IMG_6293.jpeg
IMG_6294.jpeg
IMG_6295.jpeg
Had to see for myself close up
 
...so silly question: Was the original building painted back in the day? If so, was this a common practice back then?
 
UtakataNoAnnex said:
..so silly question: Was the original building painted back in the day? If so, was this a common practice back then?
Click to expand...
no you can still see part of the original colours - it was yellow/cream and brown/regular brick colored originally. You can tell it's original because the original had coal stains on it still.

They should have sodablasted this entire building and brought it back to an original colour. Looks like they just tried to even out the red it had already been painted and didn't quite get the colour right.
 
Chronamut said:
no you can still see part of the original colours - it was yellow/cream and brown/regular brick colored originally. You can tell it's original because the original had coal stains on it still.

They should have sodablasted this entire building and brought it back to an original colour. Looks like they just tried to even out the red it had already been painted and didn't quite get the colour right.
Click to expand...
...sorry, but it just seems so unthinkable that they would do this. Unless they're planning on turning it into a bawdy house or something.
 
UtakataNoAnnex said:
...sorry, but it just seems so unthinkable that they would do this. Unless they're planning on turning it into a bawdy house or something.
Click to expand...
Lol there's a word you don't hear every day anymore...

the only consolation is they didn't appear to be sloppy with the application, but yeah, painting over brick is always a dodgy business. Shoulda just cleaned it. The good news is it can always just be cleaned in the future - strip all the paint and soot off and restore it at a later date.
 
Chronamut said:
no you can still see part of the original colours - it was yellow/cream and brown/regular brick colored originally. You can tell it's original because the original had coal stains on it still.

They should have sodablasted this entire building and brought it back to an original colour. Looks like they just tried to even out the red it had already been painted and didn't quite get the colour right.
Click to expand...

Typically you do not sodablast brick because even the most skilled restoration mechanics can pit the surface of the brick. Pitting removes the protection layer that clay bricks get during the firing process. It means the brick will absorb more water and are more likely to spall during freeze-thaw cycles.

My guess is there were cost cutting measures on sourcing bricks that match the heritage ones. Or that there have been so many renovations/restorations that the brick was piecemeal anyways so the stain evens the appearance.

Again, this is not paint. It is a stain that absorbs into the bricks and still allows for moisture movement.
 
MOB said:
Typically you do not sodablast brick because even the most skilled restoration mechanics can pit the surface of the brick. Pitting removes the protection layer that clay bricks get during the firing process. It means the brick will absorb more water and are more likely to spall during freeze-thaw cycles.

My guess is there were cost cutting measures on sourcing bricks that match the heritage ones. Or that there have been so many renovations/restorations that the brick was piecemeal anyways so the stain evens the appearance.

Again, this is not paint. It is a stain that absorbs into the bricks and still allows for moisture movement.
Click to expand...
We do it in hamilton all the time - looks great after - just gotta be careful.

But yes those are legitimate issues, but not ones that are super threatening - none of ours seem to have suffered detrimentally and it's been years now for some of them
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top