The dreaded black paint vs. the easy white paint..

[OnTheSpotMobile]

I agree with the fellow that mentioned the 80/20 rule and the fellow that mentioned it all looks the same under the lights. The customer gets what they pay for regardless of color and I make sure they know what they're getting before I start! If the customer doesn't understand what you are doing than why wouldn't they go to "detailer x" on detailer boulevard that does "polishing" for $100 per vehicle.



My 2 cents.

 

[Accumulator]

Just pursuing this a bit more....leaving "make it perfect" out of it for the moment (sure, "as good as it can get" is the same regardless of color) and sticking with "make it decent", making a black car look pretty OK can be a lot tougher than making a white one look OK.



I want to knee-jerk :nono when somebody asks "what color is it" and wants to base a price on that, but I guess I see the other side of that coin too :think:

 

[Accumulator]

If the customer doesn't understand what you are doing than why wouldn't they go to "detailer x" on detailer boulevard that does "polishing" for $100 per vehicle..

The people I know who have their cars detailed don't know a *THING* about it, and I mean not a single thing. All they know is whether the car looks OK to them and how much it cost.



And yeah, there are all sorts of detailer-inflicted-damage issues that this can lead to, but those don't show up until long after the vehicle gets traded/turned it/etc.

 

[C. Charles Hahn]

I absolutely agree with those kinds of people. If my goal is to have the car look "excellent", and a white car already looks "excellent" because the color is hiding defects, then why would I fix those defects? Then again, it sounds like most of the people on Autopia are trying to bring the paint to its "fullest potential", where I can understand why someone would want to perform all the same steps.

I can see where that point of view is coming from for a customer looking not to spend a ton of money for true "perfection" but rather asking for results that "look good to most people." However as a professional, I cannot with integrity sell someone a detail and claim perfection if I'm actually cutting corners and counting on the fact that certain colors hide defects better than others. I'd rather just tell someone that because their vehicle is a light color, I can make it look "acceptable" with fewer steps if that's what they choose as opposed to having me do a true full correction.

 

[Scottwax]

I believe Barry was saying that if a customer brings a white vehicle and a black vehicle in and says "make them perfect" if all things are equal (paint hardness/defect severity/etc) excluding the color of the paint would it take the same amout of work (and thus same billing cost) to complete each vehicle. AND TO THIS my answer is yes, same amount of work...



Kind of similar to how I charge the guy with a yugo the same price as the guy with a Ferrari for perfection.. I do not discriminate based on race/color/creed:yo:

My point is that it often takes less steps to make a light colored car look perfect in the sun than a darker color to the customer, and since they are the one paying for the work to be done, my job is to meet their expectations. I obviously charge less if it takes less steps so it isn't like I am charging for work that isn't being done. You can explain all you want to a customer about making the paint 100% perfect but if two steps make it look perfect in their eyes, that's what they are willing to pay for.



If someone wants me to spend the same amount of time on a white car that I would on a black car to make it as perfect as possible, I will. I'll do all the steps, the jeweling, etc required to make it perfect. If perfection under all lighting conditions is the goal, then there are no shortcuts.

 

[Deep Gloss Auto Salon]

My point is that it often takes less steps to make a light colored car look perfect in the sun than a darker color to the customer, and since they are the one paying for the work to be done, my job is to meet their expectations. I obviously charge less if it takes less steps so it isn't like I am charging for work that isn't being done. You can explain all you want to a customer about making the paint 100% perfect but if two steps make it look perfect in their eyes, that's what they are willing to pay for.



If someone wants me to spend the same amount of time on a white car that I would on a black car to make it as perfect as possible, I will. I'll do all the steps, the jeweling, etc required to make it perfect. If perfection under all lighting conditions is the goal, then there are no shortcuts.

Sounds like we are saying the same thing

 

[fergnation]

I think detailers are being silly if they think a white car is as easy or easier than a black car. They obviously havent done enough black cars.

 

[JohnKleven]

A single stage polish is the same to us if it's black, white or anything in between. The same goes for a two stage, or three stage polish. I however always ask the customer "what color is it?", because it's pretty much automatically a two, three or four stage if it's a dark color, but if it's a light colored car I always explain to the customer what the difference will be so they can make the decision if they want to pay the extra money for more correction work on lighter colored vehicles. You're not taking proper care of your customers by overselling them a service that they may never even notice.

 

[amcdonal86]

The people I know who have their cars detailed don't know a *THING* about it, and I mean not a single thing. All they know is whether the car looks OK to them and how much it cost.

I agree! I used to go to this polish and wax detailer in Virginia and he has GREAT reviews! But then I started noticing he was leaving rotary buffer trails on the car. I bet people with white cars think he does a fantastic job (and their cars probably do look great after he's done with them for the same amount of time/money)!



