Technical Report

Technical Summary

Renoir executed this painting on a [glossary:commercially primed], standard-size, medium-weight [glossary:canvas]. The commercial [glossary:priming] consists of three layers—a chalk ground followed by a double ground of lead white in oil—and as a result it is extremely smooth, filling much of the canvas [glossary:weave]. An additional, possibly artist-applied, layer covers the compositional area, is smooth, further mutes the texture of the canvas, and appears to have been applied with a [glossary:palette knife] and then worked with a brush. Despite the diminished texture resulting from the heavy preparation, the canvas weave is accentuated in many places by Renoir’s technique—he dragged an almost dry brush across the surface, catching only the thread tops. The artist probably chose this canvas and [glossary:ground] preparation for its luminosity, a trait he exploited early in the painting process. He began the painting with very thin washes, now revealed between skips in the thick, upper paint layers. He also blocked in initial forms as thin washes, glazes, and semiglazes for some of the major structural elements, including the wood balustrade across the foreground, the overhang along the top edge, and the wood elements in the upper left.

Various changes to the paint layer can be seen under normal viewing conditions; additional alterations are visible with [glossary:raking light], infrared, and [glossary:X-radiography]. Renoir altered the angle of the male figure’s coat and diminished or changed the perspective of the female figure’s hat. Infrared examination shows an unidentifiable form extending from the male figure’s hand; this form was never completed and was later covered with foliage. In the background, the artist raised the horizon line, leaving only a narrow band of cloudy sky visible. Other areas of the painting show evidence of changes that do not correspond to compositional elements; some of these may be adjustments in [glossary:palette].

Renoir used a relatively limited palette and mixed most colors on the surface of the painting. He also made use of various brushes and thicknesses of paint to achieve textural effects. He appears to have moved systematically around the canvas, working up multiple areas at once. As a result, it is unclear to what extent he established the figures before bringing in the background. The female figure’s hat seems to have been fully articulated, complete with thick, white highlights, before extra background and shading were brought in to alter its shape. Smaller details were added at the end of the process, after much of the painting was dry, including the figures along the lakefront path, the small boats, and the hanging vines.

Multilayer Interactive Image Viewer

The multilayer interactive image viewer is designed to facilitate the viewer’s exploration and comparison of the technical images (fig. 10.15).21

Signature

Signed: Renoir. (lower right, in blue paint) (fig. 10.16, fig. 10.17).22

Structure and Technique

Support

Canvas

Flax (commonly known as linen).23

Standard format

The original dimensions of the canvas were approximately 46.3 × 54.8 cm, measuring from the apparent original foldover edge.24 This probably corresponds to a no. 10 portrait ([glossary:figure]) standard-size (55 × 46 cm) canvas, turned horizontally.25

Weave

[glossary:Plain weave]. Average [glossary:thread count] (standard deviation): 26.0V (0.9) × 29.9H (0.6) threads/cm. The horizontal threads were determined to correspond to the [glossary:warp] and the vertical threads to the [glossary:weft].26

Canvas characteristics

The canvas has mild [glossary:cusping] on all sides, corresponding to the placement of the original tacks.

Stretching

Current stretching: When the painting was lined in 1971, the original dimensions were slightly increased on all sides (see Conservation History).

Original stretching: Based on cusping visible in the X-ray, the original tacks were placed 5.5–6 cm apart.

Stretcher/strainer

Current stretcher: Four-member redwood ICA spring stretcher. Depth: 2.5 cm.

Original stretcher: Five-member keyable stretcher with vertical [glossary:crossbar]. Depth: Approximately 1.3 cm.27

Manufacturer’s/supplier’s marks

Stamp
Location: verso of original canvas (covered by lining)28
Method: ovular stamp
Content: COULEURS [FINES] [&] TOILES [À] TABLEAUX / P: APRIN / PARIS / [48] RUE DE DOUAI [48] (fig. 10.18, fig. 10.19)

Preparatory Layers

Sizing

[glossary:Cross-sectional analysis] indicates a thin, brownish layer of material between the paint and the canvas that closely follows the contours of the canvas weave. This material is organic in nature and is estimated to be glue (fig. 10.20).29

Ground application/texture

The canvas has a very complex preparation: a three-layer commercial priming that extends to the edges of the [glossary:tacking margins], and an additional, possibly artist-applied, preparatory layer covering the compositional area only.30

The commercial preparation extends to the edges of the tacking margins and looks very smooth in consistency. Localized interlayer [glossary:cleavage] in the preparatory layers seems to be within the commercial priming, giving the initial impression that it is a double-layered preparation. Cross-sectional analysis confirms that the commercial ground is a three-layer system with an initial chalk layer filling the interstices of the weave. Under stereomicroscopic examination, it can be seen that this initial layer barely fills the canvas weave and appears rougher in texture, with chunkier chalk particles visible. The upper layers of the commercial preparation are thicker and smoother, greatly diminishing the texture of the canvas weave. All three layers of the commercial ground are relatively thin: the intial chalk-based layer is approximately 1.5–30 µm thick, the lower layer of the commercial priming is approximately 5–35 µm thick, and the upper layer is approximately 10–45 µm thick (fig. 10.21).

