Talk:Paint sheen

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:Gloss (paint))
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Home Living (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Home Living, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Home on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
 

Gloss is measured in "gloss units" and not a percentage. The reference you list (Triboropaintcenter) is also incorrect. I reference the following (http://www.gloss-meters.com/GlossIntro2.html#4) for a better explanation of gloss, its measurement and units.

I found this while looking for information on this topic. Maybe someone wants to integrate it. http://www.dunnedwards.com/PaintingContractors/Paint101/HowToGuides/SelectingtheRightGloss.aspx

Common Names and Associated Gloss Values[edit]

Since we're missing a citation on the current table of common names/gloss values, I propose we use this list: http://www.rochelepainting.com.au/paint-sheen-level, which lists values very similar to the table already present:

Soupfork (talk) 00:44, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

What physical component or ingredient within paint is responsible for specular reflection?[edit]

Hello,

I came to this page seeking to understand what physical component or ingredient within a paint is responsible for its specular reflection qualities. For instance are there plastic or glass spheres added to the paint to give a specific specular reflection? It is fine to say that gloss or lack of gloss of a paint is due to it's specular reflection but what physically within the paint causes this?

Thank You70.54.60.161 (talk) 19:25, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment. I found a rather comprehensive source and will try to add that information to the article. No such user (talk) 12:25, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Title, MOS, etc[edit]

@AjaxSmack: Thanks for your edits. However, I see a few issues with them:

  • The lead now fails WP:BOLDTITLE, by bolding "sheen" and "finish" that do not appear in the title. We should either fix the lead or fix the title. I moved the article from Gloss (paint) to Gloss and matte paint back in March, but now I realize there might be better choices available(Paint sheen, Finish sheen,...). Suggestions? RM?
  • {{cn}} on a photo caption is kind of lame. The point of the picture was to illustrate how a high-gloss kitchen looks like, and I found it on Commons. You might be right that it's laminated rather than painted (hard to tell, but judging on edge shapes you're probably right), but that's kind of irrelevant as to its purpose. By all means, replace it with a better one, but nobody can provide a citation for a run-of-the-mill photograph.
    No such user (talk) 09:24, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the comments. I had planned to instigate a move request and didn't get it done. I will now. —  AjaxSmack  04:27, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Move request January 2016[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved to Paint sheen. Jenks24 (talk) 06:20, 24 January 2016 (UTC)



Gloss and matte paintPaint sheen – The article deals with all paint sheens, not just gloss and matte sheens. Alternatively, the title could be paint finish. —  AjaxSmack  04:27, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

  • Support Paint finish. A matte paint is one without a sheen, so the inclusive term "finish" is better here. It is also better than the current title. 64.105.98.115 (talk) 05:16, 12 January 2016 (UTC)Update, after comments below: I stand by my preference, but paint sheen is also an improvement over the current title. 64.105.98.115 (talk) 04:50, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
    While I support a move somewhere, to me it seems that "finish" is too inclusive. Focus of the article is on sheen, and "finish" could also cover color, materials, chemistry, techniques etc. (and I'm reluctant to expand its scope). No such user (talk) 15:45, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
    User:No such user: Any other suggestions?  AjaxSmack  03:00, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
    Not really — having been editing the article for a while, I would have moved it myself if I had a better idea :). But I guess I could support Paint sheen. No such user (talk) 08:09, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
    I was just driving by looking for an article on paint sheen, noticed that Wikipedia didn't have one, and then noticed this article seemed to be it in disguise. However, as you are a frequent editor, your opinion should carry weight. Any reason for reluctance?  AjaxSmack  00:03, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
    Maybe Bus stop, below, better formulates my concerns. While I do take interest in the subject and I'm trying to improve the article, I'm unsure what a proper title in an encyclopedic register would be. "Paint sheen" is indeed concise, but I feel it a bit too informal; something that would be rather used by a layman than by someone knowledgeable in the field (which, again, I'm really not; and English is not my first language so I can't always determine an appropriate register of a term). But I'm unable to pinpoint a title that would be the most appropriate. No such user (talk) 15:49, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Support Paint sheen: zero sheen is a "level" of sheen, just as black is the zero level of lightness, value, or brightness. I agree that "finish" is too broad. --Macrakis (talk) 15:50, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Support - Paint sheen "Finish" is not specific enough and could cover a variety of different things. Meatsgains (talk) 02:43, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose As an article title Gloss and matte paint identifies the article best. Countless factors contribute to the appearance of a coating of paint. But these two terms (gloss and matte) are most commonly used by people talking about the sorts of qualities that are commonly under consideration. Bus stop (talk) 05:11, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
Other coatings (e.g., varnish) have gloss levels, not just paint.
There are many levels of glossiness or flatness between gloss and matte (satin, etc.). This article presumably covers the quality of glossiness, not just the two extreme levels: the article on brightness is not entitled "White and black".
Anyway, "flat", not "matte" is probably the most commonly used name for a matte finish in interior painting at least. --Macrakis (talk) 16:09, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.