I think the % of customers who actually want to bring a car to its full potential are incredibly slim, but it probably depends on your customer base. Most detailers that charge $100 for a buff and wax are probably doing lots of volume and have customers who aren't looking for perfection.

 

[Bill D]

Most detailers that charge $100 for a buff and wax are probably doing lots of volume and have customers who aren't looking for perfection.

True indeed. The first question I always ask anyone who approaches me for a detail is,"

How far do you want to go?" and when I explain what I mean by that, sometimes I get some interesting looks in response. Generally the rarer and higher end car owners are receptive to the "Autopian standard" which I enjoy doing when it's called upon.

 

[C. Charles Hahn]

True indeed. The first question I always ask anyone who approaches me for a detail is,"

How far do you want to go?" and when I explain what I mean by that, sometimes I get some interesting looks in response. Generally the rarer and higher end car owners are receptive to the "Autopian standard" which I enjoy doing when it's called upon.

I take a similar approach, but I've started going a slightly different direction and first asking people "What do you want done, and what's your budget?"



By asking this and knowing the hourly rate I shoot for, I know about how much work I can deliver within their budget. If it allows for the job to be completed to their stated level of satisfaction, great.... otherwise I have to sell them on raising their budget OR adjust their expectations to fit with what they can afford (within reason, of course).

 

[Scottwax]

I take a similar approach, but I've started going a slightly different direction and first asking people "What do you want done, and what's your budget?"

I also ask them how they take care of their car currently and how much time a week they are willing to put in to it each week to maintain it. No sense selling a correction to someone unwilling to keep it looking good. You'll end up taking the blame if the car looks like crap in a month.

 

[David Fermani]

Paint is paint, defects are defects.



I don't and never have understood how people say "on light paint I can go straight to lsp when I use product x"...



If you can do it on light paint, why not on dark paint? The same defects will still be present.

Ok, I'm going to go against the grain a little and play devils advocate here....(not singling Jason out btw either)





Paint is paint(especially clearcoat), but defects/micromarring isn't the same if it is at level to where you can't even distinguish them with a naked eye. Were talking the difference of gloss on a yellowish clear surface thinner than a sheet a paper. What is viewable to the naked eye is 100% contingent on the color of the base it’s refracting off of. Darker colors shadow and display less clarity then lighter ones therefore slight gloss variances cannot be detected most times. To say you need to finish out every paint to the Nth degree of perfection (to me) isn’t realistic. I've polished light colored cars at times(with M105 via DA specifically) where going to a "finishing" polish didn't bump up the gloss one bit unless you were to measure it with a gloss meter. OTOH, if I were looking at this same circumstance with a darker color I’m certain this wouldn’t be the case.

 

[Deep Gloss Auto Salon]

Ok, I'm going to go against the grain a little and play devils advocate here....(not singling Jason out btw either)





Paint is paint(especially clearcoat), but defects/micromarring isn't the same if it is at level to where you can't even distinguish them with a naked eye. Were talking the difference of gloss on a yellowish clear surface thinner than a sheet a paper. What is viewable to the naked eye is 100% contingent on the color of the base it’s refracting off of. Darker colors shadow and display less clarity then lighter ones therefore slight gloss variances cannot be detected most times. To say you need to finish out every paint to the Nth degree of perfection (to me) isn’t realistic. I've polished light colored cars at times(with M105 via DA specifically) where going to a "finishing" polish didn't bump up the gloss one bit unless you were to measure it with a gloss meter. OTOH, if I were looking at this same circumstance with a darker color I’m certain this wouldn’t be the case.

I only inspect for defects with the naked eye, I do not use a loom or any magnification device so, if I can see them with my naked eye under various light sources I have at my disposal, I do not consider the paint 100% corrected. If I can't see defects with my naked eye I consider it 100% corrected.

 

[Deep Gloss Auto Salon]

I also ask them how they take care of their car currently and how much time a week they are willing to put in to it each week to maintain it. No sense selling a correction to someone unwilling to keep it looking good. You'll end up taking the blame if the car looks like crap in a month.

Every customer that pays for correction gets a dissertation by me explaining what will be needed to maintain the paint – I tell them, why spend the money if you can’t maintain it.



I have yet to have a customer that came to me asking for correction decline after my very thorough and honest explanation on how it is not for every person/car.



I explain:

• The cost

• The amount of work (time) it takes to maintain

• The investment ($) it takes in proper tools & chemicals to maintain

• That clear coat is a non replenishable source and that we are removing CC and once it’s gone, it’s gone.



If after all this, the prospect still wants correction, they get what they want and I feel I did my part to properly educate them so that if they come back with a swirled up mess I know I did all I can to make sure they were in the “know”

 

[David Fermani]

I only inspect for defects with the naked eye, I do not use a loom or any magnification device so, if I can see them with my naked eye under various light sources I have at my disposal, I do not consider the paint 100% corrected. If I can't see defects with my naked eye I consider it 100% corrected.

