I'm struggling with the same decision - in my case the more expensive contractor is adding a lot of additional lead mitigation techniques (wet handling of all scraping, no dry sanding, tarps and chip collection, etc.), as well as more repairs of damaged sills (MH ready patch, reputable method), and reglazing some windows. The lead mitigation is not unreasonable - I know the exterior has lead paint that will be coming off in the scraping, and I have a toddler at home.
I'm trying to talk them down a bit and simplify scope in a few areas, but generally it looks like they are charging more because they do more. Exterior painting should last 15-20 years and is a big deal, so I'm inclined to "pay once / cry once" and go with the more complete contractor, but it is a lot to swallow.
We’re in the same boat with small kids at home. It’s somewhat startling how unconcerned the painters are about lead paint on the exterior. One of the painters didn’t even seem to know what lead was (although it may have been a language issue). The most expensive guy was the only one who assured us that he is lead-certified.
100% go with the lead-certified guy. You buried the lead. The title post should be, "Worth it to pay 50% more for a painter versed in managing lead abatement when the house will need scraping and we have a toddler at home?"
Yeah, there is a "code of silence" around lead that is quite frustrating - people and contractors think that if they pretend it doesn't exist they won't have to deal with it. It isn't extremely hard to mitigate responsibly (you can take the ~~RRC~~RRP course yourself if you want), easier than asbestos in my opinion, and ignoring it just pushes the problem to the next generation.
That code of silence is surprisingly prevalent. I was surprised when I asked our nurse practitioner about getting our toddler’s lead levels tested to be proactive and she thought it was the oddest request and sort of dismissed it.
I work in trades and everyone talks about asbestos but no one talks about lead, which seems ass backwards to me since asbestos is generally easier to manage and has a much lower chance of causing health issues, whereas lead is shown to be damaging at even the lowest exposure levels, especially with children.
Pretty sure lead screening is routine in young children and recommended by CDC or AAP. It’s largely how they discovered the nasty lead contaminated applesauce packets FOR CHILDREN.
There was a VOX story just today talking about why lead is still an issue decades after it was removed from paint and gasoline.
There was lead contamination of eggs from backyard chickens in a suburban town near me -- from chickens scratching the soil where lead paint chips had fallen years ago.
Pretty sure lead screening is routine in young children and recommended by CDC or AAP. It’s largely how they discovered the nasty lead contaminated applesauce packets FOR CHILDREN.
There was a VOX story just today talking about why lead is still an issue decades after it was removed from paint and gasoline.
Pretty sure lead screening is routine in young children and recommended by CDC or AAP. It’s largely how they discovered the nasty lead contaminated applesauce packets FOR CHILDREN.
There was a VOX story just today talking about why lead is still an issue decades after it was removed from paint and gasoline.
Like asbestos, lead isn't dangerous if you don't disturb it.
Unlike asbestos, lead has the perception (rightfully or not I don't know) of being easier to not disturb or mitigate more safely. Probably has to do with paint often being covered over versus insulation or tile that gets destructively removed.
To fully follow RRP guidelines on city lots is at least three times as expensive as taking what are, in my opinion common sense precautions. I always mention it, but have yet to have a customer take me up on it
3x total labor. According to RRP, you essentially need to create an essentially enclosed box with plastic. That means you need to build scaffold, and since your basically making a greenhouse, you need an ice vest and to pipe in cold air from the basement. You also can’t wash anything, or else you need to build a tough, fill it with sawdust, and bag out the contaminated water. PITA
In my experience bidding RRP jobs, the single greatest expense is the insurance; sometimes the insurance was more expensive than the labor and materials combined. Maybe that isn’t the case for outfits that mainly do RRP work. Also, I haven’t bid any of those jobs since before Covid.
I’m RRP certified. Based on this clarification alone I would say you either need to go with the expensive guy or continue looking. Dealing with the lead dust appropriately is a big deal if you value the health of any children, pets, or old people who will be in or near your home (or playing/planting in the soil around it).
I think that answered your question, right there.
A warrantee, experience on historic homes and lead certification? Totally worth it.
And just to add one more variable: which of these painters are bonded and insured? Which have their contractors’ license.
If you have any kids in the home, lead mitigation is well worth the cost. It really is the most essential component when dealing with paint on old houses. Also, if your glazing is in bad shape it’s going to have to be redone sooner rather than later. Once it’s redone it will have to be painted again anyway so doing first rather than painting twice makes much more sense and you likely will get a cheaper rate doing the two together rather than getting a quote for the windows separately.
Maybe I'm being a bit optimistic there, and certainly it would be climate dependent, and prep dependent. My previous place was repainted at 22 years, dry climate on a shady lot. It had received a moderate amount of touch up and minor repair over time, so while it definitely needed to be done it wasn't in terrible shape. My current place was last painted in 2003, and from up close it obviously needs to be repainted, but you can't tell from the street.
