison of the drawing underneath the layers of paint – revealing very similar drawing styles, possibly by the same hand. Martens, Conrad England/Australia 1801–78 Brisbane c.1852 Watercolour and gouache over pencil Collection: Queensland Art Gallery Gift of the Queensland Museum 1910 Ultraviolet light image showing fluorescence of paper and pigments Attrib. to Conrad Martens (Brisbane) n.d. Watercolour over pencil Collection: Private Ultraviolet light image showing fluorescence of paper and pigments While the composition and size of the works is almost identical, the palette of colours used varies slightly. Ultra-violet imaging shows differences in the types of white paint used, indicated by the amount of fluorescence seen under UV light. UV imaging also highlights the difference in the two papers. It is likely, but not conclusive, that the second work is a drawing by Martens that has been painted over later by a different hand. Research into these works is continuing – it is fascinating to see how conservation analysis and historical data can combine to accurately identify and date works of art. Anne Carter and Lyn Streader Conservation Department, Queensland Art Gallery Print friendly version

Printed from: http://www.qag.qld.gov.au
http://www.qag.qld.gov.au/content/page.asp?name=Martens_context_brisbane_examination