# Are you a painter?



## Jmayspaint (Apr 20, 2014)

I've been in the trade my whole life and I take it pretty seriously. I'm a workaholic, or at least a think about workaholic. I enjoy analyzing procedures and products, and finding efficient systems. 

More and more though, as I delve into the technical side of the trade, I'm starting to dissociate with the word "painter". 

The word Painter can mean anything from a guy painting a house for money, to Bob Ross, to a kindergartner finger painting. 

Lately I'm thinking in terms of coatings applications rather than just painting. 

I have a question for all the "real" painters here. 

Assuming prep and atmospheric conditions are within spec, what is the most important factor in the performance of an applied architectural coating?


----------



## Big Shoe (Jun 16, 2008)

I can't say, I'm not sure if I qualify. :whistling


----------



## avenge (Sep 25, 2008)

I'm confused already, which question?


----------



## maxwage (Nov 25, 2012)

Even coverage.

I worked for a contractor who primarily had paint contracts because of his coatings background, but hired me for my carpentry/general construction experience.

My first day, was a Walmart paint job, exterior/interior. I'd never used an 18" roller, or primed a spray pump, strained paint, properly washed/spun brushes, etc...

I had some basic painting experience, but what I learned in the year I worked for this company, I gained a new found respect for painters. A perfectly executed job, could be ruined by a poor paint job. 

It's finish work. 

Semantics. You're a painter. I'm a carpenter. Just like someone who only builds birdhouses and picnic tables is a carpenter, and I build structures, I'm a carpenter.

Anyone who doesn't respect painters as a legit trade have some insecurity complexes.


----------



## Jmayspaint (Apr 20, 2014)

*Are You A Painter?*



avenge said:


> I'm confused already, which question?



What is the most important factor in the performance of an architectural coating? 

Any of the coatings we apply to our customers property to protect and/or beautify it. 


I'm wondering, other than prep work, what do you think is the most important factor in a coatings' (paint's if you prefer) performance. Whether it be a kitchen wall, or a block wall.

Edit: I mean to refer to factors within the painters control and not product specific issues.


----------



## avenge (Sep 25, 2008)

Jmayspaint said:


> What is the most important factor in the performance of an architectural coating?
> 
> Any of the coatings we apply to our customers property to protect and/or beautify it.
> 
> ...


Well you've taken away the 2 most important factors, prep and product. Only thing left includes more than just one aspect. As a "professional" painter you have to know your substrate, the correct product, how to apply it properly with speed and precision. Then you have choosing the correct roller cover and type of brush, etc.

So if I had to choose a one word answer taking away product and prep it would be "application". While many think anyone can paint it's not as simple as opening a can of paint and putting it on the wall.

But what do I know...my trade is listed as remodeling.:laughing:


----------



## stelzerpainting (Feb 27, 2014)

Jmayspaint said:


> What is the most important factor in the performance of an architectural coating?
> 
> Any of the coatings we apply to our customers property to protect and/or beautify it.
> 
> ...


Hey Josh. First time I've ran into you here versus over at PT. My answer would probably have to be applying at the correct millage. I think if the majority of painters actually measured the thickness of their coatings, they'd be quite surprised. All other things being equal, taking prep & atmospheric conditions out of the equation, I'd say applying to proper mils spec with the appropriate applicator medium.

My paint stores give me the WFT gauges for free, although I've never seen them out on the counters or racks. Good question BTW.


----------



## instock (Nov 17, 2012)

When a liquid boils, the bubbles form at little rough spots or imperfections in the container called nucleation sites. On Mythbusters, they demonstrated that if you put distilled water in a smooth glass and stick it in the microwave, it can be superheated above the boiling point without boiling. Then they threw a sugar cube in it and the whole thing boiled instantly and exploded everywhere. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_OXM4mr_i0

I think of paint the same way. When paint fails, the failure has to start somewhere. A paint film is only as strong as it's weakest link. A thicker film is not going to adhere better. The key to a long lasting paint job is applying a CONTINUOUS film. If possible, disassemble stuff and paint it from all sides. Caulk the gaps and get deep into the nooks and crannies.


----------



## griz (Nov 26, 2009)

Jmayspaint said:


> ...Assuming prep and atmospheric conditions are within spec, what is the most important factor in the performance of an applied architectural coating?...


I am not a painter, but have had to deal with many painting issues.

To answer your question most problems seem to arise from improper application methods/techniques.

Failure to RTFD.....


----------



## Jmayspaint (Apr 20, 2014)

griz said:


> To answer your question most problems seem to arise from improper application methods/techniques.
> 
> 
> 
> .....




Sure, to elaborate though, what type of problems are we talking about. You might have ascetic problems like flashing from miss application, but what factor in the application procedure (other than prep and product quality) can cause early failure of a coating. Whether it be extremely faded siding, or a supposedly scrubbable matte that burnishes after a light rub. 

