warning Bruns & Fils

[Boston Hangman]

I opened these rolls last week to hang and there was a very clear warning to hang these bolts in sequence. The sequence numbers are on the fold , which also wastes the first 1.5" to 2" of paper. I have seen this before with Farrow & Ball , but this is my first with The B & Fils. This a 20" X 11 yard bolt.

They did not however warn me about all the streaks of color that were in the run that did not belong there :mad: , these made it difficult to hang ,as I also had to be aware of the order in which they were hung. :rolleyes:

I tried to post this in the PRS thread but could not gain access. I will try to do this after I contact the web committee folks and/ or Eunice. :)

technical info.
manufacturer: Brunswig & Fils
pattern name Chartwell , Jaspe
pattern # 06-1554-059
batch # 3144
problems: sporadic red and green streaks running thru bolts as well as blotches in striae


467

[Chris Murphy]

Those are the 'normal' characteristics of Chartwell Jaspe. It's one of those papers where I tell the customer, "This stuff is not always as straight-forward as it might seem." In other words, higher charges & rollage apply.
I use a wheat/clay mix on this (as I almost invariably do for English pulps). If you use a very high-water content paste, the stuff turns to tissue paper.

[Gary Lucas]

I tried to post this in the PRS thread but could not gain access. I will try to do this after I contact the web committee folks and/ or Eunice. :)



467

Sorry Mark, only Eunice or bulletin board moderators can post on the PRS forum. To report on products, go here http://www.ngpp.org/members/product_reporting_service.php and fill out the form.

Gary

[Boston Hangman]

Thanks , Gary

aha.........;)

I knew it was something...:lol:

Dawn breaks:confused: over Marblehead


Mark

[B Blanchard]

This paper is a pet peave of mine. I have hung it for years and never had an easy time with it. It wants to loose ink at the slightest provocation. And it's difficult (near impossible) to touch up. Also, the trimming has never been very good. And, as Chris mentions, it can get mushy with too much moisture.

My most recent experience with it, which was last month, has pushed me over the edge. This particular colorway and run was so sensitive that, when attempting to get better seams by lightly pushing or pulling the paper, the inks pushed away from the substrate! And god forbid that I have the slightest paste on a finger. That would lift the color right off.

I primed with Prep Coat, hung with Pro 838 (as this is a recommened paste), and lined the walls, as recommended. I started with pulling one bolt at a time and slowed that down to one piece at a time. I didn't have problems with every piece but enough so that it was a problem that required me to replace paper. There is still one piece that I already replace once that has to be replaced again.

My decorator went to bat for me and contacted the distributer. Their first response was:

"Could you ask your wallpaper hanger the following questions

What kind of paste did he use?
How were the walls primed?
Did he use a lining paper?"

After I responded with the information above (not what they hoped, I'm sure), the next line of defense was,

"In regards to the ****** wall paper problem, based on our previous sales of
this item, and the amount sold from this same lot, we feel that this is an
installation problem. To be sure, we tested a roll from this dye lot from
our stock. When over soaked, the color did come off. Even though
sufficient soaking time should be allowed to the paper to be supple,
oversoaking is to be avoided. The hanging instructions for this paper
Specifiacally advise that: "no paste should be allowed to come in contact
with the printed surface of the paper, and hands at all times be kept clean
and dry. Any paste allowed onto the surface of this wallpaper may cause
disfigurement" It also states that"not all wallpapers are wipeable and some
may become damaged by moisture(paste, water,moisture)on the surface.

Let me know if you need any more information."

After hanging hundreds of rolls of this stuff over the years I am fed up. I'm telling my decorators that to hang this is like hanging silk or a Zuber or Gracie and I will charge accordingly. I also suggest that they look for a line of stries from another company. (The only good thing I can say about this Chartwell paper is that the "look" is very good.)

I would like to hear from other hangers what stries they really like the look and hang so that I can give a list to my decorators. I've got to get them away from bad paper and bad attitude.

[Chris Murphy]

Barry, with you I know I can talk apples-to-apples, our jargon is the same. I have experienced the exact same problems as you & Mark, but I've found a slight change in paste helps immensely. Will you be coming to St. Louis? If not, I'll show Bill & Mark my wheat/clay mix: 85-90% Paper-hangings.com ph wheat + 10-15% Dynamite 111 non-strippable clay.
I tried (with Yates, btw) to use Bob's wheat/cellulose mix, and had results like you guys ran into. Paper wet out fine, but then it was almost impossible to touch, as the color rubbed off with natural sponges. This was in a living room w/mantel, and up a stairway & hall.
My mix wets it out enough that it will conform to the wall, but doesn't lose its integrity (I'm talkin' about the paper, not the company!). Yes, a tacky finger will still lift color, but I have less of that problem with the mix; that happens more to me when I use a premix, for whatever reason. I do not line, unless I can't get rid of paint texture through pole sanding. The mix dries quick enough that there is no seam shrinkage. Of course, this also entails that I'm pasting clean, so the sponge only hits the face once after running a seam roller down it. The paper doesn't get soaked.
I haven't tried the mix in a machine, because I doubt that it'd work. I mix the wheat to about a 1/2 yield of pkg. directions: the stuff is not quite as thick as oatmeal, but still forms stiff peaks when it's whipped with a whisk. I strain it after about 20 min., and then add the clay & whip again. The clay, with 50% solids content, somehow smooths the mix, much more than you'd think until you try it. If the mix doesn't roll on well, or the paper remains too stiff, I'll add some water, a sponge full at a time.
Since I can't machine the goods, there is that time element added to the labor. But since I don't have to line (I'll size by moulding cut-outs, etc., for more working time), there is that savings in labor + material. My charges then are not quite so high as to enter water-color territory.
I've done almost every room in the house where I first installed the Chartwell- great clients. Since it is on a stairway, and they have kids & dogs, wouldn't you know there are marks & stains all over. She wants me to try touching them up, and because of the lighting I think I can do a credible job, but this paper should not go where it will receive any wear.

[B Blanchard]

I appreciate the info and trust your experience. Why would using this mix eliminate the need for lining paper? Just because there's less moisture? I just don't think I would feel comfortable hanging this without liner.

If you were to have a problem with this paper using your paste and no liner, can you imagine the response when you answer the first line of questioning?

Mark, I'm pretty sure those streaks you see are a printing defect. I've seen that in the past and had the paper replaced. When you do the job it most likely will take you much longer than expected. Using Chris's mix you'll be pasting by hand. With a clear premix I would recommend one sheet at a time even if you use a pasting machine. I hope it goes well and would like to hear your experience.

