did Norm stain black walnut with a dark walnut stain? Beautiful wood turned
to ugly.

I just don't understand, somebody 'spain it to me

Gary

GeeDubb wrote:

did Norm stain black walnut with a dark walnut stain?

No idea. Didn't see it.

Beautiful wood turned to ugly.
I just don't understand, somebody 'spain it to me

One man's beauty is another man's ugly. Nothing more complicated than
that.

Joe Barta

He'd just finished painting his mahogany poker table mahogany-colored
and was on a roll.

On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 13:07:52 -0700, "GeeDubb"
wrote:

did Norm stain black walnut with a dark walnut stain? Beautiful wood turned
to ugly.

I just don't understand, somebody 'spain it to me

Gary


Yeah. Norm does that. Makes a wonderful project using a premium
wood, then stains the hell out of it (almost as bad a paint), sigh.

I was rather surprised to see that myself until I thought about it. This is
Norm usual. He doesn't seem to like the natural color of any wood. All his
stain jobs are very, very dark and for paint, green seems to be a favorite.
He did admit on one show that he was not known for good finishes. He said
that the piece he was making that day (I don't remember what it was) was
going to be finished different than the prototype. The crew all told him
that the prototype was so ugly, he needed to do something different for the
show. I've seen him apply a dark stain to cherry and paint teak green.

"GeeDubb" wrote in message
...
did Norm stain black walnut with a dark walnut stain? Beautiful wood
turned
to ugly.

I just don't understand, somebody 'spain it to me

Gary

On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:43:39 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm,
Phisherman quickly quoth:

On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 13:07:52 -0700, "GeeDubb"
wrote:

did Norm stain black walnut with a dark walnut stain? Beautiful wood turned
to ugly.

I just don't understand, somebody 'spain it to me

Yeah. Norm does that. Makes a wonderful project using a premium
wood, then stains the hell out of it (almost as bad a paint), sigh.

He sands only to 150, stains the **** out of it (to bring out the
scratches?), nails things onto it, then swabs poly all over it.
Oy vay!

-
The advantage of exercising every day is that you die healthier.
------------
http://diversify.com Dynamic Websites, PHP Apps, MySQL databases

"GeeDubb" wrote in message
...
did Norm stain black walnut with a dark walnut stain? Beautiful wood
turned to ugly.

I just don't understand, somebody 'spain it to me

Gary

My guess is that it's because he's sponsored by Minwax.

Gary in Virginia

I kind of find it funny when I am at shows, and people ask me what
stains do I use.
" I don't stain anything, these are the natural colors of the woods."
"Oh, they are so beautiful"

I don't know where people get the idea that wood has to be stained to
look good.
robo hippy

There is intelligent life here, but I am only visiting. unknown

"robo hippy" wrote in message
oups.com...

I don't know where people get the idea that wood has to be stained to
look good.
robo hippy

Because most people that stain, stain unfinished pine furniture.

GeeDubb (in ) said:

| did Norm stain black walnut with a dark walnut stain? Beautiful
| wood turned to ugly.
|
| I just don't understand, somebody 'spain it to me

'Cause it was nicer than the avocado latex he had in the paint shed?

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto

"GeeDubb" wrote in message
...
did Norm stain black walnut with a dark walnut stain? Beautiful wood
turned to ugly.

I just don't understand, somebody 'spain it to me


Just take a look at Norm's entire body of work. He almost always smears
some black tar crap on what was a nice looking piece of furniture, although
I think that it may actually not be as dark in reality as it looks in the
finishing room on the show. I can't recall him ever leaving anything a
natural color.

Frank

"Morris Dovey" wrote in message
GeeDubb said:

| did Norm stain black walnut with a dark walnut stain? Beautiful
| wood turned to ugly.
|
| I just don't understand, somebody 'spain it to me

'Cause it was nicer than the avocado latex he had in the paint shed?

.... and it had five pounds of brads in it, so why not?

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/13/05

Phisherman wrote:
On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 13:07:52 -0700, "GeeDubb"
wrote:


did Norm stain black walnut with a dark walnut stain? Beautiful wood turned
to ugly.

I just don't understand, somebody 'spain it to me

Gary



Yeah. Norm does that. Makes a wonderful project using a premium
wood, then stains the hell out of it (almost as bad a paint), sigh.

Never seen the show, but it gets right up my nose when blokes do that
sort of thing.
Worked for a furniture company once that specialised in making Jarrah
side boards and kitchens.
They used to make this real beaut piece out of sold Jarrah, then slap
Jarrah stain on it, "So as to even out the colour".
IMO they should have used merrantie or pine and whacked the Jarrah stain
on that. Leave the real stuff for blokes that appreciate real timber and
it's many colours and defects.

regards
John

"Gary in Virginia" wrote in message
link.net...