Gotcha, but some could argue at the same time that if the paint could be improved by doing extra final polishing step(s) (even if you can see it) you're not correcting the paint to its fullest until they are completed. Technically speaking of course. No doubt that going through extra steps only adds to the law of deminishing returns that can't even be measured in some cases. Boils down to knowing your customer and saying enough is enough based on non-OCD Autopian methodology. :wink1:

 

[Deep Gloss Auto Salon]

Gotcha, but some could argue at the same time that if the paint could be improved by doing extra final polishing step(s) (even if you can see it) you're not correcting the paint to its fullest until they are completed. Technically speaking of course. No doubt that going through extra steps only adds to the law of deminishing returns that can't even be measured in some cases. Boils down to knowing your customer and saying enough is enough based on non-OCD Autopian methodology. :wink1:

I agree 100%, knowing your customer is key.



I also do not advocate full correction if the customer cannot maintain it but, at the end of the day they get what they want and al I can do is educate them. Flip side of that is I would not grind at the paint of the thickness readings were low.



To your point, I do think it is amusing when I see individuals using magnification devices to remove what cannot be seen with the naked eye.

 

[Accumulator]

Not that I'm saying it oughta be done...but I want to add another $0.02 about the idea of polishing "beyond what you can discern with the naked eye". Heh heh, whenever this comes up it can sound soooo goofy, and elicit all kinds of "I don't care if I can't see it" type comments that just might miss the point. That's if there *is* a point because I'm the last guy to advocate doing something that nobody appreciates anyhow. But here's what I'm driving at-



Take two white cars (or silver ones...like two silver S8's since that's how I've demonstrated this). Correct one to "perfectly fine to the naked eye" level. It'll look fine, no question about it. But then take the second one beyond that with a little burnishing/"jeweling". In decent lighting, the difference will be obvious, even to "normal people". BTDT and while nobody else thought it was worth doing, people *did* see the difference.



Want to be the guy with the "naked eye" car...parked next to the guy whose paint got burnished? That's where individual preference comes in. Hey, if you don't care that's fine with me, and as David Fermani has pointed out, *my* Audis could currently benefit from a polishing to take them beyond their "OK to the naked eye" level. And if I were paying sombody to do it, I'd want that extra 1%. But I don't want it badly enough to polish them myself in the forseeable future :grinno:

 

[Deep Gloss Auto Salon]

Not that I'm saying it oughta be done...but I want to add another $0.02 about the idea of polishing "beyond what you can discern with the naked eye". Heh heh, whenever this comes up it can sound soooo goofy, and elicit all kinds of "I don't care if I can't see it" type comments that just might miss the point. That's if there *is* a point because I'm the last guy to advocate doing something that nobody appreciates anyhow. But here's what I'm driving at-



Take two white cars (or silver ones...like two silver S8's since that's how I've demonstrated this). Correct one to "perfectly fine to the naked eye" level. It'll look fine, no question about it. But then take the second one beyond that with a little burnishing/"jeweling". In decent lighting, the difference will be obvious, even to "normal people". BTDT and while nobody else thought it was worth doing, people *did* see the difference.



Want to be the guy with the "naked eye" car...parked next to the guy whose paint got burnished? That's where individual preference comes in. Hey, if you don't care that's fine with me, and as David Fermani has pointed out, *my* Audis could currently benefit from a polishing to take them beyond their "OK to the naked eye" level. And if I were paying sombody to do it, I'd want that extra 1%. But I don't want it badly enough to polish them myself in the forseeable future :grinno:

And this is a great point and why when polishing to perfection one should always do a test spot to see if going to the "next level" will yield noticeable returns... If so, proceed.

 

[amcdonal86]

Bwahaha, I just did a quick wash and wax of my white Honda Insight (2 months old, never washed, except once I took it through a machine wash). I didn't bother to do a polishing or clay step in between because I really don't care about that car (just wanted the bare minimum of protection so that I don't get dinged when it's time to turn it in at the end of the lease).



Looks just as good to me (and I assume the average person) as my black 2006 Jaguar XJ, other than the fact that my Insight is probably the ugliest car on earth.



As for what Accumulator said:



"Take two white cars (or silver ones...like two silver S8's since that's how I've demonstrated this). Correct one to "perfectly fine to the naked eye" level. It'll look fine, no question about it. But then take the second one beyond that with a little burnishing/"jeweling". In decent lighting, the difference will be obvious, even to "normal people". BTDT and while nobody else thought it was worth doing, people *did* see the difference."



I just don't buy it. Maybe if you put the cars side by side, somebody would notice the difference, but if you have one group of people look at car A and another group of people look at car B and judge how they look without seeing the other car, I bet their wouldn't be any statistical difference in the results! Only true car detailing nuts can tell the difference on a white car, at least from a few feet + away!