High quality non-drip gloss

[Duncan]

I generally use trade paints. I find the extra benefit in ease of application and quality of finish amply compensate for their extra cost. The exception is gloss paint. I just cannot get to grips with full gloss, especially around vertical mouldings etc. so I have always used non-drip. And the trade doesn't use non-drip so I'm stuck with inferior retail products.

In the last 20 years the quality of non-drip gloss seems to have been falling further. The last batch I used (white Dulux) was truly awful. It has a very high shine but there seems to be so little pigment it is almost transparent. Even painted over a smooth white undercoat the finished effect is grey and streaky. I am guessing the paint companies are adding more plastic at the expense of pigment.

Are there any really good quality non-drip glosses available?

[Bruce]

I haven't found any. A relation swears by Dulux "Once" but I cannot get the hang of applying it. It goes on like toffee and I always end up applying too much.

I strongly prefer liquid gloss and just resign myself to having to apply twice as many thin coats.

[stuart noble]

Hardly. Pigments are usually the cheapest ingredient.

Nothing much has changed in the basics of painting. 90% undercoat and a single LICK of liquid gloss for the final finish. Horses,courses. You don't "build" a finish with gloss

Non-drip is a compromise. You can whip anything into a gel but, once on the surface it continues to behave as such, making it impossible to achieve any fine detail

[EricP]

Leyland non drip gloss paint.

Best there is.

[Bruce]

I wonder how many posters here share that view? I suspect very few.

One coat of gloss is not enough to fully develop the desired colour, especially if the undercoat is a very different colour. I can remember the days when a variety of colours were available in undercoat, but that is a long time ago now.

[stuart noble]

I think they still are at trade outlets.

[Edward]

You *can* tint undercoat, you know ;¬} There are other standard colours than off-white too. But being able to paint with proper, trade gloss paint is what sorts the pros from the amateurs. It's all in the laying off. I agree that mouldings can be a pain, but you should treat gloss paint like plaster - let it go off a bit, and then go back and lay it off again with a brush with no paint in it. I don't mean a new or clean brush, but work all the remaining gloss onto, say, a clean piece of lining paper and then do the laying off. Wherever possible, but particularly on vertical pieces, lay off in a downward direction.

Edward

[Bruce]

My grandfather taught me how to paint when I was in my teens. I come from a family of coachbuilders and -painters and the painting skills have been passed down.

At some point I will also teach my son, if he is interested.

[m1ss_wh1te]

On 16 Jun, 21:44, "Edward" wrote: lay off

On the contrary. Always better to lay off with strokes bottom to top.

[stuart noble]

As a plasterer said to me, "If you can piss, you can paint". Nothing you can't learn in half an hour really.

[teddysnips]

Sorry, you're wrong, though I'd agree that, for example, you do have to finish off vertically oriented surfaces such as stiles, mullions, architraves etc. with a short upward movement. 90% top-to-bottom, 10% bottom-to-top.

[Rod]

Why? Care to explain what real difference the direction makes? (Asked out of curiosity. I certainly don't know.)

[Bruce]

I bet painters say the same sort of thing about plasterers. ;-)

[Bruce]

That's how I was taught, but I'm not sure that the direction of laying off is anywhere as near as critical as the issue of whether you lay off, or don't.

[Bob Mannix]

Quite. Not to mention the fact that, if doing horizontal timbers you do the final laying off sideways to match the grain. On vertical timbers (personally) I lay off up and down quite firmly then left-right less firmly and finish with a gentle up-down laying off. For white gloss it's better to make the undercoat perfect and put on two thin coats of gloss thinned with w/spirit. Much faster and less plasticy looking (taught that by decorator stepson who can both p*ss and paint).

"High quality non-drip gloss" is an oxymoron.

[matthew.larkin]

For the clueless like me, can you explain "laying off".

Thanks

Matt

[Bruce]

Try reading this:

[Bob Mannix]

[teddysnips]

When painting using paints that "flow", such as oil paints, you need first to distribute them approximately evenly over the surface. Once this is done, you "lay off" to complete the process. Why top-to- bottom? Well, gravity, basically. When laying off, you're moving paint around, albeit to a lesser extent than when applying it. If you lay off bottom-to-top on most surfaces where you would find gloss paint, chances are that you'll encounter some sort of "obstacle" (for example, when painting a panel on a panel door, at the top of the panel will be the moulding.) If you lay off bottom-to-top you'll be depositing paint at exactly the point where drips and curtains are likely to begin. If you lay off top-to-bottom you're helping to remove the excess that will cause the drips.

[Rod]

Right - so on a flat panel with no edges (infinitely large :-) ) it would make no difference?