To me, the obvious answer is the thickness of the film. Sheen consistency, hide, abrasion resistance, flexibility, etc are all directly impacted by the film thickness. To get the best performance from any coating, applying it at the thickness it's designed to be applied at is crucial. 

It's confusing to me when we say things like "two thin coats are better than one heavy one" or "a thicker film is not going to adhere better" 

Just saying thick or thin or heavy or light seems to be a very subjective observation.


----------



## Jmayspaint (Apr 20, 2014)

instock said:


> When a liquid boils, the bubbles form at little rough spots or imperfections in the container called nucleation sites. On Mythbusters, they demonstrated that if you put distilled water in a smooth glass and stick it in the microwave, it can be superheated above the boiling point without boiling. Then they threw a sugar cube in it and the whole thing boiled instantly and exploded everywhere.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_OXM4mr_i0
> 
> I think of paint the same way. When paint fails, the failure has to start somewhere. A paint film is only as strong as it's weakest link. A thicker film is not going to adhere better. The key to a long lasting paint job is applying a CONTINUOUS film. If possible, disassemble stuff and paint it from all sides. Caulk the gaps and get deep into the nooks and crannies.



Continuous yes, that's the key to good flow and avoiding runs. But continuous what? What do you mean exactly by a thicker film?


----------



## Ohio painter (Dec 4, 2011)

Good question and good answers too. I believe the most important aspect in the performance of pain.....ops architectural coatings is knowing when to use primers and which primers to use.


----------



## avenge (Sep 25, 2008)

Jmayspaint said:


> Sure, to elaborate though, what type of problems are we talking about. You might have ascetic problems like flashing from miss application, but what factor in the application procedure (other than prep and product quality) can cause early failure of a coating. Whether it be extremely faded siding, or a supposedly scrubbable matte that burnishes after a light rub.
> 
> To me, the obvious answer is the thickness of the film. Sheen consistency, hide, abrasion resistance, flexibility, etc are all directly impacted by the film thickness. To get the best performance from any coating, applying it at the thickness it's designed to be applied at is crucial.
> 
> ...


 I agree somewhat with your film thickness statement it goes along with my statement "application". It always annoyed me when someone would say "Lay it on thick" As a painter it's pretty easy to know when you're applying it too thin or too heavy. 2 thins coats are better than one heavy coat, you're going to get a better film thickness and it will dry properly.

Some of the best paints are thin so film thickness depends on the product.


----------



## Jmayspaint (Apr 20, 2014)

*Are You A Painter?*



avenge said:


> I agree somewhat with your film thickness statement it goes along with my statement "application". It always annoyed me when someone would say "Lay it on thick" As a painter it's pretty easy to know when you're applying it too thin or too heavy. 2 thins coats are better than one heavy coat, .




Yes, the word application does go along with film thickness, so does even coverage. 

How is it easy for a painter to know? I agree that it is, in fact easy to know, but how do you know? Are you meaning a feel type thing?


----------



## avenge (Sep 25, 2008)

Jmayspaint said:


> Yes, the word application does go along with film thickness, so does even coverage.
> 
> How is it easy for a painter to know? I agree that it is, in fact easy to know, but how do you know? Are you meaning a feel type thing?


It's visual and feel to me, pretty easy to know if you don't have enough paint on a roller or a brush if you're not spreading anything or spreading it too far. It shouldn't take pressure to spread more paint. 

A lot of painters use too long of a nap cover, applying too much paint and too much texture. To add to that different covers release and apply paint differently. I use a 1/2" that feels more like a 3/8" and a 3/4" that feels more like a 1/2" but they release a lot . A lambswool holds a lot of paint, actually too much and they leave large voids which take several passes to cover. If you apply paint heavily with a roller and you're not spreading it you're leaving too much texture. It's easier to apply a heavy coat with a brush at least you can lay it off.

This is why spraying has a bad rap because it's too easy to apply a very thin coat. The last thing you want when spraying is runs so the tendency is to apply till covered. That's why exteriors that are only sprayed one coat don't last very long at all, even two coats can only equal the thickness of one versus brush and roller.


----------



## stelzerpainting (Feb 27, 2014)

avenge said:


> It's visual and feel to me, pretty easy to know if you don't have enough paint on a roller or a brush if you're not spreading anything or spreading it too far. It shouldn't take pressure to spread more paint.
> 
> A lot of painters use too long of a nap cover, applying too much paint and too much texture. To add to that different covers release and apply paint differently. I use a 1/2" that feels more like a 3/8" and a 3/4" that feels more like a 1/2" but they release a lot . A lambswool holds a lot of paint, actually too much and they leave large voids which take several passes to cover. If you apply paint heavily with a roller and you're not spreading it you're leaving too much texture. It's easier to apply a heavy coat with a brush at least you can lay it off.
> 
> This is why spraying has a bad rap because it's too easy to apply a very thin coat. The last thing you want when spraying is runs so the tendency is to apply till covered. That's why exteriors that are only sprayed one coat don't last very long at all, even two coats can only equal the thickness of one versus brush and roller.


