Phil Speight

Ron Hough`s funeral will be at All Saints Church Braunston on Tuesday the 22nd at 12.30pm. I have been asked to post this here by his family so it can be taken that all are welcome.

Generally of whisky - as I think I remember! Good times much missed and hopefully a rematch may be on the cards for early March. Remember all, there had to be a fair degree of marketing involved when I first started Craftmaster. We had all long used red oxide finishes of various kinds on the areas of "traditional" boats that once would have been painted in old fashioned red raddle,which was a sort of brick red colour - although there would have been an amount of variation. I needed a name for the Craftmaster product we introduced for that purpose and, given the colour and the intention that it be used on roofs, decks and gunwhales, "Raddle Red" seemed appropriate. Neither Rylards, nor Rapidpaints nor anyone else had any product of that name in their ranges at that time. A number of our standard colours were lifted by these manufacturers - name included. "Union Green" for instance. I`ve no problem with that - none of us own any colours. Using the same names bemused me a little though! As time wore on people began to ask for the same product - Raddle as in a satin finish enamel - so we made it a range rather than a single colour product. I hope that clears things up and lays to rest any notions that the Craftmaster raddle range is some exotic material deriving from canal history. It`s a damn good paint - but it`s roots lie in the mid 30`s when synthetic enamels were introduced and no earlier.

Yup - It was marvellous. Still is - shame we`re not allowed to use it any more. H&S again.

Red oxide, contrarily , comes in various shades. They`re all red but some have more brown/white/orange etc.It tastes awful in tea by the way...................

in common usage Red Oxide, as a material rather than as a colour, is usually a primer. Craftmaster Raddle Red is a finish - not a primer and the name refers only to the colour. You can be assured Craftmaster, from day one, was very aware of all such distinctions. The bloke who specified all the core products was a trained coach painter of over 30 years working experience. Me in other words.As far as Craftmaster are concerned if you ask them for Red Oxide PRIMER that`s exactly what you`ll get.

Forgot to mention. Craftmaster`s Bilge Paint is, unless specifically ordered otherwise, full gloss rather than satin better to resist oil stains. My young -oldfriend/ex-trainee/colleague/dock foreman John Sanderson took over my boat painting business at Dadford`s Wharf. Craftmaster is now in the capable hands of the Brown family of Over near Cambridge. I sign-write for the one and work as a consultant for the other. Still don`t make the tea though.

When we were building up Craftmaster`s original product range I wanted a suitable name for a satin red-oxide finish that we intended for the roof and decks of "traditional" boats. I had often heard Ron Hough, a close friend , refer to "red raddle" when we were having one of our fairly rare conversations about painting at Nurser`s yard in the old days. We usually talk about normal things - like cricket! Since it was a paint used on the aforementioned bits of boat I decided to call ours "Raddle Red". The colour is British Standard red oxide (if I remember rightly). We were easily able to offer it in other colours since they used the same binder and would therefore perform the same. The use of the name began to spread round the system, particularly after a Birmingham based paint supplier deliberately copied our entire product range although they did it without the use of HMG`s "Craftmaster only" materials. Until then there was nothing on the market called Raddle Red. Entertainingly ( well I find it so ) the same company sold a brushing additive called PPA - without knowing that in a fairly blank moment I had decided some years earlier to call ours "Phil`s Paint Adjuster" which we quickly abbreviated!

Ha ! Well thanks a bunch for not giving this old man a vote! As it happens if my mate Dave is doing it that`s fine by me - got to keep the old gimmer in red wine and whisky after all. However don`t forget folks even though I live in snowy Argyll I have not retired and my location is my problem - not the customers. I arrange trips round a number of jobs to make things economical for all concerned. Just realized this probably constitutes an advert.That being so chaps please free to bin it, no offence meant.

