Thoughts & Opinions

Hearing Conservation for Stone Carving - March/Apr 1999

Details: Created: Tuesday, 02 March 1999 05:25

Top 10 excuses for not using hearing protection

1. I can't stand anything in my ears

2. I can't hear my equipment run

3. They hurt my ears

4. I'm too old, what's been done is already done

5. I'm used to noise

6. I can't get them in my ears

7. Earplugs give me infections

8. I lost my earmuffs; new ones are too expensive

9. I'm in and out of noise, it's too much hassle

10. I can't hear anyway

High sound levels are encountered in creating sculpture; especially true with stone carving. Stone carvers can experience high noise levels from: the tools they use, where they are working, the types of material they are using, and the duration of the exposure to the noise.

Another factor is the anatomical factor; simply that all people do not respond the same to noise as far as physical damage to the ear is concerned. However, over time the effect will be similar.

With repeated and long duration exposure to sound levels above normal conversation, damage to the ear will occur ... some will be permanent and some may be reversible.

With proper knowledge of the hazards of uoise, the correct use of protective equipment and knowing the symptoms of hearing damage, working in high noise environments can be carried out safely and healthfully.

As you may know, science and medicine measure noise level in units of sound called decibels which is symbolized as dB. Normal conversation occurs between 60 to 90 dB. Continual, unprotected exposures to noises louder than 85 dB is dangerous and conld eventually result in hearing

What are the noise levels for stone carvers? Shop tools such as drills, sanders, and light duty saws will emit sound levels between 90 to 100 dB and 8 (only) hours a day exposure is considered safe without earprotection.

Chain saws, pneumatic tools and grinders are in the realm of 100 to 115 dB and only 2 hours a day is safe without ear protection.

Proceeding on to higher noise levels, sandblasting noise occurs between 115 and 140 dB and should be limited to IS minutes a day without protection. Even brief exposures above 140 dB, such as dynamite blasting, or jet engine noise, can cause pain and permanent injury without protection.

Location. If you are working close to a sound source or are in a studio with sonnd reflective walls or one with sound absorbing walls, all make a difference to the sound dose experienced.

The time of exposure. The human ear can tolerate short bursts of high intensity sound. But continued exposure over prolonged periods of time will cause severe damage. As an example, a short burst of noise from a sandblaster at 130 dB for 5 minutes is less damaging than a longer exposure of a lower sound level of an air compressor at 110 dB. This is why most industrial regulations and ratings of hearing protection equipment talk about a time weighted average, or dBA, which computes an average of noise exposure over a definite period of lime, usually an 8 hour work shift.

One yard rule. So how can you tell if you need hearing protection in a situation such as a shop or symposium? One rule of thumb: if you bave to shout to be heard at one yard away, you are exceeding 85 dBA and hearing protection should be used. Another is if you are to be working for a long period with a constant noise nearby or in the background, protection should be used even if the noise does not seem to be too bothersome; remember the longer the duration of noise, the more likely the damage.

Physical signs. What are some symptoms that noise exposure is affecting your hearing? Headache; temporary hearing impairment, ringing in the ears, voices sound muffled; or pain in the ears.

Reduce the effects. Remove the source of the noise or muffle the noise is an engineering control. This could mean using another brand of tool or placing a sound absorbing shield or acoustical blanket over or around the noise source if it is a generator or air compressor.

Use mufflers on equipment. Noise barriers can be built over fixed noise sources. An example is enclosing an air compressor or generator from a workroom or studio. Remember there still needs to be adequate ventilation to exhaust excess heat but this venting can be away from the workspace.

Move away from the noise source. Anotherrule of thumb: double the distance from the noise source will reduce 6 dBA. If you are working 10 feet away from a noisy air compressor (say 90 dBA), by moving to 20 feet away you effectively reduce your noise exposure to 84 dBA, an acceptable level. Also, keeping away from corners in a workroom or studio will reduce noise by 6 dBA. Stay away from a sound refleclive surface will drop 3 dBA.

Establish a regular rest period. Another method is an organizational control when working in a noise environment above 85 dBA. Just move to a more quiet environment, say 70 dBA, for 15 minutes to 1/2 hour, or until you are comfortable again. Technically you are waiting for the blood flow on the hearing surfaces of the ear to normalize.

Hearing protection. The best protection are hearing protective devices such as ear plugs. There are a number of varieties that are a soft, flexible foam material that compress easily to fit into the ear canal, then slowly expand to form to the shape of the i ndividual ear. Some of these plugs are disposable after each use, some are reusable and some are corded for wearing around the neck until they need to be used. A factor for stone carvers against the corded type is possible contamination of the ear with grit and dust. Ear plugs come in special designs for hard to fit ears, such as tapered, designed for smaller ear canals, or special proprietary seals for inside the ear for added comfort. Earplugs cost from 15 to 40 cents for uncorded plugs; corded plugs about and special fit plugs about $1.00.

An alternate to ear plugs are earmuffs. These are the type of protection used by tlight deck crew at airports or in industry around heavy machinery. Protection level is less than ear plugs but they have the advantage of more comfort over a long period of lime and offer more protection from low frequency noise (such as the drumming from a fan). Plan to spend $20.00 to $25.00 for earmuffs.

One word of warning: Don't use your walkman or portable CD with earphones to serve as hearing proteclion. It won't provide the required protection and could also prevent communications and warnings while working with dangerous equipment. Approved hearing protective devices will not block frequencies of sound necessary for persona] communication.

Not all ear protection is created equal. Each type of hearing proteclion device will have an industrial standard (ANSI) noise reduction rating, or NRR. These ratings will run from 25 dB to 33 dB for earplugs and 26 dB to 29 dB for earmuffs. These ratings are for comparison between devices and do not retlect the actual noise reduction to your ear. Most audiology experts agree that half of that value is the protection level a user will actually receive. The actual protection you will receive onsite for these devices is 12.5 to 16.5 dB for earplugs and 13 to 14.5 dB for earmuffs.

Hearing protective devices are available at industrial safety supply outlets or at some art supply stores.

Don't underestimate the damage that can come to your hearing while pursuing your passion. For a very small investment and some common sense it shouldn't be necessary to ask "What'd you say?" as a mark of maturity of a sculptor. ""

Article published by James SekOJ;

Submitted by Patricia Sekor for NWSSA March 1999

Member Viewpoint: Art & Politics - March/Apr 1999

Details: Created: Tuesday, 02 March 1999 05:10

The recent Governor's Blue Ribbon Arts Task Force determined that " ... Washington's state funding is at the bottom in comparison to other states ".1 The Seattle PI. confirmed that, "Despite its big artist population, Washington ranks 48th out of 50 states in per capita spending on the arts ".2

With such an embarrassing statistic, it is important that Washington work to develop her own artists. Washington State has a legal responsibility to support "the viable development of her artists and craftsmen" (RCW 43.46.090).

An Artist Trust survey revealed that there are 40,000 (self-proclaimed) artists working in Washington State. The Governor's Blue Ribbon Arts Task Force report states that "Washington is blessed in having an extraordinarily talented community of artists ... ". 1

By contrast, the Washington State Arts Commission (WSAC) has determined that only 312 Washington artists are good enough to even be considered for art purchase opportunities by local selection committees. The high quality of much of the artwork rejected by the WSAC would amaze all but the most critical of contemporary art elitists. The data shows that there are very few Washington artists brought on each year and ... a smaller group yet has access to a huge number of low budget opportunities.

There are three issues of concern:

1. The WSAC has chosen to interpret State law in such a way as to severely restrict opportunities to all but a few Washington State artists.

2. The WSAC's centralized control of art selection disempowers local selection committees.

3. Repeated purchases of familiar artists by the WSAC has limited the diversity of the State art collection.

The Exclusive Club

The Washington State Art in Public Places Program (AIPP) "develops, inventories, maintains and presents to the public the state art collection." AIPP maintains an Artists Resource Bank(ARB), the roster of artists (and only these artists) are eligible for state-funded purchases and commissions.

