RESTORE IT OR NOT?

[Nemo]

All,

Let's say a guy discovered a piece of vintage diving equipment that was fairly famous for being used in, say, Sea Hunt or maybe 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea.

Let's take it one step further and say that the item is in extremely poor condition: badly torn up, missing some parts, etc. But still: a valuable entertainment media artifact and, potentially, something that could be repaired and dived again.

What do you think should be done with it: Restore it, or not?

If you think it should be left as is: why?

If you think it should be restored: why, and to what degree?

If restored to servicable condition: should it be dived again, or preserved as a museum display?

Thanks. Your thoughts and opinions will be greatly appreciated.

VBR,

Pat

[swimjim]

What is the end use? If it's in my personal collection, it needs to be brought to dive able condition. Otherwise, what's the point?(IMHO) I dive every reg I own. If I came across one of those 25th anniversary golden Royals, I'd dive that sucker at Lake Wazee just for shock value. I'd go through it first of course. Museum piece? Needs to be restored to accurate in use condition, not necessarily dive able as it's only for viewing,not diving. Just my dos centavos.

Jim

[sea.explorer]

This is a good question and something I have some experience with.

As a general rule I try to find out if the deterioration is the result of its original use or from years of neglect in storage. If the damage/deterioration is part of the story behind the piece I leave it be. For example I have a suit that was worn by Jacques Cousteau and it has stains all over the back. At first I thought that It was from poor storage but as it turns out it was from a dive where they were making plastic castings underwater and the plastic ended up getting all over the equipment including this suit. I now know what episode of the Undersea World the suit can be seen and I have also found photos of Cousteau wearing the suit. This is a great case for no restoration. Similarly I would never think of rechroming a well used Cousteau team reg.

On the other hand I have a set of Cousteau Tanks that were in a fire years after they were retired. The straps melted an the tanks were stained. I replaced the webbing with new webbing (original Spiro webbing a perfect match to the originals) and cleaned the tanks but stopped short of repainting the tanks to make them like new.

My third criteria is to determine weather or not the restoration will stop further decay and preserve the item for future generations. This is common in the fine art world where priceless works of are are painstakingly restored and retouched. Many items if not restored will perish for ever. This is the easiest call for me. Restore! I have done this from time to time with Cousteau wet suits, repairing tears and delaminating yellow seam tape.

As for diving with original items. I have original Cousteau equipment that I have restored to diveable condition and used. My judgment call here is will the use of the equipment further historical preservation or benefit the greater cause more so than the deterioration of the equipment. I think the opportunity for people seeing equipment in use is a priceless experience with a greater impact than simply displaying. That being said I typically don't dive with truly one of a kind items. Also by experiencing the equipment first hand I can relate my experience to the broader history more effectively. Not to mention it's fun ;D

I'm not sure if this is helpful but it is the basic process I use with my Cousteau items.

-Ryan

[Nemo]

Good points Jim and Ryan. Thanks.

Still interested in hearing from others. Anyone else got two cents they want to pitch into the pot?

[duckbill]

Basically, what Ryan said.

If it was one-of-a-kind, then leave it alone. If it was one of several on the set and in the show, then probably still leave it alone. If it was one of hundreds used during production, then maybe restore it- especially if it was only used off-set.

My inclination would be to leave it as-is if it was a piece of historical value due to rarity or was, as may be in this case, used in a prominent place and/or by a prominent person.

I also collect railroad antiques. I have several journal box covers from the Central Pacific Railroad Co. that were dug up along the original grade in Nevada. They date from the 1860s, during the construction of the first transcontinental line, through the 1870s. They look pretty good, but I noticed each time I picked them up to look at them a few more flakes of iron oxide would crumble off. I hated to have to do it, but in the name of preservation I wire wheeled the loose stuff off, treated the iron with a rust neutralizer, and coated them in Varathane. I really would have liked to have kept them in their original state, as found, but not having an environmentally controlled cabinet I did the best thing I could and I don't regret it. This is a case of preservation though, not restoration.

I'd need more information on your piece to say one way or the other what I would do, but I'd tend toward leaving it alone. Let the myriads of similar items that were in Diver Schmoe's closet get the restorations for use.

[JohnA]

One other way to look at this, if it is a mechanical item, is to restore and use it. Much like an vintage automobile, would a collector leave a 66 vet or a Stroop Bronco in it’s aged condition or rebuild it to original condition? Sure and all original 66 vet is valuable but one that is in rough shape and then properly restored is almost as valuable. Its not art work. Just one opinion.

John

[seakrakken]

If it was a prop used in a movie or TV series and my intent were to use it in a static display I would leave it in "as found" condition. Thats my $0.02 worth.

[duckbill]

nemo said:

All,

Let's say a guy discovered a piece of vintage diving equipment that was fairly famous for being used in, say, Sea Hunt or maybe 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea.