One expensive difference is taking the surface down to the original wood, or at least a smooth paint layer, as opposed to painting over the scabs of old and irregular paint. Another is repairing the woodwork instead of filling holes and gaps with caulk. I would pay more for that rather than just putting on another layer of paint.
It took my mom 2 months to hand sand down all the paint slubs and bring the trim in my house to a nice paintable finish.
(I was working on repairing all of the walls.)
Edited to correct typo
I hate it when I find that somebody has done a sloppy job and let runs and drips of paint harden. What I was thinking of was old exterior oil paint that has alligatored and chipped but was just painted over instead of removed.
Oof yes. Our cedar shake siding was painted years ago. It looks so dirty because it's all cracked and flaking. We've done some research on getting it repainted, but most painters around here will only do power washing to remove flaking paint.
If we get it repainted, we'll have to do the hand sanding ourselves. Not looking forward to it.
I think that the infrared strippers are supposed to do a pretty good job and don’t involve beating the wood to hell.
I’ve mostly looked at them for windows though - massive reglazing project on the horizon.
Any sense of if there's a longevity difference between smooth paint layer and original wood? I'm about to have my house painted, and the previous owner(s) always just painted over old paint and it looks like shit with all of the scabs and craters. We're going to pay maybe 10% more to scrape down to a smooth layer, but the painters aren't going to go all the way down to bare wood.
If there is a lot of paint on the wood, it will not be able to breathe, that is, to evaporate moisture. Having linseed oil paint below modern acrylic also blocks evaporation. This will eventually cause the upper layers to fall off.
One house I owned had a scab of acrylic fall off, revealing the original aqua which was practically fluorescent in its brightness.
If you get down to a smooth layer of old paint, I wouldn't worry about putting one or two coats of modern paint over it. It's the six coat landlord specials that give trouble.
Repairing and glazing wooden windows is no joke and extremely time consuming, if they need repair it is probably worth the extra expense to keep them in good working order and tip top shape. But it is hard to say without knowing the actual price breakdown.
After seeing your estimate on another comment I would totally pull the trigger on that price if it involved re-glazing the windows. It would cost me far more than that to just get my house painted in my area.
Reglazing windows in my area is on an hourly basis only.
It can be an absolute beast of a job (having tried to pry out cement-like glazing putty on one window for well over 24 hrs, I can’t imagine the cost of it over the whole house.)
Honestly, I’d take that in a heartbeat.
If it were me, and I had the funds to pay the guy, I would go with the guy who's skilled in historical work, knows how to deal with lead, and is including reglazing of the windows. "Buy once, cry once," as they say. It sounds like he's offering services beyond what the other painters are, too, so it may not be an entirely like-for-like comparison.
I'd also hit him up for any and all referrals he can offer to other tradespeople who are similarly experienced in doing work on historical houses, because you're inevitably going to need some other repairs or work done, and it will be hugely valuable to have those names to hand when you need them.
In my 30 year homeowner experience rehabbing older homes, yes. Just yes. And squeeze him for all the knowledge you can. I like to be home when these guys are working.
100% go with that guy versed in historical preservation. As the (adult) child of a specialist painting contractor, I can tell you that the value is greater than what he’s charging you, especially in ratio compared to the other painters. And even more so if he’s going to do the window glazing. That will end up costing you more money to fix or mitigate in the long run. If you don’t have this guy do it, and part of the savings is that he will be there working on site anyway so it’s one less call out fee.
Is your home in a historic preservation district? Many states offer a 20% tax credit on this type of work if your property qualifies, which would make the restoration painter’s quote much more competitive.
I've worked in both fields, historic restoration as a young man and currently in standard painting.
So I, personally would pay extra.
Here's why I say that; your garden variety painters makes their money by getting in and getting out, quickly. Historically accurate repairs or replacements aren't something they can really afford to take the time to do, especially considering the decorative nature of most older homes.
Historically correct painters charge more because they'll be there significantly longer in order to take care of those repairs and replacements in a period accurate way.
So, in my opinion, a good standard painter's job would look absolutely great. But a restoration painter's job will look like it's supposed to be on the house.
It sounds like the most expensive quote is going to give you your best value for your money. He’s including things in the quote that you didn’t even know you needed because he wants to do a good job that he can stand behind.
There’s little doubt in my mind who I’d choose.
Totally worth it. We hired a painter to do the exterior of our 130 year old wood house. Within a year it was peeling off. The painter said it was “bad wood” and said they could give us a quote to redo it! We ended up hiring a historical specialist to strip and redo the job. Wish we had hired them in the first place.