Pray you never get one of the dark colors!

[Bill Archibald]

Great discussion on this.

For those of us fortunate enough not to have been faced with the challenge, I'm thinking it would be "fun" to have this as a subject for a workshop or Chapt Meeting. This would be a good opportunity to also see the difference of installing as directed and using Murph's mix.

Good luck to all.

-bill

[Boston Hangman]

Ok....
first ,I dun hung it already....are you ready for the secret to hanging Chartwell?

First address the paper...<g> (lil inside Boston joke)

seriously, primed the walls with Gardz, I lined with the Cavalier heavy duty.....
pasted with Chris's fave...880 thru the Tapo, a bolt at a time.
made a bunch o' money ....and hung out of sequence when needed.(no shading, although it was only a couple of headers)
Now I know this sounds like a bad thing and I am sure there a couple of winces out there..LOL, but it looks great I was able to hide a couple of streaks(defects ,yes ,to be sure) behind an entertainment cabinet and the rest are sitting in a box at the clients thanks to my generous ordering habits :)

BTW Brunswig states in the instructions NOT to use a "modern day PVA or PVC type adhesive as used for vinyl" Isn't that what 838 is? :(
and who is going to trim the bottom and top with shears? are they talking ceiling and base? LOL Hello! were these written by Dickens at the turn of the last century ! <g>

I will be back soon to hang the front hall another Brunswig I believe...we'll see what evil lurks there???

I have seen this streaking in other striaes as well , I believe Farrow and Ball and Christopher Norman ?? is it inherent in the printing of these? I remember a great Stiae from Brunswig that was hand screened seamed beautifully and hung fast no liner doublecut, wet trim or dry trim all good! Where is that now??
Oh well , "thats why they pay us the big bucks" as my Dad used to say ..LOL

Barry , good to hear from you and thanks for chiming in! and as always Bill and Chris
See you at the next meeting I hope.

Mark

[Jeff Evans]

I just hung a bunch of strie from Farrow and Ball and ended up trimming 1/2" off of the left side of 22 rolls (that's 44 rolls in our world, sports fans). Rather than lose a day's pay and disappoint a very nice client I bit the bullet. Went a long way toward good will with the F&B folks too, so now I'm the proverbial fair haired boy :D . I don't recall ever seeing the B&F you guys speak of, but this is cropping up in every strie I hang lately. Hung a pink Warner pulp strie a few weeks ago, didn't trim it and wish I had now. Funny enough, I'm going to that house tomorrow to start back up with the yellow version. Tall ceilings in a stairwell, and I do hope it doesn't do the same thing as the pink (lines at the seam), 'cause I'm not too sure I want to trim 60 rolls of paper when I didn't bid for it. It seems like there is so much opportunity with that type of paper to have irregularities, and we're stuck with the mess and have to fix it- so what else is new?:lol:

[Chris Murphy]

I appreciate the info and trust your experience. Why would using this mix eliminate the need for lining paper? Just because there's less moisture? I just don't think I would feel comfortable hanging this without liner.

If you were to have a problem with this paper using your paste and no liner, can you imagine the response when you answer the first line of questioning?

Mark, I'm pretty sure those streaks you see are a printing defect. I've seen that in the past and had the paper replaced. When you do the job it most likely will take you much longer than expected. Using Chris's mix you'll be pasting by hand. With a clear premix I would recommend one sheet at a time even if you use a pasting machine. I hope it goes well and would like to hear your experience.

Pray you never get one of the dark colors!

The mix doesn't replace the *need* for liner. In a normal room, i.e., not a kitchen or a bath, a liner isn't needed to wick away moisture. The mix dries quick enough so that the seams are set, and don't shrink. And I am careful not to oversoak the sheets, with the paste or by washing the face. I use good prep techniques & primers, too. This is one English paper that I'm familiar enough with that I know what I can do (been there) and what I can't (been there, too). I normally spec liners, and if you feel better using one, I sure wouldn't argue against it.

As far as the mfr./distributor's questions, you did what was spec'd and still got shafted. Because that is the norm for the industry, I only let their instructions be one thing I consider. I know once I vary from their spec's I'm on my own, but since when is that *not* true?

And I will say, and I've said it for years, that problems with English pulp papers invariably involve 1) premix and 2) machines. Blankstock seems to eliminate almost all problems with seam shrinkage, and excessive ambient moisture. Key word is "almost." 95% of the time, I use liner & that mix, too. When I haven't there have been bad consequences.

It's the instability of the surface inks that got me to use what I use, materials & techniques. I suppose if I could get a layer of premix on thin enough then there would not be enough moisture to make the inks unstable. But I was not able to do that. And I have a nasty habit of ending up with a spot of premix on a fingertip that I don't notice that ends up pulling a piece of print off; "A man's got to know his limitations" kind of thing.

Tim Bodine will have a 5 of 111 at STL, and I'm bringing a bag of wheat. I'll demo the mix. One other note, and this also adds time on a job: the mix, as any I've found using powdered wheat, only lasts up to 2 days. It begins to 'release' the water after a time, and this can come through on pulps.

As ever, this is just one 'fix' that one hanger uses. Money doesn't seem to be a problem, until I'm the one wanting it!

[Chris Murphy]

The "streaking"- it's usually one of the component colors of the ink mix, and it looks like the particles weren't totally mixed so that there are different color streaks, right? That's what I see, and usually have to spend some amount of time figuring where to use what particular sheet. On the Chartwell, I've hung out of sequence, but as close as possible while hiding defects (cutting off the defect at a door, for ex.) and haven't had noticeable problems.

[Buff1]

Great discussion on this.

For those of us fortunate enough not to have been faced with the challenge, I'm thinking it would be "fun" to have this as a subject for a workshop or Chapt Meeting. This would be a good opportunity to also see the difference of installing as directed and using Murph's mix.

Good luck to all.

-bill

I agree! I would sure like to see what this paper looks like. Help me out here...there's a word you guys have used, each of you spelling it differently: strie, stries, striae, stiae....what IS this? Striations as in stretch-marks? Mark, did you take any pictures?

Buff

[Chris Murphy]

Strie`: stree-ay. Best ex. I found on short notice:
(http://www.artisticalternatives.com/textured_strie.htm)http://www.artisticalternatives.com/textured_strie.htm

[B Blanchard]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong: 838 is a starch based premix vinyl adhesive. 880 is a synthetic. 880 is my paste of choice and have used it for years with most papers, including brit pulps, even the Chartwell. But I have been reading in the posts and hearing in discussions that people have been having problems with staining due to 880, sometimes long after the installation is completed.