Let's take it one step further and say that the item is in extremely poor condition: badly torn up, missing some parts, etc. But still: a valuable entertainment media artifact and, potentially, something that could be repaired and dived again.

What do you think should be done with it: Restore it, or not?

The key words:
"valuable entertainment media artifact"

Some of the responders seem to be missing this point. He isn't talking about restoring the average piece of equipment.
And, he hasn't said it was a regulator to which he was referring

[Nemo]

Good points made by all, thank you. But I can see I need to pose the question with reference to a more definite scenario. So.....

Let's say we're talking about the movie THUNDERBALL. Remember the DPV's Largo's henchmen drove? There was maybe a half-dozen of them, and let's say they've become popular among movie fans and collectors.

A few DPV's had been saved for display by the Studio, but the rest were ordered destroyed and/or otherwise disposed of; there's only the few left; and they are in the hands of the Studio and one or two collectors.

Everybody thought that's all there was. Then, one turns up in a warehouse. It's one of those that was disposed of, and it's really hacked up bad; but somebody rescued it from the dumpster and stashed it. Now he's wondering what to do with it.

As a display in it's present condition, it looks worse than junk. But it's still the real thing; it has distinguishing markings that would enable people to identify that particulur one in the movie; and it could be restored and even dived again.

What would you do? Restore it and display / dive it?

Or, leave it looking like a victim from Texas Chainsaw Massacre , and display it with some kind of written explanation of how it got that way?

And in either case, why?

[Broxton Carol]

Why "restore" it at all. You have a piece of history that will be bastardized by a restoration that will mask all the patina that it has recieved over its life. All this is part of the aura of such a piece. So what if it has flaws. Thats the intrigue of such a piece, bringing the viewer to wonder how it got that way. If you go to an antique car show there are tons of restored cars that arent at all like they were in the first place, BUT the one that is beat up, with the original paint, or other parts is the one that always brings the interest. Dont erase its historic value by ruining it trying to make it look new. One thing I have found is nobody cares what you like. Thats your private thing. People can take it or leave it. If I like a broXton reg, others just have to have a royal, or a mistral, and thats fine. Or the other way around, the guy who has a royal thinks thats the only way to go, but I rarely use mine. Everyone has different tastes, but in this case you have an item of historic or intrinsic value. An item of vertu, or of value by association. Take care of it, display it as it is, and it will tell its own story to those "deep" enough to get the message! Put on a picture of your "find" so we can see it.

[JohnA]

Again, it is no different then if you found the original ASTON MARTIN DB5 from the movie in a junk yard full of water, dented with birds living in it, an auto buff would not think twice (if he/she had the money) of restoring it to original condition.

The hard part is restoring it to original condition using original parts, same paint numbers, ect....

John

[Broxton Carol]

Back in 1969, or 1970 I went to CARL GAGE dive center, at the north edge of KEY LARGO to look around. In there he had a lot of vintage stuff including one or two of those undersea vehicles used in that James Bond movie. They were in good shape with plexiglas cockpit covers I seem to remember. I dont know where they got them, but they explained they were from the movie. When the place sold out all their vintage stuff when they closed I wonder who got those items? I was told all the double hose items, were sold in lots, there on the parking lot, but you had to buy all of this, and all of that. One guy told me he bought banjos for a buck a piece. he had to buy a dozen or get none at all. The undersea transports were painted yellow I seem to remember. and they held two or more people, one guy sitting in front of the other. Thats been 37 years ago. I am Chucko and I approved this message.

[SeaRat]

It would be an easy call for me--restore the diving vehicle. In pieces, it does no one any good. I would want not only to restore it, but then to dive it to get a "feel" for how it works, and what the divers experienced in the movie when the "flew" it. As I recall, it is a "wing" design which looked very unique. If it is restorable, even with some blemishes, and can again be "flown," in my opinion it should be restored. I for one would probably pay some money for the privelege to "fly" it.

John

[Broxton Carol]

If a guy finds a paterson revolver, out in the desert, that is in only fair shape, but missing parts, and finish, to restore such an item would be to bastardize it, as it would not only be a false representation of the piece, but it would decrease its desireability as well as value. If you found one of these vehicles, why change it from what it is. Its story is in every particle of dirt and rust on it. I got an idea, lets restore the Titanic! Then go for a cruise. Some things are best left as is with their story to convey.

[sea.explorer]

Without seeing the condition first hand I would offer the following possibility:

Use the original to create an exact reproduction to display alongside the original. The reproduction could be functional or just to display. Making reproductions with access to original parts greatly simplifies the process. Odds are most of the components are off the shelf parts that may or may not still be available. Set/prop designers often take a path of low resistance due to time constraints and the temporary nature of their creations. This is a technique I have used as well.

This allows for a nice display or functional unit and preserves the history as well. It is always interesting when items are discarded. Cousteau chopped up and discarded countless peaces of equipment or just stole the parts for the next thing around the corner.



-Ryan