"GeeDubb" wrote in message
...
did Norm stain black walnut with a dark walnut stain? Beautiful wood
turned to ugly.

I just don't understand, somebody 'spain it to me

Gary

My guess is that it's because he's sponsored by Minwax.

Gary in Virginia

Who make all manner of clear finishes as well. Doubt it.

Norm's still got the carpenter mentality, I think, where he's knocking
things together out of #2 common SPF and trying to make it look good. Ever
try to match spruce to pine or white pine to red? Takes a heap of color and
glaze.

He did admit on one show that he was not known for good finishes.

Maybe he's color-blind. Seriously. That would explain the unusual
paint schemes.

brian

"Frank Ketchum" wrote in message
news:rLRHf.14645
Just take a look at Norm's entire body of work. He almost always smears
some black tar crap on what was a nice looking piece of furniture,
although I think that it may actually not be as dark in reality as it
looks in the finishing room on the show. I can't recall him ever leaving
anything a natural color.

I'd have to check which ones but I recall projects finished with Danish oil
only.

Cheers!
Duke

While Norm is frequently used for target practice with most "almost
professionals", I am wondering since he is a paid employee of Morash if
he has a choice. Especially since he has said more than once that he
makes almost always make three of each piece; one to sell, one for the
show, and one for sale/show/Morash.

I guess the other thought would be... gawd forbid... maybe in his own
simple, pedestrian way, he likes it. I guess many here would stop
watching if they found out poor Norm actually had different tastes than
the "experts".

I watch eagerly for each of your shows to show how to finish
"correctly".

Robert

"brianlanning" wrote in message
ups.com...
He did admit on one show that he was not known for good finishes.

Maybe he's color-blind. Seriously. That would explain the unusual
paint schemes.

I have to use some proprietary software from time to time that is a
graphically intense program. And the guy who does all the graphics is color
blind. I have to spend hours changing the colors to something that doesn't
give me headaches.

Talk about putting the wrong guy on this particular task.

On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 01:33:43 +0000, Leon wrote:


"robo hippy" wrote in message
oups.com...

I don't know where people get the idea that wood has to be stained to
look good.
robo hippy

Because most people that stain, stain unfinished pine furniture.

Some truth in this. I know, I was one of them. Started out 25 years ago
buying home center pine and staining and varnishing everything. Now I use
hardwoods and haven't used stain for several years. Finishes of choice
are shellac, homemade wiping varnish, and sometimes oil.

Sometimes I like the way Norm finishes his projects. Most of the time I
don't. Since they are his projects and not mine I figure he can do what
he wants and I'll do what I want.

D.G. Adams

Grow up.

wrote in message
ups.com...
While Norm is frequently used for target practice with most "almost
professionals", I am wondering since he is a paid employee of Morash if
he has a choice. Especially since he has said more than once that he
makes almost always make three of each piece; one to sell, one for the
show, and one for sale/show/Morash.

I guess the other thought would be... gawd forbid... maybe in his own
simple, pedestrian way, he likes it. I guess many here would stop
watching if they found out poor Norm actually had different tastes than
the "experts".

I watch eagerly for each of your shows to show how to finish
"correctly".

Robert

I know Norm bashing is popular but in his defence staining is often
necessary in the real world. Customers often have expectations that
must be met. They may expect their new cherry table to look like 100
year old cherry that they see in antique furnitue and don't want to
wait for it to darken. If you want to make the sale you do what you
have to to try to give that look. If you are doing a one off showpiece
you can spend three years looking for a piece of wood with that perfect
figure. If you are making kitchen cabinets for moderate prices you may
have to "enhance" the appearance a little. Stains, glazes and even
topcoats change and enhance the appearance of wood. Oils, shellac and
even varnishes add color to the appearance. Ironically some of the much
ridiculed polyurethanes probably are the clearest, read least
colormodifying, coatings. You may be lucky and able to enjoy the
natural looks of woods. but even recreational woodworkers have
customers to deal with, specifically SWMBO, so learning the technique
probably isn't a bad idea. Now I won't defend Norms skills as a
finisher. If you want to be really good at it get a good book like Bob
Flexner's and spend your couch time productively.

Lee Michaels wrote:
"brianlanning" wrote in message
ups.com...

He did admit on one show that he was not known for good finishes.

Maybe he's color-blind. Seriously. That would explain the unusual
paint schemes.


