# walls look horrible after paint.



## cdwoodcox (Feb 3, 2012)

So we had this discussion over at drywall talk but I wasn't happy with any of the responses over there so I will throw it at you guys.

perfectly sanded joints showing edges like they were never sanded after paint is applied. This job I'm on I took the job foreman back too look at a couple of rooms showed him the seams he said their is nothing else you can do looks good. 
After paint looks horrible both edges show like they were never sanded.
Painters used sheetrock firstcoat primer and devoe paint&primer for the finish paint (satin). 1/2 nap for primer 3/8 nap for finish coat. Walls were dusted prior to prime and sanded between finish paint. 
Have you guys ever seen this and if you have what is your take on it.


----------



## ProWallGuy (Apr 7, 2007)

If the edges look like they weren't sanded, then they weren't sanded. How do they feel whole running your hand over them with your eyes closed? Are they smooth and flush or not?


----------



## cdwoodcox (Feb 3, 2012)

ProWallGuy said:


> If the edges look like they weren't sanded, then they weren't sanded. How do they feel whole running your hand over them with your eyes closed? Are they smooth and flush or not?


Thanks for the input but I disagree. I have sanded thousands of houses and this is a new problem. I am just looking for someone that has experienced it first hand to get new ideas from a painters perspective on why it would be happening.


----------



## Schmidt & Co. (Nov 6, 2008)

cdwoodcox said:


> Thanks for the input but I disagree. I have sanded thousands of houses and this is a new problem. I am just looking for someone that has experienced it first hand to get new ideas from a painters perspective on why it would be happening.


Either the paint is flashing, or the seams are rough. It can only be one or the other. So I'm assuming by your reply I quoted, that there is no problem with the seams? Try painting one wall with two coats of a premium paint, that is not of the same brand currently. See how it looks and you have your answer.


----------



## RH (Sep 7, 2010)

I thought PWG ended the thread by telling you to feel the wall. Either it's smooth or not. What else is there? I'm guessing drywall talk told you the same thing....


----------



## Rcon (Nov 19, 2009)

I'm thinking he might be referring to a 'fat-edge' left by a roller or something. 

Should be pretty easy to tell the difference between unsanded corners and fat edges though.

Edit - anything in this pic look familiar?


----------



## TJ Paint (Jun 18, 2009)

Pictures would help.


----------



## ewingpainting.net (Jun 2, 2008)

What was the paint system used?


----------



## Workaholic (Apr 17, 2007)

Got pics? Can I find them at DWT? 

I would have to agree with everything said. 
1. not sanded properly.
2. A substandard drywall sealer was used if you can not feel it, you may be seeing how the material soaks into the wall. It will suck in more at the joints showing a flash. Is it just some joints or all butt joints and heads? 
3. Roller marks which is a painters error. 

Again pics would help this thread quite a bit.


----------



## cdwoodcox (Feb 3, 2012)

You guys must have never seen it or if you have just assumed the drywaller didn't sand properly. Cause that is exactly what it looks like. But haven't you ever looked at a wall before paint and prime and say good job then after p/p thought this drywaller sucks.

It has to be something more complex like maybe the moisture from the primer kind of wet sanding the feathered edge off of the seams or the paper absorbing moisture and slightly swelling. it doesn't show unless strong side light or strong down light. under normal lighting conditions it will probably never be seen but it does look bad when their is halogens sitting around showcasing what appears to be unsanded work.


----------



## CliffK (Dec 21, 2010)

Is it possible when the joints were sanded that so was the paper facing on the sheetrock? What you get then is a smooth joints, but rough paper where the paper meets the compound giving the illusion of a rough joint, but it actually the paper facing on the sheetrock that is rough and of a different texture mostly visible from an angle.


----------



## cdwoodcox (Feb 3, 2012)

CliffK said:


> Is it possible when the joints were sanded that so was the paper facing on the sheetrock? What you get then is a smooth joints, but rough paper where the paper meets the compound giving the illusion of a rough joint, but it actually the paper facing on the sheetrock that is rough and of a different texture mostly visible from an angle.


