Paint is important!
Thread Starter
|
OVERDRIVE
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,201
Likes: 8
From: Norfolk, VA
Paint is important!
We spend a lot of time here comparing various tools/techniques/products for keeping our finishes looking their best, but I don't think it's stressed often enough that the paint that's on the car has a HUGE impact on the end result.
If you look at the magazine or TV ads for various detailing products, keep in mind that many of the cars depicted in the ads are show cars, and have exotic paint jobs that have been wet-sanded smooth before being buffed to within an inch of their lives.
I've even seen black show cars where the painter has added black pigment to the clearcoat for extra depth. (This is exactly like "candy apple red", where a red-tinted clear is applied over a metallic gold basecoat, except that it's a black-tinted clear over a black basecoat.) Tinted topcoats are just one way to increase depth that has nothing to do with the detailing products that may be used later.
Even among factory finishes, some are smoother than others, and pigments vary between different manufacturers. Porsche's "Diamond Black" and "Guards Red" are different from MINI's "Jet Black" and "Chili Red".
Also, minor differences in results between two products are hard to compare from memory, so the only way to evaluate them fairly is to have them both on the same car at the same time. This is also important because comparing finishes via video clips, photographs, or even applying the different products to the same car over the course of several days introduces too many variables like lighting, time of day, quality of light, etcetera. Watch the Barret-Jackson auction as an example - even an average paint job "pops" and sparkles when they have the car under the super-bright lights on the block. It's also the same reason that jewelry stores have all of those little halogen spots illuminating their pieces.
In short, remember that just as wearing a particular outfit isn't going to make you look like Linda Evangelista or Josh Duhamel, you can't expect that using a particular wax, polish, or sealant is automatically going to give you the same finish as the show car in the advertisement. Just like fashion models, those cars are show cars, shot under controlled lighting and possibly Photoshopped afterwards for good measure.
If you look at the magazine or TV ads for various detailing products, keep in mind that many of the cars depicted in the ads are show cars, and have exotic paint jobs that have been wet-sanded smooth before being buffed to within an inch of their lives.
I've even seen black show cars where the painter has added black pigment to the clearcoat for extra depth. (This is exactly like "candy apple red", where a red-tinted clear is applied over a metallic gold basecoat, except that it's a black-tinted clear over a black basecoat.) Tinted topcoats are just one way to increase depth that has nothing to do with the detailing products that may be used later.
Even among factory finishes, some are smoother than others, and pigments vary between different manufacturers. Porsche's "Diamond Black" and "Guards Red" are different from MINI's "Jet Black" and "Chili Red".
Also, minor differences in results between two products are hard to compare from memory, so the only way to evaluate them fairly is to have them both on the same car at the same time. This is also important because comparing finishes via video clips, photographs, or even applying the different products to the same car over the course of several days introduces too many variables like lighting, time of day, quality of light, etcetera. Watch the Barret-Jackson auction as an example - even an average paint job "pops" and sparkles when they have the car under the super-bright lights on the block. It's also the same reason that jewelry stores have all of those little halogen spots illuminating their pieces.
In short, remember that just as wearing a particular outfit isn't going to make you look like Linda Evangelista or Josh Duhamel, you can't expect that using a particular wax, polish, or sealant is automatically going to give you the same finish as the show car in the advertisement. Just like fashion models, those cars are show cars, shot under controlled lighting and possibly Photoshopped afterwards for good measure.
Vendor & Moderator :: MINI Camera and Video & c3 club forum
iTrader: (6)
You make some good points here, except that I disagree on one thing--the last sentence. I think anybody can have a "Show Car" or something that looks like a "Show Car" to the everyday person if they treat their car right and use the right techniques without having to use any trickery. That's the premise behind my website of ShowCarGarage.com
Considering that most paint is neglected--not counting the enthusiasts here on NAM that actually spend their time talking to others about which wax is better. The majority of the car population has paint thats rough, has bird crap etching or even the poo still on it, water spots, and SWIRLS. All the things that require more effort than a simple hand applied product can take care of for the average consumer, and you know how lazy they are to even think about putting on wax once a year on the WHOLE car!