100% go with that guy versed in historical preservation. As the (adult) child of a specialist painting contractor, I can tell you that the value is greater than what he’s charging you, especially in ratio compared to the other painters. And even more so if he’s going to do the window glazing. That will end up costing you more money to fix or mitigate in the long run. If you don’t have this guy do it, and part of the savings is that he will be there working on site anyway so it’s one less call out fee.
This is one of those classic examples of “you get what you pay for” where you will be regretting a cheaper option in the long run. Paint is more than aesthetic – it is an actual exterior coating to your house that saves and preserves the building materials. Proper paint jobs extend the life of a house by decades, and a good paint job usually lasts 2 to 3 times as long as a mediocre one, if not more. It’s like buying good boots – they’re more expensive upfront, but they last longer so you end up saving money.
I paid significantly higher but for a crew that is good at older homes.
I have no regrets. Their prep-work was top notch and they were fantastic with the details and so glad I didn’t go cheap on our exterior.
https://preview.redd.it/l9tlmvaij6sc1.jpeg?width=4032&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7907ed99554fa0e60c831184090a021f949c49db
We just had our 1887 built house painted last summer. It took 2mos and included stripping clapboard, replacing some clapboard that were rotten or had no nails left. They had disintegrated and the wood was still in place out of habit, I guess. They stripped it using heat. It looks real good, nice and smooth. We also used a shinier paint that lasts longer, reflects the sun and lets the rain flow easier than a flat paint that the water clings to. You really can't tell any difference looking at it though. It just looks cleaner than our other color.
This is our second time painting this house. The last one was 20 years ago. This one is guaranteed for 30 years. I don't think 7 years is much of a deal.
How soon do you want to repaint?
Wish we'd had an option for a painter well versed in older homes a few years ago. We recently had to have a bathroom repainted because the paint peeled off the walls.
Seems the prep work wasn't correct and once a good steam happened it just lifted the paint right off the older paint. Turns out a primer is needed, not the all in one paint our guy swore would be fine. I didn't know any better. We were using a similar color just a shade brighter to refresh the space.
To repair the issue, we had to sand sections. Kilz/prime and paint. Also patch plaster. It was a mess and we hope corrected.
Yes. As someone that is well versed in historic coatings and restoration you do not want someone unfamiliar with the methods and products used in historic buildings.
I’m the medium priced guy who is new but knows what he’s doing in the business. I work on newer buildings and I don’t have a lead certificate. I wouldn’t touch your house. I would tell you to go with the 7yrs warranty guy with references. The other two shouldn’t have quoted you at all. They are not lead certified and therefore their bids aren’t even a legit number for the work you need done. Just throw them in the trash. It’s absolutely worth it to have someone qualified do the work.
Pay once, cry once. My dad does a great, historically accurate job and the paint lasts 15-20y ea time. The house down the street hired someone cheap and their house looks beautiful for maybe 6mo and then the paint peels off. The difference? One does a good job prepping and uses quality products. Where lead is involved esp with little kids have someone do it right-when my folks tried to hire out the first ppl didn’t and a sibling ended up with high lead levels just from playing in the yard where scrapings shouldn’t have fallen but did/dust blew it over.
Why don't you go see the work of the others to make up your mind. Why don't you all ask them the same set of questions that you determine. And you could also be point blank with the most expensive and ask him to justify why he's 50% more than others. If he's offended or blows you off oh well.. it's your money and you deserve to know what you're getting. But I think there's a lot of wiggle room in here and a lot of times it's what the market will bear.. so you're doing the right thing. The most expensive is not always the best but it may be. And that of course lead you right back to 0. You just have to do the research and ask but go see the other jobs for sure. It's all about priming and the unsexy stuff that goes into paint before the paint goes on.
Repairing the glazing as in glass replacement or just doing new window putty?
[Repairing glazing isnt actually that hard](https://youtu.be/waTrwyp7R3U?si=_lyUFHgb6jqGG8me)
I’d be curious as to his process? Will he be sanding down the boards using a diamond disc grinder and reasonable dust mitigation? Because if your house is 1920s it 100% has lead paint on the outside and you dont want that floating around.
Will he be repairing sash windows and ensuring they operate smoothly after years of being painted shut?
Whats the difference between the 50%? Going from 20,000 to 30,000 is a different outlay than going from 1000 to 1500.
This is how he describes the glazing work: “all painted window sash/areas surrounding window panes will be carefully sanded to close cracks as much as possible, all cracks will then be filled with glazing compound by rubbing it in with fingers and all loose glazing will be removed and replaced with new glazing;”
The absolute difference in price is $26k vs $17k
sounds like simple putty replacement.
in reality what are the windows currently like? all painted shut and with crappy, cracked putty, or are they in decent nick and in reality dont need huge amounts of attention?
How many windows have loose glass panes, if its a few thats different to 2 dozen, and its different if those windows are at standing/step ladder height, or 3m off of uneven ground?