You might be onto something. Yes the paper does fuzz up while sanding. It is dusted off before p/p but in order to fuzz up the paper it has to be getting sanded also. It is hard to sand one surface and leave no edge when the surface below is dissipating also. It would look perfectly fine until p/p and all dust is removed by sweeping walls and sanding between coats. And with the cheaper recycled paper now days it would be quite possible. 
See now were thinking out of the box. Who else can brainstorm.


----------



## Workaholic (Apr 17, 2007)

cdwoodcox said:


> You guys must have never seen it or if you have just assumed the drywaller didn't sand properly. Cause that is exactly what it looks like. But haven't you ever looked at a wall before paint and prime and say good job then after p/p thought this drywaller sucks.
> 
> It has to be something more complex like maybe the moisture from the primer kind of wet sanding the feathered edge off of the seams or the paper absorbing moisture and slightly swelling. it doesn't show unless strong side light or strong down light. under normal lighting conditions it will probably never be seen but it does look bad when their is halogens sitting around showcasing what appears to be unsanded work.


Yeah it is hard to determine without pics. We essentially gave the short answer since there are variables on both ends. Could of been sanded to fine to where you sealed the pores, could of been painters material. Could be a lot of things on either end. Either way it comes down to really two things material or technique. Drywall end or paint end. 

Give me the pics you are killing me. lol


----------



## DeanV (Apr 18, 2007)

Did you spray and backroll the primer or just spray it?


----------



## CliffK (Dec 21, 2010)

cdwoodcox said:


> You might be onto something. Yes the paper does fuzz up while sanding. It is dusted off before p/p but in order to fuzz up the paper it has to be getting sanded also.  It is hard to sand one surface and leave no edge when the surface below is dissipating also. It would look perfectly fine until p/p and all dust is removed by sweeping walls and sanding between coats. And with the cheaper recycled paper now days it would be quite possible.
> See now were thinking out of the box. Who else can brainstorm.


 This is very common in this area. I see it all the time. The reality is ...is that the joints should really be polished coated and feathered to the paper facing without any sanding where the spackle meets the paper facing. That's the way it was intended to be done and was done for many, many years. There was no dust to control and most professional spacklers/tapers didn't even carry a piece of sandpaper. Somewhere along the line as a result of the need for greater/faster production and the lack of experienced tapers the trend became to put it on and sand it smooth instead of polishing to a fine edge. Now it is just the way it is done and the way younger guys are taught. Many paints and primers will actually make that slightly fuzzy edge stand up and be more noticeable after paint, where you could hardly see it after sanding and before priming. Add in the lesser quality drywall paper facing and you've joints that show.


----------



## cdwoodcox (Feb 3, 2012)

Workaholic said:


> Yeah it is hard to determine without pics. We essentially gave the short answer since there are variables on both ends. Could of been sanded to fine to where you sealed the pores, could of been painters material. Could be a lot of things on either end. Either way it comes down to really two things material or technique. Drywall end or paint end.
> 
> Give me the pics you are killing me. lol


 I will take pics on Monday. Both sanded edges and after p/p


----------



## 2buckcanuck (Dec 14, 2010)

CliffK said:


> This is very common in this area. I see it all the time. The reality is ...is that the joints should really be polished coated and feathered to the paper facing without any sanding where the spackle meets the paper facing. That's the way it was intended to be done and was done for many, many years. There was no dust to control and most professional spacklers/tapers didn't even carry a piece of sandpaper. Somewhere along the line as a result of the need for greater/faster production and the lack of experienced tapers the trend became to put it on and sand it smooth instead of polishing to a fine edge. Now it is just the way it is done and the way younger guys are taught. Many paints and primers will actually make that slightly fuzzy edge stand up and be more noticeable after paint, where you could hardly see it after sanding and before priming. Add in the lesser quality drywall paper facing and you've joints that show.


