On Nov 5, 9:16*am, N8N wrote:
On Nov 5, 3:37*am, gpsman wrote a bunch of
****.

Listen, you insufferable douchebag, why don't you just killfile me and
stop reading my posts?

Can't figger that out either...?

I've lost count of your reports of including me in your killfile...
and you still think that might work for me...?

I wouldn't killfile anything but spam.

I've never learned anything from you except that nitwits tend to
become more nitwitty as threads grow longer, but I'm not going to rule
out that remote possibility.

You are demonstrably an idiot.

Says the self-professed "knowledgable" driving expert who admits he
can't simultaneously monitor his speedometer and the road.

Nice demo, btw.

You contribute nothing useful to the discussion.

Or perhaps you are unable to discern it.

You obviously have taken a dislike to me because I see through your
bull****.

You know you're among my favorite Usenet nitwits.

Why don't you just **** right off into the sunset and hang out on a
group more your own speed, like alt.tonka.trucks or something?

As usual, you suggest somebody other than yourself address your easily
remedied "problem".
-----

- gpsman

On Nov 5, 2:23*pm, gpsman wrote:

As usual, you suggest somebody other than yourself address your easily
remedied "problem".

Um, I don't have the multiple problems. I'm not the insufferable
douchebag who insists on infesting multiple newsgroups, making an ass
of himself, and ****ting on the carpet.

If you'd STFU, realize that you don't know a tenth as much as you
think you do, lurk and learn, and THEN post, you might be marginally
tolerable. As it is, you're on the same level as such luminaries as
SADDAM, Calrog and Bullis. You're even more pathetic than them,
however, as you affect this air of superiority which is at once
annoying and pitiable.

nate

(why am I responding to this pathetic idiot?)

"N8N" wrote in message
...
On Nov 5, 3:37 am, gpsman wrote a bunch of
****.

Listen, you insufferable douchebag, why don't you just killfile me and
stop reading my posts?

You are demonstrably an idiot.

You contribute nothing useful to the discussion.

You obviously have taken a dislike to me because I see through your
bull****.

Why don't you just **** right off into the sunset and hang out on a
group more your own speed, like alt.tonka.trucks or something?

nate

I see you've met gpsman. Don't waste your time. He's an unhappy human with
nothing to offer in an intelligent conversation. He wanders from group to
group until his **** gets old, then he just morphs identity and keeps on
going, like some stupid wag who won't shut up. Like one of my ex-wives
............... I didn't talk to her for seven years ........... she would
never shut up. Just plonk him and save keystrokes. I mean yes, killing a
fly does alter the balance of the universe by some amount, but not that
much.

Steve

"gpsman" wrote

snip

Morphed again, you slimy little worm?

Apologies to worms.

Steve

N8N wrote:
On Nov 4, 10:45 am, Jim Elbrecht wrote:
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 07:18:28 -0800 (PST), N8N
wrote:

On Nov 4, 7:53 am, "dadiOH" wrote:
Red Green wrote:
Like to add, when touching up even from an original can, blend/fog by
running the brush/roller virtually dry way past the area being done.
Differences are harder to notice.
IME and IMO this is the best solution for the OP assuming that the new paint
color is pretty close. One can also feather out by diluting the paint.
It's not at all, that's the problem. I've had three different batches
of paint mixed and only one was close enough to even try putting it on
the wall, and it is clearly different - patches look like shadows.
I guess I just don't repaint often enough-- or maybe too often-- but
in 50 years of home-owning and doing my own painting, I don't recall a
single time that I tried to paint part of a wall-- and only a handful
of times that I painted less than the entire room.

We bought a very old house a couple years ago, and the PO's repainted
before the sale - and they apparently were big fans of mounting stuff
on the wall (e.g. mirrors etc.) and were NOT big fans of removing
things like light fixtures, mirrors, switch plates, etc. when
repainting. So for an example, when we had air conditioning installed
and had the old round thermostat replaced with a new programmable one,
there was an ugly exposed area of old paint, mounting holes, etc. left
behind with a big ridge of brush marks showing the outline of the old
thermostat. Likewise, they'd glued pieces of mirror on the wall in
the living room to conceal the old electrical boxes for wall sconces;
when I ripped those down to install new sconces I've got more
ugliness. (but I still have to take the big mirror - mounted like a
bathroom mirror, with clips - down over the mantel, which will cause
another big mess-o-ugliness) In each case there's enough brush marks,
holes, etc. that most of these areas get a skim coat of drywall mud,
primer, etc.

Once I've got enough of these really egregious trouble spots done,
then we'll likely go ahead and repaint whole walls or rooms, but I'm
just trying to keep the house from looking like a perpetual
construction site while this is going on.

nate

Follow up:

apparently I wasn't being too picky.

Somehow, miracle of miracles, I actually managed to get free from work
twice in one week so I went back to the Real Paint Store and told the
guy I wasn't happy with the match. He tuned it up and it's MUCH better.
Haven't rolled any on the walls yet but it looks like it is a better
match than I got from the Orange Colored Store. I'll be happy even if
it isn't perfect, just so long as the patches aren't real obvious until
such time as we can repaint. Guess I just got the b-teamer on the first
attempt. And the guy did take notes on his touchup so I can get more if
I need it, but I hope I won't.

So now I get to patch the ceiling in the kitchen, 'cause I can paint it.
Yay! (I think yay?)

