Polishing New Painwork
Discussion
we start with 1500 grit as the most aggressive cut , then go over with 2000 grit then 2500/3000.
BUT its not the grit being to aggressive thats normally the problem (in your case using 1000 grit it maybe) its always contamination (we are talking microns only and the human eye can see a single micron deep score, a piece of A4 paper is 100 microns think to put into perspective) under the sand paper and between the paint and sand paper thats putting in deep scores into the surface on the top coat which in turn needs very heavy cut to remove.
You need a very good clean working area thats as much as possible dust free, and flood the area constantly with water.
Hey your not alone thou , many super/hyper cars have scores and pig tails after wet sanding from the factory, its actually very very difficult to do correctly , but very easy to do averagely.
Kelly
BUT its not the grit being to aggressive thats normally the problem (in your case using 1000 grit it maybe) its always contamination (we are talking microns only and the human eye can see a single micron deep score, a piece of A4 paper is 100 microns think to put into perspective) under the sand paper and between the paint and sand paper thats putting in deep scores into the surface on the top coat which in turn needs very heavy cut to remove.
You need a very good clean working area thats as much as possible dust free, and flood the area constantly with water.
Hey your not alone thou , many super/hyper cars have scores and pig tails after wet sanding from the factory, its actually very very difficult to do correctly , but very easy to do averagely.
Kelly
I think scratch free shines are an extreme rarity. Remember your paint will look 10x worse under artificial garage light than sun light so I wouldn't get caught up on try to remove every little scratch, you will be down to the primer before that ever happens. If you ever walk around a show like Autoport International or Top Gear live all of the cars look scratchy under the artificial lights, even those at the Autoglym stands etc.
On Cellulose I used 1200 -> 1500 -> 3000 -> 3M Fast Cut paste -> Farcela G10.
On Cellulose I used 1200 -> 1500 -> 3000 -> 3M Fast Cut paste -> Farcela G10.
NISaxoVTR said:
I think scratch free shines are an extreme rarity. Remember your paint will look 10x worse under artificial garage light than sun light so I wouldn't get caught up on try to remove every little scratch, you will be down to the primer before that ever happens. If you ever walk around a show like Autoport International or Top Gear live all of the cars look scratchy under the artificial lights, even those at the Autoglym stands etc.
On Cellulose I used 1200 -> 1500 -> 3000 -> 3M Fast Cut paste -> Farcela G10.
Not here to argue , but sun light is the best form to view defects, lighting inside show halls hide most defects. On Cellulose I used 1200 -> 1500 -> 3000 -> 3M Fast Cut paste -> Farcela G10.
Also to let you know all compounds that i used and test (i used most) have fillers , some more than others.
These fillers are extremely tricky to remove safely, IE only strong gun wash thinners remove fillers and oils.
There is now a product that we used and tested that does remove the filling effect , gtechniq panel wipe.
also yesterday found out that nanolex panel prep does too.
If you dont remove this filling effect, what your eyes see is only around 50%-70% (your eyes see 100% or very close to 100% corrected paint) true real honest correct paint, on dark coloured cars the oils burn out in days when in strong sunlight.
This happens much faster the hotter the paint surface becomes.
The main cause of so called "the paint has dropped", "the paint has settled" after any bodywork or detailing, this is why detailing (more so machine correction) does not last, it was never fully corrected in the first place.
the same goes for wet sanding scores and pig tails from wet/damp sanding with DA machines as per factory cars, they are then polished with filler heavy cuts that mask alot of what your meant to be removing.
HTH kelly
Maybe sun light is the wrong term and I should say natural light. Bad paint can look pretty bad when the sun is splitting down on it too, but still never worse than when under fluorescent light in my opinion. I went through a paint OCD stage when doing my own car and grumbled about most finishes at Autosport International one year. I remember Jamiroquai's Enzo looked terribly swirly under the indoor lighting, and this was the car on the Autoglym stand. I don't think it would have looked half as bad outside.
Now though I think good on him for obviously using the car properly and not giving too much of a s
t about whats after all just a coating.