Yo Dave me old buddy, colleague and periodic drinking partner. I`m snowed in in `t glen with only a bottle of Aberlour to keep me from going stir crazy. What a splendid essay on Scumbling! Thank you for including my possibly excessive response to knotting rubbers ! I don`t use them in cabins at all as you know, preferring simpler effects given the occasional spark by medular rays drawn with a "chisel" carved from a rubber eraser. Something I always do is apply dark brown decorative brush work, sparingly, over the graining - an arch of leaf shapes over the curved top of the table cupboard door for instance. I saw such work in`an old cabin decorated by Nurser`s in the early 1950`s ( that`s when they painted it - not when I saw it ) so I breathed a sigh of relief because that demonstrated that I hadn`t been introducing non-traddy fripperies for the previous 30 years. Perish the thought eh! I`m still in awe of graining done by such as Ian Kemp, Steve Priest and a couple of others. Mind you, the two of us don`t do too bad either! The pictures in the OP look fine don`t you think? Someone new to graining actually doing it tastefully. I`d hate to see my first couple of cabins now. Well done chap.

You`re right ! Errr...No. The paint manufacturer has already done that. You should add only an approved brushing additive in modest quantities if the need arises. Relevant - but possibly unpopular in some areas !

I`ve started a separate thread from "Paint pimpling" because I don`t want what I say here to be mixed up with anything I said there ! So, no particular response to something already said and no references to any persons or paintjobs previously discussed. Imagine, in the light of commonly held opinion, a steel narrow boat painted in 2014. It has a full synthetic paint system of good dry film thickness. The word nowadays seems to be that it may well micro-blister and that is because of 2010 legislation banning VOC`s. So, each coat was rubbed down when it was properly through dry ( a good painter can tell, as soon as he/she begins rubbing down whether it really is dry ) and as a result of applying the correct number of coats NETT AFTER FLATTING we have somewhere ( hopefully ) between, say,140 and 200 microns of dry paint. There will be NO VOC`s present in the paint film. Now imagine a second boat, painted in 2008. Apply exactly the same theoretical paintjob as on the 2014 boat - in every detail. Once finished and properly dry we would hope for a similar dry film thickness and - gosh - there will be no VOC`S present in the paint film. The solid content of the paint, in both cases is what remains to be measured on the boat. Everything that accounted for the difference between the wet and dry film thicknesses has gone. Vanished, in fact, into thin air! That`s why the powers that be deemed the legislation necessary - the VOC`s were considered to become harmful once they evaporated into the atmosphere. They always were absent once the paint had dried. Manufacturers may well have to replace the old solvents now but the end result remains the solid content of the dry paint. Pigments remain the same as does U/V protection and any flow agents. Driers, present in all synthetics, act chemically to aid the drying process and are not relevant to the VOC debate. Synthetic systems have not suddenly changed into something else. I`ve done this in a very black and white way because that`s how many people see it. There IS reason for concern and much research is being undertaken and acted upon believe it or not, but it could also be said that the 2010 legislation was a bit of a godsend to some when carelessness and bad practice back-fired on them, although that does not apply to the dozens of diligent professionals out there - many of whom I`ve enjoyed working or arguing/debating/discussing various things with for many years. I`ve also not muddied the waters by repeating things I`ve already said about products that were exempted from the legislation. Mainly because most readers, it seems to me, would rather ignore all that. Last thing. As I`ve said before , the paint manufacturer I have been involved with for years is working very hard to solve what is, in the main, a canal problem ( measured by a comparison of blistering complaints across all markets) and they are grateful to the handful of painters who, despite the difficulties they have occasionally faced, have willingly helped.

Hi - no offence meant David. I take the point but it`s a question of how an individual values the different properties of a material. In my view the danger of moisture penetration is the greater evil than the danger of rust coming through from under the primer. Certainly with the quality of preparation done by John I would not have thought the latter would be an issue anyway. Without both characteristics of the material being taken into account your report of John`s conversation with you made less sense to me than it may otherwise have done.

