µ • NOTES 2000Vol. 3 No. 1

July 1999

A Publiration of the State Microscopical Society of Illinois

µ • DOT€ 2000

Volume 3, No. 1, July 1999

Bill MikuskaEditor

• NOTES 2000 © 1999State Microscopical Society of Illinois

EDITORIAL

Once man experienced the images formedby microscopes and telescopes, his imagination ledhim to comprehend better himself and the worldin which he lived. Modern science, as we thinkwe know it , was born.

Man's exploitation of the electromagneticdiscoveries dating from the later part of the 19thcentury up to current times have led to new kindsof microscopes, telescopes, and other devices toproduce new kinds of images. Still not content bynature, man's fertile imagination drives him toexamine even the very particles used for imageformation. In a recent Fermilab lecture, a theo-retical physicist talked of particle accelerators aslarge, high energy microscopes that permit us tosee better the stuff of the universe. Where does allthis lead us? How does one really know that aparticular interpretation is the valid one.

As long as the scientist knows the rules ofthe game of science and maintains objectivity andscientific integrity, then images have meaning.Objectivity and scientific integrity are endangeredspecies. If a "scientist" allows his ego, emotions,or beliefs to interfere in experimental design or datainterpretation by fabricating physical laws to suithis data, then the images formed are meaninglessor fraudulent.

Richard Feynman tells us "the first prin-ciple is that you must not fool yourself–and youare the easiest person to fool....After you've notfooled yourself, it's easy not to fool other scien-tists. You just have to be honest in a conventionalway after that."

Two articles in this issue of µ-Notes re-late to twists on "image" interpretation. In one(McCrone) we again, in part, learn about the shroudimage and also about an "expert" who has little orno scientific training making M$ decisions in art.In another (Palenik) we learn how science can pro-duce a non-fraudulent image.

This year SMSI grants the Emile M.Chamot Award for 1999 to Leo Barish, in part, forimage enhancement techniques for the SEM.

Bill C. Mikuska Front Covers: Obverse and Reverse sides of the SMSIEmile M. Chamot Medallion, photographs courtesy ofRichard H. Lee.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A Protocol for Authentication of Paintings 1Walter C. McCrone and Eugene Markowski

A Case of Art Fraud Unmasked 9Skip Palenik

Beware the Duster 12Richard Hoyt Lee

Using Electrographic Techniques 13in Microchemical Metal Tests

James J. Benko

Julian D. Corrington 15and the Bausch & Lomb Model R Microscope

John Gustav Delly

Corrections 21

Want Ads 21

SMSI Treasurer's Report - 1998 23Susan N. Young

Emile Chamot: The Man Behind the SMSI Award 24Richard Hoyt Lee

A Microscopist and His Shadows 25Leo Barish

1999 SMSI Emile M. Chamot Award Recipient Inside Back Cover

Volume 3, Number 1 July 1999

A Protocol for Authentication of Paintings

Walter C. McCrone* and Eugene Markowski

ABSTRACT

Strictly speaking, it is impossible to authenticate anypainting to the extent of naming the artist who pro-duced that object. One can only increase the likeli-hood thereof. In one celebrated case I felt I had fullyproved Manet had indeed painted a particular paint-ing (McCrone 1987) but a "scholar" on whose reac-tion the art world depends for final acceptance of au-thenticity only said "someone" could have borrowedManet's palette one fine day and painted that picture.In a second celebrated case (McCrone 1990) I waseven unable to prove to the world that a particularpainting was, in fact, a painting and not an artifactproduced by other means, e.g., some sort of photo-graphic process.

We can only suggest the ways and means ofincreasing the likelihood of authenticity in terms of aparticular artist's effort. This includes a cooperativeapproach by a group of experts: experts in the com-position and dating of the physical components, thatis, pigments, medium, and support, of the painting;scholars trained in art history; investigators able todevelop the provenance for that painting; and styliststrained in the study of the attributed artist's paintingtechniques and style(s). The idea of authenticity ex-tends from authenticity of the painting to authentic-ity of the experts themselves. They must be proven(and recognized as proven) experts in one or more ofthe areas of science and scholarship involved in evalu-ating authenticity.

There is a basic difference between the sci-entific contribution to the question of authenticity ofan object and that of the scholars. Carbon-dating andpigment identification techniques answer a "Yes orNo" question. Either they yield a date within the timeof an attributed artist or they do not. On the other

hand, the contributions of the scholars are still sub-jective and we often find such experts divided on thesubject of authenticity of a given painting.

INTRODUCTION

There is a need for an organization, recog-nized by the art world, charged with the task of evalu-ating claims of authenticated-artist paintings. If thispanel then states that the evidence of the experts hassufficiently proved the likelihood that a given paint-ing is authentic, then their published conclusion tothat effect should be accepted by the art world andthat painting is authentic.

The only paintings I would bet my last dollaron being authentic would be The Last Supper byLeonardo or Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel murals.Any paintings on canvas, wood or other portable sur-faces are impossible for anyone to authenticate withabsolute certainty. The experience of the RembrandtCommittee during the past few years in de-authenti-cating dozens of previously "authentic" Rembrandtsis a case in point. We can only build up positive evi-dence in favor of authenticity until recognized artexperts concede a given painting is authentic. Eventhen the accolade of authenticity is an opinion andmany such have been discredited by subsequent ex-perts.

To have a chance of being acknowledged asauthentic requires a body of evidence sufficient toreduce doubts to the point they can be ignored. Thisrequires significant convincing evidence based onscientific analyses of the composition of all thepainting's components (pigments, medium, and sup-port). Equally important are the opinions of art schol-ars experienced in the iconographic aspects and stylecharacteristics of the artists' works during different

*Director Emeritus, McCrone Research Institute, Chicago, IL 60616-3292Professor of Art History, Trinity College, Washington, D.C.

1

Figurel : Head Image Areas, Shroud of Turin

periods of their career. And finally, a convincing prov-enance for that painting must be determined to thedegree possible. Unfortunately, it is impossible toprove to the satisfaction of every one that any paint-ing is authentic. A confirmed skeptic can always findsome reason any painting cannot be authentic. I cancite two such examples.

I once worked on a painting The InfantaMarie Marguerite, a painting alleged to be a lost copyof a Velsquez painting in the Louvre by EdouardManet about 1860 (McCrone 1987). I found that thepigments not only matched Manet's known palette ofthat period, but amaz-ingly to me, it containedvery rare variants ofthree of these pigmentsI had never seen before.They were cobalt blue,lead white, and vermil-ion; all were known to,and used by Manet butnot usually in the variantforms I found in TheInfanta. The cobalt bluehad a uniquely low re-fractive index. The leadwhite was lead carbon-ate, PbCO3 , rather thanthe usual basic lead car-

bonate, PbCO3•Pb(OH)2,and the vermilion wasunusually pure in termsof trace elements.

Two paintings"known" to have beenpainted by Manet about1860* were then ana-lyzed and found to have these same three variant pig-ments. In addition, individual lead white pigmentcrystals from both The Infanta and the Ballet Espagnolwere analyzed quantitatively for trace metals. Both

contain the same nine trace metals in closely similarpercentages; this can only mean they have a commonsource. I concluded those three pigments in threedifferent paintings would not be more similar if theyhad been squeezed from the same tubes of paint. Icouldn't imagine any better proof of authenticity ofThe Infanta Marie Marguerite than that; but a scholarwhose opinion we sought said only "someone couldhave borrowed Manet's palette and painted theInfanta."

Another acutely frustrating experience in-volved a grisaille painting on linen done with red

ochre and vermilion pig-ments in a gelatin medium(McCrone, 1990). Therecan be no doubt about thatconclusion, but a vocalbody of dissenters state inno uncertain terms that theimage is blood and no pig-ments are present (see Fig-ure 1). Obviously, opin-ions are more importantthan facts in some authen-ticity studies.

