The author describes the possible physical and aesthetic damage to an oil painting on canvas from conventional lining techniques, especially the use of vacuum as a pressure source. The technique of electrostatic hold as a substitute for vacuum pressure in lining paintings is described. The modification of existing vacuum systems for hot table use is described. The results of comparative tests between the imprint of canvas texture upon mil polyester film caused by the lowest effective vacuum (about 2 Hg) and that caused by electrostatic hold, both at 65°C are given as significantly less for the latter. The degree of attraction of the electrostatic hold can be varied by placing padding beneath the painting. The strongest attraction occurs with the lining directly on the metal. The author states that the protecting of aesthetic surfaces from the risk of vacuum damage justifies modifying existing equipment. (See also >AATA 13-1014, 14-263 and 14-1013.)