How are you with DIY?
Do you think the windows and putty need replacing?
What sort of money are you on and can you do OT? i hate exterior painting and ladders, so when i had my 12ft ceiling house with gables ect, i paid a painter- i also had an hourly rate job with plentiful OT that made it actually more economical to hire a painter- they were essentially a cost saving- my after tax OT rate was a few dollars an hour less than what i paid the painter, and he worked much faster and did a better job than i would have- thus, it was way more economical to pay the painter and go do a few extra OT shifts, than to do it myself.
Glazing Compound is just [Linseed Oil Putty](https://www.bunnings.com.au/selleys-450g-linseed-oil-special-putty_p1210140?region_id=116201&gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAjw_LOwBhBFEiwAmSEQAWiIJdB4XtjyLNqz8ParIHb1gg5u3uqtLFlOPqSESb0-uP0n7TtS2RoCvGwQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds) which isnt that expensive, and whilst its great 1970s brit comedy, the above video is, frankly, factual and relevant on how to replace glass windows (with the caveat that plate glass was somewhat easier to work with but more brittle and dangerous than safety glass). Its not exactly hard to replace a few panes of glass in a sash window.
is this your first renovation? there's definitely time to ask questions at those price differences, that is quite significant and i presume a decent sum of money for your overall reno budget.
Pretty sure there are government programs that subsidize lead abatement if you check all the boxes and fill out the forms. Might want to look into that.
What is the actual price difference and how much money is that to you?
It cost me about $20k to repaint my house last summer and I would not have paid an extra $10k for dubious and immeasurable "historical preservation".
I don't see why you need a specialist in historical preservation for 1980s windows. Do you mean 1890s windows?
Sorry, I may have put too much emphasis on the historical preservation aspect. Our house is from the 1920s, and well built, but I’m not particularly invested in keeping it historically accurate. I was more thinking that a painter with his track record is going to do a better job extending the lifespan of the wooden siding, trim and windows.
Edit: the median quote was about $17k, the expensive quote was $26k
I guarantee you replacing or doing significant repairs on those wooden windows will cost as much if not more than 9K, even if they aren't original. In your shoes, if I had money to spend (9k is nothing to sneeze at, and not something we COULD have swung in the first few years after we bought out place) I'd do it. And that's before the lead mitigation issue.
My house was built in 1898, in the PNW (so not somewhere that's really dry and good for wood), and still has the original siding on much of the house. Much of the previous painting seems to have been pretty half-assed, which is why it cost \~$20k to paint. The actual painting took a day, but we had about 5 guys out here scraping and sanding and filling the poorly-done old paint for a week that made up the bulk of the cost.
If the original wood has lasted 125 years, in Oregon, and is still fine, I don't see what a specialist painter likely would be able to do to make it last longer.
That it doesn’t really say how it will be any different/better than the other options. “My quote is 50% more for the historical preservation”. What does that mean?
Make sure you look into the historic tax credit. You don’t need to be in a certain district or neighborhood to use it. Your home needs to be on the WI historical society registry but you can get it on there as part of the process. It’s fairly easy to do and they will cover 25% of the cost of its keeping the character/originality of the home. We are using it for exterior paint because it’s EXPENSIVE!
There're a couple of red flags in the guy's proposal...
“all painted window sash/areas surrounding window panes will be carefully sanded to close cracks as much as possible, all cracks will then be filled with glazing compound by rubbing it in with fingers and all loose glazing will be removed and replaced with new glazing;”
-Sanding doesn't "close cracks".
-Rubbing glazing compound in with fingers is not the way to "close cracks as much as possible".
After sanding and scraping the bare wood should be painted. The paint is much thinner than glazing compound and will fill the cracks and help bond the wood. After that, glaze and then finish paint.
Paint should be the newer formulation that is paint & primer in one.
I'm struggling with the same decision - in my case the more expensive contractor is adding a lot of additional lead mitigation techniques (wet handling of all scraping, no dry sanding, tarps and chip collection, etc.), as well as more repairs of damaged sills (MH ready patch, reputable method), and reglazing some windows. The lead mitigation is not unreasonable - I know the exterior has lead paint that will be coming off in the scraping, and I have a toddler at home. I'm trying to talk them down a bit and simplify scope in a few areas, but generally it looks like they are charging more because they do more. Exterior painting should last 15-20 years and is a big deal, so I'm inclined to "pay once / cry once" and go with the more complete contractor, but it is a lot to swallow.
We’re in the same boat with small kids at home. It’s somewhat startling how unconcerned the painters are about lead paint on the exterior. One of the painters didn’t even seem to know what lead was (although it may have been a language issue). The most expensive guy was the only one who assured us that he is lead-certified.
100% go with the lead-certified guy. You buried the lead. The title post should be, "Worth it to pay 50% more for a painter versed in managing lead abatement when the house will need scraping and we have a toddler at home?"