Your painter, who I trained and who became my close colleague and friend ( with the occasional spat inevitably !) for over 16 years is a hell of a painter - but I don`t actually understand a word of what you have written here ! Perhaps it has not translated well at second-hand since this is a subject he and I have discussed at very great length over a long period. If there is a significant difference between the two types of primer it is that one dries with the film "open" and the other with it "closed". The former is more likely to harbour moisture than the latter if a tradesman does not take care or have the opportunity to counter this. The next bit is not specifically a response to your goodself David and your painter is not targeted in what follows. There is a lot of heresay around about paints , primers and legislation and while there is a foundation for concern in some areas( see above re. primers for instance ) please remember that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. None of the brushing primers commonly used by boat painters is water based incidentally. For goodness sake everybody, paint is a very broad term and you can`t have a "fits all" set of myths and half facts to cover the whole range of materials available for a huge variety of different applications. If I need an opinion on something specifically Alfa related I ask someone who has specialist knowledge - not a guy down the street who has "ad cars fer years mate. Wot ee don`t know ain`t worth knòwin`Them fancy so called experts `ll just bullshit yer..........."etc etc. And, if there isn`t one such somewhere on your moorings - well, that`s a rare place you`ve got .

Sorry to be the odd few days late everybody - but better late than never eh! HAPPY NEW YEAR.

Me last thought ! Why is it that when one business ( mayhap a paint making business) explains a paint related problem no one is willing to believe them while another business , quite often less qualified to actually KNOW the answer (say for instance a boat painting business) is seen as a paragon of honesty ? It has always been so and I`d love to know why. Is a boat painter automatically more plausible than a manufacturer when something goes wrong? And remember please - I say this having made a living for thirty years as a boat painter ! Magic ! Now - it would help a certain painter I know if you could identify a green one for us.

Just a thought ! If by any chance someone had been grinding steelwork in the vicinity of your boat and the dust had landed on your paintwork- the result could well be lots of stable orange spots all over the place. They certainly aren`t symptomatic of a problem with either the paint or it`s application.

Painters need to protect themselves. It`s not enough to blame any problems that MAY occur on materials before they even start the job - as some do.If they want to do their utmost to counter difficulties with the jobs they do and give themselves real credibility in any disputes that may arise afterwards they need to equip themselves suitably. Monitor surface and ambient temperatures regularly through the day, ditto humidity, be aware of dewpoints and LOG IT ALL. If they have acted appropriately given the information they are observing and logging (and demonstrate that they have) they can then start to look elsewhere for the causes both legitimately and with a good chance of getting co-operation from the paint industry. They may also find they have fewer problems. Paint can go wrong - after all human error and specification changes can sometimes come into play - although the latter is by no means as widespread as people imagine because changes are usually very minor indeed in materials that aren`t necessarily caught in the legislation net. Everyone can mess up though and it would be unreasonable and unfair to make an exception of paint manufacturers. One has recently had to quarantine an enormous quantity of one pigment as a result of a legitimate customer complaint which was immediately researched and acted upon. I can honestly say though that the painters who have invested the most money in and on their facilities are the ones who have the least problems - but even they aren`t always spared and when, if, they do get caught out they have a good sound platform on which to defend themselves.

I`ve not heard of any freak weather conditions yet this winter but if a number of boats have suddenly been affected in one confined area is it possible that they have all suffered from some sort of atmospheric pollution possibly integrated with rainfall. Man made airborne pollution can travel miles from it`s source before dropping down to earth. For instance, the northwest has been notorious for paint problems caused by fallout from industrial plants around Ellesmere Port and Widnes and close by Trevor. Such problems have not been confined to boats.