I would half to call bull on that one, tapers never use to sand

If anything, the muds are too soft these days. back in the day, the mud was way more tougher to sand, so yes you had to be cleaner with the work. While these days, you can let things slide more. A mud blob on the paper, back in the day, would take 50 strokes with 100 grit paper, to sand off, and take the paper off if you tried scrapping it (when dry). These days, 3 or 4 strokes with 150 grit, and it's gone.

as for the paper on the rock back then, guess we can't prove which is better. But I would GUESS todays is better.

And yes pictures would be nice.

my advice to cd is a tougher mud, I know he does good work, seen pics of it on DWT. But he is younger than me, and I find the younger bucks like the softer muds. Seen some of those soft muds just "flake" right off the walls when painted. just saying.... don't want to bore everyone with mud talk on this site so......:thumbsup:


----------



## CliffK (Dec 21, 2010)

2buckcanuck said:


> I would half to call bull on that one, tapers never use to sand
> 
> 
> Sorry man, it's true. When I first started in this business(yeh, I'm getting old) there was no dust, and joints were feathered & polished. Maybe on a particularly difficult spot, angle or splay there may have been a couple passes with some paper, but absolute minimum. Yes the muds were harder and slicker. not soft a powdery. After the second coat they would knock any ridges off with the knife and polish it out. The jobs were better and cleaner. I'm not saying it's wrong to sand now. I have accepted that, that is what it has become. That's the way the newer generation of mechanics are taught. That's why the paper is roughed up and the joints show if you are sanding at all off the spackle itself.


----------



## Wood511 (Dec 13, 2010)

I've noticed softer mud over the years as well. For small areas, tape repairs or new joints, I never dry sand these days. Most of the time, I will just use a sponge and get the dried mud slightly moist - enough to see some streaks if I press a bit. Then I back off and go over it very lightly to smooth out the coat. Sponging removes a bit of mud but also moves it around to smooth it out and give it a craftsman finish.

The difference around a tape joint between sponging and sanding can be profound in my experience. With sponging (or even sometimes lightly wet sanding) you are pushing substantive and sticking mud in the crevice adjacent to the tape line. With dry sanding using today's mud/spackle/joint compound, I have found that the crevice is mostly filled with dust. Even sweeping doesn't get the dust out unless you follow the tape line. The wet paint roller then grabs the dust and removes just a bit, which makes the line visible.

I'm certainly not positive that this is the issue in this situation, but this is a problem these days.


----------



## RH (Sep 7, 2010)

Ok I've experienced the dust fill in air bubbles that the paint has lifted afterwards so suppose it could happen on edges as well though I don't see how since there is no hole to catch it. Since you've done thousands, what did you do differently this time? New wallboard, joint compound, employee , method? 

I assume you would recognize roller ropes or paper burn.


----------



## jack pauhl (Nov 10, 2008)

Its likely the mud type. Some of the muds we've been seeing are not feathering off to the surface of the paper rather an edge outlining the patch remains. This photo below was a result of that mud type. The builder re-mudded all of them as seen below. Some muds feather to some board brands better than others.



In this photo, the mud type became shiner with each coat applied but did feather to the board surface.


----------



## epretot (Dec 17, 2011)

jack pauhl said:


> Its likely the mud type. Some of the muds we've been seeing are not feathering off to the surface of the paper rather an edge outlining the patch remains. This photo below was a result of that mud type. The builder re-mudded all of them as seen below. Some muds feather to some board brands better than others.
> 
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/jackpauhl/6508725597/
> 
> ...


So...what was done about the mud becoming shinier with each subsequent coat. I do a lot of commercial repaint work on a specific property where the paint is very inconsistent. I am able to see each drywall seam and filled hole from the original construction. The campus is painted in vivid colors and I assume the contractor simply did as many coats as it took to cover (become opaque). This building is just now receiving its first repaint. Most of the time another coat makes the finish look very good...but not always. It sometimes does what you experienced in your second photo.The specified paint is Devoe Wonder Pure eg-shel.