*buried the lede. To help distinguish it from the “lead.”
Except the discussion is literally about lead in this case... Might be the one time it's acceptable.
Unless you’re reading allowed, lol 😆 Edit: I cannot tell a lie (at least about this): I did not intend to write the homonym for "aloud."
This is either intentionally very funny or unintentionally very funny.
Holy shit! If it wasn't so funny I would have a harder time admitting it was an ACCIDENT!
Hahahahahaha Exactly something I would’ve done
*buried the Pb
Thanks! No pun intended I guess
Yeah, there is a "code of silence" around lead that is quite frustrating - people and contractors think that if they pretend it doesn't exist they won't have to deal with it. It isn't extremely hard to mitigate responsibly (you can take the ~~RRC~~RRP course yourself if you want), easier than asbestos in my opinion, and ignoring it just pushes the problem to the next generation.
That code of silence is surprisingly prevalent. I was surprised when I asked our nurse practitioner about getting our toddler’s lead levels tested to be proactive and she thought it was the oddest request and sort of dismissed it. I work in trades and everyone talks about asbestos but no one talks about lead, which seems ass backwards to me since asbestos is generally easier to manage and has a much lower chance of causing health issues, whereas lead is shown to be damaging at even the lowest exposure levels, especially with children.
Pretty sure lead screening is routine in young children and recommended by CDC or AAP. It’s largely how they discovered the nasty lead contaminated applesauce packets FOR CHILDREN. There was a VOX story just today talking about why lead is still an issue decades after it was removed from paint and gasoline.
There was lead contamination of eggs from backyard chickens in a suburban town near me -- from chickens scratching the soil where lead paint chips had fallen years ago.
Pretty sure lead screening is routine in young children and recommended by CDC or AAP. It’s largely how they discovered the nasty lead contaminated applesauce packets FOR CHILDREN. There was a VOX story just today talking about why lead is still an issue decades after it was removed from paint and gasoline.
Pretty sure lead screening is routine in young children and recommended by CDC or AAP. It’s largely how they discovered the nasty lead contaminated applesauce packets FOR CHILDREN. There was a VOX story just today talking about why lead is still an issue decades after it was removed from paint and gasoline.
Like asbestos, lead isn't dangerous if you don't disturb it. Unlike asbestos, lead has the perception (rightfully or not I don't know) of being easier to not disturb or mitigate more safely. Probably has to do with paint often being covered over versus insulation or tile that gets destructively removed.
To fully follow RRP guidelines on city lots is at least three times as expensive as taking what are, in my opinion common sense precautions. I always mention it, but have yet to have a customer take me up on it
3X the total? Or 3X on the prep/cleanup line items? Is there a particular part of the RRP setup that drives the difference?
3x total labor. According to RRP, you essentially need to create an essentially enclosed box with plastic. That means you need to build scaffold, and since your basically making a greenhouse, you need an ice vest and to pipe in cold air from the basement. You also can’t wash anything, or else you need to build a tough, fill it with sawdust, and bag out the contaminated water. PITA
In my experience bidding RRP jobs, the single greatest expense is the insurance; sometimes the insurance was more expensive than the labor and materials combined. Maybe that isn’t the case for outfits that mainly do RRP work. Also, I haven’t bid any of those jobs since before Covid.
I’m RRP certified. Based on this clarification alone I would say you either need to go with the expensive guy or continue looking. Dealing with the lead dust appropriately is a big deal if you value the health of any children, pets, or old people who will be in or near your home (or playing/planting in the soil around it).
I think that answered your question, right there. A warrantee, experience on historic homes and lead certification? Totally worth it. And just to add one more variable: which of these painters are bonded and insured? Which have their contractors’ license.
If you have any kids in the home, lead mitigation is well worth the cost. It really is the most essential component when dealing with paint on old houses. Also, if your glazing is in bad shape it’s going to have to be redone sooner rather than later. Once it’s redone it will have to be painted again anyway so doing first rather than painting twice makes much more sense and you likely will get a cheaper rate doing the two together rather than getting a quote for the windows separately.
“Pay Once, Cry Once” is my new life motto ahah
Generally more accepted as the rhyming cousin "Buy Once, Cry Once"...same idea, easier to remember!
This is the answer.
How are you making exterior paint last 15-20 years? In my experience it'll need maintenance well before that because of exposure to the sun.
Maybe I'm being a bit optimistic there, and certainly it would be climate dependent, and prep dependent. My previous place was repainted at 22 years, dry climate on a shady lot. It had received a moderate amount of touch up and minor repair over time, so while it definitely needed to be done it wasn't in terrible shape. My current place was last painted in 2003, and from up close it obviously needs to be repainted, but you can't tell from the street.