I believe 838 is one of the adhesives that is recommended by the industry for brit pulps (Bill?). So, worrying about stainging and being a good dobee I recently have been trying out 838.

I have always considered the Chartwell to be an unnecessarily sensitive paper. But this paper was in a whole different league of difficult. I was thinking that it was the run but thanks to this thread and Chris's insights I see that the problem is most likely moisture. I'm a bit surprised that the 838 releases so much more moisture to the paper than 880. And I can see how the clay/wheat mix would lessen the moisture even more.

I'm not going to be at the convention this year so I'll have to really on a report from Mark and Bill. I'm not a fan of clay and don't like to work with it. And the hand pasting would be a hassle. But I'll try to be open minded. At a minimum, I'm going back to the 880. And I'm going to continue to steer my clients away from the Chartwell.

Glad yours went well, Mark. Nobody here except us hangers, and we won't divulge your creative skullduggery. I've never had a problem with shading with this product, even when hung out of sequence.

Buff: Strie is a faux painting technique where two related colors are applied to a wall and then combed vertically to created a narrow, soft striping effect. You've probably seen it a hundred times, just didn't know the term.

[Boston Hangman]

Chris
thanks for the spellcheck <g>

as far as the pre mix machine english pulp test I have over ten years of it waiting to be stripped (tfpic), I truly have had no probs to date since using liner and clean work habits. I agree there are exceptions though they are usually noticeable after a couple of sheets.

Buffy

As far as the strie look, I posted a picture in the photo forum but in shrink wrap..when I go back I plan on taking pictures with furniture in place.

even better:

http://images.google.com/images?q=strie+wallpaper+&hl=en&btnG=Search+Images

if this link doesn't work just type strie wallpaper in Google images..there a few examples.

Mark
Boston paperhanger, extreme paperhanger walking a hi wire of 880 and pulp threaded together taking me from one hell to the next<g>

[Bill Archibald]

I believe 838 is one of the adhesives that is recommended by the industry for brit pulps (Bill?)
It was in the March Pulp Fusion, page 2 (check your "I-Archive" program for it :devil: ) that I posted that Cole & Son deems GH-34 and 838 as suitable for their pulps.

I just extrapolated that they would be suitable for all sensitive pulps. I still prefer GH-34, although the 838 in C.H. was good stuff.

Apparently we (NGPP) need to write MORE instructions as to the proper way to hang many difficult materials.

As far as the make up of the pastes, they are ALL starch based. Read Murph's dissertation on pastes, "What Makes Us Stick" INSTALLER March/April 2004. I'll let him describe the processing difference and the different molecule sizes.

-Bill

[Bob Bachmann]

mark, i mentioned the mix i use in your cole and son thread a few months ago. about 70-30 wheat to professionals 774. 774 is pourable, doesn't have to be cut, mixes great with wheat, and i pull it thru my tapo with no probs. i never had a prob with clear either, but after using the mix, i just like it better.

i've always contended and always will that staining with pulps is due to too much paste and oversoaking. if you remember some directions used to say(some still do) not to paste sheets on top of each other, for this reason. (line down the middle of a sheet where the edge of one sheet lay on top of the middle of another.) depending what room i'm hanging, i never paste more than a few sheets ahead and don't sit more than 10 mins.and never paste a few rolls and throw them in a bag. :rant: IMO. ;)

[Jeff Evans]

Mark White, a creative skullduggerer?:eek: Wow! Who knew?:banana: :llama:

[Chris Murphy]

Barry, all wallpaper pastes, except cellulose, have starch in them. And cellulose is the same molecule, with a 'twist' in its structure (read your Installer! Or go to my site and read "Wallcovering Adhesives").
880 is a patented, "proprietary" mix; however, when I said to paste guru Frank Nicholson that 880 seemed to be similar to mixing Dynamite 234 + cellulose, he said, "That's about right." Per the Duron private-labelled 880 (Premieum Heavy Duty Clear- black label), 880 has starch, dextrin (a modified starch) and sodium nitrate (a thickener). However thhey make it, and whatever is in it, it releases its water much more slowly than anything but cellulose. i find it hard to clean up, so it's not my paste of choice, but I use a fair amount of it as it does answer to a lot of situations. I don't like it for pulps because it doesn't[I] release water quick enough to wet out pulps enough, but it does give great working time. There are [I]less reports of staining pulps with it, but there have been some. I would advise, when using 880 on pulps, to not dilute it at all, only whipping it, and putting it on thinly.

[Buff1]

Buff: Strie is a faux painting technique where two related colors are applied to a wall and then combed vertically to create a narrow, soft striping effect. You've probably seen it a hundred times, just didn't know the term.

Great description!

Buff

[Chris Murphy]

Chartwell Jaspe? You wanna see some? Enjoy.

BTW, we didn't realize that there was a Practice Room at the convention until we were packing up. I had Tim get some 111, and Brenda Mehring kindly brought some of Kelly's wheat. Oh, well. But as you can see, it works great on the B&F Chartwell. The tent ceiling was blankstocked on the knee and dormer walls; Cavalier's Maestro liner on ceiling- that was all cut to lines, not double-cut. That would have left shiners and gawd knows what had I tried. Easier to precise cuts to precise lines. Sealed Maestro handles that cutting.

[Chris Murphy]

i've always contended and always will that staining with pulps is due to too much paste and oversoaking.
Bologna. The paste on this was an almost undiluted 234, and it was hung as quickly as the stuff reached its expanded size.

[B Blanchard]

The Chartwell looks great! I'm convinced that when I hung this paper the last time (with 838, not my usual 880) that there was too much moisture. But it certainly didn't have more moisture than a wheat paste.

Anyway, the next time I hang Chartwell I'll try the wheat. (At least I'll be able to leave the pasting machine home.)

I'm really surprised with the Morris staining. I've hung a ton of Morris patterns, the most recent just two weeks ago, and never had anything approaching a problem. It's one of the best substrates out there, for my money. Which leads me once again to the conclusion that there are things happening out there in the world of chemistry that we can't predict or analyze with our limited knowledge.

[Chris Murphy]

Where are you hearing problems with a Morris paper? Did I miss something in this thread?