Are you saying that a brush/roller is capable of putting on a heavier coat than spraying? Let me clarify that. You have a brush, roller and sprayer in your arsenal. Which applicator is capable of putting on the thickest coat?


----------



## avenge (Sep 25, 2008)

stelzerpainting said:


> Are you saying that a brush/roller is capable of putting on a heavier coat than spraying? Let me clarify that. You have a brush, roller and sprayer in your arsenal. Which applicator is capable of putting on the thickest coat?


I already said a brush if you are applying it properly because I can lay it off. Can't do that with a sprayer or roller.

I'm not saying that a sprayer can't lay down a heavier coat, obviously it can but in what scenario, slightly too heavy and you end up with runs. It would have to be laying horizontal.

When I paint I don't attempt the heaviest coat possible. When I worked for a painting co. I was in the shop spraying shutters, mist coating then several coats, boss walked in and asked "Why aren't you just spraying them with one heavy coat" DUH what do you I'll get if I attempt that, runs and possibly cracking from too heavy a coat.


----------



## hdavis (Feb 14, 2012)

If you count a mist (or fog) + spray as one coat, then spray can give the thickest coat without sags, runs, or drips.

To me, the sound of the roller tells a lot about how thick a film is going on - for a given cover and paint, it will make a specific sound. Calibrate your ears with a mil gauge.


----------



## avenge (Sep 25, 2008)

hdavis said:


> If you count a mist (or fog) + spray as one coat, then spray can give the thickest coat without sags, runs, or drips.
> 
> To me, the sound of the roller tells a lot about how thick a film is going on - for a given cover and paint, it will make a specific sound. Calibrate your ears with a mil gauge.


Ya but technically that's not one coat.

Anyone else notice with some no voc paints and certain roller covers it makes a sound like the cover fibers are being pulled? I noticed this once while testing different covers. Brought it to my suppliers attention and he said it was the no voc paints and I'll have to try a different cover.

It was pretty bad almost like spreading contact cement.


----------



## Caslon (Dec 15, 2007)

avenge said:


> I already said a brush if you are applying it properly because I can lay it off. Can't do that with a sprayer...


Technically, you can load up brush or roller with more paint than it was intended to hold and maybe get a thicker coating. In actuality, spraying puts on an even paint film that is one and a half times thicker than normal brushing or rolling. Both rollers and brushes take off paint as well as put it on, when applying.


----------



## Jmayspaint (Apr 20, 2014)

Skyvorima said:


> ....It really seems like what you are seeking here is semantic superiority. Calling yourself a painter, applicator, aesthetic architectural manipulator, or master of coats is irrelevant.
> 
> 
> 
> The work speaks for itself. Always.



I didn't really mean it that way. What I'm proposing is a different way to look at our trade. 

I've been told by other posters here that to use methods other than traditional brush and roll, such as taping to make lines, means that your not a "real painter". It seems the general attitude here, and with many other painters I've met, is that the brush is king. That brush skills are the hallmark of the trade. While I agree it's an important skill to have, I've found in many instances the brush is not the most efficient or effective application tool. 

If thinking outside the brush means I'm not a real painter, I'm fine with that. I can barely draw a stick man, much less paint a picture or something. My job is to apply coatings. I find that focusing on the technical aspects of application, such as film thickness to be more valuable to my success than focusing on maintaining specific traditional methods used in application. 

And of course, the work does speak for itself. An ace paint job is a ace paint job whatever tools or techniques are used to accomplish it.


----------



## Skyvorima (Nov 3, 2013)

Jmayspaint said:


> I didn't really mean it that way. What I'm proposing is a different way to look at our trade.
> 
> I've been told by other posters here that to use methods other than traditional brush and roll, such as taping to make lines, means that your not a "real painter". It seems the general attitude here, and with many other painters I've met, is that the brush is king. That brush skills are the hallmark of the trade. While I agree it's an important skill to have, I've found in many instances the brush is not the most efficient or effective application tool.
> 
> ...


Rather than proposing a different way of looking at the trade why not ignore those who claim you or I are not real painters because we have different application methods? As you know there is no one way to apply the product and to me the real professionals are those who consistently ask basic questions such as:

Will this application provide the longest quality product for the client?

Is there another application method Ive not reviewed for possible improvements?

Had a client a few years ago comment about how the net sort of leveled the playing field for contractors but I disagreed with him and said it actually helps separate contractors into different groups because any contractor in any trade that does not use the net for product or application research is still living with Ben Franklin as a roommate. 

All I can suggest is let the work and your posts speak for themselves because nobody with a professional handle ever gives much respect to people who say "The only way is my way!" If someone accuses you of not being a real painter ask them to specifically detail their objection to your product and methods. Soon enough they will stop playing that game with you. :thumbsup:


----------