There is a greatneed for a better under-standing of what consti-tutes authenticity and fora recognized panel of ex-perts capable of evaluat-ing claims of authenticityin order to present a "cer-tificate" of authenticitythat would be accepted bythe art world. An orga-nization, I believe, well

qualified for such a responsibility is IFAR, the Inter-national Foundation for Art Research, in Manhattan.They are best known for their Stolen Art Alert, a recordof stolen art and efforts to recover such. They also

*La Verscuse: La Femme a la Creche in the Ordrupgaard Collection, Copenhagen and the Spanish Ballet in thePhillips Collection, Washington, D.C.

2 • NOTES JULY 1999

WADER C. McCRONE

accept individual authenticity problems and are verycompetent in evaluating art and establishing its au-thenticity.

Many, if not most of us are familiar with IFAR

Reports, a publication that publicizes stolen art. Thiswas first called the Stolen Art Alert ,then the Art LossRegister and now, again, he Stolen Art Alert.Constance Lowenthal as Executive Director andVirgilia Pancoast as Director of the AuthenticationServices until recently deserve the credit for estab-lishing IFAR as the group for the authenticating re-search or for evaluating the research of others. As of1998, IFAR took on a new life with the retirement ofConstance Lowenthal. Her ideal replacement isSharon Flescher, and IFAR Reports is now a formaljournal, IFAR Journal. Virgilia Pancoast, I'm pleasedto see, is still "Consultant, Authentication Services."The IFAR Journal now publishes formal papers. Withworldwide contacts and a very high reputation, IFARhas the ability to fill a real gap in authentication stud-ies. For too long, the subjective viewpoints of manyscholars have left many works of art in limbo, nei-ther accepted or unaccepted as authentic. I believeIFAR could evaluate any existing claims of authen

ticity, perform additional work to test those claims,and produce a carefully considered opinion that wouldbe accepted as a final verdict. I dearly hope they willdo so. Unfortunately, they haven't accepted this fear-some responsibility perhaps because they haven'tbeen asked. I am sending them a copy of this paperbefore publication to elicit a response.

Going back to my "Protocol," I would like topresent as an example for authenticating paintingsJohn Harrington's Christ Among the Doctors (seeFigure 2). John Harrington possesses a remarkableset of qualities: an avid interest in art, an eye for qual-ity, and an ability most historians would envy of be-ing able to investigate and establish a credible prov-enance for authentic paintings. A pretty complete cov-erage of what was then Harrington's 12-year authen-tication effort has been published (McCrone, Graham,and Polizzi, 1996).

Since that publication at least two additionalart scholars have studied Christ Among the Doctorsand concluded it to be a long-lost Leonardo paintingas determined by John Harrington. Kl àra Garas ofBudapest has a long and important background in thearts. Starting with a degree in History of Art and Ar-

Figure 2: Christ Among the Doctors

3

cheology from the University of Budapest, she wenton to become Assistant Curator, Curator, and finallyDirector of the Museum of Fine Arts in Budapest(1964-1984). She is a member of the Hungarian Acad-emy of Sciences and has published more than 100articles in art magazines and scientific journals andat least 10 books including Paintings in Hungary inthe 17th Century, followed by the same title but inthe 18th Century, Venetian Paintings of the 18th Cen-tury, and Italian Portraits of the Renaissance. An as-yet unpublished book covers in detail the paintingsof Giorgione.

Her study of Christ Among the Doctors-Harrington led to strong evidence that this paintinghad been owned by the noted Italian Martinelli fam-ily since the 16th Century. The Martinellis were then,and later, closely associated with the theatre and thearts in Italy. John Harrington purchased Christ Amongthe Doctors in 1984 from a present member of thatfamily. Klàra Garas' conclusion after her historicalstudy was that Leonardo painted John Harrington'spicture.

The other well-known scholar, Professor ofArt History, Eugene Markowski, of Trinity Collegein Washington D.C. has made an independent detailedstudy of Christ Among the Doctors-Harrington andhis critical analysis follows:

1. THE ICONOGRAPHY

A. Christ's Vestments: The cloth bands which criss-cross the Christ figure in Christ Among the Doctorsare a representation of the liturgical stole worn as partof the priest's liturgical vestments during the time ofChrist. During this period the stole represented thepriest's authority as teacher, or presider, one who ledthe congregation in religious ceremonies. For priestsin the Roman Catholic Church, the stole was wornover the other vestments; by the time of Vatican IIand until recently, the stole was worn under the othervestments. Presently, the stole is worn over the priest'sshoulders and hangs down alongside the arms.

The color of the vestment under the stoleworn by the Christ figure is red, the color for priestly

vestments worn during the Feast Day of Pentecost.This feast day is the celebration (memorial) of theevent in which the power of the Holy Spirit (tradi-tionally represented as flames, hence the color redfor the vestments) descended upon the apostles em-powering them with knowledge of, and the ability tospeak in other languages and to teach the new reli-gion of Christianity.

B. Christ's hands: The hands of the Christ figureare held close to one another with three fingers ex-tended, two on the left hand, and one on the righthand, to form a triangle. The triangle is often used,especially by the Roman Catholic Church, to repre-sent the Triune God, three in one: the Father, the Son,and the Holy Ghost. While just two fingers form thelateral sides of the triangle, the near forefinger of theleft hand suggests a part in the triangular representa-tion of the Triune God.

C. The figures in the background: To the left andto the right of the Christ figure are depictions of thepriests of the temple, representing the old church/temple, (the Old Testament of the Bible), while thecentral figure of Christ represents the new church/temple (the New Testament). The various styles ofclothing worn by these figures refer to the variouspositions held by the temple priests.

D. The title of the painting Christ Among the Doc-tors refers to St. Lukes's description in the New Tes-tament (2: 42, 46, 47, 49, 50) of Christ teaching tothe priests in the temple. St. Luke says that Christwas about twelve years old at this time and that itwas Christ's first teaching experience. Leonardo'srepresentation of Christ in this painting is that of avery young man, perhaps in his teens.

E. Conclusion: The various forms of iconographyused by Leonardo for this painting direct attention toChrist as a teacher, founder of the new church, andthe doctrines as well. Quite possibly, Leonardo con-ferred with a priest advisor concerning the iconogra-phy just as Michelanglelo certainly did concerning

4 • NOTES JULY 1999

WALTER C. McCRONE

his frescos for the Sistine Chapel. It is also possiblethat Leonardo visited the cathedral in Prato to see thefresco of The Feast of Herod, painted by Fra Fillippoin 1452. In the background of this fresco, at the feasttable centrally located is a figure wearing the stole ofpriestly authority within the temple and of teachingauthority. This fresco also juxtaposes the New andOld testament, just as Leonardo does in Christ Amongthe Doctors. Finally, Christ Among the Doctors , in-tended as an image concerning teaching, may havebeen commissioned by a teaching order within theChurch, rather than as a private commission. Thefacial and hand expressions for each priest repre-sented are direct links to St. Luke's statements foundin Chapter 2: 46, 47, 49. John Harrington believesthat the Christ figure may well have been painted byLeonardo in support of his application to the Guild ofFlorentine painters in 1472.

2. PERSPECTIVE AND COMPOSITION

A. Perspective: Leonardo often used one-point per-spective in his paintings and drawings. The Last Sup-per fresco in the refectory of Maria delle Grazie(Milan), The Adoration of the Magi, 1481, UffiziGallery (Florence), The Annunciation, 1470, Uffizi(Florence), and the Mona Lisa, 1503, Louvre (Paris)are among the more obvious examples. Nearly al-ways, the vanishing point among his one-point com-positions may be located behind the central figure orobject. The horizon line, located on a single vanish-ing point, is placed about one third of the pictureplane's proportion from the top. This proportion tiesin with Leonardo's preference for a strong verticaland horizontal axis. The vertical minor axis and thehorizontal may be the axes that hold groups of fig-ures or objects.