[Bill Archibald]

Barry,

Two factors may have bearing on your experiences with Morris. Type of paste and amount of paste. Maybe 880 is safer than 234 (I said MAYBE !!! - IOW you may hear more infrequent :roflmao: cautionary words from the Boston Chapt Communications Officer :deadhorse: about 880 :D)

AND, you are very proficient at applying as little (or less) paste as necessary. I agree with Bob Bachmann that the amount of paste has a bearing on the possibility of staining. That was part of the original recipe I was told on how to make a Brit Pulp stain. The other ingredients were 234 and overbooking.

But you are correct, we need scientific studies to be able to accurately predict when, where, and what will stain.

-Bill

[Chris Murphy]

The Chartwell looks great! I'm convinced that when I hung this paper the last time (with 838, not my usual 880) that there was too much moisture. But it certainly didn't have more moisture than a wheat paste.

Anyway, the next time I hang Chartwell I'll try the wheat. (At least I'll be able to leave the pasting machine home.)




I'm really surprised with the Morris staining. I've hung a ton of Morris patterns, the most recent just two weeks ago, and never had anything approaching a problem. It's one of the best substrates out there, for my money. Which leads me once again to the conclusion that there are things happening out there in the world of chemistry that we can't predict or analyze with our limited knowledge.
You gotta understand how the wheat & 111 interact. The clay binds up the moisture: you ain't messin' with a wheat like you're used to. You can adjust the mix in many ways: more water in the wheat mix, or more clay. My wheat yield is much less than Kelly's pkg. directions, also. I don't add more than 20% clay because once I did, and I did get some stains, and not that seam staining like in the pictures above, but spots. They were obvious immediately, and I was able to change the paste and continue. And I wouldn't trust any other wheat, or clay. Other wheats are of inferior grade flour, and other clays have more ingredients other than just kaolin clay.

I tend to go with what I know works. I'll try to reason a problem out, but there are variables at play here that we are only guessing at. That being said, I don't have to bull**** about my experience. The seam staining in the picture was not caused by too much paste, or by bagging it, or by letting it sit. And it wasn't obvious at the outset because the whole sheets darkened, not just those seam areas. But those seams stayed dark. "Parchmentized," as Frank Nicholson called them. And it also seems to be a function of ingredients in the paper itself, as Frank speculated. Hang a thousand or so pulps and you get a varied outlook.

If you don't know how to paste paper, then yes, your problem could be the amount of paste: you only put on as much as the paper needs. It is much more likely that the problem relates to water, and whether it is 'free' enough to carry the staining ingredients through to the surface of the paper.

I've wanted to try adding kaolin to wheat to see if it has the same effects. It is sold & eaten in S. Georgia. Nothin' like Southern cookin'.

[Paul Sullivan]

You gotta understand how the wheat & 111 interact. The clay binds up the moisture: you ain't messin' with a wheat like you're used to. You can adjust the mix in many ways: more water in the wheat mix, or more clay. My wheat yield is much less than Kelly's pkg. directions..

If you don't know how to paste paper, then yes, your problem could be the amount of paste: you only put on as much as the paper needs. It is much more likely that the problem relates to water, and whether it is 'free' enough to carry the staining ingredients through to the surface of the paper.

I've always considered wheat to be the most loathsome of all pastes, but I don't remember being hit with Chartwell Jaspe. The last pulp strie' I hung was
Farrow & Ball - more delicate than most pulps - but not too bad. Used Paper-Hangings cellulose one pound to a scant 5 of water, over a gallon less than directed. Used BS, hung ok.

So my question is; the Paper-Hangings wheat bag says "2 pounds dry powder to 3 gallons water" (I don't have a scale). What is the wheat/water ratio before cutting it with the 111?

[Bob Bachmann]

That being said, I don't have to bull**** about my experience.

who's bull****ting about their experience?

[Chris Murphy]

I've always considered wheat to be the most loathsome of all pastes, but I don't remember being hit with Chartwell Jaspe. The last pulp strie' I hung was
Farrow & Ball - more delicate than most pulps - but not too bad. Used Paper-Hangings cellulose one pound to a scant 5 of water, over a gallon less than directed. Used BS, hung ok.

So my question is; the Paper-Hangings wheat bag says "2 pounds dry powder to 3 gallons water" (I don't have a scale). What is the wheat/water ratio before cutting it with the 111?
Paper-hangings' wheat is made of food-grade flour, so it is different than other wheats out there. There is one other left that is similar; I used to get it at an Ace Hardware, comes in a waxed carton like milk. Other wheats have too much of the germ and hulls; it's the starch in the flour that provides the tack. Wheat cleans a heck of a lot easier than cellulose, and has much more tack ( a good wheat, that is). It is, though, gonna be 90% or more water. And it won't last but 2 days, at most: not because it 'goes bad,' like with mildew, but because the water starts separating from the wheat. Even with clay mixed in.

So I only mix up about 1- 1 1/2 lbs. at a time. That is stirred into agitated water slowly, but only about 1-1 1/2 gal. of water. I don't measure, I'm going by the volume in the bag. Really, I go by how it looks: gets to about Cream of Wheat thickness- it'll peak with a whisk. So instead of 6 gal. of paste, I get about 4. Depending on what I'm hanging and what I want the paste to do determines how much clay to add, and if I add more water to the finished mix: it may not wet-out a pulp like I want, so I'll add more water. I'm not adding clay for tack, necessarily, but for the way the clay binds to the water. If I want more tack, I size the walls.

[B Blanchard]

Chris,

My Morris comment was in regard to the two papers in the photos with seam staining. The patterns are Morris and they sure look like Morris papers. Am I mistaken?

I agree with you on the paper-hangings wheat - it's an excellent product. The only reason I don't use it more is that wheat doesn't go through my pasting machine. But I'd rather do a job right than fast, so, like I said, I will try this combo of paste on the next Chartwell.

Barry

[Chris Murphy]

Chris,

My Morris comment was in regard to the two papers in the photos with seam staining. The patterns are Morris and they sure look like Morris papers. Am I mistaken?

I agree with you on the paper-hangings wheat - it's an excellent product. The only reason I don't use it more is that wheat doesn't go through my pasting machine. But I'd rather do a job right than fast, so, like I said, I will try this combo of paste on the next Chartwell.

Barry
Oh, OK- if it is a Morris design, I don't know who made it. I don't often see Sanderson's stuff, and that co. has most of the Morris designs, I think. I did this about, I dunno, 8-10 yrs. ago, so it's hard to remember. I've done many rooms since in the house, and they called me back because the room was re-painted, and the painter put blue tape to protect the paper. When it was removed, it took up the facing all over the place. I had to use all the leftover stuff to cover it (appliqued).