Now another paint matching question - I have another area that needs
some spot repairs that's a slightly different color. In that room
however the vent grilles are on the baseboards so I don't have any
easily removable pieces painted the wall color that I can take to the
paint store. How do I get that matched? or do I just take a whole
buttload of color chips home with me and start holding them up to the
wall? (my eye really isn't quite good enough to narrow it down enough
that I can just grab two or three chips...) Or is there an easy way to
peel a sheet of paint off of a wall?

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

"SteveB" wrote in
:


"hr(bob) " wrote in message
.
.. On Nov 4, 8:09 pm, "SteveB" wrote:
"DanG" wrote in message

...

You're expecting way too much. If you had the original can of
paint, it would probably not be dead on out in the middle of a
wall. Any touch up painting will always require painting corner to
corner, top to bottom.

At last, a reasonable man.

I saved a quart of kitchen wall satin finish paint from when we
painted 8 years ago and when we had to change the mount for our
cordless telephone answering system last month, I mixed a little paint
with the drywall mud and filled in the appropriate areas. Then I
sanded down the entire area and painted it with a 2" roller, doing it
twice. I can't find the edge marks because it blended in so well.
But, the paint is a very mild off-white/yellow color. I washed the
whole wall before starting the patching, and even the sheen matches so
closely that it is difficult where the transition is. But, it was the
exact same apint.

Where I go, to the local big orange box, they smear a heavy coat of
the newly mixed paint on a white paper and then dry it thoroughly with
a hair dryer and check that against the sample you provide. They
prefer an actual chip of the paint to be matched, from some
inconspicuous point on the wall. If they are esperienced, and the
color is a little off, they can add a little of one of the colorants
to the original mix, put it in the shaker and try a second time. Then
they have to change the formula on the paper that they print out to
stick on the can.

reply:

I've had good luck with the big box store, too. And if you can peel a
big enough chip off to put in their computer, it will match pretty
good, even if it has aged or faded.

But if the paint is textured it can toss the reader into tilt mode I
hear. Any sample surface not perpendicular to the reader will be
interpreted as a slightly different shade. Not saying it always will but
the probability is a lot higher.

It's all up to the individual, as
slight differences may not be a big deal to some people, yet others
have to have it just so.

Steve

On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 17:46:21 -0700, "SteveB"
wrote:


....

Paint is a bitch. Even if you do save those things they put on the top of
paint cans stating exactly how many parts of which color they put in it, you
can have another gallon made down the road, and it comes out looking
different.

This can be for several reasons:


I will add one more comment. Often you can do a single plane
(one wall) stopping at a physical edge and not have any problems. We
are accustumed to seeing slight differences on different walls as the
light will not be the same on two different walls.
....

On Nov 5, 3:42*pm, N8N wrote:
On Nov 5, 2:23*pm, gpsman wrote:

As usual, you suggest somebody other than yourself address your easily
remedied "problem".

Um, I don't have the multiple problems.

Then what is your CC?

I'm not the insufferable
douchebag who insists on infesting multiple newsgroups, making an ass
of himself, and ****ting on the carpet.

You seem to intend to imply that is me. I don't know how I might
convince you what you think you think is not a problem for me.

I collect Usenet nitwits. I suppose it's kind of a k00ky amusement,
but I don't care what anyone might think of it, especially the likes
of you.

If you'd STFU, realize that you don't know a tenth as much as you
think you do, lurk and learn, and THEN post, you might be marginally
tolerable.

Learn what: correlation = causation; drivers observing speed limits
are not only violating the rights of those who don't but create
hazardous conditions for them relative to speed disparity per "Solomon
(1964)"; all rear-end crashes proximate to red light cameras are due
to the cameras and not poor operational choices; drivers are supremely
competent unless a condition should arise where they must reduce their
velocity, however slightly, against their will, at which time any
subsequent crash they might have is the sole responsibility of
whatever caused traffic to their front to slow; speed limits are
nothing more than a revenue grab from the entirely innocent; proof by
(single) example is a perfectly logical basis for a conclusion;
whatever most people might think is "right"; anyone with any
"credentials" hasn't nearly the credibility of someone who has only
barely managed to obtain a Class D license, ad nauseum...?

I'll tell you some things I know:

You post to Usenet far too often during business hours to be employed,
or be an honest employee.

You do not witness at least 2 rear-end crashes per day at freeway
velocities.

You are obviously a liar, fraud, and thief. If you are actually
employed you require constant supervision to extract any more than the
minimum amount of productivity.

As it is, you're on the same level as such luminaries as
SADDAM, Calrog and Bullis. *You're even more pathetic than them,
however, as you affect this air of superiority which is at once
annoying and pitiable.

It's more than an air. I actually have vast "accredited" education,
training, experience, and reading comprehension and critical thinking
skills. Those and my industriousness allowed me to retire with
nothing to do and all day to not do it. You have a Class D license
and nothing but contempt for what little training you were offered and
you rejected that in favor of whatever your dad and similar idiots
might proscribe.

(why am I responding to this pathetic idiot?)

It seems there is no limit to what you don't know but should, or your
lack of capacity for embarrassment for not knowing it.

You respond because you know, or more likely suspect, you look stupid
outside a group of the similarly ignorant with their similarly
imbecilic and preposterous perspectives.

This seems another of your transparent attempts to "appeal to
popularity" and rally a couple of nitwits in support of your most
common cause; shouting down conflicting opinion.

Or maybe you're just trying to substantiate my assertion that nitwits
tend to grow nitwittier as threads grow...?
-----

- gpsman