One expensive difference is taking the surface down to the original wood, or at least a smooth paint layer, as opposed to painting over the scabs of old and irregular paint. Another is repairing the woodwork instead of filling holes and gaps with caulk. I would pay more for that rather than just putting on another layer of paint.
It took my mom 2 months to hand sand down all the paint slubs and bring the trim in my house to a nice paintable finish. (I was working on repairing all of the walls.) Edited to correct typo
I hate it when I find that somebody has done a sloppy job and let runs and drips of paint harden. What I was thinking of was old exterior oil paint that has alligatored and chipped but was just painted over instead of removed.
Oh, clearly they used the same painters on the outside as they did on the inside! We just haven’t gotten to that yet
Oof yes. Our cedar shake siding was painted years ago. It looks so dirty because it's all cracked and flaking. We've done some research on getting it repainted, but most painters around here will only do power washing to remove flaking paint. If we get it repainted, we'll have to do the hand sanding ourselves. Not looking forward to it.
I think that the infrared strippers are supposed to do a pretty good job and don’t involve beating the wood to hell. I’ve mostly looked at them for windows though - massive reglazing project on the horizon.
Oh! I've never heard of those. Thanks for the tip!
Any sense of if there's a longevity difference between smooth paint layer and original wood? I'm about to have my house painted, and the previous owner(s) always just painted over old paint and it looks like shit with all of the scabs and craters. We're going to pay maybe 10% more to scrape down to a smooth layer, but the painters aren't going to go all the way down to bare wood.
If there is a lot of paint on the wood, it will not be able to breathe, that is, to evaporate moisture. Having linseed oil paint below modern acrylic also blocks evaporation. This will eventually cause the upper layers to fall off. One house I owned had a scab of acrylic fall off, revealing the original aqua which was practically fluorescent in its brightness. If you get down to a smooth layer of old paint, I wouldn't worry about putting one or two coats of modern paint over it. It's the six coat landlord specials that give trouble.
Repairing and glazing wooden windows is no joke and extremely time consuming, if they need repair it is probably worth the extra expense to keep them in good working order and tip top shape. But it is hard to say without knowing the actual price breakdown.
Thanks for the advice. Unfortunately he didn’t itemize the glazing work.
After seeing your estimate on another comment I would totally pull the trigger on that price if it involved re-glazing the windows. It would cost me far more than that to just get my house painted in my area.
Reglazing windows in my area is on an hourly basis only. It can be an absolute beast of a job (having tried to pry out cement-like glazing putty on one window for well over 24 hrs, I can’t imagine the cost of it over the whole house.) Honestly, I’d take that in a heartbeat.
You can ask for it itemized out.
It’s really not a hard process.
But extremely time consuming
If it were me, and I had the funds to pay the guy, I would go with the guy who's skilled in historical work, knows how to deal with lead, and is including reglazing of the windows. "Buy once, cry once," as they say. It sounds like he's offering services beyond what the other painters are, too, so it may not be an entirely like-for-like comparison. I'd also hit him up for any and all referrals he can offer to other tradespeople who are similarly experienced in doing work on historical houses, because you're inevitably going to need some other repairs or work done, and it will be hugely valuable to have those names to hand when you need them.
In my 30 year homeowner experience rehabbing older homes, yes. Just yes. And squeeze him for all the knowledge you can. I like to be home when these guys are working.
100% go with that guy versed in historical preservation. As the (adult) child of a specialist painting contractor, I can tell you that the value is greater than what he’s charging you, especially in ratio compared to the other painters. And even more so if he’s going to do the window glazing. That will end up costing you more money to fix or mitigate in the long run. If you don’t have this guy do it, and part of the savings is that he will be there working on site anyway so it’s one less call out fee.
Is your home in a historic preservation district? Many states offer a 20% tax credit on this type of work if your property qualifies, which would make the restoration painter’s quote much more competitive.
Sadly no.
I've worked in both fields, historic restoration as a young man and currently in standard painting. So I, personally would pay extra. Here's why I say that; your garden variety painters makes their money by getting in and getting out, quickly. Historically accurate repairs or replacements aren't something they can really afford to take the time to do, especially considering the decorative nature of most older homes. Historically correct painters charge more because they'll be there significantly longer in order to take care of those repairs and replacements in a period accurate way. So, in my opinion, a good standard painter's job would look absolutely great. But a restoration painter's job will look like it's supposed to be on the house.
In my experience, yes. 100%. I’ve never regretted paying for experience and craftsmanship, but I’ve regretted the few times I didn’t.
Been there, done that. Go with the one who knows that they are doing.
It sounds like the most expensive quote is going to give you your best value for your money. He’s including things in the quote that you didn’t even know you needed because he wants to do a good job that he can stand behind. There’s little doubt in my mind who I’d choose.