[Boston Hangman]

That being said, I don't have to bull**** about my experience. The seam staining in the picture was not caused by too much paste, or by bagging it, or by letting it sit. And it wasn't obvious at the outset because the whole sheets darkened, not just those seam areas. But those seams stayed dark. "Parchmentized," as Frank Nicholson called them.

I had the same thing happen to me with a Sanderson around 12 years ago, give or take. I think it may have been a Morris "willow bough minor??"I was not using much liner at the time . I hung it over R-35 and used either 838 or 880, probaly the latter. Anyway , Sanderson said it was probaly the lack of liner and the paste wicked thru the seam , darkened and stayed dark the same as Chris's. I seem to remember my seam having a finer dark line, like a thin pencil line right down the seam. I've been lining since and most of it has gone up with 880 , even when they put those obnoxious "MUST Be Hung with Wheat" stickers in the early to mid 90's:roflmao:

I no longer use R-35 either , but doubt that had much of a role in that problem. BTW it was only on one wall:confused: so Sanderson sent out 3 bolts and I redid it. over liner , no probs:cool: .

So for those of you having problems , listen up. :lol:

1.prime the walls with Shieldz or Gardz

2. line with Eddie's(cavalier) or Bob K's( paper-hangings) blankstock....let dry overnight.

3. pull a bolt at a time thru your newly acquired Tapo 32" ( the machine of Pro's) ,filled with 880 thinned with agua -H2O- water

4. clean up , collect check and do it again:thumbup:

5.I hope you know that my tongue is firmly planted in cheek:tiphat:

but it does work for me..

[Paul Sullivan]

A little history. Back around '02 - '04 there were endlessly reoccuring debates between Bob Kelly and Jim Parodi about the "wet" vs. "dry" school of pulp-hanging on the APN. Jim's "dry" school favored the use of 880, while Bob vehemenently held to the use of high-moisture, powdered pastes for hanging pulp papers. Jim never stained with 880 because he added no (or next to no) water, used a very thin amount and apparently hadn't run across the right pulp to bite him in the ass yet.

During that time I dabbled in both camps and learned until my head was so drowning in paste-mixes and paste-concoctions that I needed to find a way to get stupid again real fast. I did.

Shortly later (but not soon enough), Murph came in and ended the whole debate with tests showing that 880 and 234 could stain pulps even when undiluted and even over blankstock. You just have to be "lucky" enough to find the right one and give it enough time.

Oh yes, all this is about staining from the backside.

Believe or not, I still wasn't conviced whether or not staining was entirely a result of the amount of adhesive used (regardless of paste) and the method of pasting. So I would sometimes revert to my old method of rolling on undiluted premixes with a nearly unloaded 1/8" nap roller. Bumper-sticker effect. Why? Because I liked using pre-mixes better. (Hey I said I wanted to get stupid :bash: .)

But as has been made clear, you just never know when you get the wrong one and everything may go well 98% of the time. The solution for me that I unwittingly fell upon was to find a safer combination that I liked using all of the time. Here it is;

Paper-Hangings Methyl-Cellulose -
One pound bag to 4.5 gal water.
Mixed at least 24 hours before job.
Run through a Tapo.
Hung over sized blankstock. :thumbup:

No blankstock? Size the walls with clay.
Need more tack? Size the blankstock with clay.
Thinned GH-34 or wheat also makes a wonderful size. :toast:

Of course, you can't always use it. :2cents:

[Chris Murphy]

That being said, I don't have to bull**** about my experience. The seam staining in the picture was not caused by too much paste, or by bagging it, or by letting it sit. And it wasn't obvious at the outset because the whole sheets darkened, not just those seam areas. But those seams stayed dark. "Parchmentized," as Frank Nicholson called them.

I had the same thing happen to me with a Sanderson around 12 years ago, give or take. I think it may have been a Morris "willow bough minor??"I was not using much liner at the time . I hung it over R-35 and used either 838 or 880, probaly the latter. Anyway , Sanderson said it was probaly the lack of liner and the paste wicked thru the seam , darkened and stayed dark the same as Chris's. I seem to remember my seam having a finer dark line, like a thin pencil line right down the seam. I've been lining since and most of it has gone up with 880 , even when they put those obnoxious "MUST Be Hung with Wheat" stickers in the early to mid 90's:roflmao:

I no longer use R-35 either , but doubt that had much of a role in that problem. BTW it was only on one wall:confused: so Sanderson sent out 3 bolts and I redid it. over liner , no probs:cool: .

So for those of you having problems , listen up. :lol:

1.prime the walls with Shieldz or Gardz

2. line with Eddie's(cavalier) or Bob K's( paper-hangings) blankstock....let dry overnight.

3. pull a bolt at a time thru your newly acquired Tapo 32" ( the machine of Pro's) ,filled with 880 thinned with agua -H2O- water

4. clean up , collect check and do it again:thumbup:

5.I hope you know that my tongue is firmly planted in cheek:tiphat:

but it does work for me..

Take any English pulp. Any. Paste a piece with 880 (a scrap), book it and let it dry. It will be a different shade than the unpasted roll.

[Boston Hangman]

Take any English pulp. Any. Paste a piece with 880 (a scrap), book it and let it dry. It will be a different shade than the unpasted roll.

Sounds like a dare:devil: .
I only speak from that which I have done.
I know there are other ways, heck I've even used them...but I am as stubborn as the next guy. I like what I like....

Happy Hanging!

[Chris Murphy]

It's not a dare, it's an invititation to do your own test. Check it out.

[Chris Murphy]

A little history. Back around '02 - '04 there were endlessly reoccuring debates between Bob Kelly and Jim Parodi about the "wet" vs. "dry" school of pulp-hanging on the APN. Jim's "dry" school favored the use of 880, while Bob vehemenently held to the use of high-moisture, powdered pastes for hanging pulp papers. Jim never stained with 880 because he added no (or next to no) water, used a very thin amount and apparently hadn't run across the right pulp to bite him in the ass yet.

A little more about all that: Bob & Barry hosted the Scenics class around that time, and I attended. One thing struck me watching Bob: he had his own "system." Part one of the system is indeed high-moisture. But Part Two is applying this high moisture paste extremely thinly, with a pasting brush. In other words, the total amount of moisture put on the paper is very small using Bob's system.
'10-knot prime pasting brushes' are no longer made ( a thick, wide handled bristle brush), and others are junk. So, since I must use a roller or machine, went with low-moisture paste, but without the premix variety being the main ingredient.
One note about the clears: they are all at least 65% water (234; 70% 880). The staining problem, to me, comes when the clears are diluted. And they are diluted when a machine is used. If they are not diluted, many English pulps do not 'wet-out' enough, they do not relax and become supple. So again, the clear gets diluted to 'fix' that.

