Hello,

Would like to ask a few painting type questions, please.
Live in New England.

a. Thinking ahead a bit here. In the Spring having new clapboards put up
on house.
They come pre-primed.
Will be painting them with Latex, sort of a tan-coffee color, with the
"best" quality
Latex paint I can find

Any suggestions re brand, etc.?

Question: Can I assume that a single coat will do it, or will two coats be
almost mandatory ?

b. Also having Andersen "New-Construction" double hung windows installed.
Apparently, they come with wood frame on the inside, but it is left as
unfinished Pine, the idea
being, i guess, that everyone will want a different color stain, so it's
left unfinished.

What would most folks use ? Just an ordinary Stain, or would one
of the e.g., MinWax products that has Polyurethane mixed in be wiser ?

Or, regular stain, and then another Polyuurethane top-coat ?

Or,... ?

Much thanks,
Bob

Robert11 wrote:
Hello,

Would like to ask a few painting type questions, please.
Live in New England.

a. Thinking ahead a bit here. In the Spring having new clapboards put up
on house.
They come pre-primed.
Will be painting them with Latex, sort of a tan-coffee color, with the
"best" quality
Latex paint I can find

The best quality paint isn't from the US.
http://www.finepaintsofeurope.com/ The stuff's not cheap compared to
domestic brands, even quality domestic brands, but if you can make that
$8,000 paint job last even just a year or two longer the quality paint
pays for itself.

Any suggestions re brand, etc.?

Question: Can I assume that a single coat will do it, or will two coats be
almost mandatory ?

There's no almost. Two coats or you're ****ing money away on the
painting.

b. Also having Andersen "New-Construction" double hung windows installed.
Apparently, they come with wood frame on the inside, but it is left as
unfinished Pine, the idea
being, i guess, that everyone will want a different color stain, so it's
left unfinished.

What would most folks use ? Just an ordinary Stain, or would one
of the e.g., MinWax products that has Polyurethane mixed in be wiser ?

Or, regular stain, and then another Polyuurethane top-coat ?

Depends who is doing the staining. The Minwax Polyshades doesn't
penetrate the wood as much as stain directly applied. That would allow
you to change to a lighter color stain more easily should you ever
decide to redo it. You can achieve the same effect by using a sanding
sealer prior to staining with straight stain, then topcoating with
polyurethane.

R

For the best you prime it yourself with oil and 2 topcoats latex.
Research the aplication required by a paint Sherwin Williams guarntees
for life, you use their oil primer and paint [ their product specs may
have changed]. Another point is you know nothing about the product
quality on Pre Primed. I don`t trust Pre Primed.

If you want the windows natural just use poly, oil if you want it to
amber, water base if you want it to stay as light as possibe. If you
want a darker color wood you must Pre Stain with a shellac base product
like Bix, then stain, not a job for an amature. Or the Best painting is
Ben Moore enamel underbody, sanded with 220, topcoated with Ben Moore
Satin Impervo thinned with Penetrol, again not for an amature. You can
order your windows painted I bet..

Try Consumer Reports. They have data on various brands of paint that
they have tested.

"RicodJour" wrote in message
oups.com...
The best quality paint isn't from the US.
http://www.finepaintsofeurope.com/ The stuff's not cheap compared to
domestic brands, even quality domestic brands, but if you can make that
$8,000 paint job last even just a year or two longer the quality paint
pays for itself.

Sounds like a crock of **** to me. They're comparing to "less than $15"
paint in the US. Well no kidding that ain't the best paint. But $30 paint
is good paint and doesn't contain crappy fillers either. $90? No thanks.
Good US paint lasts plenty long.

How much do FPE paints cost?

Most of our finishes are in the $80 - $90 per EurogallonT price range. A
EurogallonT will normally provide the same coverage as a U.S. gallon of
similar gloss.

Why are your paints so expensive?

More to the point, why are domestic paints so inexpensive? The United States
represents an aberration in the world market for architectural coatings.
This is a consequence of the absence of performance standards for paint in
our country, as well as the unusually short average residency period (four
years for the typical family!). Under these circumstances, domestic
manufacturers have focused on producing impermanent formulations, which are
typically heavily laden with chalk and other inexpensive fillers. Quality
has been compromised in favor of low price for more than 40 years in this
country. In 2003, the average gallon of architectural coating sold for less
than $15. In view of wholesale and retail margins, packaging and
transportation costs, a $15 can of paint will seldom contain more than $2 or
$3 in raw materials.

jeffc wrote:
"RicodJour" wrote in message
oups.com...
The best quality paint isn't from the US.
http://www.finepaintsofeurope.com/ The stuff's not cheap compared to
domestic brands, even quality domestic brands, but if you can make that
$8,000 paint job last even just a year or two longer the quality paint
pays for itself.

Sounds like a crock of **** to me. They're comparing to "less than $15"
paint in the US. Well no kidding that ain't the best paint. But $30 paint
is good paint and doesn't contain crappy fillers either. $90? No thanks.
Good US paint lasts plenty long.

How much do FPE paints cost?

Most of our finishes are in the $80 - $90 per EurogallonT price range. A
EurogallonT will normally provide the same coverage as a U.S. gallon of
similar gloss.

Why are your paints so expensive?