Granted, what I work with, when I work on any car is the RELATIVE difference. The Before and After. But even that isn't foolproof, because the lighting conditions can have a major effect on how good the finish looks. Shooting a MINI under bright sunlight on a swirled out car will look horrible, but put a nice sunset on that same car, and it will look beautiful.
So I like to show the result of Test Spots to show how much improvement has been made on a side by side comparison. But paint needs to be treated with respect. There are only so many times that a full rotary buffer restore can be made on a paint before the paint is compromised. It's not like a facial makeover where you can make things look great for a few days or weeks and then it all washes away.
With paint, you can restore it to a "better than new" state in most cases, and it will stay that way with proper care. But if the owner lets it deteriorate in the same manner as before the makeover, the chance of a second or third restore is much slimmer.
Therefore as the subject of this thread, Paint is Important, rings very true!
People that have white or silver finishes that can't see swirls, park your car under a street lamp or take a xenon flashlight to your paint at night--in complete darkness. The swirls and scratches will practically light right up that were masked during the daytime. While these specific defects may not be visible during the day, they do affect the overall quality of reflections and "pop" from your paint---so IMO, any paint can be improved even if the defects aren't immediately evident in that paint.
Richard
Considering that most paint is neglected--not counting the enthusiasts here on NAM that actually spend their time talking to others about which wax is better. The majority of the car population has paint thats rough, has bird crap etching or even the poo still on it, water spots, and SWIRLS. All the things that require more effort than a simple hand applied product can take care of for the average consumer, and you know how lazy they are to even think about putting on wax once a year on the WHOLE car!
Granted, what I work with, when I work on any car is the RELATIVE difference. The Before and After. But even that isn't foolproof, because the lighting conditions can have a major effect on how good the finish looks. Shooting a MINI under bright sunlight on a swirled out car will look horrible, but put a nice sunset on that same car, and it will look beautiful.
So I like to show the result of Test Spots to show how much improvement has been made on a side by side comparison. But paint needs to be treated with respect. There are only so many times that a full rotary buffer restore can be made on a paint before the paint is compromised. It's not like a facial makeover where you can make things look great for a few days or weeks and then it all washes away.
With paint, you can restore it to a "better than new" state in most cases, and it will stay that way with proper care. But if the owner lets it deteriorate in the same manner as before the makeover, the chance of a second or third restore is much slimmer.
Therefore as the subject of this thread, Paint is Important, rings very true!
People that have white or silver finishes that can't see swirls, park your car under a street lamp or take a xenon flashlight to your paint at night--in complete darkness. The swirls and scratches will practically light right up that were masked during the daytime. While these specific defects may not be visible during the day, they do affect the overall quality of reflections and "pop" from your paint---so IMO, any paint can be improved even if the defects aren't immediately evident in that paint.
Richard
We spend a lot of time here comparing various tools/techniques/products for keeping our finishes looking their best, but I don't think it's stressed often enough that the paint that's on the car has a HUGE impact on the end result.
If you look at the magazine or TV ads for various detailing products, keep in mind that many of the cars depicted in the ads are show cars, and have exotic paint jobs that have been wet-sanded smooth before being buffed to within an inch of their lives.
I've even seen black show cars where the painter has added black pigment to the clearcoat for extra depth. (This is exactly like "candy apple red", where a red-tinted clear is applied over a metallic gold basecoat, except that it's a black-tinted clear over a black basecoat.) Tinted topcoats are just one way to increase depth that has nothing to do with the detailing products that may be used later.
Even among factory finishes, some are smoother than others, and pigments vary between different manufacturers. Porsche's "Diamond Black" and "Guards Red" are different from MINI's "Jet Black" and "Chili Red".