Above the commercial preparation, an additional layer covers the area of the composition only and has visible ridges along the original edges of the canvas (fig. 10.22). These ridges have been crushed by the heat and pressure of the lining process, but they suggest that this layer was applied with a palette knife and further worked with a brush (fig. 10.23). The commercial priming fills a good amount of the canvas weave, and the additional ground adds to the overall smoothness and further mutes the canvas texture.

While the canvas has a relatively fine weave and features a complex preparation that serves to even out its texture, in many areas Renoir nevertheless used the weave to create a textural effect. The artist employed thin, translucent washes that sank into this texture or dragged a loaded brush across the surface, catching only the thread tops (fig. 10.24). In some places he repeated this process so that the texture was reinforced with each brushstroke (fig. 10.25). Additionally, he left little of the ground visible in the final composition and probably used its brightness to achieve luminosity rather than as a chromatic element.

Color

The commercially applied preparation was probably white, as there is no microscopic evidence of additional pigments. Because this layer is porous, it has darkened—discolored with grime and saturated by the [glossary:wax-resin lining] material (see Condition Summary). The tacking margins were not cleaned when the painting was treated, and in places once covered by nails in the original stretching, a brighter commercial priming color can be seen (fig. 10.26).

The additional layer covering the compositional area appears warm white, with yellow and dark particles perceptible on the surface under stereomicroscopic examination. Very little of this layer was left visible in the finished composition (fig. 10.27).

Materials/composition

The commercial preparation is made of three layers, beginning with a chalk layer directly above the glue [glossary:sizing]. This layer serves to fill the interstices of the weave, with little to none present on the high points of the canvas, and is predominantly chalk with traces of alumina, silica, iron-containing silicates, and occasional magnesium-containing carbonates.31 The middle layer is mostly lead white with calcium sulfate and traces of aluminosilicates, silica, and iron-containing silicates. The upper layer appears more medium rich; it is predominantly lead white with some calcium sulfate and contains traces of yellow silicates and related minerals as well as carbon black.32 The [glossary:binder] for both lead white layers is estimated to be [glossary:oil].33

A single cross section contains a warm-white layer that may correspond to the apparently artist-applied ground (fig. 10.28). This layer is predominantly lead white with some zinc yellow and small amounts of cobalt blue, emerald green, barium sulfate, alumina, and possibly chrome yellow.34 The binder of this layer is estimated to be oil.35

Compositional Planning/Underdrawing/Painted Sketch

Extent/character

Infrared examination suggests that Renoir may have used thin paint to sketch the female figure’s costume. Sketchy strokes of paint outline the major contours and appear under microscopic examination to be directly above the ground (fig. 10.29).36

Medium/technique

Dark-blue paint.

Revisions

Renoir slightly adjusted the forms of his contour sketch between the drawing and painting stages; however, there do not seem to be adjustments within the compositional planning stage. (See Paint Layer.)

Paint Layer

Application/technique and artist’s revisions

In this painting, Renoir seems to have laid in initial tones in very thin layers, as translucent washes, glazes, and semiglazes, for a few of the major structural elements—including the overhang across the top (fig. 10.30), the wood elements in the upper left, and the railing—and in certain areas around the figures. These layers pass under the edges of the figures to varying degrees, as in the interface between the lower foreground and the left edge of the female figure. The artist achieved a luminous effect by using washes in the underlayers to contrast with thicker, more opaque brushwork in the upper paint layers. Evidence of these washes can be seen not only between skips in the heavier brushwork, but also around the edges of the painting. In several places, the color revealed in the interstices is that of the underlying wash rather than the ground (fig. 10.31). In other areas, the initial layers are relatively opaque, as under the female figure’s hat, where brownish-yellow hues were mixed with white (fig. 10.32).