B. Composition: When Leonardo uses a single van-ishing point perspective, his compositions tend to besymmetrical, lending a certain formality to the over-all image. Within the rather formal composition ofsymmetrical arrangements he activates figures andobjects into movement through gesture and place-

ment. When a single figure or groups of figures areused in one of these compositions, depicting the van-ishing point from about the waist to the top of thehead, he suggests that it is, in fact, the entire figure,or person who is being represented, implying there-fore, a full-length figure portrait. This suggestion ofa full-length portrait is accomplished by the relation-ship of the figure's hands relative to the bottom ofthe picture plane (about 1/3 to 1/4 from the bottom),and the head with about the same proportional rela-tionship to the top of the picture plane. One may findthat throughout all of Leonardo's compositions amathematical permutation is in play. These are, ineffect, compositions that visually read as "right" and"correct", and quite architectural.

Hands as shapes in Leonardo's compositions alwaysplay a major role in the success of his compositions,but more important than shape within the composi-tion is the hand as a key to understanding the contentof the painting or drawing. Furthermore, hands asLeonardo depicts them are in fact outward manifes-tations of an inward emotion, thought, or doctrine.The hands of the Christ figure in The Last Supperrelay two doctrines, the left hand is extended in anoffering of bread symbolizing the consecration of thebread at the sacrifice of the Mass (this is my body),while the right hand is extended in blessing of thewine, or consecration of the wine (this is my blood).The expression, or position of the hand is also theposition of the priest's hand in the final blessing atthe conclusion of the Mass toward the congregation(go in peace). The hands of the apostles, depicted ina great variety of positions and placement within thecomposition, are quite clearly intended to be outwardvisual expressions of each apostle's inward emotionaland intellectual response to Christ's revelationsthrough hand gestures.

While the hand of the Virgin in Leonardo'spainting Madonna of the Rocks, 1483, in the Louvre,is extended in blessing over the Christ child, her handis in the very same position that Leonardo used forhis Christ in The Last Supper. For both paintingsLeonardo used the triangle as the central geometric

5

shape for both Christ and the Virgin. The Christ fig-ure in Christ Among the Doctors is also shaped withina centrally located triangle. For each of these paint-ings, the central triangle is proportionally the largergeometric shape and is contrasted against other tri-angles within the totality of the composition.Leonardo uses the triangle with mathematical permu-tations that create the underlying architecture of hiscompositions, thus lending a firm structural whole.In several of these composition types such as the MonaLisa, Woman with an Ermine, and Christ Among theDoctors-Harrington, the hand or hands are used as avisual lead-in to the composition. In each of thesecompositions the hands may be active or at rest, butthey are, without question, significant symbols in notonly understanding Leonardo's genius for composi-tion, but important leads to the content.

C. Conclusion: The perspective, both linear andaerial, and composition for Christ Among the Doc-tors are directly related to the other Leonardo paint-ings mentioned, and as such, could not be understoodby a copyist to the degree of execution seen in thispainting. Further, the perspective and compositionfor this painting are used by Leonardo to underscorethat this painting was indeed a "teaching painting".Leonardo used all his knowledge in mathematicalpermutations within the compositional and perspec-tive guidelines to support his iconographic informa-tion to form an image that was not only a fulfillmentof the patron's desires, but was also an early signa-ture work whose visual and intellectual content maybe found in other later paintings.

3. STYLISTIC ANALYSIS

Chiaroscuro aside, which is so clearly related to otherLeonardo paintings, there appears to be stylistic simi-larities between Christ Among the Doctors and otherpaintings by Leonardo that are important enough toestablish this painting as one of Leonardo's.

The hair in this painting is not linearly treatedas it is in some of his other paintings, but is moresoftly brushed with pigment, as it is in the treatment

of the hair of the Christ figure in The Last Supper.Christ's hair in The Last Supper is parted off-centerand is parted off-center in Christ Among the Doctorsas well. The proportion of the fingers to the body ofthe hand are greater than one would find normally.This odd proportional preference by Leonardo maybe found in his other paintings such as St. John theBaptist, Lady with Ermine, Madonna of the Rocks andthe Mona Lisa. This extension of the fingers by aboutone-fourth more than normal, is certainly intendedfor expressive purposes. Given the importanceLeonardo placed on hands in his compositions, it iseasy to understand why he stylized the fingers as hedid. The lips of the Christ figure in The Last Supper-are dearly outlined and color filled. The Christ Amongthe Doctors painting reveals that the lips of the Christfigure are treated in the same stylistic manner as arethe eyes. The eyes are not on a perfect horizontal,and the nose is long and thin. These facial character-istics may be found in most of Leonardo's represen-tations of the human face. It is rare to find a perfectsymmetrical face in his paintings or drawings.Through study of Leonardo's "study sketches," hevisually states that no true symmetry exists in natureincluding the human form, except for mathematicalsymmetry such as one to one, two to two, etc.

Finally, the light source in most of Leonardo'swork is left-hand oriented, that is, the light appears tocome from a source that is located to the left of thepicture plane. At times, this light source offers a verystrong light, producing clear cast shadows, or at timesa softly diffused light with cast shadows not dearlydefined. Since Leonardo was left-handed, this wouldbe a natural if not automatic choice for a light source.Christ Among the Doctors reveals a light source thatcomes from the left of the picture plane, a strong lightsource producing the chiaroscuro effects of light,shade, cast shadow, reflected light, and highlight.Through this lighting mode, the modeling is carriedout to the highest degree in order to produce volumesthat will give the most convincing illusion: a thirddimension. Leonardo focuses the light directly uponthe left hand of Christ (this could be a subconsciousplacement by Leonardo because of his left-handed-

µ • NOTES JULY 1999

WALTER C. McCRONE

ness, or, a connection to his own spirituality) intend-ing to bring the observer's attention to the hands whichform the central triangle of the Christ figure.

CONCLUSION

Throughout Leonardo's career his use of light in hispaintings and drawings is consistent (nearly alwaysleft-handed orientation) along with his compositionaltechniques. It is this very consistency that one findsin Christ Among the Doctors-Harrington. Each oneof the visual elements in this painting, if examinedseparately and placed within the context of any otherof his paintings, shows that the transfer would makea perfect fit technically and stylistically.

Stylistically, Leonardo creates a very fine ten-sion between the figures and objects he represents, atension that one may visually read as a frozen mo-ment in time, but one that never excludes the observer.He brings the observer into the space and activitythrough his technical ability and force of genius, aspace that is always represented as one devoid ofsound, a quiet stillness of peace. Christ Among theDoctors exemplifies these qualities and stands finallyin the place of progression from this early work tolater works.

As of today, there are scholars who do notaccept the attribution of Christ Among the Doctors

-Harrington to Leonardo. All of those, however, who

have made a serious study like Joseph Polizzi, LanierGraham, Walter McCrone, Klara Garas, EugeneMarkowski and, of course, John Harrington, are infull agreement that the available evidence fully sup-ports the attribution to Leonardo da Vinci.

This, then, is where IFAR is needed. Theowners, John and Elfriede Harrington, want nothingmore than to share this fine painting with the publicby seeing it hanging in a major art museum. Now,however, it can be exhibited only in their home whereonly they and their friends can envy it. IFAR, by acareful and complete study of all past authenticationstudies and their own added effort, could draw theirconclusion with a published paper—a decision thatlike those of the Rembrandt Committee would jus-tify a universal agreement accepted by all parties andremove a fine painting from limbo.

REFERENCES

McCrone, W.C. (1987) Authenticity Study of a Pos-sible Manet Painting; Microscope 35: 173-194.