I have to use some proprietary software from time to time that is a
graphically intense program. And the guy who does all the graphics is color
blind. I have to spend hours changing the colors to something that doesn't
give me headaches.

Talk about putting the wrong guy on this particular task.




Had a mate who was describing the paint job he intended to do on house.
He was trying to give me an idea of the tone of red he was going to use
and after looking around the sitting room and finding nothing the colour
he had in mind, pointed out the window and said "There, that's the
colour, the same red as the door on your shed".

The door on my shed is GREEN, this bloke was a copper to.

regards
John

Leon wrote:

Because most people that stain, stain unfinished pine furniture.



What's really sad is that if you're buying unfinished pine furniture, it
looks heaps better down the road if it was simply clear coated then
stained. Or for that matter, milk painted.

I've seen old pine stuff take on a decent look because it was coated
with shellac or an oil varnish. Again, not appropriate for the
Vanderbilt's ballroom, but still displaying a comfy, warm, country charm.

OTOH, pine stained with Minwax Dark or Special Walnut just NEVER seems
to look good. G

Barry

On 13 Feb 2006 19:24:43 -0800, "ktc" wrote:

I know Norm bashing is popular but in his defence staining is often
necessary in the real world.

Not by cabinetmakers working at Norm's level, with timber of that
quality.

There are good reasons for staining. Nearly all are a combination of
either cheap timber or ignorant clients. If you're not constrained in
this way then there's no excuse for doing it as Norm does - taking
perfectly fine timber and ruining it.

"Andy Dingley" wrote in message
...
On 13 Feb 2006 19:24:43 -0800, "ktc" wrote:

I know Norm bashing is popular but in his defence staining is often
necessary in the real world.

Not by cabinetmakers working at Norm's level, with timber of that
quality.

There are good reasons for staining. Nearly all are a combination of
either cheap timber or ignorant clients. If you're not constrained in
this way then there's no excuse for doing it as Norm does - taking
perfectly fine timber and ruining it.

I have made that point before.

Somebody got all upset wih me and said that Norm was just being
"historically accurate".

Which I thought was just stupid. Why take beautiful wood and cover it up?
If that is some kinda tradition, we don't need it. Wood has its own unique
beauty and it is a crime to cover it up. (Think we can get that legislation
passed?)

"Lee Michaels" writes:

"Andy Dingley" wrote in message
.. .
On 13 Feb 2006 19:24:43 -0800, "ktc" wrote:

I know Norm bashing is popular but in his defence staining is often
necessary in the real world.

Not by cabinetmakers working at Norm's level, with timber of that
quality.

There are good reasons for staining. Nearly all are a combination of
either cheap timber or ignorant clients. If you're not constrained in
this way then there's no excuse for doing it as Norm does - taking
perfectly fine timber and ruining it.

I have made that point before.

Somebody got all upset wih me and said that Norm was just being
"historically accurate".

Which I thought was just stupid. Why take beautiful wood and cover it up?
If that is some kinda tradition, we don't need it. Wood has its own unique
beauty and it is a crime to cover it up. (Think we can get that legislation
passed?)


Say what? Man, if someone wants to use stain, more power to them. Who are
you, or I to say what looks best? To you a clear finish looks good. To Norm,
and many many others, stain is a look they like. Why not just let them
do as they like?

scott

Scott Lurndal wrote:

Say what? Man, if someone wants to use stain, more power to them.
Who are you, or I to say what looks best? To you a clear finish
looks good. To Norm, and many many others, stain is a look they
like. Why not just let them do as they like?

I agree. I tend to not like natural finish wood. I usually like a
darker and more robust finish. Then again I kinda like chubby chicks,
so who the hell is going to listen to me anyway??

Joe Barta

"Joe Barta" wrote in message
.. .
Scott Lurndal wrote:

Say what? Man, if someone wants to use stain, more power to them.
Who are you, or I to say what looks best? To you a clear finish
looks good. To Norm, and many many others, stain is a look they
like. Why not just let them do as they like?

I agree. I tend to not like natural finish wood. I usually like a
darker and more robust finish. Then again I kinda like chubby chicks,
so who the hell is going to listen to me anyway??

Joe Barta

Hey Joe, did you say something?

Gary

;-)

Andy Dingley wrote:

There are good reasons for staining. Nearly all are a combination of
either cheap timber or ignorant clients. If you're not constrained in
this way then there's no excuse for doing it as Norm does - taking
perfectly fine timber and ruining it.