The X-ray illustrates elements of Renoir’s working process and seems to show specific areas differentiated by their underlayers, some of which are no longer visible. In the top third of the background, toward the right and center of the picture, the X-ray shows two [glossary:radio-opaque] areas with a relatively thinly painted section between them. The topmost of these two bands appears to be white and is an extension of the clouds still visible along the top, just under the overhang of the roof. In partially obscuring this area with the details of the distant hills, the artist moved the horizon line so that only a sliver of sky is now present between the overhang and the land. The function of the second horizontal band in the X-ray is unclear; however, it was painted with a beige color that Renoir created by mixing small amounts of red and a brownish yellow into white to produce very pale colors, worked heavily wet-in-wet.37 These two areas are heavily covered and are not visible on the surface under normal viewing conditions. Between them, the [glossary:radio-transparent], more thinly painted section is almost completely covered by subsequent paint layers, though microscopic examination suggests that it incorporates large amounts of blue. In apparent contrast to the physical reality of the scene being described, the background—including leaves, sky, and water—is very heavily painted, while the most solid and substantial components, the railing and wood elements in the upper left and across the top, are articulated with thin, flat paint (fig. 10.33). UV examination shows that these thinly painted areas contain large amounts of translucent red lake, illustrating the artist’s interest in exploiting the reflective qualities of the almost white preparatory layer (fig. 10.34).

The order in which Renoir constructed his composition is unclear, which suggests a more fluid, less rigid way of working up the entire picture at once. He may have established more of the background and left the figures in a kind of reserve after painting the first layers.38 Raking light and X-ray images indicate changes to the female figure’s hat. Originally, the overall profile was larger, with a fuller crown and a wider, slightly curved brim (fig. 10.35). This larger profile is visible in the X-ray as a radio-transparent area, with the background brought in around it. The degree to which the artist finished the hat before painting the background varies between the front and crown portions and the back brim. Thick, white highlights on the hat indicate that it was fully articulated in its initial form before additional background and shading were brought in to alter its shape and size. After the initial contour of the girl’s smock was outlined, it was created using broader strokes that moved lengthwise down the coat and along the figure’s left sleeve. The sleeve may have been slightly more rounded, especially at the cuff, before the final details and volumetric shading were introduced.

There is also evidence that Renoir made changes to the male figure’s coat, some of which are discernible on the surface of the painting. The left side of the coat was altered from a lower, more closed position to one slightly more open, suggesting that the figure’s hand might be in his pocket (fig. 10.36). Another modification can be seen only in the infrared image: an unidentifiable object extends from the man’s left hand (fig. 10.4). It is unclear what this dark-blue object could be, as the artist did not finish it before covering it with subsequent layers.

Many of the colors were mixed directly on the surface (fig. 10.37); however, this painting has a few admixtures that occur with relative consistency, suggesting that they were mixed on the palette. The brownish-yellow, ocher-colored paint appears under the microscope to contain yellow, red lake, and dark pigment particles (either black or blue),39 while the flesh tones contain red lake and white with a small amount of blue. In raking light, it is clear that pronounced, directional brushwork in some areas that does not correspond to the visible composition may be the result of changes in palette, such as along the upper shoreline and under the female figure’s arm (fig. 10.38). For the most part, it seems that Renoir wanted to minimize the visibility of this brownish-yellow mixture. Instances of the color can be seen throughout the painting, noticeably in the foreground, beneath the arm of the female figure; in the upper portions of the hanging vines; and along the shoreline on the left. It is likely that the upper layers of most of the background sky, shoreline, and water, including the brownish-yellow areas, were painted in a single session, and the artist later went back to add the cool greens along the shoreline (fig. 10.39).

Renoir achieved multiple textural effects through the use of various brushes and thicknesses of paint, at times with added medium. In some places, such as the wet-in-wet flesh tones, very soft brushes and liquid paint created luminous, smooth areas with no specifically defined lines or rigid features (fig. 10.40). For other elements, such as the female figure’s hair, the artist dragged a lightly loaded, stiff-bristle brush across the finished costume, simulating individual strands (fig. 10.41). Smaller brushes and thicker paint combined to create the heavier impasto and more systematic brushwork seen in both figures’ hats.

For the hanging vines, once the heavily textured water and sky were dry, thin lines of red lake and touches of yellow and green were dragged down the surface, often collecting only on the high points of the underlying strokes (fig. 10.42). The X-ray suggests that these clumps of vines were present early in Renoir’s process, as the areas anchoring the tops and bottoms of each are radio transparent and interrupt the heavy background layers. The thin preliminary layers of the vine masses are largely composed of the ocher-colored mixture and were later covered by tones of green to indicate the leaves and change the tonal balance. Details such as the small figures walking along the lakeshore path and the boats were added as a final step (fig. 10.43).

Painting tools

Round, soft-bristle brushes; stiff-bristle brushes of varying widths (strokes up to 0.5 cm wide); palette knife in ground application.