[Paul Sullivan]

Sounds like a dare:devil: .
I only speak from that which I have done.
I know there are other ways, heck I've even used them...but I am as stubborn as the next guy. I like what I like....

Happy Hanging!

Mark, You ain't the first that's used 880 on english goods (probably) for a number of years and never heard a complaint. Taking the proof to be in the pudding (or paycheck) hangers tend to stay with what they know.

After (about) 4 years of using 880 on pulps I finally got it this year. Of course as you'll see there was no liner. Yet the staining still took 2 years to show up. I don't see how liner can prevent all the short-chain molecules and additives from eventually making their way to the front when there is sufficient humidity to rewet them.

No :coocoo: scientist here, just another grad from the school of hard knocks :banghead: http://ngpp.org/lounge/showthread.php?t=1308

The reason why I recommend the cellulose is because it is very suitable to the hanging style of those who like 880. Pulps suck up moisture so quickly after pasting. Cellulose stays wet a good bit longer. Pulps don't need that much tack. If I want some insurance (like in a bath) I'll use the clay-sizing.

Then of course there's Ecofix P7, which has about the same open time. I've found it works fine over BS without any sizing. But for a powder it has such an abnormal amount of tack that I'm afraid I'm gonna wake up to find the disclaimer..

"We have deemed this product unsuitable for the use of pulp papers due to the genetic engineering of the formula.." But, that's just me :hide:

[Dave D]

I almost hesitate to enter this debate but I have never installed pulps with redimix paste of any kind. The way I figure it if the Brits have been hanging the stuff for over 100 years and they do it with wheat paste. I figure it must work, and so far I have found that it does with no staining.

I have used other high moisture adhesives (cellulose, patato starch, and combinations of cellulose and wheat) but I still think that I get the best results from wheat. Also, liner is a must for the very best results.

Dave

[Bill Archibald]

Dave, thanks for weighing in.

I understand your hesitation as this does have a tone of "debate" meaning "right" vs "wrong" with the winner being exalted and the losers chastised :hide:.

We need to enter this as an EXPLORATION. We all have had valid experiences.

And so:
A number of years ago I was told that some hangers were asking for staining by over application of paste and over booking of pulps with high solids paste, ie 880 and 234. I did a test with 234 and sure enough, I experienced some immediate staining and as time has gone by, dramatic worsening of the stains. I jumped on the bandwagon that using high solids paste on pulps heightens the chance of staining. It would not happen every time with every pulp, but there had been sporadic evidence that should cause caution. My warnings were oft refuted, categorically, by some fellow chapter members who have been using 880 for years on pulps. I have recently been working with these exalted installers, and by gosh they have good results with 880 on Pulps. No staining, blushing, or change of color.

there really is a lot to explore and learn. Not every pulp will stain with 880 or 234.

But then again, I harken back to a pulp hung with wheat in a master bath that stained over time. But I think it was a combo of the wheat mixed with tap water (high mineral and chlorine content) and daily steaming with that water.

So, under the "right" conditions, apparently wheat is not 100% safe.

we need testing to determine better if, when, and why staining occurs with some pre-mixes. But it don't happen all the time, so it will tough to re-ceate.

-Bill

[Jeff Evans]

I'm with Dave, but find recently that companies like Osborne and Little and others are asking for a pre mix of some sort. I have found that these papers aren't like the pulps of old, but heavier and don't seem to hang as well with wheat paste. I actually like using Wheat paste, but now I'm finding more often than not that it's 785 or 880. Even GH34/Wheat mixed doesn't work well on the English goods I'm talking about. Ecofix seems to be nice enough, but I have found the opposite of what Paul said- that it works good without sizing over liner. There again, it was an O&L paper quite recently that I tried P7 on without size. 785 works fantastic without a size over blank stock.

[Bill Archibald]

First, Jeff, I too love wheat with lighter weight pulps, and you know my opinion of wheat and GH-34 with the "heavier" pulps. So I gotta know, in what way did they not hang as well? :help:

And then we have, as I've written many times before, the Cole and Son directions: "Use a ready mix wheat or cellulose tub paste....." (we all know how the Brits love their pre-mix tub pastes) ......"These adhesives must not contain fungicides or preservatives." :bs: Well, talk about being contradictory. They want a pre-mix, but it can't have preservatives. :confused: Can anyone think of a pre-mix without preservatives or fungicides? :bash: They sure cover the gamut (and their A$$ES) with that statement. :banghead:

Kinda sours one on sticking to directions. But what paperhanger has ever been accused of THAT :devil:

-Bill

[Chris Murphy]

I'm with Dave, but find recently that companies like Osborne and Little and others are asking for a pre mix of some sort. I have found that these papers aren't like the pulps of old, but heavier and don't seem to hang as well with wheat paste. I actually like using Wheat paste, but now I'm finding more often than not that it's 785 or 880. Even GH34/Wheat mixed doesn't work well on the English goods I'm talking about. Ecofix seems to be nice enough, but I have found the opposite of what Paul said- that it works good without sizing over liner. There again, it was an O&L paper quite recently that I tried P7 on without size. 785 works fantastic without a size over blank stock.

By gosh, call it Karma, I had one of those today (but I left the camera there). Some of these co.'s are going with a heavier coating, I guess to fulfill that pledge on the front, " Wipeable surface."
<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->
<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->
Take any English pulp. Any. Paste a piece with 880 (a scrap), book it and let it dry. It will be a different shade than the unpasted roll. __________________

Well, that didn't happen with this paper. As a matter of fact, the paper wouldn't lay down on liner with 880. A lot of edge curl (differential). So I remixed the wheat/clay stronger, and sized with clay. I still had to go over the seams a second time.

[B Blanchard]

I, and my paperhanging buddies, just hung a William Morris Brit pulp. I believe this is the same line of papers that Chris took pictures of above that show staining at the seams. I used an 880/cellulose mix (approx 60/40) and pasted with a tapofix 29. At the end of one day we had several pasted sheets and no time to get them up. We were running a little tight on the paper and didn’t want to waste it so I dipped the ends of the sheets in water and wrapped them in plastic.
http://www.ngpp.org/lounge/images/smilies/eek.gif

It wasn’t that much paper and I had already decided that if the paper stained I would toss it and pull new sheets, although that would be cutting things close on the paper. We hung the paper the next day. It looked fine at the time of installation. After another day of drying it still looked perfect, as you can see below. (The left sheet on the left side was hung the same day, the sheets on the right were soaked over night.)

http://www.ngpp.org/lounge/images/attach/jpg.gif

Here is a close up of a seam. There is absolutely no staining to be seen.

http://www.ngpp.org/lounge/images/attach/jpg.gif

(Disclaimer: I don’t recommend doing this. It will, in many cases, cause problems with the paper. I was lucky!)

