I'm sure I'm opening a can of worms here, but why not take the hook. I come from the Classic Motorbike world, where there is plenty of controversy regarding standards of restoration. Assuming you want to get the lamp working well, -that said, you then have the issue of cosmetics. Some may want to re-finish all the parts so they look new (maybe even better than when it came out of the factory). Some may prefer just to clean it up and 'detail' it thoroughly, leaving the patina of age. Some may go a step further by actually sealing in the patina'd look by spraying a clearcoat over the top, (fashionable in the US car scene). I'm interested in your responses.
I make a decision on the extent of intervention depending on the state of the lamp, but one thing I don’t do is clear-coat over “patina”. I usually clean the lamp and then decide what intervention is required. I prefer not to re-paint a lamp unless the original paint is in very bad condition. With plated tanks I clean off corrosion and polish. If the lamp has historical significance I will try to keep it close to a very clean “as found”; but on occasion I’ve had to resort to re-painting the tank to stop further rusting. Cheers Tony
Of course Jeff, I just thought it would be interesting to get people's opinions. For me, a lot depends on the condition of the lamp 'as received'.
I normally only re-finish lamps that are considered 'too far gone'. Those that the original finishes are completely beyond rescue. That way, I'd not worry too much about destroying the original finish, be it painted or plated. Otherwise, only a thorough clean-up. In my opinion, making it functional again would be the primary objective but that's up to the individual. Cosmetics are optional. In such cases, I could either leave the patina alone or polish it to a mirror-finish. I seldom would re-paint these but if I do, it'd normally be with the toughest, chemical-resistant coatings I can find. My preferences do change from time to time .