McCrone, W.C. (1990) The Shroud of Turin: Bloodor Artist's Pigments? Accts. of Chem. Res. 23: 77.

McCrone, W.C., L.Graham and J.A. Polizzi (1996)Microscope 44: 119-136.

7

HUMAN

Our Book Selection Just GotVisit McCrone Microscopes & Accessories at www.mccrone.com! Bigger

Fluoresence Microscopy, 2nd EditionBrian Herman, 1998, pp. 170

Fluorescence microscopy is an impor-tant laboratory tool used in modern celland molecular biology. This book is therevised, updated and expanded secondedition of a best-selling introductory texton the use of fluorescence microscopyin cell biology. This book covers thefundamental principles of fluorescenceand their application to fluorescence microscopy. A detaileddescription of the fluorescence microscope and otherrequired equipment is given, too. Applications to immuno-fluorescence, in situ hybridization, and photomicrographyare presented in full, practical detail.

Atlas of Human Hair MicroscopicCharacteristicsRobert R. Ogle, Jr. & Michelle J. Fox,1999, pp.83

This book fills a void in the resourcesavailable to researchers and practitio-ners in forensic hair examination. Itprovides photographic archetypes forthe microscopic characteristics ofhuman hair and the varieties of thecharacteristics seen in forensic examinations, including curl;color; pigment distribution and density; cortical fusi; andovoid bodies. These illustrations provide a uniform basis fordescribing the characteristics and their variations forforensic professionals in differing geographical areas. Also,the documentation of hair characteristics using the scoringsystem outlined in this atlas allows researchers to developdata regarding the frequency of characteristics.

Microstructural Characterisation ofFibre-Reinforced CompositesJohn Summerscales, 1998, pp. 319

This book comprehensively examinesthe application of advanced microstruc-tural characterization techniques tofiber-reinforced composites. Withcontributions from internationalexperts, the book serves as an essen-tial reference for materials scientistsand research workers. Features includediscussions on the range of reinforcement forms used incommercial applications, and an outline of the techniquesappropriate in identifying a material's micro- and meso-structures.

The Usborne Complete Book of theMicroscopeKirsteen Rogers, 1998, pp. 96

The Complete Book of the Microscopeis a breathtaking introduction to anextraordinary new world. Fantasticphotographs, a thousand or even amillion times larger than life, revealflies' eyes, flu viruses, and evenindividual atoms. Project ideas, with clear step-by-stepinstructions, explain how you can use your own micro-scopes to see an amazing - sometimes startling - view ofeveryday objects.

X-Ray Diffraction: A PracticalApproachC. Suryanarayana and M. GrantNorton, 1998, pp.273

The primary aim of this book is toenable students to understand thepractical aspects of the technique,analyze x-ray diffraction patterns froma variety of materials under differentconditions, and to get the maximumpossible information from the diffraction patterns. Topicscovered include, lattices and crystal structures, practicalaspects of x-ray diffraction, components of an x-raydiffractometer, x-ray safety, and pattern interpretation. Thebook is broken into two sections: Part I-Basics and Part II-Experimental Modules.

Fakebusters: Scientific Detection ofFakery in ArtWalter C. McCrone and Richard J.Weiss, 1999, pp. 400

Presents actual casework, such as theShroud of Turin, Christ Among theDoctors, Caravaggio's paintings andmore, where scientific techniques wereused to foil attempts to counterfeitfamous art. Discusses light micros-copy, carbon dating, X-Ray analysis, ARCOS, Raman,chemical microscopy, and IFAR. Will be of great interest toart conservators, museums, forensic scientists, historiansand more. Includes an Appendix of dates for pigment use.

McCrone Microscopes & Accessories, 850 Pasquinelli Drive, Westmont, IL 60559-5539 800-622-8122 • 630-887-7100 • FAX 630-887-7764 • Web: www.mccrone.com

A Case of Art Fraud Unmasked

Skip Palenik*

An interesting application of analytical micros-copy is the detection of art and archaeologyhoaxes. The benefits of a microscopical ap-

proach to these problems arise not only from the ca-pacity to deal with microscopic samples but also the"resolving" ability of the microscope to distinguish asmall inhomogeneity and exploit it. Such was thecase in a recent problem submitted by a long timeclient of ours who is a dealer in prehistoric art withgalleries in New York city. He explained that whileon a buying trip in Switzerland, he had the opportu-nity to examine an extraordinary early Greek bronzestatue which was being offered for sale at a reason-able price. The item, if authentic, would be the world'sbest example of this particular subject, exceeding thatof the best example known at the time, which wasdisplayed in a museum in Turkey. The price, how-ever, was reasonable which made him cautious.

The studio which offered the item for sale per-mitted him time to examine it and to take smallsamples to help in his purchase decision. Our dealeroriginally trained as a metallurgist and conservatorand was used to taking small samples. During hisinspection of the entire object with a low magnifica-tion stereomicroscope, he noticed what appeared tobe an encrusted fiber sticking out of the patina whichcovered the surface of the statuette. Using a pair offorceps, he broke off a small piece of the corrosionwhich contained the encrusted fiber. He sent the speci-men to us on his return to New York.

The sample which we received consisted of asmall quantity of particles of a blue copper corrosionproduct. One of these had an apparent fiber stickingout of it (Figure 1). Previous experience with an-cient fibers trapped in corrosion products on coinsand other archaeological specimens taught us thatthere may or may not have been a fiber inside. Inprevious cases these have ranged all the way from

*Microtrace, 1750 Grandstand Place, Elgin, IL 60123

Figure 1: "Blue" fiber as first seen, 40X

intact fibers (usually wool or cotton) to pseudomor-phs where replacement by the corrosion minerals iscomplete. Most archaeological fibers fall somewherein between, but in almost every case where there isstill something remaining, it can at least be identifiedas a cellulosic (cotton or linen) or protein (wool) fi-ber.

One thing archaeological fibers all have in com-mon is their brittleness. We, therefore, took great careto attempt to remove the fiber intact. We first iso-lated the particle containing the apparent fiber (Fig-ure 2). Next we chipped away as much of the corro-sion product as possible using tungsten needles whileobserving through a stereomicroscope (Figure 3).Finally, we used dilute acid to gently dissolve the re-maining corrosion compounds, a technique which hadworked well in the past on coins from ancient

9

Figure 2: 'Blue" fiber after removal from the bulk ofcorrosion, 40X

Carthage. The remaining fiber was washed in suc-cessive droplets of distilled water. A segment of thefiber was cut from the whole length, mounted in adrop of water, and examined with the polarizing mi-croscope (Figures 4 and 5).

The fiber was easily identified as cellulose onthe basis of its morphological features and behaviorbetween crossed polars. It was remarkable, however,because of its freshness. There appeared to be littleor no physical attrition to the fiber. The gradual lossof morphology is one of the most obvious character-istics of fibers recovered from corrosion crusts. Thisfiber looked as fresh as if it had originated from adustball in the corner of a bedroom. Since there isnothing odd about a cotton fiber being found in anancient corrosion product, we decided to proceed astep further.

The piece of the fiber which had been cut offfor the morphological examinationdescribed above was now examined with the fluores-cence microscope using ultraviolet excitation. Thecolorless fiber exhibits the strong blue-white fluores-cence characteristic of an optical brightener. Opticalbrighteners are fluorescent compounds (usually de-rivatives of stilbene) which are added to textiles tomake them "whiter than white." Their brightness is

Figure 3: Composite Photomicrograph showing thefiber after the completion of mechanical cleaning.