I know that some papers, Brit pulps being one, that tend to stain more than others. I know that some pastes tend to stain more often than others. What is never clear to me is when and why. Certainly over-soaking contributes to it and it seems that clear premixes are often associated with it but other factors obviously come into play.

The items we’re dealing with are substrates (usually, if not always, paper), inks, paste (with various ingredients such as solids, vehicles and preservatives), things we add to the paste (water, other paste), installation techniques and environmental conditions (wall conditions, humidity, mold spores, etc.) Any or all of these things can contribute to a wallpaper failure, including staining.

One possible contributing factor to staining problems that I haven’t seen mentioned is differences between batches of printing inks and/or paper lots. Let’s use as examples the paper pictured here and the one that Chris posted, which, theoretically, are using the same paper stock and inks. One stains and the other doesn’t, despite conditions that one would expect to cause staining. Wouldn’t it be possible that there are differences in the porosity of the paper or the stability of the inks due to slight variations at the manufacturing level?

Just throwing out another possibility to ponder!
http://www.ngpp.org/lounge/images/smilies/2cents.gif

Barry

[Chris Murphy]

Polyvinyl acetate (PVA) is listed as an ingredient in many European pastes, used only on vinyls. The hangers there generally use cellulose or powdered potato paste on the rest. Then again, those Old Worlders do a lot of funny things. For instance, many of us have seen the endorsement of 'tub paste' in the hanging directions for European wood-pulp papers. We American hangers, who thought we spoke English, usually assume they mean premix, which comes in a tub, er, pail. Sometimes, not always, but often enough to impede one's financial progress, these pulps will show marks that look wet after the sheets are pasted. The first thought is, "I sure hope that dries out." This darkening can happen anywhere or all over the piece but most often shows at seams and cut edges.
Frank Nicholson of Gardner-Gibson (and NGPP National Associate President) tells me he investigated similar staining some years ago. His apt description of the look of the staining is "parchmentized," meaning it looked like parchment, prepared hides used for writng that have a somewhat translucent appearance. He followed the trail back to the paper substrate manufacturers and found that the stains seemed to occur when melamine resin was not added to the paper mix. This colorless resin is impregnated into papers to give them better wet strength, shrink resistance and printability.21 (http://scenichanger.com/WallcoveringAdhesives.htm#_edn21) When the starches used in premixes are processed into smaller molecules, they apparently can 'bleed' through pulps with no melamine barrier. They may also evade the barrier at the seam edges by going in through the exposed side and carried up to the surface by capillary action. More insidious, months or years after an installation the premixes can start to spot and yellow the pulps. One answer, found by South Jersey member Cliff Hayes, is Ecofix P7. This is a Swedish potato paste that reportedly works well in machines.22 (http://scenichanger.com/WallcoveringAdhesives.htm#_edn22)



http://scenichanger.com/WallcoveringAdhesives.htm

[Paul Sullivan]

The items we’re dealing with are substrates (usually, if not always, paper), inks, paste (with various ingredients such as solids, vehicles and preservatives), things we add to the paste (water, other paste), installation techniques and environmental conditions (wall conditions, humidity, mold spores, etc.) Any or all of these things can contribute to a wallpaper failure, including staining.

One possible contributing factor to staining problems that I haven’t seen mentioned is differences between batches of printing inks and/or paper lots. Let’s use as examples the paper pictured here and the one that Chris posted, which, theoretically, are using the same paper stock and inks. One stains and the other doesn’t, despite conditions that one would expect to cause staining. Wouldn’t it be possible that there are differences in the porosity of the paper or the stability of the inks due to slight variations at the manufacturing level?

Just throwing out another possibility to ponder!
Barry

By this time I'm wondering at which point we start begging the government for money! (filling out grant applications) If we need any pointers we can ask my Dad! (he did that for a living)

Below is a test board I did which still looks exactly the same - like one piece of paper. This was a pulp I stained the edges of 1/4" out a couple times with thinned 880 and permanently darkened the seams with the Connecticut mix over BS (838/Teknabond). I really couldn't tell a difference from this board and the unpasted roll, but as I tell my designers, I'm really color-blind.

But the method in the test rarely demonstrates field conditions, as it's as far from production work as it gets. Ever heard of a paperhanger who rolls out of a paint pan? :lol: :hide: :lol:

The method:
Paste one, burn one
Hang one, burn another one

So I ditched it largely in favor of practical work. Those are some serious lengths you go to to avoid the vehicle of staining with pre-mix. So as I posted I love cellulose in the machine even better than P7, but don't care for it otherwise. I've thrown pre-mix in with it, but later found it unnecessary....

What caught me most about this thread was when Chris mentioned how wheat/clay would wet-out just enough to make a pulp workable without softening a delicate face. The Farrow&Ball strie' has a similar delicate feature as Barry mentioned about the Chartwell Jaspe - likely not as extreme. I found the inks could be pushed from side to side, and that's a potential problem.

[dgauthier]

has anyone considered that its not the paste but the water. where i live we have what we call hard water. lots of chemicals. if i go north of of here they have well water.
the well water always penertates the paper better. the same happens when you try to remove paper. the dark spots you see are where the water has penertated.
when i started out my uncle who taught me, would alway use distilled water when we had a touchy call to mix paste.

[Bill Archibald]

OH DENNIS !!!! :D

You have brought up one more variable that can very likely be part of the equation.

But first, we, here in Norfolk MA, are on well water and it, without any chemicals (added during treatment by humans) is VERY hard and acidic. Lots of iron and acid. (soap does not suds very well) The WW's aunt's and uncle's house on Buzzard Bay (MA) has very SOFT water.(Use 1/2 recommended detergent and the laundry room floor is covered with suds). Point is, well-water or municipal water is not what determines hardness.

That said, sometimes water, IMO, has a lot to do with some stains. I am really leaning toward high mineral content and chlorine in the tap water as the cause of brown stains I had with a pulp.

I agree, water has something to do with SOME staining.

