A pair of black leather high top athletic shoes, c. 1920s, photographed in three ways to capture all of their characteristics.

In my last blog installment, I announced the 2022 Digital Photography Project that is run with the assistance of the Government of Canada’s Young Canada Works in Heritage Organizations employment program. Since that blog was posted, we have been busy capturing images of artefacts in the collection. In this blog and upcoming blogs, I will go over some of the details involved in taking the actual picture, processing the image files, and getting the images saved safely to the right place.

The preparation to photograph starts with selecting the artefacts in the storage area. Having been trained in the principles of safe artefact handling, the project team’s artefact handler Catharine Solomon gathers a trolley. She has selected objects that are going into the new exhibition All Dolled Up: Fashioning Cultural Expectations. A few of the items in that exhibition haven’t yet been photographed, and this needs to be done before they are installed as we will need documentation photos for reference while the exhibition is up. So Catharine pulls the catalogue datasheets for the objects flagged for photography (note the orange tags), and collects the artefacts from the storage area, placing them on the trolley. The photography room is just down the hall, and there she has a workspace set up with space to prepare the artefacts. Preparing the artefact most often requires the removal of storage mounts.

With the artefact prepared for photography, she places it on the shooting surface, centering it because the shooting surface and seamless backdrop are quite narrow at only 6 feet wide. Now the image capture begins!

Using a digital single lens reflex (DSLR) camera -- a Canon EOS 5D Mark IV – we capture the images in RAW format, saving each shot to the memory card and to the computer workstation, to which the camera is tethered. Shooting on the Manual setting, and using the 50mm range on the zoom lens, we shoot for maximum depth-of-field keeping the f-stop at f22. The Canon camera has complementary software that allows for remote shooting, so we never have to touch the camera and risk ‘shake’ of the image. The camera also allows for Live View shooting that gives a preview of what the camera is seeing. This large preview displays on the computer workstation. This feature gives the three of us the ability to see what is being captured while we remain a safe 2-metres apart for COVID-19 safety.

The remote shooting program open on the left screen, and the Live View shooting program in operation on the right screen.

Our lighting setup is simple. We have four 18” lamp heads on tripod stands. Each lamp has a nylon diffuser on its face. The lamps are fitted with cool compact bulbs, a necessity in our very small, not-well ventilated photography room. We arrange the lighting so that two lamps illuminate the backdrop and two lamps illuminate the artefact.

As Christine Spenuk, project photographer, checks for lighting, exposure, focus and composition issues, she captures a few test shots of the artefact. Getting all of the settings perfect for each shot takes time and attention. Both Catharine and Christine check for the quality of the image and even lighting. They keep a logbook of the artefacts they have shot that includes a list of the shots per artefact, the composition of each shot, and the file name of the best shot. This logbook will help with the later steps in processing. The catalogue datasheet that stays with the artefact is also updated with a penciled notation of the date it was photographed.

The final step is to check the composition to see if the shot is showing the most important characteristics of the artefact. Depending on the artefact, curators and researchers may want to see a specific aspect of the shoe emphasized in the shot, perhaps the heel, the closure mechanism, the toe shape, the silhouette or the vamp. Finding a composition and shooting angle that best represents the shoe in an overall shot is sometimes very challenging. This is where creativity comes into play.

After capturing the overall shot, we take at least two additional shots: a profile and a sole shot. So often the sole of the shoe is not seen, and the sole can give a good deal of information, so this in an important shot. If there are finer details on the shoe that should be captured, we will do additional shots. For very close detail shots, we change the lens on the camera to a 100mm macro lens and shoot with an f-stop of f/32, for the best depth-of-field.

After all of the angles have been shot, the artefact is ready to be prepped to go back into storage. The storage mounts that were initially removed are put back into place, and the artefact is placed on the trolley for the short trip back to the storage room.

In the next blog, I will talk about the image file processing that comes next in the process.

This project has been made possible in part by the Government of Canada’s Young Canada Works in Heritage Organizations employment program.

Suzanne Petersen, Collections Manager

I am retiring this summer and thought my last conservation treatment should connect to the first one. Thirty-four years ago I was hired to work on the women’s 18th century collection. It was a unique moment, as there was a BSM collection but no exhibition space. Myself and another conservator conserved the footwear that was most in need of intervention.

These shoes were purchased in 1982 from a dealer specializing in historic clothing and accessories. While the embroidered silk faille vamps were very pretty, it was obvious someone had fiddled significantly with the quarters on both shoes. Remnants of the original silk faille were glued to a figured silk satin. Random embroidery elements some original, a couple with a completely different aesthetic, were also glued to the replacement fabric.