More to the point, why are domestic paints so inexpensive? The United States
represents an aberration in the world market for architectural coatings.
This is a consequence of the absence of performance standards for paint in
our country, as well as the unusually short average residency period (four
years for the typical family!). Under these circumstances, domestic
manufacturers have focused on producing impermanent formulations, which are
typically heavily laden with chalk and other inexpensive fillers. Quality
has been compromised in favor of low price for more than 40 years in this
country. In 2003, the average gallon of architectural coating sold for less
than $15. In view of wholesale and retail margins, packaging and
transportation costs, a $15 can of paint will seldom contain more than $2 or
$3 in raw materials.

I have used their paints, so it's not something that "sounds" like a
crock of **** to me. Do you feel $200/gallon marine paints are a crock
of **** as well?

90% of painting is in the prep work, and 90% of the time that's not
done adequately. Of course the more expensive paint doesn't make sense
for those people. If you're looking for quality work, and are willing
to do the required prep work, saving a couple hundred dollars in
materials, at the expense of longevity, is false economy.

You do know there are nylon stockings, light bulbs, shoe soles, etc.
that never wear out, right? You don't see any of those on the market,
do you? Why? Is it because no one wants them, or because the
manufacturer would be cutting into their own profits and possibly
killing their business? How do you think that would fly in a corporate
boardroom?
"Boss, I have a way to make our paint last twice as long!"
"Really? Will we sell more of it?"
"Errr, no. Probably about half as much."
"I see. You're fired. Don't let the door hit you on the way out."

R

back prime any new wood.

vinyl siding ends all the work for your lifetime.......... never peels
flakes wears etc etc

As a professional with decades of experience, I can attest to the
quality of the European Paint, HOWEVER it's not THAT much better to
justify the cost. If it lasted only twice as long as the best paint
available here in the USA (Benjamin Moore Paint, IMHO) it would be
worth it - or if it reduced labor by one half it would be worth it -
but it doesn't do either. Mind you, it's good paint, but I don't find
it's more durable or applies any better than Ben Moore. Of course,
compared to paints like Sherwin Williams, Rodda, Parker, Glidden or
Behr - it would be worth the expense. But you will find that Ben Moore
looks just as good, lasts just as long and applies just as smoothly and
costs half as much.

Let me also echo the caution about pre-primed exterior (interior
pre-primed is ok) ALWAYS prime (and back-roll/brush) with whatever is
recommended by the manufacturer of whatever topcoat you're using. One
coat of primer should be fine, two coats of topcoat with at least 24
hours between coats. Always apply the paint (primer and topcoat) on DRY
material within the recommended temperature range for a long-lasting
job.

Jeff


Robert11 wrote:
Hello,

Would like to ask a few painting type questions, please.
Live in New England.

a. Thinking ahead a bit here. In the Spring having new clapboards put up
on house.
They come pre-primed.
Will be painting them with Latex, sort of a tan-coffee color, with the
"best" quality
Latex paint I can find

Any suggestions re brand, etc.?

Question: Can I assume that a single coat will do it, or will two coats be
almost mandatory ?

b. Also having Andersen "New-Construction" double hung windows installed.
Apparently, they come with wood frame on the inside, but it is left as
unfinished Pine, the idea
being, i guess, that everyone will want a different color stain, so it's
left unfinished.

What would most folks use ? Just an ordinary Stain, or would one
of the e.g., MinWax products that has Polyurethane mixed in be wiser ?

Or, regular stain, and then another Polyuurethane top-coat ?

Or,... ?

Much thanks,
Bob

jeffreydesign wrote:
As a professional with decades of experience, I can attest to the
quality of the European Paint, HOWEVER it's not THAT much better to
justify the cost. If it lasted only twice as long as the best paint
available here in the USA (Benjamin Moore Paint, IMHO) it would be
worth it - or if it reduced labor by one half it would be worth it -
but it doesn't do either. Mind you, it's good paint, but I don't find
it's more durable or applies any better than Ben Moore. Of course,
compared to paints like Sherwin Williams, Rodda, Parker, Glidden or
Behr - it would be worth the expense. But you will find that Ben Moore
looks just as good, lasts just as long and applies just as smoothly and
costs half as much.

Consumer Reports doesn't agree with your opinion of Benny Moore paints.

There is no way to reduce painting labor using the same equipment. The
way most people try to reduce painting labor is by cutting corners
during the prep work.

I generally figure paint at roughly 10 to 15% of the job cost using
good quality US paints, so it's not necessary for the Euro paint to
last twice as long to reap benefits.

Beyond the economics, there's the aesthetic criteria. You can't argue
that a granite countertop is an unjustified expenditure based solely on
the fact that it costs more. When was the last time someone walked
into a house and said, "Oooh! Plastic laminate!"?

Paint is the final, most visible part of the construction or remodeling
process. Not exactly the place where I'd start settling for "good
enough". The Euro paints have textures and sheens that are different
than what's generally available in the US. Some of the paints looks
like suede, and others I can't describe. US paint manufacturers are
entering that market with some of their designer paints, but the end
result is not even close. It's a start, though.

One aspect you may have overlooked, something I can't, is the depth of
color. The Euro paints use more pigment and more of them.
http://www.thisoldhouse.com/toh/know...216054,00.html

This part was especially interesting to me as I learned of a US
manufacturer of high end paints that I was unaware of:
" The Donald Kaufman Color Collection ($40 to $75 per gallon) is a set
of 37 preblended "full-spectrum" paints. Whereas most paints use just
three pigments and obtain a static color, Kaufman's paints use up to 12
pigments to create a paint whose numerous hues react to changing light
with much of the same richness and range of color found in the natural
world."
http://www.donaldkaufmancolor.com/

I'll have to try some of their stuff. If it's cheaper to buy and gives
similar results as the more expensive Schreuder paints, I'll use it.