Holy crap I wish I was that proud of my opinion. I am thinking now of
all the ignorant clients I have had over the years... they didn't know
that they shouldn't have their cabinets, built-ins, and decorative
moldings painted or stained.

It is always reassuring to me to see the level of acceptance of the
ideas of others in this group. Outstanding. I always thought that you
could do what you wanted with your own personal projects, but not too
sure now. And now to find out my well heeled clients are "ignorant";
it may be more than I can handle. After all I do what they want, that
is what they pay me to do. Some folks here may be sorely surprised at
the masses of the great unwashed, the unknowing, that actually prefer
stain and paint.

My own personal taste is a natural oil for most pieces, maybe with an
occasional tint to highlight some grain patterns. However, if Norm or
anyone else want to **** on their projects for finish, I am fine with
that. He could stain it brown with whatever he thought was fine, and
as long as he could contain the smell (I do have some limits). It's
his project. He built it. I personally wouldn't give a moment of
thought to asking someone else what they preferred on my projects. If
I built it, that sombitch is mine. Period.

Time to get the brad/glue bitch going again. Or maybe the one where he
is a puppet for his coporate masters to shill machinery.

Robert

wrote:

I am thinking
now of all the ignorant clients I have had over the years... they
didn't know that they shouldn't have their cabinets, built-ins,
and decorative moldings painted or stained.

Quite a few years ago I was going through a book on old Georgian
colonial homes. It had many full page photos of amazing interior
woodworking... to me, it was some of the most beautiful stuff in the
world.

I remember distinctly seeing a caption below one of the pictures
noting that while the wood paneling and various woodworking were
currently a natural type finish, when the home was built it would have
been common for the woodwork to have been painted, and in fact this
interior had been stripped of paint at some point. I thought... paint?

As I thought about it further, even though it seemed odd *to me*, I
suppose the rooms would look damn fine painted.

I guess beauty is in the eyes of the beholder and beauty is often what
the beholder thinks beauty is *supposed* to be.

Joe Barta

said:

snip

My own personal taste is a natural oil for most pieces, maybe with an
occasional tint to highlight some grain patterns. However, if Norm or
anyone else want to **** on their projects for finish, I am fine with
that. He could stain it brown with whatever he thought was fine, and
as long as he could contain the smell (I do have some limits). It's
his project. He built it. I personally wouldn't give a moment of
thought to asking someone else what they preferred on my projects. If
I built it, that sombitch is mine. Period.

While I wholeheartedly agree with the gist of your altruistic defense,
you must admit that, although the first clock intro'd looked pretty
good, the one he built and "stained" while filming the episode was one
butt-ugly sumbitch. Looked as though it was drug through... well...
something brown and lumpy. :-o I was truly aghast, and I've
developed an acute tolerance for the stain and glaze mentality.
Perhaps it was an interrupted bitstream in the HDTV broadcast, but the
sight of this high resolution atrocity was nearly nauseating. ;-)

Time to get the brad/glue bitch going again. Or maybe the one where he
is a puppet for his coporate masters to shill machinery.

But he's a really affable shill... ;-)
As with most who find themselves in the public spotlight, I'm sure a
certain amount of criticism is to be expected.

FWIW,

Greg G.

Joe Barta said:

I remember distinctly seeing a caption below one of the pictures
noting that while the wood paneling and various woodworking were
currently a natural type finish, when the home was built it would have
been common for the woodwork to have been painted, and in fact this
interior had been stripped of paint at some point. I thought... paint?

As I thought about it further, even though it seemed odd *to me*, I
suppose the rooms would look damn fine painted.

Much fine woodworking is indeed painted, but I still cringe to think
of buying that $7 bf walnut and painting or staining / glazing it.
That's what poplar is for... :-o

Temporal perceptions have altered the general public consensus on what
"looks good" in this decade. As the commonplace and mundane woods of
yesteryear faded to synthetics, gypsum and latex, we now find
ourselves celebrating natural woods once again. I suppose in times
past, being surrounded by unfinished wooden bowls, spoons, tables,
chairs, and well... everything, paint was considered quite upscale.

The changing fortunes of time continue to wreak havoc on expectations.
Now that wood isn't so common, we yearn for what was once concealed.

FWIW,

Greg G.

Sun, Feb 12, 2006, 9:43pm (EST+5) (Phisherman) trieh to
assert:
snit (almost as bad a paint), sigh.

Uh huh, yeah, sure, right. And next thing you're probably gonna
tell us don't paint cherry.



JOAT
I'm busy now, can I ignore you some other time?

