|
|
|
to brush or to roll? |
|---|
| message from John Richer on 19 May 2004 |
For appplying emulsion to walls and ceilings, what's the general view on
rolling vs brushing? I much prefer a brushed finished, especially in
the more formal rooms of a house, and in older properties. I was
speaking to an otherwise excellent decorator the other day who had a
beautiful portfolio of work, but told me he always rolled as brushing
was too slow. BUt given that most of the time is spent on the prep
anyway (thinking of Victorian rooms here, grotty sashes, crumbly
plaster), surely this is a minor consideration.
|
| Christian McArdle replied to John Richer on 20 May 2004 |
Personally, I'm a roller type, despite every attempt my mother made from
birth to steer me towards pads. I can't seem to get a consistent film
thickness with pads, whilst brushes leave horrible brush marks. I'd probably
spray everything if I had a spray gun, though, and could empty the room of
furniture (rarely possible). My ideal surface has no application marks at
all.
Christian.
|
| Bob Mannix replied to Christian McArdle on 20 May 2004 |
Hear, hear!
Bob
|
| Bob Mannix replied to John Richer on 19 May 2004 |
Well you have answered your own question haven't you? I always roll (having
cut in with a brush) because I prefer the rolled finish (and it's a lot
quicker). If you *much* prefer the brushed finish, why are you even asking -
you are the one who has to live with it!
Bob Mannix
|
| John Richer replied to Bob Mannix on 19 May 2004 |
To be specific, I suppose I was (a) interested in others' opinions and
(b) after a guess as to *how* much longer (more expensive) it would take
to brush rather than roll a 5m x 4m room, for a professional
decorator. I figured a big emulsion brush on a well prepared surface
wouldn't be so much slower than rolling, for a pro.
|
| Mary Fisher replied to Bob Mannix on 19 May 2004 |
I prefer living with the brushed finish too.
Mary
|
| N. Thornton replied to John Richer on 20 May 2004 |
Roller is way quicker than brush, but it splatters everywhere. If the
room is completely stripped, fine, but otherwise all the extra paper
and clear up negates the time saving IME.
Regards, NT
|
| RichardS replied to N. Thornton on 21 May 2004 |
news:<ucbrkkb1w2.fsf@grigori.ra.phy.cam.ac.uk>...
Decent dust sheets are what's needed! Fraction of the time of using paper.
If you're cutting in is any good you don't need to mask anything, and one of
the reasons decorators paint woodwork last is that any fine roller spatters
(if you dont' go mad with a roller they are pretty fine, there's definitely
a knack to it) dry quickly and are not seen under the gloss/eggshell finish
coats.
Even if you use an emulsion brush you still need to do cutting in with a
smaller brush, so there's no time saving there.
|
| RichardS replied to John Richer on 20 May 2004 |
Painted a room a short while ago using Farrow and Ball's Estate Emulsion.
This was the first time I'd used this particular paint, and the advice on
the tin was to apply with a brush for the flattest finish.
I didn't - went for applying with a roller and then laying off with an
emulsion brush - gave a very good flat finish and I reckon quicker than just
applying with a brush.
IMHO roller is quicker. perhaps as much as 30 to 50% quicker for a pro.
|
| Andy Hall replied to RichardS on 20 May 2004 |
It's a nice paint which helps as well.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| Mary Fisher replied to Andy Hall on 20 May 2004 |
Lovely paint - but a roller isn't suitable for all conditions - such as
small profiles.
I prefer the action of using a brush for any paint, time isn't important,
the pleasure of the activity is. But Spouse prefers a pad and sometimes a
roller. I don't insist that he uses a brush, I'd have to clean it :-)
Mary
|
| Bob Mannix replied to Mary Fisher on 20 May 2004 |
"Mary Fisher" <mary.fisher@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in message news:40acbaba$0
<snip>
Ah, all is clear, we clearly inhabit a different planet to you.. :o)
Bob Mannix
|
| Mary Fisher replied to Bob Mannix on 20 May 2004 |
Which planet are you on then?
Actually, I suspect it's less a matter of space, more time. I do tend to
live in the past ...
And in fact I do save a lot of time by not painting that often ... the last
time a room in this house was painted was about five years ago. The previous
occasion was more than ten, before that I can't remember. Different rooms by
the way. So when I do it's a novelty and I want to experience it to the full
<G>
I've been looking at the smallest room, some of the bl**dy grandchildren
have been picking at the paper. I now understand how my aunt felt (who owned
this house from new) when I carefully squashed down all the bubbles in the
Anaglypta I could reach while sitting with my little legs dangling ... and
denied it of course. I think I can't bear it any longer and shall have to
find a brush.