R

wrote:
back prime any new wood.

vinyl siding ends all the work for your lifetime.......... never peels
flakes wears etc etc

All plastic houses, eh? Blech!

R

You do know there are nylon stockings, light bulbs, shoe soles, etc.
that never wear out, right? You don't see any of those on the market,
do you? Why? Is it because no one wants them, or because the
manufacturer would be cutting into their own profits and possibly
killing their business? How do you think that would fly in a corporate
boardroom?
"Boss, I have a way to make our paint last twice as long!"
"Really? Will we sell more of it?"
"Errr, no. Probably about half as much."
"I see. You're fired. Don't let the door hit you on the way out."


Reminds me of "The Man in the White Suit"
http://imdb.com/title/tt0044876/

Jacque wrote:
You do know there are nylon stockings, light bulbs, shoe soles, etc.
that never wear out, right? You don't see any of those on the market,
do you? Why? Is it because no one wants them, or because the
manufacturer would be cutting into their own profits and possibly
killing their business? How do you think that would fly in a corporate
boardroom?
"Boss, I have a way to make our paint last twice as long!"
"Really? Will we sell more of it?"
"Errr, no. Probably about half as much."
"I see. You're fired. Don't let the door hit you on the way out."


Reminds me of "The Man in the White Suit"
http://imdb.com/title/tt0044876/

Hey! Good call. I'd never heard of that movie, now it's on my must
see list. Thanks.

R

"RicodJour"


You do know there are nylon stockings, light bulbs, shoe soles, etc.
that never wear out, right? You don't see any of those on the market,
do you? Why? Is it because no one wants them, or because the
manufacturer would be cutting into their own profits and possibly
killing their business? How do you think that would fly in a corporate
boardroom?

The "nylon stockings" you refer to are also called "woolen athletic socks,"
the eternal light bulb uses a ten-penny nail as a filament, and the
everlasting shoe soles are really hunks of tire tread popularized as sandals
by the Viet Cong.

"Boss, I have a way to make our paint last twice as long!"
"Really? Will we sell more of it?"
"Errr, no. Probably about half as much."
"I see. You're fired. Don't let the door hit you on the way out."

How does that square up with florescent lights, PVC pipe, or other
long-lasting consumer goods that seem popular?

HeyBub wrote:
"RicodJour"


You do know there are nylon stockings, light bulbs, shoe soles, etc.
that never wear out, right? You don't see any of those on the market,
do you? Why? Is it because no one wants them, or because the
manufacturer would be cutting into their own profits and possibly
killing their business? How do you think that would fly in a corporate
boardroom?

The "nylon stockings" you refer to are also called "woolen athletic socks,"
the eternal light bulb uses a ten-penny nail as a filament, and the
everlasting shoe soles are really hunks of tire tread popularized as sandals
by the Viet Cong.

Let's see...no, no, and, ummm, no.

"Boss, I have a way to make our paint last twice as long!"
"Really? Will we sell more of it?"
"Errr, no. Probably about half as much."
"I see. You're fired. Don't let the door hit you on the way out."

How does that square up with florescent lights, PVC pipe, or other
long-lasting consumer goods that seem popular?

Fluorescent (florescent means to blossom) bulbs aren't forever. Their
life can be roughly doubled by keeping them running constantly. The
switching on and off is what kills them before their time.
http://www.lightingdesignlab.com/art...luorescent.htm

PVC pipe largely replaced cast iron, copper and galvanized iron pipe.
Those items already lasted for decades at least. They are not
consumables.

R

RicodJour wrote:
wrote:
back prime any new wood.

vinyl siding ends all the work for your lifetime.......... never peels
flakes wears etc etc

All plastic houses, eh? Blech!

R

so you enjoy the hassle and expense of constant scraping priming and
painting just to do it again in what 5 or 6 years?

while a replacement that lasts a lifetime is available at a affordable
price.............

wrote:
RicodJour wrote:
wrote:
back prime any new wood.

vinyl siding ends all the work for your lifetime.......... never peels
flakes wears etc etc

All plastic houses, eh? Blech!

R

so you enjoy the hassle and expense of constant scraping priming and
painting just to do it again in what 5 or 6 years?

while a replacement that lasts a lifetime is available at a affordable
price.............

I don't enjoy brushing my teeth, but it's necessary maintenance. I
personally don't like the look of vinyl siding, and I've seen, and
installed, too much of it. It certainly has its place, but it also
certainly has limitations.

It's not unusual for me to spend a couple or three days playing around
choosing colors while painting (not full days, mind you, there's lots
of thinking and burping in there). Vinyl siding has more color choices
than it did ten or twenty years ago, but it's still limited. I also
don't like how the corners are handled, the J-channel, the seams, etc.

My major kvetch with the "lasts a lifetime" stuff, is that it doesn't.
Vinyl siding hasn't been around a lifetime yet. It's also problematic
when renovation and additions are done. It may well be impossible to
locate the same siding.

People do everything possible to avoid maintenance on their houses.
Not a good idea. Nothing is maintenance free, and sometimes the only
reason people have to get up on the roof and poke into odd corners is
when painting and caulking maintenance is performed. No inspection, no
discovery of the problem before it grows to be a big problem.