The flower on the left is a completely different style than the finely executed flower on the right.

The adhesive was disfiguring and damaging. It was an orangey-yellow colour, composed of brittle islands on the silk, as well as the leather lining to which it had been attached. The hard patches of adhesive were cutting through the desiccated fibres of the remaining faille. In several of areas the adhesive had dried out causing losses of embroidery, as witnessed by adhesive stains to which nothing was attached. The original silk ribbon binding was extant along the top edges of the tongue extensions but completely missing along the tops of the quarters. It had been replaced during the previous ‘restoration’.

After discussing these issues with the curator it was decided the figured silk satin should be replaced with a silk faille, the adhesive residue should be removed as much as possible and the replacement ribbon would be reused. Solvents were tested to determine which one would be best at removing the disfiguring adhesive. The topline ribbon was removed first, by clipping the stitches with a pair of curved blade scissors to prevent nicking the original fabric. Then the adhesive securing the original fabric to the replacement needed to be reduced in order to detach these components, and finally the quarters were removed.

Left: adhesive stains Right: removing adhesive residue from embroidery

The original faille was ivory but over time developed a very faint brown discolouration. The new faille, and hair silk for sewing, were dyed with tea to impart an aged appearance. The most complete replacement quarter was used as a template from which to cut the new quarters. It was lasted into the sole seam with a reversible adhesive and a spatula, taking into consideration that the weave of the new fabric needed to match the direction of the weave of the original remnants. The quarter was secured to the leather lining with tiny clips and rare earth magnets as anchors. The new fabric was sewn with hair silk and a fine beading needle that was passed through existing stitch holes along the topline.

Finding a replacement ribbon similar in weave and width to the 18th century ribbon is virtually impossible, at least I have yet to find a suitable source. The topline binding that came with the shoes was sewn back in place using the same technique as for the new quarters (hair silk, beading needle).

The treatment has stabilized the original fabric to prevent further damage, resulting in a shoe that looks more in keeping with the intention of the shoemaker.

This summer I am joined by Emma Pakstas and Eric Watters, both graduate students in Toronto Metropolitan University’s Photography Preservation and Collections Management program at the Creative School. Their work with me on the Digital Photography Project here at the Bata Shoe Museum is funded in part by the Young Canada Works in Heritage Organizations program, Government of Canada.

Shooting in high resolution digital format with a Canon E0S 5D Mark IV, the photos produced during the project are publishable quality, allowing the museum to expand its reach to visitors, researchers and online visitors.

After the initial two weeks of intensive training in our photography process and in artefact handling procedures, the three of us have started to work through this summer’s shot list. Starting with a large stockings and sock collection we acquired in 2018, we are now photographing the Museum’s shoe art holdings which includes works by Marion Borgelt, Marilyn Levine, and Victor Guillen, to name a few. After that segment is done, we’ll move on to shoot new acquisitions.

In this video you can see Emma gently moving this pair of black silk stockings into place on the photo backdrop.

Emma Pakstas is trained as the Artefact Handler for the project and is tasked with the safe and proper movement of artefacts. She plans the shot-order and the movement of the artefacts from the storage rooms to the photography studio where she prepares the objects for photography by removing storage mounts. After placing an artefact on the photo backdrop, she works with the Photographer to perfect the composition of the shot, moving the artefact slightly in order to capture its most photographic angle, and it’s most important features.

Eric records the details in the logbook and selects the photo for processing.

Eric Watters is trained as the Artefact Photographer for the project. His work involves lighting, composition, exposure, focus and depth of field. He sets up the photography equipment for each shot and maintains the equipment, making sure he captures each object at its best angle, allowing its most important features to be captured. He also tracks all of the shots in a journal, a helpful reference for the image processing steps that follow.

After the actual shooting is done, the team will process, resize, format and renamed the image files. The metadata for each image is collected in an excel sheet. Finally, the images will be uploaded to the Museum’s collections management database, along with the metadata. The final step for the three of us on the project team is to update the data sheet hard copies for each artefact. These data sheets are kept next to every single object in the artefact storage room, for quick reference. It’s a great system that merges the digital with the analog, making information accessibility very straightforward for the whole curatorial team.

This project has been made possible in part by the Government of Canada’s Young Canada Works in Heritage Organizations employment program.

Suzanne Petersen, Collections Manager