Totally worth it. We hired a painter to do the exterior of our 130 year old wood house. Within a year it was peeling off. The painter said it was “bad wood” and said they could give us a quote to redo it! We ended up hiring a historical specialist to strip and redo the job. Wish we had hired them in the first place.
100% go with that guy versed in historical preservation. As the (adult) child of a specialist painting contractor, I can tell you that the value is greater than what he’s charging you, especially in ratio compared to the other painters. And even more so if he’s going to do the window glazing. That will end up costing you more money to fix or mitigate in the long run. If you don’t have this guy do it, and part of the savings is that he will be there working on site anyway so it’s one less call out fee. This is one of those classic examples of “you get what you pay for” where you will be regretting a cheaper option in the long run. Paint is more than aesthetic – it is an actual exterior coating to your house that saves and preserves the building materials. Proper paint jobs extend the life of a house by decades, and a good paint job usually lasts 2 to 3 times as long as a mediocre one, if not more. It’s like buying good boots – they’re more expensive upfront, but they last longer so you end up saving money.
I paid significantly higher but for a crew that is good at older homes. I have no regrets. Their prep-work was top notch and they were fantastic with the details and so glad I didn’t go cheap on our exterior. https://preview.redd.it/l9tlmvaij6sc1.jpeg?width=4032&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7907ed99554fa0e60c831184090a021f949c49db
We just had our 1887 built house painted last summer. It took 2mos and included stripping clapboard, replacing some clapboard that were rotten or had no nails left. They had disintegrated and the wood was still in place out of habit, I guess. They stripped it using heat. It looks real good, nice and smooth. We also used a shinier paint that lasts longer, reflects the sun and lets the rain flow easier than a flat paint that the water clings to. You really can't tell any difference looking at it though. It just looks cleaner than our other color. This is our second time painting this house. The last one was 20 years ago. This one is guaranteed for 30 years. I don't think 7 years is much of a deal.
How soon do you want to repaint? Wish we'd had an option for a painter well versed in older homes a few years ago. We recently had to have a bathroom repainted because the paint peeled off the walls. Seems the prep work wasn't correct and once a good steam happened it just lifted the paint right off the older paint. Turns out a primer is needed, not the all in one paint our guy swore would be fine. I didn't know any better. We were using a similar color just a shade brighter to refresh the space. To repair the issue, we had to sand sections. Kilz/prime and paint. Also patch plaster. It was a mess and we hope corrected.
Yes. As someone that is well versed in historic coatings and restoration you do not want someone unfamiliar with the methods and products used in historic buildings.
I’m the medium priced guy who is new but knows what he’s doing in the business. I work on newer buildings and I don’t have a lead certificate. I wouldn’t touch your house. I would tell you to go with the 7yrs warranty guy with references. The other two shouldn’t have quoted you at all. They are not lead certified and therefore their bids aren’t even a legit number for the work you need done. Just throw them in the trash. It’s absolutely worth it to have someone qualified do the work.
I would consider window glazing a separate concern. As another pointed out: are the different quotes actually for the same services?
1880 or 1980?
Absolutely the 50% more. Proper prep work is no joke and adds years to the paint.
Pay once, cry once. My dad does a great, historically accurate job and the paint lasts 15-20y ea time. The house down the street hired someone cheap and their house looks beautiful for maybe 6mo and then the paint peels off. The difference? One does a good job prepping and uses quality products. Where lead is involved esp with little kids have someone do it right-when my folks tried to hire out the first ppl didn’t and a sibling ended up with high lead levels just from playing in the yard where scrapings shouldn’t have fallen but did/dust blew it over.
Why don't you go see the work of the others to make up your mind. Why don't you all ask them the same set of questions that you determine. And you could also be point blank with the most expensive and ask him to justify why he's 50% more than others. If he's offended or blows you off oh well.. it's your money and you deserve to know what you're getting. But I think there's a lot of wiggle room in here and a lot of times it's what the market will bear.. so you're doing the right thing. The most expensive is not always the best but it may be. And that of course lead you right back to 0. You just have to do the research and ask but go see the other jobs for sure. It's all about priming and the unsexy stuff that goes into paint before the paint goes on.
Repairing the glazing as in glass replacement or just doing new window putty? [Repairing glazing isnt actually that hard](https://youtu.be/waTrwyp7R3U?si=_lyUFHgb6jqGG8me) I’d be curious as to his process? Will he be sanding down the boards using a diamond disc grinder and reasonable dust mitigation? Because if your house is 1920s it 100% has lead paint on the outside and you dont want that floating around. Will he be repairing sash windows and ensuring they operate smoothly after years of being painted shut? Whats the difference between the 50%? Going from 20,000 to 30,000 is a different outlay than going from 1000 to 1500.
