On Jan 20, 7:32*pm, wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 11:33:24 -0800 (PST), camryguy

wrote:
On Jan 20, 1:01*pm, wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 06:40:03 +0000 (UTC), (Dick

Adams) wrote:
s1027.photobucket.com/albums/y332/camryguy89/?action=view&current=IMG_0801 1.jpg

* The picture in #1 looks like johns manville siding - not wood -
which takes paint quite well, and the paint lasts a LONG time.

The siding is ASBESTOS cement. Not an issue if you leave it be. Might
be an issue to remove - but not serious... Unless there is damage I'd
just paint it

It is wood--Its cedar shake siding.

*Check again. The picture shows regular sized (as contrasted with
random sized) "shakes". Cedar doesn't come that way, in my experience.
There are numerous houses in my neighbourhood that look EXACTLY tile
that. All Johns-Manville siding. If I was a betting man I'd say it was
a pretty sure bet. I'd say 99.9+%

100% sure its cedar shingles! When the house was built about 40 years
ago, bi-laws or covenants restricted the siding material used on
houses. A percentage (I can't remember the exact amount) of the front
exterior had to be built with brick from a specific brick manufacturer
(Shaw concrete I believe) and cedar shingles over the rest. The brick
covenant still exists, but since then the siding type has been
eliminated.