Possibly one of the most distressing results of damage to a painting is the loss of the paint itself from the surface. When these losses are large, you can be left with extensive gaps that range in severity from unsightly to near-obliteration of the composition.
Not only do these gaps interfere with the viewer’s experience of the painting, they can leave the work at risk of further deterioration over time if unchecked. However, it is most likely that the compromised aesthetics of the work will drive someone to seek my help as a painting restorer.
There are a variety of techniques that we use, as conservators, to retouch areas of paint loss and in this article I will be looking at one of these called rigatino or tratteggio. This method is usually used when the lacunae (gaps) are large and disrupt the visual experience of the art work. An Italian restorer, Cesare Brandi at the Central Institute of Restoration in Rome developed this technique in the mid twentieth century.
The technique involves filling the gap with tiny vertical hatches in a colour palette restricted to three primary colours: yellow, red and blue. An optical illusion is created that allows the eye to harmonise the retouching with the surrounding original painted surface, particularly when viewed from a distance. However, the retouching is visible on close inspection by the naked eye – no tools are required to detect and identify the conservator’s intervention.
In any project that I approach as an art conservator, a balance between sensitivity to the preservation of the original and restoration of the aesthetic viewing experience has to be found. Rigatino is a method of neutral retouching that does not imitate or compete with the original aesthetic. By using the restricted colour palette, I will avoid imposing my own interpretation of the original colours used by the artist. My intervention as a conservator will be visible to the naked eye as distinct from the original paint so that the viewer is aware of the retouching without compromising the aesthetic experience of the art work. As such, this technique lies closer to the conservation end of a spectrum that ranges from pure conservation to full restoration.
The first high-profile opportunity to try rigatoni at scale was presented in 1966 when flooding devastated Florence.
The flood was so severe that the waters rose to unimaginable levels inside buildings with devastating consequences for the irreplaceable art that hung in the city’s many churches.
In Sta Croce, a Crucifix painted for the church by the early Renaissance artist Cimabue was found floating in the water. 60% of the surface paint was lost, creating lacunae so vast that the composition was rendered unreadable.
The Sta Croce Crucifix was not only an object of stunning beauty, it was a highly significant art historical artefact documenting the evolution of Tuscan painting. Giotto had trained in Cimabue’s workshop, and the latter is deemed by art historians to be the father of Renaissance painting.
For the conservation team Cimabue’s Crucifix was an ideal candidate for retouching using the rigatino method. We cannot know what the original Crucifix looked like at its completion by the workshop, and any retouching that seeks to hide the gaps requires a speculative interpretation on the part of the conservator. By deploying the rigatino method in the conservation of this Crucifix, the loss of paint is not hidden. The optical illusion generated when viewed from a distance allows the viewer to experience the visual composition without disruption.
This method of retouching is more suitable for historical artworks that play a role in our understanding of the art historical canon. For individuals who seek my services as an art conservator, the aesthetics of their piece are often given more weight in the choice of retouching methods. In these cases, art conservators like myself preserve the rigorous practice of making sure that no intervention is irreversible – it is important that the original be compromised as little as possible. However, the reversible retouching is often less detectable than it would be if I were to use the rigatino method to fill a painting’s gaps.