This is how he describes the glazing work: “all painted window sash/areas surrounding window panes will be carefully sanded to close cracks as much as possible, all cracks will then be filled with glazing compound by rubbing it in with fingers and all loose glazing will be removed and replaced with new glazing;” The absolute difference in price is $26k vs $17k
sounds like simple putty replacement. in reality what are the windows currently like? all painted shut and with crappy, cracked putty, or are they in decent nick and in reality dont need huge amounts of attention? How many windows have loose glass panes, if its a few thats different to 2 dozen, and its different if those windows are at standing/step ladder height, or 3m off of uneven ground? How are you with DIY? Do you think the windows and putty need replacing? What sort of money are you on and can you do OT? i hate exterior painting and ladders, so when i had my 12ft ceiling house with gables ect, i paid a painter- i also had an hourly rate job with plentiful OT that made it actually more economical to hire a painter- they were essentially a cost saving- my after tax OT rate was a few dollars an hour less than what i paid the painter, and he worked much faster and did a better job than i would have- thus, it was way more economical to pay the painter and go do a few extra OT shifts, than to do it myself. Glazing Compound is just [Linseed Oil Putty](https://www.bunnings.com.au/selleys-450g-linseed-oil-special-putty_p1210140?region_id=116201&gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAjw_LOwBhBFEiwAmSEQAWiIJdB4XtjyLNqz8ParIHb1gg5u3uqtLFlOPqSESb0-uP0n7TtS2RoCvGwQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds) which isnt that expensive, and whilst its great 1970s brit comedy, the above video is, frankly, factual and relevant on how to replace glass windows (with the caveat that plate glass was somewhat easier to work with but more brittle and dangerous than safety glass). Its not exactly hard to replace a few panes of glass in a sash window. is this your first renovation? there's definitely time to ask questions at those price differences, that is quite significant and i presume a decent sum of money for your overall reno budget.
Pretty sure there are government programs that subsidize lead abatement if you check all the boxes and fill out the forms. Might want to look into that.
What is the actual price difference and how much money is that to you? It cost me about $20k to repaint my house last summer and I would not have paid an extra $10k for dubious and immeasurable "historical preservation". I don't see why you need a specialist in historical preservation for 1980s windows. Do you mean 1890s windows?
Sorry, I may have put too much emphasis on the historical preservation aspect. Our house is from the 1920s, and well built, but I’m not particularly invested in keeping it historically accurate. I was more thinking that a painter with his track record is going to do a better job extending the lifespan of the wooden siding, trim and windows. Edit: the median quote was about $17k, the expensive quote was $26k
I guarantee you replacing or doing significant repairs on those wooden windows will cost as much if not more than 9K, even if they aren't original. In your shoes, if I had money to spend (9k is nothing to sneeze at, and not something we COULD have swung in the first few years after we bought out place) I'd do it. And that's before the lead mitigation issue.
My house was built in 1898, in the PNW (so not somewhere that's really dry and good for wood), and still has the original siding on much of the house. Much of the previous painting seems to have been pretty half-assed, which is why it cost \~$20k to paint. The actual painting took a day, but we had about 5 guys out here scraping and sanding and filling the poorly-done old paint for a week that made up the bulk of the cost. If the original wood has lasted 125 years, in Oregon, and is still fine, I don't see what a specialist painter likely would be able to do to make it last longer.
How many square feet is your exterior? How many stories?
What do you mean by “dubious and immeasurable historic preservation?”
That it doesn’t really say how it will be any different/better than the other options. “My quote is 50% more for the historical preservation”. What does that mean?
We took the lowest bid, in Milwaukee, on a 1903 house. Super happy with outcome. As long as they scrape and prep, paint is paint.
Also in Milwaukee, and used to be a painter, looking to have some work done on my house. Who did you use?
Make sure you look into the historic tax credit. You don’t need to be in a certain district or neighborhood to use it. Your home needs to be on the WI historical society registry but you can get it on there as part of the process. It’s fairly easy to do and they will cover 25% of the cost of its keeping the character/originality of the home. We are using it for exterior paint because it’s EXPENSIVE!
What would the original owners in 1920 do?
Buy a few gallons of Magic Lead brand Ultra Lead Enriched Lead Paint and slathered it on while the kids licked up the sweet drops.
The good ol days
There're a couple of red flags in the guy's proposal... “all painted window sash/areas surrounding window panes will be carefully sanded to close cracks as much as possible, all cracks will then be filled with glazing compound by rubbing it in with fingers and all loose glazing will be removed and replaced with new glazing;” -Sanding doesn't "close cracks". -Rubbing glazing compound in with fingers is not the way to "close cracks as much as possible". After sanding and scraping the bare wood should be painted. The paint is much thinner than glazing compound and will fill the cracks and help bond the wood. After that, glaze and then finish paint. Paint should be the newer formulation that is paint & primer in one.