R

On Wed, 1 Nov 2006 07:26:21 -0500, Robert11 wrote:

Hello,

Would like to ask a few painting type questions, please.
Live in New England.

a. Thinking ahead a bit here. In the Spring having new clapboards put up
on house.
They come pre-primed.
Will be painting them with Latex, sort of a tan-coffee color, with the
"best" quality
Latex paint I can find

Any suggestions re brand, etc.?

Benjamin Moore is popular in your part of the country and makes excellent
paint. Other major brands and even regional brands do too. Satin finish
usually looks nice.

Question: Can I assume that a single coat will do it, or will two coats be
almost mandatory ?

Spot prime any bare spots, especially board ends, with oil base primer.
Then paint with two coats of latex.

If you wanted to do an extra good job, prime everything with oil base
primer, and then finish with 2 coats of latex. This might be overkill,
although it is what I would probably do. When pre-primed siding first came
out, because of the cheap primers often used by the manufacturers, paint
peeling was a big problem, and you almost had to apply another coat of
primer to assure a good job. This isn't really a problem anymore.

b. Also having Andersen "New-Construction" double hung windows installed.
Apparently, they come with wood frame on the inside, but it is left as
unfinished Pine, the idea
being, i guess, that everyone will want a different color stain, so it's
left unfinished.

What would most folks use ? Just an ordinary Stain, or would one
of the e.g., MinWax products that has Polyurethane mixed in be wiser ?

Or, regular stain, and then another Polyuurethane top-coat ?

Use ordinary Minwax stain which will penetrate into the wood and topcoat it
with polyurethane. Before you apply the stain, apply a coat of Wood
Conditioner so the stain penetrates evenly and doesn't look blotchy.

Colored varnishes are meant for quickie jobs. The color doesn't penetrate
the wood, so minor scratches show more. Also, any runs or places where it
was applied thicker will show up darker.

On 1 Nov 2006 10:30:24 -0800, RicodJour wrote:


One aspect you may have overlooked, something I can't, is the depth of
color.

What the hell is "depth of color"? All you see is the very surface of the
paint. What a bunch of baloney!!

Are any of these sellers of "high end" paints descendents of P.T. Barnum?

"jeffreydesign" wrote in message
oups.com...
As a professional with decades of experience, I can attest to the
quality of the European Paint, HOWEVER it's not THAT much better to
justify the cost. If it lasted only twice as long as the best paint
available here in the USA (Benjamin Moore Paint, IMHO) it would be
worth it - or if it reduced labor by one half it would be worth it -
but it doesn't do either. Mind you, it's good paint, but I don't find
it's more durable or applies any better than Ben Moore. Of course,
compared to paints like Sherwin Williams, Rodda, Parker, Glidden or
Behr - it would be worth the expense. But you will find that Ben Moore
looks just as good, lasts just as long and applies just as smoothly and
costs half as much.

A complete crock of ****. You don't compare "Benjamin Moore" paint to
"Sherwin Williams" paint. There is no such thing. There is Benjamin Moore
Regal and Sherwin Williams SuperPaint, etc. You can only talk about
specific paints. BM makes good paint and they make crap paint. SW makes
good paint and they make crap paint. It depends on how much you want to
spend. For a "professional", you really don't know what you're talking
about.

"RicodJour" wrote in message
oups.com...
There is no way to reduce painting labor using the same equipment. The
way most people try to reduce painting labor is by cutting corners
during the prep work.

The easy way to reduce costs is to use better paint that goes on in one
coat.

Karl S wrote:
On 1 Nov 2006 10:30:24 -0800, RicodJour wrote:

One aspect you may have overlooked, something I can't, is the depth of
color.

What the hell is "depth of color"? All you see is the very surface of the
paint. What a bunch of baloney!!

Are any of these sellers of "high end" paints descendents of P.T. Barnum?

Karl, do yourself the favor and investigate a bit before you make posts
such as this one.

I'll do the first search for you to help you along.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...depth+of+color

R

jeffc wrote:
"RicodJour" wrote in message

There is no way to reduce painting labor using the same equipment. The
way most people try to reduce painting labor is by cutting corners
during the prep work.

The easy way to reduce costs is to use better paint that goes on in one
coat.

All paint goes on in one coat. Whether it covers in one coat is
another story.

One heavy coat is inferior to two thinner coats for several reasons.

R

"RicodJour" wrote in message
ups.com...
jeffc wrote:
"RicodJour" wrote in message

There is no way to reduce painting labor using the same equipment. The
way most people try to reduce painting labor is by cutting corners
during the prep work.

The easy way to reduce costs is to use better paint that goes on in one
coat.

All paint goes on in one coat. Whether it covers in one coat is
another story.

One heavy coat is inferior to two thinner coats for several reasons.

Duh! What did you think I meant? I'm not talking about heavy coats or thin
coats. I'm talking about cost savings using more expensive paint that
covers in 1 coat.

jeffc wrote:
"RicodJour" wrote in message
jeffc wrote:
"RicodJour" wrote in message

There is no way to reduce painting labor using the same equipment. The
way most people try to reduce painting labor is by cutting corners
during the prep work.

The easy way to reduce costs is to use better paint that goes on in one
coat.

All paint goes on in one coat. Whether it covers in one coat is
another story.

One heavy coat is inferior to two thinner coats for several reasons.