Multiple exposures with transmitted planepolarized and reflected light, 130X

10 µ • NOTES JULY 1999

Figure 4: Cut fiber mounted in water, 340X Figure 5: Cut fiber under crossed polars, 340X

SKIP PALENIK

based on their fluorescence when illuminated withultraviolet light from fluorescent lamps or sunlight.Since they fluoresce in the blue region of the visiblespectrum, they appear whiter (i.e., bluer) to our eyeswhich regard the yellow end of the spectrum as dulleror dirtier. Optical brighteners are either added di-rectly to synthetic fibers (e.g., polyester for cotton/polyester shirts and blouses) during manufacturingor in laundry detergents which is the way most cot-ton fibers pick them up. They are also added to writ-ing and copy papers. These compounds were inventedin the 1940's in Germany, but were not used com-mercially in laundry detergents or paper until the early1950's.

This final observation put the matter to rest. Thefiber is a modem cellulose fiber, most likely a paper

fiber, which was trapped in the corrosion product asit was being formed. Thus, in this case, the corrosionproduct must have been formed since 1950. As itwas being formed, a single paper fiber either settledout of the dust in the air or became in some other wayattached to the copper salt as it was being grown onthe object. Confronted with this information, the sellerwithdrew the item from sale. Our client was happyto have his doubts confirmed since he would havehated to miss out on such a great purchase opportu-nity had it been authentic.

A color photocopy of the fiber showing its blue fluo-rescence is available from the author. To obtain Fig-ure 6 simply send a self-addressed envelope to SkipPalenik at Microtrace.

11

Beware the Duster

Richard Hoyt Lee*

We usually assume that the compressed gasduster cans we purchase and use are ofgood quality. But beware of unexpected

residue and contamination from additives mixed intothe compressed gas used in the cans as the source ofthe gas for dusting!

I recently experienced serious contamination of apolished metal sample for analysis when I dusted itoff with a can of commercial duster just before plac-ing it on the microscope stage. As I focused on thesample, I saw spots of white stain and residue thatshould not have been there. Removing the sample, Igently huffed it and wiped it clean with a soft lenstissue. Having experienced this once before with a"lowest bidder" quality product ( sorry, no brands), Idid an experiment to test the amount of residue.

Since most commercial dusters use a liquefied gas,like a chlorofluorocarbon, inverting the can will ex-pel a burst of liquid which will cover an exposed sur-face with a thick film and then evaporate. Using aclean glass slide for a test substrate for the liquid al-lows one to quickly see the amount of residue afterevaporation. This also works well for simple com-pressed air dusters, which have no liquid source. Justgive the clean glass slide an extra long dose of thepropellant.

What is leaving the residue? In the case of lique-fied gas dusters, probably a light oil or other form oflubricant is added to the liquid to help it extend thelife of refrigeration units, which are the main end useof the product. With compressed air, light oil vaporsalways contaminate the air from the compressors,unless a special oil trap is used in the line. That is thereason most electron microscopes vent their cham-bers with compressed nitrogen rather than compressedair which is cheaper. Oil in the air will contaminatethe vacuum systems of the electron microscopes. Oil

*Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL 60439

12

can be trapped out, but it is difficult to remove all ofit because most of the filters are just paper or poly-mer spun fiber types that will eventually become satu-rated.

Another application of dusters is the cleaning ofmicroscope optics where no residue or deposits aretolerated due to image degradation. The incident thatled to this article is the presence of a fiber visible inall the photos taken with a reflected light microscope.Disassembly of the microscope part by part eventu-ally led to the troublesome fiber attached to the po-larizing slider.

Electron microscopes are more critical because thevacuum system usually cannot be baked out to re-move adsorbed deposits. There is an old "rule ofthumb" about fingerprints and vacuum systems; thatis, it takes 5 years to eliminate outgassing.

Below is a photo of a clean glass slide sprayedwith a large blast of a low cost and unnamed product.Notice the small droplets of liquid remaining.

• NOTES JULY 1999

Using Electrographic Techniques

in Microchemical Metal Tests

James J. Benko*

S ometimes it is better to use an electric currentto get metals into solution rather than acid(s),especially when it is necessary to preserve the

integrity of the sample surface.Useful for such items as coins or metallic art

objects, electrographic techniques are, for all intentsand purposes, virtually non-destructive since onlytraces of metal are removed. Sufficient metal dis-solves for microchemical tests when a 10-50 milliampcurrent, supplied by one or two flashlight batteries,passes through a specimen for a few seconds. Thespecimen rests on a small piece of filter paper moist-ened with an aqueous electrolyte solution of sodiumchloride or sodium nitrate.

A clever apparatus for doing this is describedby Nordmann (1) and also by Weisz (2), both authorsattributing it to Fritz (3). I have constructed this ap-paratus from ordinary materials readily available to-day. It is simple to make and simple to use.

MATERIALS

1. Aluminum cathode made from a disposableweighing dish or soda can bottom (use sandpaper to remove any can liner/coating material)

2. Plastic battery holder for two "D" cells (avail-able from Radio Shack)

3. Screw driver with plastic handle

4. Small lengths of copper wire

5. Small alligator clip (available from RadioShack)

6. Ashless filter paper, 5.5 cm diameter.

7. Electrolyte solution, 2% NaCl in deionizedwater

8. Two "D" cell batteries

DIRECTIONS

1. Cut off the tip of the screwdriver with a hack-saw leaving a flat-edged rod. File this surfacesmooth. The screwdriver could be used "as is"but the flat edge tends to minimize scratching andprovides somewhat better contact with thesample.

2. Solder one end of a copper wire to the screw-driver. This is the anode. The other end of thewire is connected to the (+) terminal of the bat-tery holder, the anode.

3. Solder an alligator clip to another piece of cop-per wire. This clip is attached to the aluminumcathode. The other end of the wire is attached tothe (-) terminal of the battery holder.

4. Put batteries in the battery holder when readyto use.

The finished apparatus is shown in Figure 1. Obvi-ously, numerous variations can be made such as add-ing an ammeter, using different sized batteries/hold-ers (Nordmann' uses a 1.5-volt dry cell), using dif-ferent metals for anodes/cathodes, using differentelectrolytes, etc.

*Microspec Analytical, 3352 128th Ave., Holland, MI, 49442

13

Figure 1: Electrographic apparatus showingcopper coin on an Al cathode before analysis

METHOD

1. Place a circle of filter paper moistened withelectrolyte on the aluminum cathode.

2. Place the sample to be tested which can be apiece of metal, coin, conductive mineral, or con-ductive powder on top of the paper.

3. Connect the alligator clip to the cathode.

4. To complete the connection firmly press thescrewdriver post onto the sample for 3-4 seconds.

Figure 2: After 4 seconds contact with theelectrodes, copper transferred to the filter paper

tested positive with 0.1% cuproine in ethanol

This should allow enough metal to be transferredto the filter paper for analysis (Figure 2).Microchemical tests for suspected metals can thenbe made using reagents commonly employed suchas dithizone, dimethylglyoxime, thioacetamide,etc. The filter paper discs can also be used inring-oven tests for further separation and identi-fication as described by Weisz (2). Changing thephysical size of the anode/cathode may be nec-essary to test large objects such as lamps, stat-ues, etc., but the basic principle remains the same.

REFERENCES

1. Nordmann, J. Qualitative Testing and InorganicChemistry, J. Wiley, N,Y., 1957, pp. 446-7.

2. Weisz, H., Microanalysis by the Ring Oven Tech-nique, Pergamon Press, 1961, pp. 17-119.

3. Fritz, H., Z. Anal. Chem, 78, 418 (1929).

14 µ • NOTES JULY 1999

Julian D. Corrington

and the Bausch & Lomb Model R Microscope

John Gustav Deily*

The name Julian D. Corrington and Bausch &Lomb's Model R microscope for youngpeople and other beginners are forever linked

in the history of amateur microscopy in America.Members of the State Microscopical Society of Illi-nois (SMSI) will be familiar with at least one ofCorrington's books, probably Adventures with theMicroscope or Working with the Microscope, but areless likely to be familiar with the elusive and scarceModel R microscope, even though it is illustrated andfeatured in Adventures with the Microscope. Duringthe depression years of the early 1930's in America,Bausch & Lomb Optical Company of Rochester, NewYork, produced several smaller microscopes for ama-teurs, including the New Gem and the Model R.Bausch & Lomb turned to a local talent, Julian D.Corrington to write several booklets to accompanythe new microscopes. Corrington was, at the time,employed by Ward's Natural Science Establishment,also in Rochester, New York, as Editor of their Bulle-tin and catalogs.