Also, minor differences in results between two products are hard to compare from memory, so the only way to evaluate them fairly is to have them both on the same car at the same time. This is also important because comparing finishes via video clips, photographs, or even applying the different products to the same car over the course of several days introduces too many variables like lighting, time of day, quality of light, etcetera. Watch the Barret-Jackson auction as an example - even an average paint job "pops" and sparkles when they have the car under the super-bright lights on the block. It's also the same reason that jewelry stores have all of those little halogen spots illuminating their pieces.
In short, remember that just as wearing a particular outfit isn't going to make you look like Linda Evangelista or Josh Duhamel, you can't expect that using a particular wax, polish, or sealant is automatically going to give you the same finish as the show car in the advertisement. Just like fashion models, those cars are show cars, shot under controlled lighting and possibly Photoshopped afterwards for good measure.
If you look at the magazine or TV ads for various detailing products, keep in mind that many of the cars depicted in the ads are show cars, and have exotic paint jobs that have been wet-sanded smooth before being buffed to within an inch of their lives.
I've even seen black show cars where the painter has added black pigment to the clearcoat for extra depth. (This is exactly like "candy apple red", where a red-tinted clear is applied over a metallic gold basecoat, except that it's a black-tinted clear over a black basecoat.) Tinted topcoats are just one way to increase depth that has nothing to do with the detailing products that may be used later.
Even among factory finishes, some are smoother than others, and pigments vary between different manufacturers. Porsche's "Diamond Black" and "Guards Red" are different from MINI's "Jet Black" and "Chili Red".
Also, minor differences in results between two products are hard to compare from memory, so the only way to evaluate them fairly is to have them both on the same car at the same time. This is also important because comparing finishes via video clips, photographs, or even applying the different products to the same car over the course of several days introduces too many variables like lighting, time of day, quality of light, etcetera. Watch the Barret-Jackson auction as an example - even an average paint job "pops" and sparkles when they have the car under the super-bright lights on the block. It's also the same reason that jewelry stores have all of those little halogen spots illuminating their pieces.
In short, remember that just as wearing a particular outfit isn't going to make you look like Linda Evangelista or Josh Duhamel, you can't expect that using a particular wax, polish, or sealant is automatically going to give you the same finish as the show car in the advertisement. Just like fashion models, those cars are show cars, shot under controlled lighting and possibly Photoshopped afterwards for good measure.
Thread Starter
|
OVERDRIVE
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,201
Likes: 8
From: Norfolk, VA
Richard,
I agree with you totally - I should have put my comments in a more-specific context. For those of us here that obsess over our finishes, there's a lot of discussion about wax versus sealant, or even which wax to use OVER which sealant, but not a lot of emphasis is placed on the fact that how wax "X" looks on a Pepper White MINI in Minnesota in February can't fairly be compared to how wax "Y" looks on a Jet Black MINI in Dallas in July.
Once you've got the paint cleaned and clayed, and all of the defects are removed, you're 95% of the way to the paint looking as good as it's ever going to look. The last 5% is *very* dependent on personal preference, paint quality, amount of factory orange peel, pigment, colour and ambient lighting, so there's really no fair way to *visually* compare waxes, sealants, quick detailers, etcetera except in person, on your car, preferably while having both products on your car at the same time.
Of course, some products are harder to apply/remove than others, and some may clog your pad more or be more prone to separate, and some are more expensive than others - I'm just talking about comparing the depth and distinctness-of-image.
So again, I should have been more specific in saying that I was talking about comparing products used in getting the last 5% out of the finish.
Oh, and I picked up one of the dual-Xenon "Swirl Finder" flashlights you recommended. It's made a world of difference in being able to pick out swirls on our white cars. Thanks for the tip! EDIT -- As you said in your last post, the dual-Xenon flashlight works best if it's the ONLY light on the car. When I used it for the first time on my wife's Pepper White MINI, I shut off the flourescent lights in my garage, but the incandescent light from the garage door opener was still "washing out" the swirls. Once the Xenon was the sole light source, the few swirls I had left were much more visible.
I agree with you totally - I should have put my comments in a more-specific context. For those of us here that obsess over our finishes, there's a lot of discussion about wax versus sealant, or even which wax to use OVER which sealant, but not a lot of emphasis is placed on the fact that how wax "X" looks on a Pepper White MINI in Minnesota in February can't fairly be compared to how wax "Y" looks on a Jet Black MINI in Dallas in July.
Once you've got the paint cleaned and clayed, and all of the defects are removed, you're 95% of the way to the paint looking as good as it's ever going to look. The last 5% is *very* dependent on personal preference, paint quality, amount of factory orange peel, pigment, colour and ambient lighting, so there's really no fair way to *visually* compare waxes, sealants, quick detailers, etcetera except in person, on your car, preferably while having both products on your car at the same time.
Of course, some products are harder to apply/remove than others, and some may clog your pad more or be more prone to separate, and some are more expensive than others - I'm just talking about comparing the depth and distinctness-of-image.
So again, I should have been more specific in saying that I was talking about comparing products used in getting the last 5% out of the finish.
Oh, and I picked up one of the dual-Xenon "Swirl Finder" flashlights you recommended. It's made a world of difference in being able to pick out swirls on our white cars. Thanks for the tip! EDIT -- As you said in your last post, the dual-Xenon flashlight works best if it's the ONLY light on the car. When I used it for the first time on my wife's Pepper White MINI, I shut off the flourescent lights in my garage, but the incandescent light from the garage door opener was still "washing out" the swirls. Once the Xenon was the sole light source, the few swirls I had left were much more visible.
Thread Starter
|
OVERDRIVE
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,201
Likes: 8
From: Norfolk, VA
I'm not going to wet-sand and buff the factory finish on a car that's going to be a daily driver, even though it would look *amazing*. You can do it, but the amount of clearcoat that you'll have to remove to get everything perfectly smooth is going to limit the amount of defect repair you'll be able to do in the future.
When I paint motorcycles, I use several coats of "build clear" to get the thickness up, and then after allowing that to cure and then wet-sanding it, I apply several coats of "flow clear" that's designed to level out more than the build clear. For anything other than a show bike, I leave it at that. For something that's actually going to compete, I even wet-sand the flow clear after it's cured. That extra work gives a finish that honestly can't be duplicated on factory paint, regardless of what products you use to make up the top few microns on the finish.
Thread Starter
|
OVERDRIVE
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,201
Likes: 8
From: Norfolk, VA
I just now noticed that in your sig, the bunny's nose is wiggling. I don't know why that cracks me up, but it does. Very nice.
I know that some of my other posts about the importance of paint may sound like I'm harping, but I'm just concerned because there are a lot of superlatives thrown around in the detailing world - in the advertisements, descriptions on vendor sites, web forums, etcetera - things like "show-car shine", "flawless", "perfect", "smooth as glass", "mile-deep", and things like that.
I'm just afraid that people (especially ones that have seen honest-to-goodness "show cars") might get unreasonable expectations from the descriptions & claims. I've seen a guy describe his driveway-painted Charger using several of the above terms, and then he posted a picture of it. I didn't say anything, but I'm looking at the photo thinking "this is a low-res digital picture on a computer monitor, and I can see the orange peel from here!"
I think there's definitely an "emperor's new clothes" syndrome going on as well, when people invest so much time and money on detailing their cars. It really twinged me to admit that the $100 container of P21S wheel cleaner I bought didn't work any better than the Griot's at less than half the price. I can't imagine what someone could talk themselves into if they just paid $175 for a tub of Zymol and spent the required time applying and removing it.
I don't want people to detail their cars and then wonder why the reflections waver slightly as they move their head back-and-forth. Like it says in Richard's video - "Sometimes all you can do is all you can do.", and I think it's important that people realize that the quality of the factory-applied paint they're working with is a *huge* contributor to the results they're going to get. Even after you clean it, clay it, polish it and wax it, you shouldn't be disappointed or confused if it doesn't look exactly like the finish on a Pebble Beach Concours winner, or Chip Foose's latest Riddler winner.