Duh! What did you think I meant? I'm not talking about heavy coats or thin
coats. I'm talking about cost savings using more expensive paint that
covers in 1 coat.

It was not clear what you meant. Maybe I'm not being clear, my
apologies. I've never seen a single coat cover to my satisfaction,
regardless of paint quality/cost. Your standards might differ. A
single coat is not as durable. When an average room takes an hour to
roll out, why even mention single coat coverage? It's false economy.

R

Let me address each arguement in order:

"RicodJour" wrote:
Consumer Reports doesn't agree with your opinion of Benny Moore paints.


My reply:
I am a member at consumerreports.org and I checked. You're just WRONG.
Consumer Reports rates Ben Moore as "Very Good" but it is also listed
as "still under test." Furthermore, CR doesn't mention testing Ben
Moore's best housepaint, which is what I was referring to.

"RicodJour" wrote:
There is no way to reduce painting labor using the same equipment. The

way most people try to reduce painting labor is by cutting corners
during the prep work.

My reply:
The more you write, the more I see you have no idea what you're talking
about. If you had ever painted much, you would know that there is a
significant difference in labor applied depending on the quality of the
paint. For instance, the better the hide on the paint, the better it
sprays and flows, the longer it holds a wet edge, the better surface
tension - all these and several other factors affect the labor applied.
It should be obvious to anyone that labor is reduced when you don't
have to re-paint as often (the coating lasts longer.)

It is equally as obvious to an painting professional that "cutting
corners" only ADDS to the labor in the end (early failures, lost
clients, etc) it doesn't reduce labor.

"RicodJour" wrote:
I generally figure paint at roughly 10 to 15% of the job cost using
good quality US paints, so it's not necessary for the Euro paint to
last twice as long to reap benefits.

My reply:
It completely depends on the job. You simply cannot generalize like
that. There are jobs that are single level (no ladderwork) new
pre-primed where labor is significantly less than a 100+ year old, 3
level craftsman house that's peeling. Sometimes paint is 5% of the
total job cost (bear in mind I only use Ben Moore's best paint and it's
not cheap) and sometimes it's 40%.

"RicodJour" wrote:
Beyond the economics, there's the aesthetic criteria. You can't argue
that a granite countertop is an unjustified expenditure based solely on

the fact that it costs more. When was the last time someone walked
into a house and said, "Oooh! Plastic laminate!"?


Paint is the final, most visible part of the construction or remodeling

process. Not exactly the place where I'd start settling for "good
enough". The Euro paints have textures and sheens that are different
than what's generally available in the US. Some of the paints looks
like suede, and others I can't describe. US paint manufacturers are
entering that market with some of their designer paints, but the end
result is not even close. It's a start, though.

My reply:

Well, no kidding. How it looks and performs is where it's at. I do not
agree that the european paints "look" any richer or better than Ben
Moore's Super Spec, for instance. I will agree that there is indeed a
difference in the "look" or richness/consistency of color and sheen
between "good" paint and cheap crap. It's something that people walking
or driving by any of my work notice right away. It's a certain "glow"
obtained when the prep work is done right, the right paint is applied
correctly and the job is finished properly.

"RicodJour" wrote:
One aspect you may have overlooked, something I can't, is the depth of
color. The Euro paints use more pigment and more of them.
http://www.thisoldhouse.com/toh/know...0,16417,216054...



This part was especially interesting to me as I learned of a US
manufacturer of high end paints that I was unaware of:
" The Donald Kaufman Color Collection ($40 to $75 per gallon) is a set
of 37 preblended "full-spectrum" paints. Whereas most paints use just
three pigments and obtain a static color, Kaufman's paints use up to 12

pigments to create a paint whose numerous hues react to changing light
with much of the same richness and range of color found in the natural
world."
http://www.donaldkaufmancolor.com/

My reply:

I didn't overlook "color depth" - which really is about opacity. I
could go into a long dissertation on paint color chemistry, but suffice
to say that there is indeed a difference and it's visually obvious to
almost anyone. Some flat paints look chalky and thin, some look rich
and smooth but still are non-reflective as flat paint should be. I find
that Ben Moore's paints achieve this look where others don't... except
the most expensive coatings. The quality, consistency and other factors
like 'grind' determine how pigment works, not just how many different
pigment colors are used. If you think about it, how many pigment colors
are used to obtain a particular color wholly depends on the color you
want to get. I have never seen ANY paint that only uses three pigment
colors.

Another factor to consider is how paint affects your spray equipment.
Cheap paint typically has what we call a "high grind" - it is very
abrasive - and it will wear out expensive valves in a hurry. That
certainly adds to the cost of labor.


"RicodJour" wrote:
I'll have to try some of their stuff. If it's cheaper to buy and gives

similar results as the more expensive Schreuder paints, I'll use it.

I reply:
I suggest a side-by-side comparison (using Ben Moore.) I think you'll
see little if any difference between two high quality paints. On the
other hand, some of the paints Consumer Reports rate a good paints I
wouldn't use for barn paint. Sometimes I have to use what a client
supplies - and recently I had to use Behr paint (CR rates as a top
paint) which was AWFUL CRAP. I had to repaint three times (which Behr
eventually paid for) in order to get a desirable finish - the paint was
somewhat translucent and had an extremely inconsistent sheen. I used
every trick in the book to make it work and a rep from Behr had to come
see for herself and she agreed with my conclusions. This only
reaffirmed my belief that Ben Moore is a better paint.

