Technical Can paint jobs be too beautiful ?

Thanks man. The car came out great, and I'm not ashamed to say I didn't paint it.

I sincerely feel that both ends of the spectrum can peaceably coexist; the people who do everything themselves, and the guys who contract services out. Sometimes those folks are the same.

 

Agreed. I hire out some things specifically because I know deep down that my best won't be good enough for the car I'm building. Depending on one's skills, interests and goals, "doing it yourself" and "hiring it out" can be interchangeable. But I still say there's no such thing as paint that's too nice, no matter who does it.

 

The very first car I ever owned and drove was a 61 Chevy Impala Bubble top - Black, white insert, red and white interior... I love this custom red one in this post with the single headlights. Its a simplified look that is elegant. I'm sure some may not like it, but all that matters right now is that the owner and I like it... Right folks? Drive it and enjoy it - its a hobby - supposta be fun, REMEMBER?

 

I’m not sure I’ve seen a paint job that’s too beautiful, but I’ve definitely seen some that were tacky, even if they were professionally done. In my mind a paint job is just part of the overall package. A large part, but just a part of it. The wheels and tires, engine of choice, stance and rake, chop, trim mods, and many other factors combine to make a car look perfect, or maybe seem like something is out of proportion. Your eye spots those cars right off, either they hit the mark, or they missed it by some margin.

 

Ask yourself this question................ (not just you, but everyone)

How many times have you been to a car show or venue where ultimately detailed and superbly painted vehicles were displayed .............and the next day the only thing that stuck in your mind was the color/paint of many of those cars.
You have a mental picture, but all those details are now vague or forgotten? Can you remember what engine each of them had?

How many times have you been to a small or local rod run and a week later you rember the color of the car but you also know what engine they used?

Why? Because you spent more time looking at the engine or other details and thinking about them than staring at the paint.

 

Sorry but this is a silly take. People pay attention to what interests them. If a nice paint job distracts them so much they can't remember other things about a car they are either not really car people or they have the attention span of a squirrel. I couldn't tell you what engine was in 90% of the cars I like because I couldn't give a shit. I pay attention to the fit and finish, the overall styling, the interior, modifications etc. and a nice paint job has never distracted me from any of that. Other probably know exactly what every component of the drive train is because that's what interests them and again if the paint distracts them from that I am not sure what to say.

 

Maybe its silly, but thats my story and I'm stickin to it.

Remember the car that was discussed at length on here a few weeks ago that DIDN'T win the AMBR trophy. What colors was it ? What engine and what displacement was the engine in it ? (You said you don't pay attention to the engines, but how many others remember?)

 

400 sbc
Beautiful pink and black paint

 

Is this allowed ?

 

Now a few more questions.........What kind of exhaust did the motor have ?
What color was the motor painted?
Is the car air conditioned ?
What type of fuel system ?

Can you answer those questions as well?

Also, do you remember what the car that won the AMBR looked like ? What color and flamed or not?
What engine did it have.

You remember the Pink car, but what do you remember about the one that actually won?

 

Show of hands, who knows one of my most consistent peaves about finishing? Anyone? Some of y'all sound like I should be treated like Wm Wallace at the end of "Braveheart" for the finish standard I set on my works.

Why do the others look so fake? Anyone? Goes back to the 1st question. I'll be back...

 

A high dollar, over-the-top, base coat clear coat paint job for sure doesn’t look TRADITIONAL on a hot rod, in my book! Good way to make a original steel Henry body look like a fiberglass reproduction. Nothing wrong with a Tupperware hot rod, especially if you hate rust, but putting all the modern “products”on an original steel body is criminal…might just as well start with a fiberglass body.

 

A black with flames hand built Brizio with whatever powering it
The reason I remember the pink one is folks can’t stop talking about it.
The winner kinda faded away
The pink one just keeps going and going and going

 

I do, the Grease Monkey princess. Pink with black flames, pink frame, black interior, black steel wheels, black top cockpit moved back in the body, big fuss about steering wheel placement, big fuss about frame being painted a differnt colour before pink. But again if others don't have an interest in the car, which most seemingly didn't, they won't care about the details either. The paint has absolutely nothing to do with what I do and do not remember my interests do. I don't believe for a second if someone has a genuine interest in a car and has half a brain that nice paint would result in them not remembering the details that interested them either.