Now though I think good on him for obviously using the car properly and not giving too much of a s
t about whats after all just a coating.NISaxoVTR said:
Maybe sun light is the wrong term and I should say natural light. Bad paint can look pretty bad when the sun is splitting down on it too, but still never worse than when under fluorescent light in my opinion. I went through a paint OCD stage when doing my own car and grumbled about most finishes at Autosport International one year. I remember Jamiroquai's Enzo looked terribly swirly under the indoor lighting, and this was the car on the Autoglym stand. I don't think it would have looked half as bad outside.
Now though I think good on him for obviously using the car properly and not giving too much of a st about whats after all just a coating.
Arrr we are getting somewhere now. BUT Now though I think good on him for obviously using the car properly and not giving too much of a s
t about whats after all just a coating.Natural light (over case / hazy sun light) is very forgiving for paint.
natural light (cloudless bright midday sunlight) is the best light for viewing defects all thou you may need to put on sunglasses if the car is light coloured as your eyes can’t take the full intensity of reflected sun light on certain colours, a HD video camera automatically alter exposure etc. to cope so is actually best light to see defect.
Here is a perfect example.
You have to trust me in this, none is this defects could be seen by me the owner and his wife.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0L06UKvcgc&fea...
But the camera captured them all (a photo camera in auto may not) , it was only when I put on sunglasses that it was easy to see.
This would be a different case on dark coloured cars; it’s all about how much light is absorbed by the colour and how much light is reflected by the colour.
Which brings me onto your wording of "fluorescent lighting" is in the form of straight tubes as seen in body shop spray booths, offices warehouses.
This is a "flat" even light that good for reflection photo, good showing orange peel using the straight edge of the light bulb BUT really really bad at showing small sharper defects like swirls.
Irony is that the worse light source for viewing defects and more importantly colour match is the light sourced used in spray booths and inspection tunnels at factory’s that produce cars including supercars.
its why photographers use strong light bounce off of large white surfaces to produce large area of "flat" natural soft lighing.
Fluorescent lights are also less fatiguing to your eyes then intense light hence office lighting
show halls will have sodium discharge , metal halide lights or similar , these are much better at showing up swirls and defects and much closer to what you see in direct sunlight.
show rooms with down lights use halogen spot lamps these are not very good at showing defects funny that
and lastly the lighting chosen will also alter depending on the colour temp of the bulbs.
The light temp / spectrum will alter what can and cant be seen.
http://www.svenlight.co.uk/Car_Detailing_Using_Sol...
This is why these are on the market
http://www.3mdirect.co.uk/p-2329-3m-colour-check-l... (I have 4)
Show hall lighting will be sourced and fitted with costs , costs to run , H&S , not for spotting swirls.
I was at http://www.waxstock.com/ this weekend working , and i remember a detailer friend saying to me how great the hall lights are at showing great paint.
What I think he meant "how great they are at NOT showing defects" and made his work look better.
so basically you cant compare one halls lights to another , one person work to another unless the paint colour is the same and the lighting being uses is exactly the same.
what more important is having all of the light sources to hand, understand the back ground of this subject and putting into use when working on a painted surface.
(Oh sorry OP its gone off topic but hopefully it helpful to members reading)
HTH
kelly
Edited by kds keltec on Friday 12th July 10:22
Actually I will summarise the above.
You could be machine polishing or paying for a machine polish that’s been carried out NOT using correct light sources and then unknowingly 50% filled with temporary filling oils and glazes, which in turn fails after washing or burnt away sitting in strong UV light.
Hence why product manufactures sell ridiculous amounts of “top up” products and a vast array to choose from to keep the car paint looking nice.
And when you realise that EVERYTIME time you make contact with the paint surface you WILL be inducing damage you are then trapped into this on-going circle
Kelly
You could be machine polishing or paying for a machine polish that’s been carried out NOT using correct light sources and then unknowingly 50% filled with temporary filling oils and glazes, which in turn fails after washing or burnt away sitting in strong UV light.
Hence why product manufactures sell ridiculous amounts of “top up” products and a vast array to choose from to keep the car paint looking nice.
And when you realise that EVERYTIME time you make contact with the paint surface you WILL be inducing damage you are then trapped into this on-going circle
Kelly
Edited by kds keltec on Friday 12th July 10:32
Gassing Station | Bodywork & Detailing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff