Art Condition Reports: Templates and Best Practices

A museum loans a 19th-century oil painting to a traveling exhibition. When it returns six months later, the courier notices a hairline crack near the lower left corner. Was that crack there before the loan? Without a condition report completed before departure, there's no way to establish whether the damage occurred in transit, during installation, or was pre-existing. The lending institution absorbs the cost of conservation because it can't prove the borrower is responsible.

This scenario plays out regularly in the art world, and it's entirely preventable. Condition reports create a documented baseline that protects lenders, borrowers, sellers, buyers, and insurers from disputes about when and how damage occurred.

When You Need a Condition Report

Condition reports aren't just for museums. Private collectors, galleries, auction houses, and conservators all rely on them. The most common situations requiring one:

• Loans: Both incoming and outgoing. The lender and borrower each complete independent reports before and after the loan period.
• Acquisitions: Document the state of a work at the moment you take ownership. This becomes your insurance baseline.
• Insurance claims: Pre-loss condition reports dramatically speed up claims processing and settlement negotiations.
• Storage changes: Moving artwork between locations, even within the same building, creates opportunities for accidental damage.
• Post-conservation: After any treatment, a condition report records the results and establishes the new baseline.

Standard Condition Report Fields

The American Institute for Conservation (AIC) provides guidelines that most institutions follow. A professional condition report covers these core areas:

Photographic Documentation Requirements

Words alone don't cut it. Every condition report needs supporting photographs that record exactly what the examiner observed. The photographic standard includes:

• Overall front view with even, diffused lighting -- this is your reference image
• Overall back view showing labels, stamps, stretcher bars, and backing
• Raking light photographs (light at a steep angle across the surface) to reveal surface texture, impasto, warping, and deformations invisible under direct lighting
• UV light photographs to expose previous restorations, varnish irregularities, and material inconsistencies
• Detail shots of damage areas with a ruler or scale reference for size context
• Detail shots of signatures, labels, and inscriptions on both front and back

Shoot at 300 DPI minimum and store originals in uncompressed formats (TIFF or RAW). Compressed JPEGs work for everyday reference but aren't sufficient for forensic-level examination if a dispute arises later.

Condition Grading Scales

Consistency in grading prevents confusion when multiple people examine the same collection over time. Two widely used approaches:

AAM Standard Terminology: The American Alliance of Museums publishes condition reporting standards that many institutional registrars follow. Their vocabulary is specific -- "stable crack" versus "active crack," "lifting" versus "flaking" versus "loss" -- and using precise terms prevents ambiguity.

Custom Institutional Scales: Many collectors and smaller organizations develop their own grading systems tailored to their collection type. A photography collection has different condition concerns than a sculpture collection. Whatever system you use, document it in writing and train everyone who completes reports to apply it the same way.

Digital vs. Paper Condition Reports

Paper reports filled out on-site with a pencil remain common in museum practice, partly because pencils can't damage artwork surfaces the way ink pens can. But paper has obvious limitations: it's hard to search, easy to misfile, difficult to share, and vulnerable to the same water damage and fire that threatens the art itself.

Digital condition reporting addresses every one of these problems. Reports created on tablets or laptops can embed photographs directly alongside written observations. They're searchable, shareable, automatically backed up, and can generate comparison views showing how a work's condition has changed across multiple examinations over time.

The practical compromise many professionals use: examine the work and take notes on paper (especially in environments where electronics pose risks), then transcribe and expand those notes into a digital record within 24 hours while observations are still fresh.

How Software Streamlines Condition Reporting

Collection management platforms with built-in condition reporting tools eliminate the friction that causes many collectors to skip this step entirely. ArtVault Pro's documentation modules include customizable condition report templates, integrated photo attachment with annotation capabilities, condition history timelines for each work, and export functions that produce formatted reports suitable for insurance submissions and loan documentation.

The efficiency gain matters because the biggest enemy of good condition documentation isn't complexity -- it's procrastination. A system that takes three minutes to complete a basic report gets used. One that requires thirty minutes of formatting in a word processor doesn't. Explore our full set of collection management features to see how the reporting workflow integrates with inventory, insurance tracking, and provenance records.

Condition reports also feed directly into insurance documentation. When a claim occurs, having timestamped, photographically supported condition records already in your system means you can produce evidence within hours instead of scrambling to reconstruct what the piece looked like before the incident.

Frequently Asked Questions

Condition Reporting Made Simple

ArtVault Pro includes customizable condition report templates with photo annotation, history tracking, and one-click export for insurance and loan documentation.

Request a Demo →

← More Guides