 

Man we got some sculptors in this custom and rod world. They look fake because as hard as these guys work, and as talented as they are, the lines, the vibe, the silhouette, the import car level door gaps, and $1,000 worth of polyester to get em there. I'll stand by the point that doing perfect panels at the least possible mil thickness at the end is always the best. News flash, more durable too. Most of us here can see it that way, another know it when you see it entry. This current trend has been a "thing" for over 15yrs and now it happens on everything. I call em mud puppies.

 

If it's flat I like it like that. HRP

 

And I think this is a good example of the difference in focus between those on here who more rod-centered, and those who are more custom-centered. For the folks more interested in the rods, there is more focus on the engine and performance and style and appearance becomes a tertiary concern. Essentially the engine IS the style. For those of us who focus on customs, the emphasis is on body modifications, style, paint, chrome and the like. The engine makes the car move, and if it also looks good, then it's a bonus. But it's always a side dish to the main course. And for many like myself that show the car with the hood closed (it ruins the lines to show it with the hood up), nobody has any idea what's under the hood.

Neither is right or wrong. But it's demonstrative of how two different perspectives can alter the impression of the same car.

 

Agreed but that wasn't really the point being made. The point being made was that if a paint job is too nice it's so distracting you can't remember anything else about the car. No different than saying if an engine is too nice you can't remember anything else about the car both of which IMO are nonsense unless you have no interest in the car on zero attention span.

 

Very well put. It is the form over function debate. With a custom, the primary purpose is form which is just about everything. And with a rod it is exactly the opposite. The primary function is to move and move well. I know on the car I am working with, the goal is to have the car running and drive it Good Guys in July. Paint and make it pretty will happen next winter. To some if the car is too pretty they fear they will not utilize the car to it's full ability. If a car is built to be seen, inspire others, and remember times past and you park it way out away from everyone to avoid door dings and finger prints, there is a conflict. Worse if you don't drive it to avoid dings, rock chips, and wear and tear, you have all but removed the purpose of the car. Neither camp is wrong but the view is entirely different. Hold up dollar bill and ask someone to tell you specifically what they can see. If they describe the images on the back of the bill, would they be wrong? If you said that isn't what you see and you described the images on the front of the bill you would be correct too despite seeing opposite views. Back to the original topic there are two distinct views, both are right to their holders. The great thing about this forum is that they view both sides as looking at the same thing a car just like in the example both sides were looking at a dollar bill.

 

Well some of us appreciate a well built hot rod and figure the essence of a car is wrapped in its mechanical attributes and how well they are made to work together and compliment each other when actually driven. If you don't wish to acknowledge that this whole thing we are part of developed from people experimenting and creating new mechanical inventions and applications in their driveways and garages, or have the abilty to appreciate mechanical harmony, then I feel sorry for you.
The emphasis of a true hot rod should be its mechanical engineering. Not just the guy with the biggest engine, biggest blower, most chrome and most money.......but appreciation of the well done 4 cylinder or flathead . So pardon me if I prefer to look at something like this rather than shiny ultra glossy metalflaked or whatever that will never see a local street.





So pardon me if Glitz and Shine don"t rule my mind................

 

Not for nothing, but we have all seen plenty of cars with outrageous engines that have enormous solid cams, sky high compression, blowers, injectors, etc., that make mountains of horsepower but overheat in traffic, can't idle, won't run on anything less than race fuel, have atrocious street manners, and also never get driven on the street but for an occasional trip to a local cruise night.

It's literally no different than what you're talking about.

 

I didn't say that no one ever builds engines that don't work well...........We've all seen paint jobs that didn't work well either.





What I said is that I appreciate the engineering and ingenuity that went into making one that does work and the installation is well engineered. People constantly experiment with different combinations of parts.........and they discover what works well and what doesn't. I see the beauty in the final combination and the effort and planning and greasy fingernails that it took to achieve that.
Thats where hot rodding started. Some People still do that even today. And there are a lot of people out there running modified motors that do have good street manners as well as sizzling performance.......Kudo's to all those guys.