But this part of the history and biography is,perhaps, best told in Corrington's own words. TheNew York Microscopical Society (NYMS) celebratedits Centennial shortly after SMSI celebrated its Cen-tennial (1869-1969). In the year following the NYMSCentennial, Hal Bowser, who was Editor of NYMS'sexcellent newsletter, invited Corrington, who was thenliving in Florida, to update the membership througha "Greetings From An Old Friend." In the invitation,Hal Bowser referred to Corrington as the person who"practically invented amateur microscopy." I have acopy of the response, but do not know in which issueof the NYMS Newsletter it was published because aflooded basement destroyed all of my copies of thenewsletter. Corrington, in responding to his contri-butions to amateur microscopy, written when he was86 years old, had this to say:

*McCrone Research Institute, Chicago, Illinois

At the time of my first articles on this subjectI was, at age 40, head of the microscope slide de-partment and editor of their Bulletin and catalogsfor Ward's Natural Science Establishment at Roch-ester, NY. I had written my Ph.D. thesis in zool-ogy, at Cornell University, and had produced a fewscientific papers, but I was by no means what couldbe called a "writer." Then the Bausch & LombOptical Company asked me to do some bookletsto accompany sales of their small New Gem andlater Model R microscopes for young people andother amateurs and beginners. These bookletsproved so successful that finally they authorizedme to do a full-sized book (455 pages) Adventureswith the Microscope, 1934. As I was under full-time employment at Ward's, I had to write and re-write and rewrite this large volume nights, week-ends, and holidays. But at length it was done, andI had learned to write by writing—and that's thebest advice any aspiring author could receive.

Since that time my bibliography shows a to-tal of 450 publications, including eight of booklength, the best known being McGraw-Hill vol-umes, Working with the Microscope, 1941, the (sic)Exploring with Your Microscope, 1957, the latteralso having a Serbo-Croat translation published inBeograd in 1972. My longest series of monthlyarticles ran in Modern Mechanix (later MechanixIllustrated), Leisure, Practical Microscopy, Bios,and above all Nature Magazine, to which I was acontributor for 22 years. These years also saw theformation of the American Society of AmateurMicroscopy (A.S.A.M.) for which I did thousandsof hours of dogged but very rewarding labor.

Before coming to Rochester I had, like thegreat majority of people, associated the microscopeonly with the biological laboratory in high school,college, and medical schools and hospitals, but my

15

ADVENTURES

WITH THEMICROSCOPEBy

:JULIAN CORRINGTON - D

connections with Ward's and Bausch & Lomb soondisabused me of such a narrow view. For magni-fying instruments of many types have a widespreaduse in industries of many sorts—paper, textiles,paints, glass, rubber, leather, and so on through along list. And so my aim in all of these series ofbooks and magazine articles has been to start thebeginner off with easily prepared slides: I advisethem to mount a postage stamp, a piece of news-print, a small square of silk, or cotton cloth clippedfrom the hem of a dress, grains of sand, a finger-print—and only later to take up the much morecomplicated procedures of fixing, sectioning,mounting, and staining of, say, a section of frogliver or cat intestine. I urge newcomers to

copy to start with fundamentals and build up gradu-ally into the numberless fields of use for the mi-croscope. To this end, I employ simple language,hoping that the beginner will establish a solid foun-dation for his or her later specialized work. It isfor this system and approach that I believe I canclaim any originality in my writings.

In 1944, I came to the University of Miami,where I have taught mainly premedical courses—comparative anatomy, histology, and embryol-ogy—retiring in 1962. Now, at age 86 I am enjoy-ing senior citizen leisure, and am happy in the factthat many former students, readers, and friends tellme I have been of help to them in their careers.

Figure 1: The Adventures with the Microscope, published in 1934

16 µ • NOTES JULY 1999

WORKING

ICROSCOPE

How to use the microscope andits accessories for fascinating

adventures In the sciences

JOHN GUSTAV DELLY

The Adventures with the Microscope (Figure1) mentioned by Corrington was published in 1934.In this volume are illustrations of the New Gem mi-croscope and the Model R microscope as well as aphotomicrographic apparatus being used with theModel R.

Working with the Microscope (Figure 2) waspublished in 1941. The microscope shown being usedon the dust jacket is not one of the "baby" micro-scopes; it looks more like the Model H ProfessionalLaboratory Microscope, which in 1938 was being soldfor $83.

Exploring with Your Microscope (Figure 3)was a much later book, published in 1957.

One of the favorite chapters in Adventureswith the Microscope for many readers is the last chap-ter, "Sherlock Holmes Buys a Microscope"; it is in

narrative form, as related by Dr. Watson. A numberof Bausch & Lomb microscopes are illustrated here,including the Model FFSB student monocular micro-scope, the Comparison Microscope used by documentexaminers, the Bullet Comparison Microscope (withand without the photomicrographic apparatus), andthe AKW-5 Wide-Field Binocular Microscope. Thischapter also illustrates a fingerprint card, and givesan introduction to fingerprint characteristics andmatching.

By 1957, Adventures with the Microscope hadalready been out of print for a number of years and soit was deemed advisable to come out with a new work,which in general plan was to be an abridged and re-vised version of the 1934 work. Some of the mate-rial and illustrations were taken from the more tech-nical Working With the Microscope (1941), but the

Figure 2: Working with the Microscope, Figure 3: Exploring with Your Microscope,

published in 1941 published in 1957

17

bulk of the new book, Exploring With Your Micro-scope, was new in scope and purpose. The last chap-ter in Exploring With Your Microscope parallels thelast chapter in Adventures with the Microscope in thatit is titled, "Adventuring with Sherlock Holmes." Thechapter opens with a quotation from Arthur ConanDoyle's "Adventure of Shoscombe Old Place"; spe-cifically, where Sherlock Holmes "had been bendingfor a long time over a low-power microscope," andthen invites Watson to observe the glue, epithelialscales, dust, and threads from a tweed coat. A won-derful photomicrograph at 11X is provided to illus-trate the field of view. The fingerprint information ishere, but the comparison microscope illustration hasbeen updated. There is also a photomicrograph of abat hair (741X).

The Model R microscope is scarce becauseduring the early 1930's depression years when themicroscope sold for $21 with a copy of Adventureswith the Microscope, not too many people could af-ford it, and by the end of the decade, Bausch & Lombhad already converted over to the manufacture of bin-oculars and other optical equipment for the military;World War II had already started in Europe. Bausch& Lomb never resumed the manufacture of the ModelR after the war.

The Model R microscope came in a beauti-

ful walnut carrying case (Figure 4) together with someblank slides, and a prepared slide of a flea—the prepa-ration featured in the Adventures with the Microscope.The front of the walnut carrying case had a stenciledlabel giving the model and manufacturer's name (Fig-ure 5).

The microscope itself was capable of a rangeof magnifications through use of a drawtube (-3-1/4"), a divisible objective, and an optional low-powereyepiece substituted for the standard 10X. With fully-closed drawtube (Figure 6) the magnification is 75X-150X; with 1" extension the magnification is 125X-250X; with fully-extended drawtube (Figure 7) themagnification is 150X-300X. Fully opened, thebodytube is -7-3/8". The image quality fully extendedis not very good because the maximum useful mag-nification based on the numerical aperture is exceeded,but use of the lower-magnification eyepiece improvesthe image quality.