----------



## jack pauhl (Nov 10, 2008)

epretot said:


> .....So...what was done about the mud becoming shinier with each subsequent coat.


The last I experienced it was back in 2008. It is the same type of flashing you get over vinyl spackle such as DAP. We used Gardz back then to fix it. Tried about 14 wall primers but never fixed it, some made the patch flash more. We were finishing in eggshell like the blue wall pic.

Today if I were faced with that problem I would expect either BEHR ULTRA or Premium Plus to resolve it in a 2 coat scenario based on my experience with them both and this is something I can test for Monday and Tuesday. I'll just add DAP Vinyl patch to the patch flashing tests because it flashes easily.


----------



## jack pauhl (Nov 10, 2008)

Essentially these photos somewhat tell the story about what is happening.

The horizontal mud joint reflects wetter than the board around it but in this case this is flat paint so it hides it when dry. The wet vertical stripe is staying wetter yet because it is sealed better underneath this top coat of flat. When its eggshell, you lose sheen on the board but the particular patch used in the blue wall photo above does not absorb the paint the same way. So, basically, in the blue photo above the patched areas are actually the true sheen of that paint where the areas around the patch is not.



in the scenario below same thing happening but this one has one primer, 3 top coats of flat. Again, the mud stays wetter longer but all goes away when dry because its flat. As this joint tends to stay wet longer, some muds absorb little of the paint or primer so the sheen builds over the patched areas.


----------



## epretot (Dec 17, 2011)

jack pauhl said:


> The last I experienced it was back in 2008. It is the same type of flashing you get over vinyl spackle such as DAP. We used Gardz back then to fix it. Tried about 14 wall primers but never fixed it, some made the patch flash more. We were finishing in eggshell like the blue wall pic.
> 
> Today if I were faced with that problem I would expect either BEHR ULTRA or Premium Plus to resolve it in a 2 coat scenario based on my experience with them both and this is something I can test for Monday and Tuesday. I'll just add DAP Vinyl patch to the patch flashing tests because it flashes easily.


I rarely have this problem with residential repaint. I use SW cashmere almost exclusively. However, when working on the specific campus mentioned above, the Devoe Wonder Pure (1) coat leaves behind some inconsistencies. I'm not being paid to apply two coats. Patch, spot prime, and paint. I'm almost certain 2 coats would help. Also, I'm sure the drywall finishing is somewhat to blame. It is commercial after all.


----------



## jack pauhl (Nov 10, 2008)

Those are tough situations to be in especially if you are unable to change the product and like you said, the workmanship can also be a challenge. Never tried Wonder Pure.


----------



## WisePainter (Dec 27, 2008)

CliffK said:


> 2buckcanuck said:
> 
> 
> > I would half to call bull on that one, tapers never use to sand
> ...


----------



## goldenwest (Aug 11, 2011)

I'm just curious - do drywall guys still do a whole surface coat for real top quality finish? Over here in Holland tape-and-top drywall is still not very common. Finish plastered walls are the norm, and frequently the plasterer is called in to apply a finish coat over sheetrock.


----------



## ProWallGuy (Apr 7, 2007)

goldenwest said:


> I'm just curious - do drywall guys still do a whole surface coat for real top quality finish? Over here in Holland tape-and-top drywall is still not very common. Finish plastered walls are the norm, and frequently the plasterer is called in to apply a finish coat over sheetrock.


Yes, its called a level 5 finish. I see it occasionally.


----------



## TJ Paint (Jun 18, 2009)

I suppose we won't ever see the pics on the op. Oh well.


----------



## daArch (Mar 15, 2008)

I saw recent replies to this and thought pix had been posted.


----------



## TJ Paint (Jun 18, 2009)

daArch said:


> I saw recent replies to this and thought pix had been posted.


Nope, just the usual suspects: JP showing how behr is a miracle paint, etc.


----------