Once in the ARB, an artist may stay in. Thus, this exclusive club continues to be promoted for potentially thousands of purchase opportunities over decades. All that is required is for these artists to update their slides.

265 artists (1 02 out-of-state) have been in the ARB continuously for more than 10 years.³

39 artists (17 out-of-state) have been with the WSAC for more than 20 years.³

There are currently 548 artists (all media) in the ARB: 57% (312) Washington State and 43% (236) out-of-state artists.⁴

Every two years artists are invited to submit samples of art for review. This art is then "screened by art selection panels and approved by the commission".5

In the last ten years an average of only 19 Washington State artists and 18 outof-state artists have been added to the ARB each year.³

These "exclusive provider" ARB artists are eligible and promoted for hundreds (thousands over time) of exclusive public-art sales opportunities, big and small, each biennium. Each time a Washington artist is rejected, they are rejected for more than 400 (10 year average opportunities.⁶

This "all-or-nothing" condition is unprecedented in America's percent-forthe-arts programs. Most states' arts councils have open competitions for each installation project, or maintain an open registry that is used directly hy the local selection committee to identify a smaller pool of potential artists for the project.' By contrast, Washington's local selection committees make their selections only from the centrallycontrolled ARB (all projects under $100,000).

Few states offer opportunities equitably, if at all.

It is important to note that of the 236 out-of-state ARB artists, 125 (23% of total ARB) come from states without any public art program whatsoever. Additionally, the vast majority of outof-state ARB artists reside in states that either totally or severely restrict their programs to benefit their own state's artists. Yet, out-of-state ARB artists can potentially be eligible for a11 high and low budget opportunities, while (non-ARB) Washington artists are ineligible for any public opportunities in their own state.

Lower budget opportunities not available.

Washington State processes approximately ten times the number of public art opportunities than do most other states.' This is due to the fact that the "common" public school projects (usually lower budget) run through the WSAC. This significant fact does not in any way help Washington State artists who are not in the ARB.

When local agencies have funds available to purchase "existing works" (average price under $2000), "the ... agency nominates its own art selection committee who is empowered to make all decisions regarding artist and/or artwork"."

This local committee is shown approximately 480 slides of work by roughly 120 artists.9 During the 1998 biennial period, for example, 261 works were purchased from 120 artists.6 In other words,virrually all artists presented for consideration, made a sale (and many made multiple sales).

In effect, the centralized WSAC (or assignees) preselects a tiny "quality pile of public art", then turns this pile over to the local selection committees (usually schools) who divvy up the pile.

This process is hailed by the WSAC as a way to empower local committees so that "artist selection by local site-based committees assures diversity.4

No one can fault WSAC staff attempting to "do more with less", but the process presented here demonstrates nothing more than administrative expediency, in combination with state-control of creative expression in public art, at the expense of diversity.

Repeated Purchases

Some ARB artists have more than 20 works in the State art collection while others have received multiple purchase awards totaling more than a 1/4 of a million dollars.' Yet, State law reads, " In order to achieve a diverse state art collection, which represents the varied means of contemporary art-making processes, priority consideration may be given to artists who are,unot represented in the state art collection." (WAC 30.40.070, Sec.4).

It is ironic that many familiar-natne artists have bad their reputations greatly assisted by the ongoing support of the WSAC. It's time for more diversity in artistic expression by offering opportunities more broadly.

It's Time for a New Vision

The highly restrictive WSAC art selection process, while possibly achieving the goal of acquiring a nationally recognized art collection, falls short of its legally mandated responsibility to develop the professional careers of Washington artists. If the WSAC had been fostering the "viable development" of this State's artists these past decades, there would be less need to search out-of-state for work of the "highest artistic merit".

The WSAC might consider a more progressive vision, that of Washington artists setting national standards of excellence through increased access to opportunities.