A very interesting feature of this microscopeis that the pillar and base separate from the stage andbodytube in the same way that Bausch & Lomb's andAmerican Optical Company's stereomicroscopesseparate from their transmitted light bases for use withincident light. The mirror could be removed fromthe base and mounted suprastage in a hole providedto supply reflected light for opaque objects, such as

Figure 4: Bausch & Lomb Model R microscope with walnut carrying case

18 µ • NOTES JULY 1999

JOHN GUSTAV DELLY

Figure 5: Front of walnut carrying case illustrating stenciled label giving model and manufacturer's name

Figure 6: Bausch & Lomb Model R microscope Figure 7: Bausch U Lomb Model R microscopewith fully closed draw tube with fully opened draw tube

19

NEW GEMMicroscope

A

Big Value at LoCost-New Model

Photos ThroughYour Microscope

Made Easy, Simple

Figure 8: A 1930's ad in Popular Science Monthlyfor the Bausch & Lomb Model R microscope

metal surfaces, postage stamps, insects, etc.The Model R microscope was extensively ad-

vertised (Figure 8) in the 1930's, especially in thepages of Popular Science Monthly, which also ranarticles of interest to the amateur microscopist. Notein the ad in Figure 8 that the New Gem Microscope,together with walnut case and "20,000-word book,"sold for $14.50. The Model R microscope, togetherwith "solid walnut case and 455-page book"—Ad-ventures with the Microscope—sold for $21.00. Thephotomicrographic outfit, using 127 film, cost $12.00.The Gem Science Kit with microscope and 49-pieceportable laboratory cost $9.50.

The three books mentioned are not scarce,but they are coming on the market less often, and thecost has gone up; Adventures with the Microscope isavailable in good used condition from a local dealerfor $65.00. The microscopes themselves are verydifficult to find, especially in mint condition. I foundmine in an antique mall, and I know of only one other.These are the only ones I have seen in three decadesof looking. Prices are commensurate with condition,scarcity, and knowledge of the dealer/seller.

Coincidentally, Charles Gellis has written awonderful article on the technical aspects of the Gem,New Gem, and Model R microscopes, which can befound in the Spring 1998 issue of The Journal of theMicroscope Historical Society, Vol. 6, #1 (Editor:Manuel del Cerro, M.D., 14 Tall Acres Dr., Pittsford,New York. Tel. 716-381-4658 (H); fax 716-244-5667). I recommend this Society and journal to any-one interested in any aspect of older microscopes,related books, and accessories. The ads and illustra-tions in Charles Gellis' article are different from thosehere, and I highly recommend it to those wishing toread more about these wonderful old instrumentsmade for amateur microscopists.

Older members of the State MicroscopicalSociety of Illinois may recall, and newer memberswill be interested to know, that JulianD. Corrington was recipient of theHonorary Award of the State Micro-scopical Society of Illinois for his con-tributions to amateur microscopy; theaward was made in the year SkipPalenik was SMSI President.

20 I" • NOTES JULY 1999

CORRECTION

The drawings that should appear in Joseph G. Barabe's article, A Microscopical Approach to

V

Figure 3. Skipping Figure 4. Jogging

Want Ads

Wanted to buy: 4-to-6 order quartz wedge for Nikon SKE pol. scope. Contact Frank S. Welsh at

(tel) 610.525.3564

fswelsh@belatlantic.net (fax)610.525.1333

Wanted to buy: Strain Free objective (Zeiss or equiv.) 20-50X, N.A. 0.5 or greater

Contact Richard H. Lee at

(tel) 630.257.7339 gentlei@enteract.com

21

3352 128th AvenueHolland, MI 49424-9263

Phone: 616-399-7400Fax: 616-399-6185

E-mail: info@mspec. cornInternet: www.mspec.comMICROSPEC

ANALYTICAL

Case History #M-368Failure of BlackPaint Coating

A consumer productsmanufacturer experienceda premature coatingfailure, and suspected thatthe wrong paint carriersystem was used during thefinishing operation. Usingmicro pyrolysis techniqueswith FTIR microscopy,Microspec Analytical wasable to match the coatingfrom the failed part to oneof several possibly used atthe facility.

Case History #M-519White Corrosion on

Hinges

An office furnituremanufacturer noticedwhite deposits developingon hinges inside one oftheir products. Opticalmicroscopy combined withmicrochemical analysesshowed the deposit to bezinc oxide. The projectwas completed in a mannerof minutes.

Case History #M-947Particles in Powder

Coatings

A metal finisherexperienced occasionalfiber contamination onfinished parts. Though apowder coating wassuspected as the source,no visible contaminantswere obvious. MicrospecAnalytical was able toisolate and identifyseveral types of fibers byoptical and FTIRmicroscopy.

Case History #M-699Industrial FireInvestigation

Optical microscopicexamination of debris fromthe source of a fire at afurniture manufacturershowed pigmentary ironoxide. Micro extractionrevealed a combustible oil.Sparks from a welding torchapparently ignited acontainer of dried woodstain that still had enoughoil content to start a fire.

SMSI Treasurer's Report - 1998

Susan N. Young*

Income Expenses

Dues $582.00 Meeting fliers, postage $703.01

Interest $294.64 Meeting refreshments $1,388.60

1998 Auction (receipts-expenses) $3,966.50 Meetings, honoraria $600.00

Silent Auction (Amateur Night) $166.00 Award medals $2,000.00

Workshop net (receipts-expenses) $166.66 Picnic $75.00

Meeting receipts for refreshments $1,077.00 p.-Notes, preparation $980.00

1997 Auction (late receipts) $275.00 µ-Notes, printing $2,087.00

1997 Silent Auction (late receipts) $41.00 µ-Notes, envelopes & postage $302.08

Pin sales $110.00 Commemorative pins $1,175.00

Members' directory printing $330.00

Prize for Amateur Night $25.00

Errors found in 1997 records $175.03

Total Receipts $6,678.80 Total Expenses $9,840.72

Opening Balance $14,821.77

Ending Balance $11,659.85

*Corn Products International/Moffett Technical Center, 6500 Archer Rd., Bedford Park, IL 60501-1933

23

Emile Chamot:The Man Behind the SMSI Award

Richard Hoyt Lee*

Who is the person for whom we name theannual SMSI award for excellence in mi-croscopy in the USA? Emile Monnin

Chamot ("Chammy") was a native of Buffalo, NewYork, and enrolled in Cornell University in 1887. Hewas awarded the B.S. degree in 1891 and did his se-nior work under G.C. Caldwell, the first head of theChemistry Department.

Caldwell possessed two light microscopeswhich he applied to the study of various crystallinephases he had prepared. Chamot was appointed in-structor in 1891 and continued graduate studies withDr. Caldwell, qualifying for the doctorate degree in1897. His interests in the organic aspects of micros-copy and toxicology were stimulated by Caldwell anda classmate, Lomax. Although Chamot then traveledto Europe to work with Behrens at Delft, he becameperhaps Behrens' first pupil of inorganic qualitativemicroscopical analysis.

Upon returning to Cornell as assistant pro-fessor, Chamot initiated courses in chemical micros-copy, for which Cornell was to become a center.Chamot also rendered to the community valuable ser-vice as a consultant in sanitary chemistry and properwater purification treatment. In 1910 he was pro-moted to Professor, teaching courses in microscopy,toxicology, and sanitary chemistry. When sanitarychemistry and toxicology were transferred to otherdepartments, he concentrated on microscopy and

metallography. Chamot published the pioneeringbook, Elementary Chemical Microscopy, in 1915 andanother book with C. Mason, Handbook of ChemicalMicroscopy, in 1930. He was instrumental in plan-ning the instruction and building the microscopy labo-ratories for the Department of Chemistry at Cornell.When the bachelor of chemistry degree was estab-lished in 1911, microscopical methods were made apart of the curriculum. During World War l, Profes-sor Chamot carried out an extensive study of explo-sive primers for the Ordinance Department.