---------

"jeffc" said what I wrote was:

A complete crock of ****. You don't compare "Benjamin Moore" paint to
"Sherwin Williams" paint. There is no such thing. There is Benjamin
Moore
Regal and Sherwin Williams SuperPaint, etc. You can only talk about
specific paints. BM makes good paint and they make crap paint. SW
makes
good paint and they make crap paint. It depends on how much you want
to
spend. For a "professional", you really don't know what you're talking

about.

I reply:

Yes, I do compare Benjamin Moore with Sherwin Williams at any grade. I
only use Ben Moore's best paint and I would only compare that with
Sherwin Williams best paint. There is no comaprison... Ben Moore is
clearly better (and costs quite a bit more too) paint. I have not found
ANY of Ben Moore's paint to be "crap" even their 'cheapest' contractor
paints are decent. On the other hand, IMHO Sherwin Williams best paints
aren't as good as Ben Moore's lowest cost paints. There is simply no
comparison unless SW has completely changed their formulation in the
last year or two. I refuse to work with the stuff.

So as for your rule that, "You can only talk about specific paints"
normally I would agree however, with some brands of paint, -throughout
their entire line- are inferior to other brands that seem to care more
about the quality of their entire line of paint.

That's my opinion. Take it or leave it. It's only based on painting a
few thousand buildings over a few decades.

-Jeff
RicodJour wrote:
jeffc wrote:
"RicodJour" wrote in message
jeffc wrote:
"RicodJour" wrote in message

There is no way to reduce painting labor using the same equipment. The
way most people try to reduce painting labor is by cutting corners
during the prep work.

The easy way to reduce costs is to use better paint that goes on in one
coat.

All paint goes on in one coat. Whether it covers in one coat is
another story.

One heavy coat is inferior to two thinner coats for several reasons.

Duh! What did you think I meant? I'm not talking about heavy coats or thin
coats. I'm talking about cost savings using more expensive paint that
covers in 1 coat.

It was not clear what you meant. Maybe I'm not being clear, my
apologies. I've never seen a single coat cover to my satisfaction,
regardless of paint quality/cost. Your standards might differ. A
single coat is not as durable. When an average room takes an hour to
roll out, why even mention single coat coverage? It's false economy.

R

jeffreydesign wrote:
Let me address each arguement in order:

"RicodJour" wrote:
Consumer Reports doesn't agree with your opinion of Benny Moore paints.


My reply:
I am a member at consumerreports.org and I checked. You're just WRONG.
Consumer Reports rates Ben Moore as "Very Good" but it is also listed
as "still under test." Furthermore, CR doesn't mention testing Ben
Moore's best housepaint, which is what I was referring to.

Jeff, trying to combine replies in one post is a nice objective, but
omitting the marks makes it difficult for people to read.

As far as the CR ratings. Benny Moore just cracked the top 20 on
exterior paints and CR doen't even rate the Euro paints.
http://consumerreports.org/cro/home-...rior/index.htm
CR is far superior to most paint reviewers as they do long term
testing. One of my pet peeves with the ratings is that some
manufacturers "wised up" and started changing formulations (maybe just
renaming?) so the long term results wouldn't be known.

"RicodJour" wrote:
There is no way to reduce painting labor using the same equipment. The

way most people try to reduce painting labor is by cutting corners
during the prep work.

My reply:
The more you write, the more I see you have no idea what you're talking
about. If you had ever painted much, you would know that there is a
significant difference in labor applied depending on the quality of the
paint. For instance, the better the hide on the paint, the better it
sprays and flows, the longer it holds a wet edge, the better surface
tension - all these and several other factors affect the labor applied.
It should be obvious to anyone that labor is reduced when you don't
have to re-paint as often (the coating lasts longer.)

The only points I had on this part of the thread is that prep work is
paramount and one coat doesn't cut it. An easy flowing paint, or a
higher hide paint won't eliminate a coat or any of the prep work and
might save ten minutes in an average room. You're coming at this from
a different end. A painter that paints eight hours a day is going to
be very concerned with those ten minutes, and very concerned with
saving one or two hundred bucks on a job because they do a lot of jobs
and it really adds up. This newsgroup is for home repair. The OP is a
DIYer. We're not setting someone up in business. The DIYer will waste
far more time than those measly ten minutes due to lack of cutting in
skills, having to mask off _everything_, lack of dedicated equipment,
etc. Just as you wouldn't advise a DIYer painting their apartment to
run out and buy an airless, or even rent one, I'm not worried about
that ten minutes.

It is equally as obvious to an painting professional that "cutting
corners" only ADDS to the labor in the end (early failures, lost
clients, etc) it doesn't reduce labor.

You're arguing with me about something we agree on? This is going to
make it difficult to keep track.

"RicodJour" wrote:
I generally figure paint at roughly 10 to 15% of the job cost using
good quality US paints, so it's not necessary for the Euro paint to
last twice as long to reap benefits.

My reply:
It completely depends on the job. You simply cannot generalize like
that. There are jobs that are single level (no ladderwork) new
pre-primed where labor is significantly less than a 100+ year old, 3
level craftsman house that's peeling. Sometimes paint is 5% of the
total job cost (bear in mind I only use Ben Moore's best paint and it's
not cheap) and sometimes it's 40%.

Please note the qualifying words "generally" and "roughly". I was
giving a general, rough, ballpark, estimated, seat-of-the-pants number.
I am well aware that job conditions vary.