I know that some of my other posts about the importance of paint may sound like I'm harping, but I'm just concerned because there are a lot of superlatives thrown around in the detailing world - in the advertisements, descriptions on vendor sites, web forums, etcetera - things like "show-car shine", "flawless", "perfect", "smooth as glass", "mile-deep", and things like that.
I'm just afraid that people (especially ones that have seen honest-to-goodness "show cars") might get unreasonable expectations from the descriptions & claims. I've seen a guy describe his driveway-painted Charger using several of the above terms, and then he posted a picture of it. I didn't say anything, but I'm looking at the photo thinking "this is a low-res digital picture on a computer monitor, and I can see the orange peel from here!"
I think there's definitely an "emperor's new clothes" syndrome going on as well, when people invest so much time and money on detailing their cars. It really twinged me to admit that the $100 container of P21S wheel cleaner I bought didn't work any better than the Griot's at less than half the price. I can't imagine what someone could talk themselves into if they just paid $175 for a tub of Zymol and spent the required time applying and removing it.
I don't want people to detail their cars and then wonder why the reflections waver slightly as they move their head back-and-forth. Like it says in Richard's video - "Sometimes all you can do is all you can do.", and I think it's important that people realize that the quality of the factory-applied paint they're working with is a *huge* contributor to the results they're going to get. Even after you clean it, clay it, polish it and wax it, you shouldn't be disappointed or confused if it doesn't look exactly like the finish on a Pebble Beach Concours winner, or Chip Foose's latest Riddler winner.
Trending Topics
^^ well, don't forget that i do this for fun. i know im not octaneguy or
skitelluride level detailer, but its just fun to keep my cars clean to my
acceptable standards. and using good tools and known good products
is also part of the fun... and trying new products like Prima is also a lot
of fun.
if you're not havig fun then you're doing something 'wrong.'
(not wrong wrong, but wrong for you).
skitelluride level detailer, but its just fun to keep my cars clean to my
acceptable standards. and using good tools and known good products
is also part of the fun... and trying new products like Prima is also a lot
of fun.
if you're not havig fun then you're doing something 'wrong.'
(not wrong wrong, but wrong for you).
Thread Starter
|
OVERDRIVE
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,201
Likes: 8
From: Norfolk, VA
Oh, nothing wrong with that - I don't do it professionally either (even though my garage looks like I should). And I think that you know enough about it that you're not going get unrealistic expectations, or believe all of the hype out there. None of my comments or concerns have been about you.
Detailing is funny in that there's a large group of people that don't worry enough about it (like the people who MIGHT hit their cars with some Turtle Wax Cleaner/Wax and a washcloth once a year, whether it needs it or not), and then there are the brand-loyal zealots that will lump you in with the first group if you're not using exactly the right combination of lark's vomit and seal fat on your paint.
I just don't want some newbie to worry that he's not using exactly the right chemical, or to wonder why his car doesn't look exactly as good as someone else's car, and blame themselves for it, when it might be something as intrinsically unchangable as the colour of his paint or the quality of his factory finish.
Detailing is funny in that there's a large group of people that don't worry enough about it (like the people who MIGHT hit their cars with some Turtle Wax Cleaner/Wax and a washcloth once a year, whether it needs it or not), and then there are the brand-loyal zealots that will lump you in with the first group if you're not using exactly the right combination of lark's vomit and seal fat on your paint.
I just don't want some newbie to worry that he's not using exactly the right chemical, or to wonder why his car doesn't look exactly as good as someone else's car, and blame themselves for it, when it might be something as intrinsically unchangable as the colour of his paint or the quality of his factory finish.
6th Gear
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 15,478
Likes: 2
The carnauba over the synthetic sealer thing is being touted in showcar forums.
As to the zymol noted ... thats because your using the wrong zymol. You need to pick up this http://www.amazon.com/Zymol-12001-Ro...880191-7373725
Just consider that you DO get a lifetime refill with it.