To rectify any inequity in opportunities to under-represented Washington State artists, the WSAC " ... recommends expanded agency technical assistance efforts" in the form of workshops "at a reduced price", a handbook designed "to assist artists in applying and being accepted into the ARB" and a web page to access information and ARB applications (that can be downloaded). 4

Under-represented state artists need access to lower budget opportunities as building blocks to to give them the experience required for larger commission projects. They don't need more workshops ... or subsidies. There is no argument that the largest percentage of overall art purchases are of works by Washington artists. However, of greatest concern, is the need to increase access to the lower budgetopportunities. Regarding higher budget sales, a survey ofWSAC records (1987-1997) reveals that 64% of purchases over $50,000 went out-of-state⁶

Clearly the WSAC-AIPP uses its discretionary powers unwisely. The politics of state-controlled artistic taste has gone beyond what is acceptable in a democratic society.

Freedom of artistic and cultural expression and freedom of aesthetic decision making (by local selection committees) is at stake. It is now time to pressure our Washington State representatives to work on the behalf of this State's citizens and professional artists. State law needs to be rewritten to narrow WSAC discretionary powers toward this State's legal responsibility to foster the interest in: " ... the viable development of her artists and craftsmen." as expressed in our state legislation.

Consider writing articles for your local arts council newsletters. And please, contact your State representatives and urge them to direct the Washington State Arts Commission (WSAC) to revise its policies, so as to allow a greater diversity of creative expression by Washington State artists for art-in-public-places.

Footnotes:

1. WSAC; Investing in the Arts, Governor's Blue Ribbon Arts Task Force, 8/J 998

2. Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Doug McLennan, E-I, 2/J/99

3. WSAC; Active Artist Resource Bank Profile, 1974-1 998 inclusive, 1/14/99

4. WSAC; Memo, To: WSAC, From: WSAC- AIPP Staff, Re: Petition, 2/22/99

5. Washington Administrative Code -WAC 30.40.070, Section 3-(d)

6. WSAC; Arts Commission, Tag # Report, Owned and Leased Assets, 75'-98',1/13/99

7. WSAC; National Assembly of State Arts Agencies, Fax to Beverly Watt, 10/6/98

8. WSAC, Web-site: http://www.wa.gov/artl.ArtlnPublicPlaces.Info. For Partners

9. WSAC; Response to inquiry, Beverly Watt, Program Manager, AIPP, 1/14/99

NOTE - For copies of the above WSAC documents: call (360)753-3860 or email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.,GOV

A Tribute to Everett DuPen - March/Apr 1999

Details: Created: Tuesday, 02 March 1999 00:17

Some of Everett DuPen's former sculpture students decided it was time to honor him as one of the great sculpture teachers of our time. The Martin-Zambito Gallery in Seattle was contacted and the show opened February 4, 1999, and concluded March 3, 1999. There were 21 artists represented, including Everett.

Professor DuPen taught sculpture at the University of Washington from 1945 to 1982. After retiring, he spent another 12 years providing a life class for those interested in an evening session at the U of W where artists met once a week to sculpt the model. The life class, now called the DuPen Academy, continues meeting at the Mercer Island Community Center.

Many of his students have followed in his legacy. They include active professional sculptors and teachers of sculpture. A few have had to earn a living in other ways, but upon retirement are happily back into sculpture. Two of the former students included in the exhibit are deceased.

Participants in the show were from Washington and Oregon. The show included work from each sculptor and photos of their larger installations. The materials included ceramic, wood, bronze, aluminum and stone. The show encompassed a broad range of styles from abstract to realistic.

At least 10 of Everett's sculptures were on exhibit, along with his drawings and photos of earlier work, creating a mini-retrospective. Four NWSSA members also were participants: Paul Buckner (Eugene, OR); Rich Hestekind (Seattle, WA), Vic Picou (Seattle, WA), and Nancy Green (Seattle, WA).

The artists wrote a tribute to Everett expressing how his teaching has affected their lives and why they chose to produce sculpture, and these words were posted beside their work.

Everett DuPen has been on the Board of Directors of NWSSA for many years and continues to contribute valuable information and insight to our group.