"RicodJour" wrote:
Beyond the economics, there's the aesthetic criteria. You can't argue
that a granite countertop is an unjustified expenditure based solely on

the fact that it costs more. When was the last time someone walked
into a house and said, "Oooh! Plastic laminate!"?

Paint is the final, most visible part of the construction or remodeling

process. Not exactly the place where I'd start settling for "good
enough". The Euro paints have textures and sheens that are different
than what's generally available in the US. Some of the paints looks
like suede, and others I can't describe. US paint manufacturers are
entering that market with some of their designer paints, but the end
result is not even close. It's a start, though.

My reply:

Well, no kidding. How it looks and performs is where it's at. I do not
agree that the european paints "look" any richer or better than Ben
Moore's Super Spec, for instance. I will agree that there is indeed a
difference in the "look" or richness/consistency of color and sheen
between "good" paint and cheap crap. It's something that people walking
or driving by any of my work notice right away. It's a certain "glow"
obtained when the prep work is done right, the right paint is applied
correctly and the job is finished properly.

I have no doubt you do quality work. I was a little surprised when you
tossed out the BM Super Spec. That's a contractor's paint, and
generally not considered a premium paint. I've never used it. Do you
feel that it is superior to BM's higher priced paints, or equal in
quality at a lower cost?

"RicodJour" wrote:
One aspect you may have overlooked, something I can't, is the depth of
color. The Euro paints use more pigment and more of them.
http://www.thisoldhouse.com/toh/know...0,16417,216054...

This part was especially interesting to me as I learned of a US
manufacturer of high end paints that I was unaware of:
" The Donald Kaufman Color Collection ($40 to $75 per gallon) is a set
of 37 preblended "full-spectrum" paints. Whereas most paints use just
three pigments and obtain a static color, Kaufman's paints use up to 12

pigments to create a paint whose numerous hues react to changing light
with much of the same richness and range of color found in the natural
world."
http://www.donaldkaufmancolor.com/

My reply:

I didn't overlook "color depth" - which really is about opacity. I
could go into a long dissertation on paint color chemistry, but suffice
to say that there is indeed a difference and it's visually obvious to
almost anyone. Some flat paints look chalky and thin, some look rich
and smooth but still are non-reflective as flat paint should be. I find
that Ben Moore's paints achieve this look where others don't... except
the most expensive coatings. The quality, consistency and other factors
like 'grind' determine how pigment works, not just how many different
pigment colors are used. If you think about it, how many pigment colors
are used to obtain a particular color wholly depends on the color you
want to get. I have never seen ANY paint that only uses three pigment
colors.

I've never seen a 3-pigment paint, either. The part I quoted was to
share my discovery of a lower priced premium paint manufacturer.
Obviously any color _could_ be made from three colors, but most paint
manufacturers use more.

Another factor to consider is how paint affects your spray equipment.
Cheap paint typically has what we call a "high grind" - it is very
abrasive - and it will wear out expensive valves in a hurry. That
certainly adds to the cost of labor.

And the finer the grind, the better the paint will cover and flow.
Rheology is a bizarre, but highly cool, science.

"RicodJour" wrote:
I'll have to try some of their stuff. If it's cheaper to buy and gives
similar results as the more expensive Schreuder paints, I'll use it.

I reply:
I suggest a side-by-side comparison (using Ben Moore.) I think you'll
see little if any difference between two high quality paints. On the
other hand, some of the paints Consumer Reports rate a good paints I
wouldn't use for barn paint. Sometimes I have to use what a client
supplies - and recently I had to use Behr paint (CR rates as a top
paint) which was AWFUL CRAP. I had to repaint three times (which Behr
eventually paid for) in order to get a desirable finish - the paint was
somewhat translucent and had an extremely inconsistent sheen. I used
every trick in the book to make it work and a rep from Behr had to come
see for herself and she agreed with my conclusions. This only
reaffirmed my belief that Ben Moore is a better paint.

I've run into a lot of old-timers that swear by Benjamin Moore, or
Dutch Boy, or swear by oil paint - in general, come to think of it,
they swear a lot. Nothing breeds confidence like success, and once
people have reached their comfort level with success they stop looking
for improvements. This is the natural state of things. Maybe I'm
unnatural, but I never stop looking for improvement.

R

"RicodJour" wrote in message
oups.com...

It was not clear what you meant. Maybe I'm not being clear, my
apologies. I've never seen a single coat cover to my satisfaction,
regardless of paint quality/cost. Your standards might differ. A
single coat is not as durable. When an average room takes an hour to
roll out, why even mention single coat coverage? It's false economy.

I don't agree. First, it might take an hour to roll, but that's just one
room. Also, it doesn't include cutting in. I know no one who can paint a
room in one hour. Second, multiply that by all the rooms in the house (or
for larger rooms or spaces).

A paint such as Sherwin Williams SuperPaint gives excellent coverage and
usually goes on fine in one coat. (Obviously cherry red over white can't go
on in one or probably even 2 coats). No, it's not as durable, but then 2
coats are not as durable as 3, and so on. The question is, how durable does
it need to be exactly? A 100% acrylic paint with high solids is going to
cover better and be more durable than a cheaper paint. Two coats of the $90
paint you were talking about seems outrageous. Even if it is that much more
durable than a domestic $30 paint (which I'm skeptical of), it still
probably doesn't matter. Good domestic paints will last almost indefinitely
anyway for all practical purposes. The room gets painted before that anyway
just because they want a change of color, or to "freshen up" the look.