I also think the detailing addiction on MINIs has a LOT to do with how tiny the car really is. Its really not all that much work. It take a lot longer on a regular sized car, never mind a SUV.
the MCS has so much curves that ittakes me longer to do the MCS vs say my Civic that is considerably
larger but with flatter panels. plus, no fender arches to worry about.
Vendor & Moderator :: MINI Camera and Video & c3 club forum
iTrader: (6)
I have a lower rate for detailing a MINI, not because it takes me 2 hours less than a BMW or Corvette, but because the owners don't expect to pay $400 to $500 for such an "inexpensive car".
Yet I love working in MINIs, and I love the experience of talking with the owners about their MINI, and so forth. Detailing or paint polishing is really about limits--how far can you/should you take the finish. If the car lives outside, in a day or so, its going to look ugly again. Should I really spend a day making it looks its best when its only going to look ugly in a few days time?? In that case, durability and longevity are far more important--so leaving as much clear is the focus, and I don't need to worry about providing a flawless finish, though done properly it will look fantastic.
I can spend 6 hours or 12 hours or 3 days on MINI if I want to--it's all about what I want to accomplish and that really should be the focus for any MINI owner--how much do you want to put into your car for the given environment the MINI lives in. For my own MINI, I"m lucky to put in 2 hours on it--to wash, and spot buff it for maintenance--but it's garaged most of the time, so it's just the dust and occasional rain that I worry about.
Personally I think the "detailing addiction" has more to do with how that car makes the owner feel when it's shiny and new, and that in many cases, the owner has never felt that way about any car before, so they are in essence newbies to the detailing world.
Yet I love working in MINIs, and I love the experience of talking with the owners about their MINI, and so forth. Detailing or paint polishing is really about limits--how far can you/should you take the finish. If the car lives outside, in a day or so, its going to look ugly again. Should I really spend a day making it looks its best when its only going to look ugly in a few days time?? In that case, durability and longevity are far more important--so leaving as much clear is the focus, and I don't need to worry about providing a flawless finish, though done properly it will look fantastic.
I can spend 6 hours or 12 hours or 3 days on MINI if I want to--it's all about what I want to accomplish and that really should be the focus for any MINI owner--how much do you want to put into your car for the given environment the MINI lives in. For my own MINI, I"m lucky to put in 2 hours on it--to wash, and spot buff it for maintenance--but it's garaged most of the time, so it's just the dust and occasional rain that I worry about.
Personally I think the "detailing addiction" has more to do with how that car makes the owner feel when it's shiny and new, and that in many cases, the owner has never felt that way about any car before, so they are in essence newbies to the detailing world.
6th Gear
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 15,478
Likes: 2
You will never forget your first time ... buying your first car
virgin until recently when i started paying attention more to
my paint.
i remember BradB was like 'wat? you shouldn't use an old t-shirt
as your wax removal cloth!
' well, back then a little imprefection on the paint was really NO BIG DEAL. its no
show car, i just wanted to keep it looking nice.
but now... NOOOO!!!
i want to make it looksuper nice.
but still show car nice is not needed.
Thread Starter
|
OVERDRIVE
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,201
Likes: 8
From: Norfolk, VA
I know what you mean - I was re-organizing my detailing towels the other day since I just got a new Tupperware tub to hold all of them, and I came across some old cloth diapers. In comparison to the new microfiber towels like the DP Monster Fluffies, they practically felt rough, and with no nap, I remember them clogging up quickly. I can't believe now that I ever used them on my paint, but I guess twenty years ago we didn't have the options we have now.
I know what you mean - I was re-organizing my detailing towels the other day since I just got a new Tupperware tub to hold all of them, and I came across some old cloth diapers. In comparison to the new microfiber towels like the DP Monster Fluffies, they practically felt rough, and with no nap, I remember them clogging up quickly. I can't believe now that I ever used them on my paint, but I guess twenty years ago we didn't have the options we have now.
makes the job so much faster too.
you should see medoing QD after a drive.
duster - maybe 2min
QD - maybe 5min tops
DONE!
well, add 2min more if doing exterior windows.
not that speed really matters.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post