How much does it contribute to the staining and blushing described here? You've just suggested another parameter to test.

-Bill

[Bill Archibald]

Above, Barry posted a couple of pictures, the lower one, however, was rotated on its side, and makes finding the seam difficult. Actually, at first, I thought he had taken the picture of the middle of the strip where there was no seam. :headslap: I am reposting the picture here and adding an arrow pointing to the seam.
If you click the picture, it should open in a new browser window, and if you click it again, it should enlarge and then you will be able see the seam better as there is a slight mismatch of the pattern.

544

Besides the nearly invisible seams that a fraud and a hack like myself can obtain with these papers, Morris substrates also appear not to be subject to staining with a high solids paste like 880.
As Barry said, this and other strips were bagged all night. I can attest to this as I was first on the job the next morning and hung these strips. (Talk about RELAXED :D) The walls had no liner and I believe the homeowner/contractor/decorator prepped them with California Acrylic Prep 'n' Size.
I have been on many other jobs where Barry has previously hung pulps with 880, and I have not seen any staining.
I am NOT absolving 880 or any high solids paste from staining any paper at any give time under any situation, I don't make global statements like that, but I am beginning to soften my condemnation of 880 and pulps. I am convinced that this question far exceeds the experience of even the most seasoned paper hanger.

-Bill

[Paul Sullivan]

...I am beginning to soften my condemnation of 880 and pulps. I am convinced that this question far exceeds the experience of even the most seasoned paper hanger.

-Bill

Doesn't it all boil down to this? ..


...stains seemed to occur when melamine resin was not added to the paper mix. This colorless resin is impregnated into papers to give them better wet strength, shrink resistance and printability.21 When the starches used in premixes are processed into smaller molecules, they apparently can 'bleed' through pulps with no melamine barrier. They may also evade the barrier at the seam edges by going in through the exposed side and carried up to the surface by capillary action. More insidious, months or years after an installation the premixes can start to spot and yellow the pulps.

Now I wonder whom who could get at the front desk of Cowtan&Snout to confirm, "no, that run # does not contain melamine".

Well, send over some freakin tub paste then

[Chris Murphy]

Edited...............................

[Jeff Evans]

Well what a fine sight to find on the job on Memorial day, a crud load of Chartwell Jaspe! And I thought I was going to be done early today....

I have two days to give this job if I want to keep the rest of the folks on the schedule happy, so liner was out of the question. This breaks my personal rule of lining under all pulps, no matter what. I have to say, that this particular paper could really use the liner. I did use the Wheat/clay mix, over Swing PC, and I sized the seams with the same. This mix seems to be the best for rolling on thin, over all of the premixes. This is really an advantage IMO. I'm falling deeper into like with this mix with every job.

I felt comfortable pasting only two sheets at a time of this stuff, as 3 meant the last one was falling apart at the booking fold where the color was. And, I was extremely careful to not crease it, but to keep the folds rounded, yet it didn't matter as the moisture seemed to be the real problem.

I pasted very clean on this stuff, and I think I had to wipe paste off one time all day. This made for very slow going and made a 1 day job into two. What an adventure.:eek:

[Paul Sullivan]

I'm wondering if strippable clay would also work (Dynamite 433). I think the Atlanta mix calls for 111, but 433 is all I see around here anymore.

I just had 3 pulps where cellulose wasn't a great idea.

Which clay did you use?

[Jeff Evans]

I used 111. I can get Dynamite or Shur Stik 111 here anywhere. I've never used 433 myself. You'll run into these pulps now where they're too stiff for cellulose, or P7. This mix seems to have everything you'd want for those pulps, meaning good wet-out, tack, and yet wont stain like a clear. It's kind of a bummer having to roll it on, though, although Bob Bachman says he uses it in a machine. He uses a little different mix I think, though. The wheat goes bad so fast that I'd not want to mix up so much for a small job. We both know it takes over a gallon of paste to get a Tapo 29 primed properly. That's a lot of wasted paste that will go bad in 2 days, and believe me, it's a different mix in 2 days.

[Paul Sullivan]

Jeff, where I didn't like the cellulose was on O&L's with metallic inks. I think the paste sat even longer wet under the metallic part and shrunk slightly at that (metallic) part of the edge. Other stiff O&L's I found were machinable with cellulose and came out perfect. There was another O&L I had that was black and so coated, I just pulled out the 838. That worked perfect, but without the extra coating, I wouldn't want to lose sleep over the premix. Those kind, and that real soft stuff like you just had got me figuring I gotta put together the right clay/wheat. :banghead:

BTW, I gave this thread 5 stars. It really re-refines what to use on pulps when. Now just add 100s of years of paperhanger's opinions and hope we're getting somewhere!

[Jeff Evans]

I've had problems with those same metallic O&L papers, Paul. I hung one of the last ones with 234 because I hadn't tried the wheat /clay yet. I think the W/C will handle them fine.

Are you of the opinion that 838 has been re-formulated in the last year or so? Perhaps it's me, but it seems to be a combination of GH34 and 880 now. I once had a bucket of it sitting in a shed, diluted, for over a year with no spoilage. Just the other day I looked in a bucket not 2 months after previously using it and it was smelly like bad GH34 used to get. I began to think they'd made a compromise with the two pastes since 838 isn't as popular, and GH34 is defunct for all intents and purposes. You're the 838 guy, what think ye?

Speaking of the real soft stuff, have you ever run into Romo pulps? Last week I had one of those that would rival the chartwell Jaspe for delicate, and it had metallic in it. Wheat and clay was the only thing I felt I could have pasted it with and had it retain its integrity while handling. I'd just as soon have the delicate ones over those tough O&L's, as at least you know the seams are going to lay down for you.


Jeff

[Paul Sullivan]

I've run into the same problem with 838 for about 5 years, especially in warm weather. Jerry Russo told me at the '03 convention not to pour back the paste you roll from into the fresh bucket. Junk that collects in your roller can help spoil it. Sometimes I remember to drop about a cap of bleach per gallon in what I've used, or diluted, and that does seem to help preserve it maybe an extra 6 weeks.

It seems to have some of the properties of GH-34, though your open time is roughly 5 times that of GH and about half that of 880. I thought 880 was a big breakthrough in adhesives once, but in recent years have found it to be the most inconsistent on the market, and try never to buy it. Whearas with 838 I can almost never tell one batch from the next.



Speaking of the real soft stuff, have you ever run into Romo pulps?
Jeff

The only real softie I remember recently was a Farrow and Ball, which came out OK with cellulose, though a little scarifying going up.