Chammy loved the outdoors and enjoyedhunting and fishing for trout. He always walked tothe laboratory and was remembered as a small, quietand friendly person. Because of his enormous storeof knowledge, he was in demand as an expert con-sultant. After 53 years of association with Cornellfrom student to Emeritus Professor, he died in 1950 .Only his modesty would prevent him from being cred-ited with creating the field of chemical microscopyand "preaching" its value.

REFERENCES

Laubengayer, A.W., Chem. Dept. Newsletter, BakerLaboratory: Cornell University, Ithaca, New York.

Mason, C.W., Industrial and Engineering Chemistry(Analytical Edition), June 15, 1939, 11 (6), 341-3.

*Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL 60439

24

A Microscopist and His Shadows

Leo Barish*

My career in microscopy began as a childwhen I received a gift of a rudimentarypolarizing Gilbert microscope. I found

most fascinating viewing subjects such as pond wa-ter; thus the microscope awakened an interest in sci-ence. However, as years went by, my interest in sci-ence waned and shifted towards music; I wanted tobecome a professional musician, both classical andpopular. I earned a relatively good salary for a youngkid by playing clarinet and saxophone in bands. Thisinterest continued through high school, and I hadhopes of studying music in college. However, I didn'thave enough money and would have to depend on ascholarship to attend such a school which, unfortu-nately, fell through. Although a major disappoint-ment, the predicament awakened me to the realiza-tion that a career in music was not really a practicalprofession for me; and I decided to pursue my sec-ondary interest: science.

I could only afford to attend a state collegeand live at home. Under these circumstances, I stud-ied textile chemistry and graduated with a B.S. fromthe only college available to me, New Bedford Tex-tile Institute that eventually became University ofMassachusetts, Dartmouth. One of the formal coursesoffered there was microscopy. I then attended gradu-ate school on a fellowship at Lowell TechnologicalInstitute that eventually became University of Mas-sachusetts, Lowell. A course given to me there wasin TEM. I received an M.S. in Textile Chemistry fromLowell. Nevertheless, throughout my college educa-tion I played in bands which was very helpful tosupplement my meager income.

Upon graduation from Lowell, my friendlydraft board finally caught up with me, and I was in-ducted into the U.S. Army Chemical Corps. Luckily,I was not shipped to Korea but actually enjoyed myassignment in England where I lived in Oxford.

Upon my discharge, I accepted a position asa Research Associate with Fabric Research Labora-tories, later to become Albany International ResearchCo. I was involved in many projects, one of whichwas the study of the morphology of polymers andfibers which required quite a little work with PLM(measurement of birefringence, growing spherulites,hot stage work, etc.). This subject was taught to meby Freddy Khoury and I became proficient at it. Al-though I was not the principle microscopist of thelab, I took many photomicrographs, not only for myprojects, but some for my colleagues as well.

John Facq was the principle microscopist atthe lab and he was superb. His specialty was metalshadowing for light microscopy to exhibit surfaces.Although he did not teach this procedure to me di-rectly, I was well aware and appreciated the metalshadowing technique as applied to light microscopysince I had learned an analogous method in the TEMcourse that I took in graduate school.

Shortly after John left the lab, I was calledinto the director's office. He told me of his decisionto assign me as a dedicated microscopist to the lab.At the time I was not at all pleased with this assign-ment since I felt that I would be "pigeon-holed" intoa narrow restricted field, acting merely as service tothe lab and thus would be precluded from challeng-ing innovative work. How wrong I was! Working inthis position I quickly realized that I was really notthat good a microscopist; therefore, to improve my-self I read extensively on this subject, practicallymemorizing Shillaber's Photomicography. In addi-tion, I practiced and experimented diligently on ap-plying metal shadowing techniques to light micros-copy and, in doing so, innovated valuable variations.This elegant method was most useful for displayingsurfaces, and I still find it surprising that it was not aspopular in the field as it should have been.

*Albany International Research Co, 777 West Street, P.O. Box 9114, Mansfield, MA 02048-9114

25

Although the results of metal shadowing weregenerally very effective, it did suffer from a few prob-lems: productivity was low, the depth of field wasshallow, and it did take a great deal of skill to do itwell. The advent of the scanning electron microscopecorrected the above problems and eventually madethe metal shadowing technique rather obsolescent.For several years I tried to convince management topurchase an SEM until we finally got one. Althoughrelatively inexpensive, our SEM was one of the fewavailable at that time that worked well at low accel-erating voltages and so was especially valuable forlow atomic number, low density subjects, such as tex-tiles, which also had a high tendency to charge.

Although my encounter with SEM has beengenerally satisfactory, I found shortcomings presentthat in some ways SEM was inferior to the metal shad-owing methods applied to light microscopy. Throughthe years many methods were produced to correctthese deficiencies, and I have published or made pre-sentations on most of these.

The background of some subjects was oftenobtrusive with SEM which led me to develop "BlackHole" techniques which largely eliminated the prob-lem. Another obstacle with SEM was that the topo-graphical contrast was low in many subjects, certainlyinferior to that obtainable with metal shadowing tech-niques. By augmenting the backscatter mode, I couldlargely match the contrast of SEM to that of metalshadowing.

When imaging textiles with SEM, severalproblems can be encountered, principally chargingand bright edge effects. The problems were analyzedand were largely corrected by the use of a low accel-erating voltage which was not as popular years agoas it is today. Another problem with SEM noted waswith the use of Polaroid type 55 P/N film. When thefilm was developed for the time recommended, in-version occurred on the negative at low exposure lev-els: A negative image actually became positive. Bymerely increasing the developing time, satisfactory

negatives resulted. Mounting some specimens onstuds for SEM can often be difficult; methods em-ploying the common glue gun were developed andfound to be very convenient.

It is often advantageous to display micro-graphs in color. Since images in the SEM are basi-cally in black and white, it is sometimes beneficial tocolorize them. Today this is commonly done withPhotoshop or similar software. Years ago I devel-oped a method to colorize SEM's using photographicmethods employing filters and double exposing.

A problem encountered with SEM is that theminimum standard magnification is often too high.To further lower magnification, I found it sometimesnecessary to revert to metal shadowing techniques orsputter coated surfaces with tent lighting. Severalmethods were developed to lower the minimum mag-nification with the SEM. These included fabricatingphotomontages, extending the normal working dis-tance, or adapting the ECP (Electron Channeling Pat-tern) mode for imaging. Advantages of the lattermethod is that an almost unlimited depth of field iscreated with a magnification of less than 1X.

In addition to overcoming problems with theSEM, I have applied this instrument to study the struc-ture of natural fibers including medulated wool, coir(coconut ) fiber, and hog bristles. The degradation ofpolypropylene fibers by sunlight was reported in aseries of papers. Even the study of the intricate struc-ture of a butterfly wing was astounding.

I have also published on the applications oflight microscopy. Among these are: a study of fail-ure in tire cord; the development of a stereo-macro-scopic technique to study coatings on cotton fabrics;a study of chromogenic film for microscopy; and theapplication of sputtercoating and tent lighting. In ad-dition, smoke and soot were found to be useful forsurface enhancement in light microscopy; and by us-ing the Bertrand Lens, the minimum magnificationof a light microscope can be lowered considerablywith an almost limitless depth of field.

26 µ • NOTES JULY 1999

Leo Barish

1999 State Microscopical Society of IllinoisEmile M. Chamot Award Recipient