Greg G. wrote:

Temporal perceptions have altered the general public consensus on
what
"looks good" in this decade. As the commonplace and mundane woods of
yesteryear faded to synthetics, gypsum and latex, we now find
ourselves celebrating natural woods once again. I suppose in times
past, being surrounded by unfinished wooden bowls, spoons, tables,
chairs, and well... everything, paint was considered quite upscale.

The changing fortunes of time continue to wreak havoc on expectations.
Now that wood isn't so common, we yearn for what was once concealed.

How very true is that? I work on a lot of houses (the one I looked at
yesterday was built in 1927; appraised value 1.1 million) and most of
the older homes had painted wood of a quality we will never see again.
This had all Douglas fir pediments, keyed trim around the windows with
all wood frames with sills and skirts. All with no knots, rough spots,
or curly grain. This also applied to the shoe mold, the 6" crown
molding (not sure of the wood, though) and the door casings with
transoms.

All was gleefully painted. With many coats, too. When I am in the
attic of an older house, it is not uncommon for me to see rafters in
the 18 - 20' range in pine that have no knots at all for the entire
length. It was only framing lumber for the builder, but for us it
would be treasure.

For me, as stated, I like finishes that let the wood come through.
That's been the norm for many and certainly the hobby guys for many
years now. But 30 years ago when I started out, we stained everything.
I mean everything. The style was darker woods, like the old dark
libraries and studies, and the dark walled game rooms. We stained
trim, paneling, cabinets, doors, etc. I mean everything. We stained
walnut to a darker walnut. We stained cherry to a cherry red, not mild
pink.

In later years, we painted over a lot of the clear lacquer finishes on
kitchen cabinets and built ins as the French Country style of deorating
took hold. Everything had to be painted out white. Everything. I
must admit, it was a huge improvement for some of the kitchens we
reworked.

But those weren't my projects, so I just did what the client wanted.
What someone chooses for a finish wasn't any of my business then, and
don't think it is now. Sure, I'll agree that it is hard to watch Norm
slather on some of those finishes, but hey... it's his project.

I just took offense to an earlier post that pronounced that people that
finish wood contrary to their authorotative, magificent opinon were
simply ignorant. Just about two shades of dark walnut too arrogant for
me.

Robert

Joe Barta wrote:

I remember distinctly seeing a caption below one of the pictures
noting that while the wood paneling and various woodworking were
currently a natural type finish, when the home was built it would have
been common for the woodwork to have been painted, and in fact this
interior had been stripped of paint at some point. I thought... paint?

I remember reading something about wealthy people having painted
woodwork, while common trim was natural. Some of the painted built up
trim was cherry or mahogany! G

Apparently paint was very expensive at one time and only the wealthy
could afford it.

wrote:

I just took offense to an earlier post that pronounced that people that
finish wood contrary to their authorotative, magificent opinon were
simply ignorant. Just about two shades of dark walnut too arrogant for
me.

I remember someone noticed and pointed out that Norm stains
everything... I don't remember anyone being "arrogant".

I saw someone say they thought his choice looked like crap. That's an
opinion, but I don't think it is "arrogant", as it doesn't lead one to
think he's assuming to himself or making any claims of any degree of
importance by wagering it.

There's no sense in arguing about taste. (how's that go? De Gustibus
non disputandum est, or something...)

But maybe I'm looking at a different post than you.

er
--
email not valid

Enoch Root wrote:

I remember someone noticed and pointed out that Norm stains
everything... I don't remember anyone being "arrogant".

This was the statement made...

"There are good reasons for staining. Nearly all are a combination of
either cheap timber or ignorant clients. If you're not constrained in
this way then there's no excuse for doing it as Norm does - taking
perfectly fine timber and ruining it."

Maybe straddling the border between opinion and arrogance.

Then again, we're talking about arrogance like it's a bad thing ;-)

Joe Barta

Joe Barta wrote:
Enoch Root wrote:


I remember someone noticed and pointed out that Norm stains
everything... I don't remember anyone being "arrogant".


This was the statement made...

"There are good reasons for staining. Nearly all are a combination of
either cheap timber or ignorant clients. If you're not constrained in
this way then there's no excuse for doing it as Norm does - taking
perfectly fine timber and ruining it."

Maybe straddling the border between opinion and arrogance.

Then again, we're talking about arrogance like it's a bad thing ;-)

Okay, I was looking (upthread) at a different (similar) statement--one
not as strongly worded.

I still think it's a strong opinion, not arrogance. I have no qualms
with strong opinions if someone can back them up. Mind you, matters of
taste seem like the most pointless topic in which to do this...

er
--
email not valid