 

Exactly Anthony........thats the point I was making. The paint became such a point that the rest of the details became less significant. You are the only one who stepped up, and again you remember the paint but not the motor when asked about the car that actually won the event. Many remember the Pink car with black flames and that a black car with flames actually won ............but what else do they remember? So the paint jobs actually overwhelm the rest of the details.

(It was a Ford Powered by a Ford)

 

Nobody will have any trouble remembering what motor was in this car, or what color paint was on it a few weeks from now. Looks like he actually drives it, and I think the primer compliments the menacing look that its not all show or all talk.............

 

The pink one sticks out cause it got more attention.
All the main details got discussed.
The paint has nothing to do with not remembering the winners details.
It didn’t strike enough nerves.

 

This thread has kinds morphed, as is usual here... .

In the spirit of the op posting & Q:

I don't think paint(or anything else) can be too nice. Too busy to look good except for real-close-inspection, imo, yes. But I'm not a fan of that kind of paint(read: low-rider-style complexity). I do however, admire the work & skill it took to get there. It doesn't seem cohesive to me, but then neither does the overdone-late-version of the 60's->70 "freak-paint". Early freak-stuff, up to ~ Brizios' AMBR-T, I like. Murals, no. When I can't differentiate what the hell it is, 'cause there's too much too close together to tell what it is, that's too much. Which btw, could also be 60's panel-painting that clashes w/the body lines. When my eyes can't focus easily on the whole thing, that's too much.

Cost(too much - usually someone elses' decision/valuation, etc) is relative to the amount of "fun tickets" somebody has available, goes for engines, interior, chrome, now-rare parts, et-al. Pocket-lint to some = monthly mortgage n food to others. It is all relative. I don't care anymore, other than wondering what they did to be able to earn that much = some positive lessons to be learned. Either way, I get to look & admire, usually for near-free. .

I actually like looking at & admiring both mills n paint. + upholstery. Uninterested in dull paint, although I understand it's "appeal". What I find interesting, is the perception(s) of cost vs usage(wear n tear). For this discussion, sheetmetal & engines' rarity have nothing to do w/it, but it is a mental-factor also.
If say(& the #'s aren't all that important, but apply amounts as needed to you personally...), you build a blown hemi for 25k, & the paint comes in at 25k(metalwork already finished), each & every time you fire-up the mill, it's generating wear. Nobody cares & it's sorta a proud point. Unnoticed most likely(except for catastrophic failure), but requires regular maintenance.
When the car gets driven, dirt n paint chips occur, but get viewed as near-catastrophic. & a big deal. & other than cleaning & waxing, paint chips probably don't get fixed as soon as they happen, on most cars anyways.
Outta-sight, outta-mind??? ;D .

What's equally as interesting, is when a new car is purchased, the cost of engine & paint isn't factored into daily wear. The whole thing kinda slowly degrades, unnoticed until it's very obvious. If those were paid for separately & the bill seen, I think the attitude of a lot would change.

I still haven't properly sorted the build a new car then use it to death vs buying one(won't be new, either). I suspect for me, other than the to-me-now-astronomical-cost of doing that, is the amount of labor that will be "wasted-away" by using as a dd. Not to mention, what I really like, isn't found often, so replacement would be difficult at best. I get varying degrees of valuation(s) applied to different things/components. It's irrational, but I'm owning it. "Hi, I'm Marcus, &..." .

Marcus...

 

I'm so "off the hook" with this one. OG paint...

 

Or to quote my dad: "Who in "H" really cares" .... .
Marcus...

 

Its kinda like the difference between wanting a dog to show at the Westminster Kennel Club who is pampered and groomed to the point of being useless for doggie things..........
A dog so beautiful for all the world to see



or just having an everyday friend that goes everywhere with you. A cur so to speak but with a big heart to see the world with you


I'd rather have the cur with the big heart that will be there with me when and where I go.




Think I've beat this horse long enough, thanks for all the discussion and opinions whether we agree or not.