Mary
|
| Bob Mannix replied to Mary Fisher on 20 May 2004 |
You explain that lower down in your reply. You are on planet grandchildren,
I have not managed lift off from planet children yet - maximum wear and
tear, minimum time to do anything about it. Rollers for the foreseeable....
Bob Mannix
|
| Mary Fisher replied to Bob Mannix on 20 May 2004 |
Hey! Just because you have grandchildren doesn't mean the children
disappear.
In the last month we've helped one son build a reclaimed brick garage
(having reclaimed the bricks for him and cleaned them some time ago).
Another son has moved to a house which needs a huge amount doing to it. We
spent last weekend (remember that glorious weather?) indoors demolishing
walls, re-wiring, de-nailing a floor (why did people use twenty five nails
per square foot?) (I counted) and sweeping the debris of half a century as
well as the chimney. I'm also doing his laundry until he gets the plumbing
fixed - which will involve Dad's help. The decorating will be last on the
list but it's a l-o-n-g list. Another son brought a car for Dad to do
welding. A daughter will be haymaking soon, she's hinted that we might like
to spend some time for relaxing on her farm. I bet there won't be much
relaxing, there'll be shearing as well as haymaking. The other daughter just
needed a pair of horn spectacle frames.
For nineteen years the demands from and caused by eight grandchildren have
been more than from five children, now, it seems, we have the sum of both -
plus their wives and husbands.
Perhaps now you understand why I like to have an excuse to take time with a
task ... :-) I should be sitting smelling of lavender and knitting ...
Mary
|
| Bob Mannix replied to Mary Fisher on 21 May 2004 |
<snip tale of woe>
All right, enough already - I give in - having been given the brush-off I
shall roll over (sorry). (I don't believe your last sentence, you don't
sound the type!).
Bob Mannix
|
| Mary Fisher replied to Bob Mannix on 21 May 2004 |
Oh it wasn't a tale of woe - I was just explaining that being grandparents
doesn't necessarily mean that you have more time than when you only had the
dependence of one generation.
(I don't believe your last sentence, you don't
I was talking to my publisher's wife about this last night. Although she
doesn't have grandchildren yet she's, if anything, busier than I am. She
asked, "Knitting? Oh yes, that's what we used to do twenty years ago when we
only had toddlers and babies and had time for ourselves ... "
Actually I used to knit a lot. I'd like to again but there has to be the
space. Also, since my arthritis makes sitting a killer, it wouldn't be the
pleasure it was :-(
Mary
|
| Andy Hall replied to Bob Mannix on 21 May 2004 |
No need to pad it out then ........ ;-)
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| Mary Fisher replied to Andy Hall on 21 May 2004 |
You've got your handle on that one ...
Mary
|
| Mary Fisher replied to Mary Fisher on 20 May 2004 |
er - wossat then?
Mary
|
| S Viemeister replied to Mary Fisher on 20 May 2004 |
Used in some families to punish children.
|
| Mary Fisher replied to S Viemeister on 20 May 2004 |
Hmm. Does it work?
I'm just trying to decipher the name of a customer - written by me. I've had
to admit defeat and mailed his lady saying that going on for sixty years ago
I often had a ruler across my little chubby knuckles because my writing was
so awful.
It just goes to show that corporal punishment didn't do anything for me ...
Mary
|
| S Viemeister replied to Mary Fisher on 20 May 2004 |
I don't know - I've never tried it. Too late now, anyhow - they're bigger
than I am.
Hitting wasn't permitted at my school (luckily for me).
Sheila
|
| Mary Fisher replied to S Viemeister on 20 May 2004 |
I didn't do it either. Spouse once hit a daughter and he broke his
wristwatch which made him even more furious and everyone else laugh ...
You're so young :-)
Mary
|
| S Viemeister replied to Mary Fisher on 20 May 2004 |
Hah.
Haven't been young for years and years.
(I didn't attend an English primary school.)
Sheila
|
| Andy Hall replied to S Viemeister on 21 May 2004 |
Oh well..... You missed out there then.
- School milk in 1/3 pint bottles which in the winter froze and had to
be thawed on the heating pipes.
- Toilets on the other side of the playground and open to the
elements.
- Music and Movement to the accompaniment of the Radio every morning
- Listen with Mother on the radio at 1345 every day for reception
class
- Permanent scabs on knees from falling over in the playground
- School dinners consisting of unidentifiable material
- The gymshoe or the cane for anybody who was naughty
- Teachers who were allowed to teach what was important rather than
what was politically correct.
- Probably the best days of my life.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| Mary Fisher replied to Andy Hall on 21 May 2004 |
I still have one <pride>
But it wasn't from the playground - I fell down the stone cellar steps while
wearing wooden clogs.
There's posh!
Mary
|
| usenet replied to Andy Hall on 21 May 2004 |
All absolutely what I remember.
I hated every bloody minute of it, it was the most truly awful part of
my life. I did end up with three good A levels in spite of it all so
it's not just sour grapes.
My first job as an apprentice in an electronics firm was a revelation,
it was fantastic compared to school (and university for that matter).
|
| Mary Fisher replied to Andy Hall on 21 May 2004 |
I liked that.
There was a roof! But they were further away than the air-raid shelters.
We didn't have radio in school until one waws imported into my high school
for the Coronation.
And picking them off. - Hey - don't kids fall down and get scabs now?
Some was identificable as cardboard. That was in the 'poptato'. I liked the
porridge we often had for pudding. Look - when you're hungry you'll eat
anything. There were no picky eaters then.
No gymshoes in my day. No cane either, two rulers across the knuckles. And
there was always the threat of The Black Book. My parents had gone to the
same school and both their names, they claimed, were in The Black Book.
Ah yes ... <sigh>
Well, for me every day is better than the last but I do know what you mean.
They WERE good days. But so is today - I'm alive.
Or: I hurt therefore I am.
Mary
|
| RichardS replied to Mary Fisher on 21 May 2004 |
<snip>
I don't think they're allowed to do anything that could possibly (however
small the risk) involve falling down any more.
Laceration can lead to a nasty case of litigation you see.....
|
| Mary Fisher replied to RichardS on 21 May 2004 |
They're deprived then. Scabs can be fun :-)
Mary
|
| Tony replied to Mary Fisher on 21 May 2004 |
My kids primary school only recently got inside toilets. And the school
opened in 1645 - took quite a long time to get those installed :-).
I think you'd be surprised at how appalling some schools still are re the
facilities.
Tony
|
| Andy Hall replied to Mary Fisher on 21 May 2004 |
I suppose we all look back with rose tinted spectacles.
With respect to the fifties, I found this little snippet the other
day:
http://www.noeasytask.com/goodwife.htm
I don't remember things being quite like it at our place though.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| Mary Fisher replied to Andy Hall on 21 May 2004 |
No point in looking back, andy. I look forward!
I don't even believe it.
Women don't even do it now.
Mary
|
| Andy Hall replied to Mary Fisher on 21 May 2004 |
I know. More's the pity.... (ducks).... ;-)
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
|
| Mary Fisher replied to Andy Hall on 21 May 2004 |
I haven't any. I have hens ... a grandson wanted me to buy him a couple of
call duck for his 19th but then he said he ws moving and wouldn't be able to
have them.
Then, as is the way with 19 yos, he didn't move. I saved money.
But going back to the subject of this particular drift, men aren't what they
were in the 1950s either, more's the pity ...
Mary
|
| Mary Fisher replied to S Viemeister on 21 May 2004 |
Mine was worse than that - it was in the North of England. I was lucky not
to be in the mill next door.
Mary
|
| Mary Fisher replied to S Viemeister on 21 May 2004 |
Hmm. I was at an OAK class yesterday.
OAK = Osteo Arthritis of the Knees.
But I think I was the oldest there so I've done quite well :-)
Mary
|
| Christian McArdle replied to Mary Fisher on 20 May 2004 |
But there surely isn't anything as satisfying as going over the wall with
the roller? I cut in first with a brush and the sheer pleasure of filling in
the middle in around 1 minute flat can't be overestimated, especially after
spending time carefully butting up to a picture rail or WHY.
Actually, I've just thought of a few things more satisfying, but it is still
pretty good.
Christian.
|
| Mary Fisher replied to Christian McArdle on 20 May 2004 |
It depends what you enjoy.
Because, for me, speed isn't important. And I really wouldn't want to use
two different applicators.
Mary
|
| RichardS replied to Andy Hall on 21 May 2004 |
<snip>
Well, it was definitely good paint and has an excellent flat finish. I
wouldn't say 2-and-a-bit times better than the leyland trade matt that I
normally use, however (which is approximately the price differential).
Still, whatever colour kept SWMBO happy....
I'll try and use the rolling on-brushing off technique with the leyland
paint when I decorate my office this year and compare the finish.
|
| Grunff replied to John Richer on 19 May 2004 |
Pads every time. Nicer finish than brush or roller, cleaner than
rolling, and nearly as quick as rolling.
|
| Mark replied to Grunff on 20 May 2004 |
Yes Seconded, ive been using Pads for years now better finish then a roller
and I don't get paint splatters on my glasses doing ceilings.
Local pound shop does them, erm for a pound so there almost use once
disposable.
|
| The Natural Philosopher replied to Mark on 20 May 2004 |
Yeah, those Tampax sure mess up the finish...
|
| Grunff replied to Mark on 20 May 2004 |
Combination of disposable pads and Harris tray liners (2 for 50p) means
no more washing up.
|
|