I`ve been thinking ! This is unusual but I`m unable to work at the moment so I`ve got time to spend with brain engaged. The widely held opinion that modern paint has no guts and is therefor the primary cause of blistering needs considering closely. Firstly , what modern paint has none of is actually lead, very difficult to replace in a formulation and certainly the reason why chrome colours no longer cover as well as they used to. Manufacturers know years in advance of any legislation that may adversely effect their products and always have had, and they work very hard to mitigate the consequences. They have to because if they didn`t they would be in trouble very quickly. Sometimes they may have only limited success - as with the coverage of the chrome colours and painters and boat owners should choose the colours least affected. Certainly some reds and yellows ( and some other formulations which include a proportion of them ) perform differently from others. We, as professionals, should really know this and advise accordingly. However, when it comes to potential physical paint failure the manufacturers cannot afford to offer product that is sub-standard. Our canal market is a very small one as far as they are concerned, indeed some of the factories would hardly miss it if disappeared completely. They have much bigger fish to fry - huge markets worldwide - to which they supply exactly the same materials with only a fraction of the problems that manifest themselves around the English canal system. That is not to deny or underplay those probems, not in the least. I am only closely involved with one major manufacturer supplying paint etc worldwide and can only comment on their work towards resolving the problems we are discussing here. Smsll as the market is they have been concerned about canal boat related issues for a number of years now. They, and I, actually have a "control boat" out on the system to be sure that whatever steps we take are tested in the relevant environment but I can assure you that the abuse the paints are subjected to in the "Accelerated Degradation" department at the works are worse than anything nature can afflict it with. Why are they doing all this ? Firstly to see if there is weakness in the paint system that only significantly affects it in our market, to identify that weakness and counter it and to see,alternatively if the problems are largely caused by paint being applied in inadequate conditions, can something can be done to help in such circumstances. It may be that one material needs attention to improve it`s suitability while another needs protecting against bad practice in the workplace. Nothing will do any good whatsoever if a boat simply has insufficient paint on it and you may be surprised by the number of occasions when this has proved to be the case. Some of you may be very surprised! It could be significant that boats tend to be pushed out into the weather as soon as the paintwork is completed, while the paint has hardly begun to cure, something that would be very difficult to guard against. It would only be relevant however in cases where the blistering appears very early in the life of the paint. We should remember as well that full gloss paint sheds moisture much more quickly than satin or matt. It could well be that with a combination of much damper weather conditions in recent years and differing specifications of driers in the paint that there will be occasions when it is advisable to leave more time between coats. These things can be addressed both in the paint docks and in the paint factories and I know docks and paint chemists who are doing so. I do have to question painters who blame specific materials for their problems and then carry on using them ! None of the above is relevant if work is done in damp conditions, in temperatures which are either too low or too high, in high humidity ( which is as much of a problem in summer, or worse, as at any other time ) when unsuitable heating is used or even when suitable heating IS used but is switched off overnight and then on again in the morning or,if quantities of solvent are used to clean off paint which has only just had chance to dry or to degrease bare metal which is then primed the moment the solvent has flashed off. I`ve written this as openly and as even handedly as I am able to try and show you that this is not simply a case of poor paint or poor painting. There is much more I could say, many more areas that should be looked at before apportioning blame in any individual case. There are lots of people out there with firmly held opinions about these issues, some are worth listening to, others either have an axe to grind, a vested interest or no real knowledge - in the land of the blind the one eyed man really can be king !

I`m not going to get too involved in this - because after years of researching blistering I and the technicians I have been working with have isolated at least two dozen separate potential causes in an industry where most people are only really interested in one of them. If you have blisters that affect only the varnish ( lacquer if you will ) then it must be coming from the paint immediately beneath it. You need to check again. Is the source of the blisters deeper in the paint layers - before you deal with it purely as a varnish problem. Whatever people may say about modern paints ( and incidentally I say again that coach, or decorative enamels were exempted from the 2010 regulations)a good synthetic varnish is almost entirely proof against surface penetration by moisture. The references here to ice etc. are probably aimed at the explanation that I and others hold to - that in a particularly severe winter some time ago micro-blistering was caused by moisture trapped by ice and successive layers of snow for up to two months.I warn you now winter is coming. If you allow accumulations of ice and snow to sit unattended on your boat for an extended period paint damage could result and it would not be the responsibility of either your painter or the paint itself. John`s pigment theory is not one I have heard before but when we next work together I will be interested to hear about it. Im trying very hard to get away from all this now - but I would dearly love to nail the whole issue and even , if possible, have an even handed consensus among painters, manufacturers and boat owners. It will need a lot of people to accept that micro-blistering isn`t a disease- it`s merely a symptom of a several potential maladies and ultimate responsibility may have to apportioned differently in different cases. Some, from differing areas of interest, will find this difficult for a variety of reasons. Therein lies the problem.