Palette

Analysis indicates the presence of the following pigments:40 lead white, cobalt blue, emerald green, viridian, chrome yellow, zinc yellow, vermilion, madder lake, and a second red lake.

Stereomicroscopic examination of the surface suggests that the ocher-colored paint found under the female figure’s arm, along the shoreline, and in the upper part of the hanging vines is a mixture including bright yellow (identified as zinc or chrome yellow), black or blue, and red lake.41

The observation of a characteristic salmon-colored fluorescence under UV light indicates that Renoir used large amounts of fluorescing red lake mixed with other colors to indicate flesh tones, hair, costumes, vines, and other foliage. In the UV image, the railing across the foreground appears to have been painted almost entirely with this lake color (fig. 10.44).42

Binding media

Oil (estimated).43

Surface Finish

Varnish layer/media

The current [glossary:synthetic varnish] was applied during the 1971 treatment (see Conservation History). There is also evidence of previous [glossary:natural-resin varnish] around areas of impasto. The date of application of this natural-resin varnish is unknown.

Conservation History

A 1971 treatment of the painting included removing grime and natural-resin varnish, [glossary:lining], and revarnishing.44 After cleaning, the painting was faced and lined to a secondary canvas with wax resin. The work was remounted on a redwood ICA spring stretcher of slightly larger dimensions, leaving a 0.5–0.8 cm unpainted border around the perimeter. Finally the work was inpainted and given three coats of synthetic varnish (an isolating layer of polyvinyl acetate [PVA] AYAA, followed by methacrylate resin L-46, and a final coat of AYAA).

Condition Summary

The painting is in very good condition, lined and planar on a four-member spring stretcher. The [glossary:wax-resin lining] appears to be stable and well adhered; however, the lining material and varnish have saturated the painting. This is most noticeable in areas where the porous commercially applied ground is exposed (around the edges); the color has darkened considerably due to this saturation and to accumulation of grime.

The tacking margins were flattened during the lining process, and a crack has formed along the entire perimeter at the original foldover edge (the interface between the thick artist-applied ground and the commercial priming). Also, ridges along the edges of the artist-applied ground, possibly from application of this layer with a palette knife, have been somewhat crushed, and there is some paint loss in these areas. The paint layer itself has a general network of fine cracks, stretcher creases, and minor losses in areas of rebate abrasion from the frame (see, for example, the small losses at the bottom center). Small, localized losses occur throughout at the intersections of cracks but seem to be stable at this time. Small, white clusters, believed to be lead soaps possibly originating in the artist-applied selective preparatory layer, are visible via stereomicroscopic examination throughout the work, especially where the upper paint layers are very thin. The varnish has been absorbed evenly and gives the work a glossy sheen, slightly saturating the colors and visually enhancing the texture of both the brushstrokes and the canvas weave.
Kelly Keegan

Frame

Current frame (2008): The frame is not original to the painting. It is a French (Paris), nineteenth-century, Neoclassical Revival, gilt scotia frame with laurel-and-berry compo ornament. The frame has water and oil gilding over French yellow bole, with red-orange bole applied to the frieze, on gesso and compo ornament. The ornament and sight molding are selectively burnished, and the cove is burnished and retains its original gilding and glue sizing, though the gilding is abraded. A straight-sided back frame was glued to the verso of the original frame; its outer sides were regilded over red bole. The pine molding is mitered and joined with angled, dovetailed splines. The molding, from the perimeter to the interior, is torus with ribbon-and-bead outer molding; scotia side; torus with laurel-and-berry ornament, bordered with fillets, with strapped corners; scotia with beaded end; plain frieze; and ogee with lamb’s-tongue sight molding (fig. 10.45).45

Previous frame (installed mid-1960s, removed 2008): The painting was previously housed in an American, Louis XV reproduction frame of water-gilt, carved basswood (fig. 10.46).46

Previous frame (installed by 1933, removed mid-1960s): The work was previously housed in a late-nineteenth–early-twentieth-century, Louis XIV Revival, convex frame with deeply recessed, cast plaster, alternating flower and pendent bellflower ornament, bracketed by foliate scrolls, with acanthus leaves at the miters.47 The frame had water and oil gilding on a dark red-brown bole over gesso and cast plaster. The sides and frieze were burnished, and the ornament was selectively burnished. The gilding was toned with raw umber and a white wash and speckled overall with black and white. The molding was mitered and nailed. The molding, from the perimeter to the interior, was ovolo with leaf-tip ornament; scotia side; convex face with alternating flower and pendent bellflower ornament, bracketed by foliate scrolls, with acanthus leaves at the miters; hollow frieze; ogee with leaf-tip ornament; cove; and fillet with cove sight edge (fig. 10.47).
Kirk Vuillemot