"jeffreydesign" wrote in message
ups.com...
Furthermore, CR doesn't mention testing Ben
Moore's best housepaint, which is what I was referring to.

No, you were just referring to "Benjamin Moore", whatever that means.
Yes, I do compare Benjamin Moore with Sherwin Williams at any grade. I
only use Ben Moore's best paint and I would only compare that with
Sherwin Williams best paint. There is no comaprison... Ben Moore is
clearly better (and costs quite a bit more too)

No it's not, and no it doesn't.

"RicodJour" wrote in message
oups.com...
I've run into a lot of old-timers that swear by Benjamin Moore, or
Dutch Boy, or swear by oil paint - in general, come to think of it,
they swear a lot.

I agree there. To say there is "no comparison" between BM and SW paints is
absurd. That is like saying you really like cola, but then saying you LOVE
Coke but Pepsi makes you vomit violently.

Well, let me put it this way;

I have had to use client-supplied Sherwin Williams "SuperPaint" a half
dozen times. Each and every time I found it to be inferior to what I
normally use on exteriors (SuperSpec) and FAR inferior to Benjamin
Moore's best exterior paint MoorGlo (for interiors, Aura - paint I
highly recommend as well.)

I will no longer accept a job that specs Sherwin Williams. I just don't
like the stuff, even their "best" paint. Maybe it's ok for Joe
Homeowner but in a production environment, it just doesn't cut it. I
happily warranty my work and I have learned what I can rely on.

I will warranty Ben Moore Paint (SuperSpec or [Regal] MoorGlo), Donald
Kaufman Paint, Eurolux and Eco.

My work is as close to perfection as it can be and clients are willing
to pay for it. I currently have a three-year waiting list for existing
[mostly commercial] clients and a five+ year waiting list for new
clients. My work speaks for itself.

-Jeff

jeffc wrote:
"RicodJour" wrote in message
oups.com...
I've run into a lot of old-timers that swear by Benjamin Moore, or
Dutch Boy, or swear by oil paint - in general, come to think of it,
they swear a lot.

I agree there. To say there is "no comparison" between BM and SW paints is
absurd. That is like saying you really like cola, but then saying you LOVE
Coke but Pepsi makes you vomit violently.

jeffreydesign wrote:

My work is as close to perfection as it can be and clients are willing
to pay for it. I currently have a three-year waiting list for existing
[mostly commercial] clients and a five+ year waiting list for new
clients. My work speaks for itself.

Sorry. You lost me with that last bit. I know of no client, no
person, commercial or otherwise, that would be willing to wait years
three to five years for a paint job. "Oh, hi, sorry about the lobby
and the peeling paint. The painter is due here sometime in late 2009."
Yeah, right. Those silly business owners are well known for their
patience.

Even if you plan far in advance, complete a job and immediately
schedule the repainting several years down the road, what about clients
that do improvements? What do you say? "Sorry, can't be done. I know
you just built an addition for the new baby, but we have to stick to
the schedule."

Second nail in that coffin - if you have that long of a waiting list,
and some rubes willing to wait that long, you don't know how to price
your work. Are you hanging on to a 1992 Means book to do your
estimating? Hell, give the work away for free. I'm sure you can get
the waiting list up to well beyond your lifetime.

R

In article om,
says...
Well, let me put it this way;

I have had to use client-supplied Sherwin Williams "SuperPaint" a half
dozen times. Each and every time I found it to be inferior to what I
normally use on exteriors (SuperSpec) and FAR inferior to Benjamin
Moore's best exterior paint MoorGlo (for interiors, Aura - paint I
highly recommend as well.)

I rather like BM paints, perhaps because I really like the service
I get from the local store. However, I just did a bunch of pine
clapboards and the "super spec" primer was iffy. The knots stained
through the top coat (solid stain).

I will no longer accept a job that specs Sherwin Williams. I just don't
like the stuff, even their "best" paint. Maybe it's ok for Joe
Homeowner but in a production environment, it just doesn't cut it. I
happily warranty my work and I have learned what I can rely on.

I am "Joe Homeowner" and have had less than stellar luck with SW.
When the nozzle on a tube of caulk fell off and the calk went
everywhere it shouldn't be I wasn't impressed.

I will warranty Ben Moore Paint (SuperSpec or [Regal] MoorGlo), Donald
Kaufman Paint, Eurolux and Eco.

My work is as close to perfection as it can be and clients are willing
to pay for it. I currently have a three-year waiting list for existing
[mostly commercial] clients and a five+ year waiting list for new
clients. My work speaks for itself.

I simply like BM's paints, particularity the interior stuff. I
like the help I get from the local BM store. The End.

--
Keith

"jeffreydesign" wrote in message
ps.com...
My work speaks for itself.

Obviously it doesn't if you have to say it. Your bragging is doing all the
speaking.

"RicodJour" wrote in message
ups.com...
jeffreydesign wrote:

My work is as close to perfection as it can be and clients are willing
to pay for it. I currently have a three-year waiting list for existing
[mostly commercial] clients and a five+ year waiting list for new
clients. My work speaks for itself.

Sorry. You lost me with that last bit. I know of no client, no
person, commercial or otherwise, that would be willing to wait years
three to five years for a paint job.

He's really a bit full of himself.