Yo - I`m back ! It`s perhaps presumptious of me to disagree with Tony Dunkley but.................................... The roses on the weatherboard are 100% Dennis Clarke but I don`t think any of the others are. Compare the brushwork in the rose petals and the way the veins are painted on the leaves. The roses that stand alone on a green background are totally different and the ones on the table cupboard are different again. Here`s my (fairly timid) theory. Cabin was painted at Braunston during the post Nurser era, by three painters. This often happened both on boats and in the loft where they produced painted ware. So; The roses on the table cupboard are by a very young Ron Hough - the way the main rose petal is painted has a very characteristic shape which can be traced through the ongoing development of his style right up to recent times and same is true of the leaves. The ones on the green background differ from any others in the cabin and could be by another painter altogether, maybe Colin Clarke or the one whose name I can never remember ! Check the detail and the more precise and therefor slower application. The castles are difficult. Again the weatherboard seems to be Dennis Clarke and given that the Braunston painters tended to paint a panel from start to finish before starting another one its likely ( if I`m right ) that he did the castle and the roses on the weatherboard at the same time. I`m reluctant to apply the same logic to Ron Hough with the table cupboard. That castle doesn`t look remotely professional to me and I can`t see much to suggest that a painter trained by Nurser ( Hough or Clarke ) in the painting of it. It may well be a repaint over the top , or copied from, earlier painting. There are similarities in the foregrounds of both castles but none whatsoever in the execution of the castles themselves. The backdoors , are everyone seems to agree, are much later and painted by Ron. Bet you wish I`d stayed away now ! Hi Pete. I saw them - they were actually a transfer, The guy wore a Stetson and cowboy boots the gal similar but much more winsome items. I know their significance as well but it`s not my story to tell.

Youngsters eh ! Oh well............. ( and incidentally, well done you guys - hope to see y`all soon.x

True - Given a sample ( preferably of the colour as it is now rather than when it was first applied Craftmaster can do a colour match.

Glad to see lots of people use Craftmaster wax - it was one of my introductions to the range and I was deeply impressed with it when I did trials on my two bright red cars ! That said there are other entirely suitable polishes out there. Modern car polishes , good as they are, are best avoided.Apart from their considerable silicon and polymer content they are expressly designed for modern automotive finishes. The paint on most canal boats is chemically softer than today`s car finishes and and there is a danger, usually a certainty, that the polish will integrate itself with the molecular structure of the paint. This can cause immense problems come touch-up or repaint time. Incidentally, and please forgive me mentioning it again, Craftmaster Carnuaba Wax does not dry - so it can be buffed off immediately.

All I say isbased on my personal experience and I have no wish to imply that just because I don`t do something it would be wrong for anybody else with painting experience to do that which I don`t ! On that basis - I never use White Spirit because it is a fast solvent and has no constructive properties. I always thought that it was the equivalent of watering your cuppa down.( Other genuine painters disagree. ) There will already be a quantity of it within the binder element of the paint and the manufacturer will have measured that quantity very carefully. So I don`t set out to thin the paint as such. Obviously any additive which makes the flow easier must be affecting the viscosity of the paint on application - but the intention is that the resultant dry coat will retain it`s integrity and the solid content will be largely unaffected when the film is dry. ( Im saying all this in reply to Higgs but he already has a good professional`s knowledge - so a lot here is so that other readers get the picture clearly. I`m not trying to teach my granny to suck eggs. As it were ! ) Chemical additives such as Craftmaster PPA will do this while Owatrol may remove some properties while replacing them with it`s own. All the manufactuer paint adjusters work in one or other of these ways and I have used them AT NEED for years. Like many old hands though I`d much rather do without and when possible I use the paint as it comes and it took much persuasion to get me to use them in the first place. It`s the one area in which I have followed the more modern approach while always being mindful that too much additive is a very bad thing and that many painters bomb the paint to death with the stuff to achieve a finish they couldn`t otherwise manage at their skill level. The various products available should never be used as a skill substitute.