Today I finished priming the bay window. It’s all white and kind of boring, but it looks better than it did before and the wood will be protected during the winter months. I still have some (a lot of) caulking to do, so don’t look too carefully!
The scraping, repairing and patching took much longer than I had anticipated, and it had to be squeezed in between the extraneous bits of chaos collectively known as “life”. During the process, however, I was able to determine the original color scheme for the bay. I still don’t know the color of the surrounding siding, but will discover that in the spring when the hideous vinyl starts coming down.
I do know the original color for the metal shingles in the gable ends, however! Surprisingly, they were painted a bluish green which can only be described as seafoam. While we will probably use the seafoam again, I am open to tweaking it a bit. So, when looking at the color renderings at the end of this post, try to imagine this color in the gable above the bay window… it may sway your opinion as to which of the three options look best.
As a side note, I’ve been uncovering more information about the history of the house and it is proving to be quite colorful — and at times tragic. More on that when I’ve got more dots connected!
First we’ll look at the bay window’s evolution over the past few months:
Following are two more versions of the same idea… I just lightened and darkened the olive to see what that might look like. Bear in mind that the gable directly above will (probably) be done in Seafoam — and I have no idea what the adjacent siding color was or will be.
Well, that’s it for now! What do you think about the colors? Be honest!
I like the second color option, more natural. But the other two are good too. 😉
I’m drawn to that one, too! I’m really torn between staying historically accurate and doing what I prefer… it’s a tough dilemma. I’ll probably wait until Spring (when I get to discover the siding color) to make the finial determination. Thanks very much for your vote!
Wow, the bay window looks so great! You repaired a whole lot of detail in what seems a short time. The repairs you and Jim did to the bay window and the gothic trim have already revitalized that house significantly, and you haven’t even addressed the siding yet.
Of the three color variations you posted, I like the top one best. I have seen gothic revival-influenced houses with similar color schemes that look great, so I think this could be a real winning combination of colors. Maybe make the olive a touch lighter to really highlight that wonderful detail?
I am glad you and Jim are giving this charming little house so much attention. From the theme of your blog I know that you believe that non-show-stopper old houses deserve attention too. I feel the same way. Sometimes it seems that more effort is put into restoring those grand old homes–which I love too, believe me!–but sadly, the little, simpler old houses are more likely to be neglected and get torn down or altered beyond recognition. Someone had made a significant effort to stabilize my humble house about 30 years ago but since then, up until we bought it, it really hadn’t been shown a lot of TLC. The good news is that most of the house’s wonderful original woodwork and detail is amazingly untouched!
Anyway, I could talk old houses for hours! Therefore I really enjoy reading your blog very much, and I look forward to the progress you make on this home. Thank you!
Glad you think that we accomplished something in a relatively short amount of time. In some ways, it seems like we’ve been working on the house forever! While the house is definitely modest, it was something of a showplace in 1886 given its very remote location. Most houses in the area were far more modest at that time, but the few that survive are not nearly as intact as this house is. The actual history of the house is turning out to be just as captivating as its decorative appeal; perhaps even more so!
Jim shares your preference for the first color scheme shown. I definitely like it but also feel that it is a bit loud, and maybe even theatrical. That doesn’t rule it out, however! Fortunately we have the whole winter to contemplate it. He trusts my color sense, so I’ll likely get my way! It’s just going to take more time — and discoveries — to figure it out.
Original, intact, woodwork is always a good thing! How old is your house? Humble houses are often the most comfortable; their inherent character typically charms and their livable scale never ceases to be practical. The grand houses have long enjoyed the lion’s share of attention; that’s why I focus on the uncelebrated structures. These “common” places are becoming less common with every passing day and tell us much more about our shared history than the homes of the phenomenally wealthy.
I recall your writing that your home was a showplace in comparison to other structures in the town built around the same time. The fact that an artist had rendered a picture of it suggests that the house (or its owner) was considered important at the time. Do you think that could be one reaon why it is still standing when so many other older homes in your town were torn down?
I wish I knew when my house was actually built. The deed says 1920 but the dwelling–with the same floor plan as today–is featured in the 1911 Sandborn map of my town. It seemed as though there was probably a renovation of the house in 1920 since there is a shed dormer on one side of the house that adds an asymmetry to the original construction, and the style of the kitchen cabinets appears to have been built around that time too. It has a side-gable roof on the front elevation that could have been extended in 1920 to make it look more like a Craftsman, but it also could have been part of the original structure. The porch supports are of that decorative concrete that was popular between 1900-1910, but the whole house is not of one particular, clear design–rather a mutt, I think, which makes it difficult to pin down its exact construction date, but it’s been fun trying to figure out its history!
I was just reading last night that gothic revival structures usually had paint schemes where the main color and the trim did not contrast too much, so maybe the second picture you posted is the correct way to go after all!
No; I don’t think that the house is still standing because of the owner’s social status. I think that it is still standing in spite of his social status! The city appears to have chased him off to Seattle after failing to force him to tear down the house following a lawsuit in 1923.
Like yours, this house is also kind of a mutt; likely not architect-designed but also not without its charms. There is a lot to admire about vernacular houses which reflect their locales more meaningfully than designs which were repeated multiple times in various far-flung locations.
The question of paint color is going to be more challenging than I had originally anticipated!
Great progress! It’s nice to see another update!
I would lean towards Option #2, but agree that until the siding color (and perhaps other trim colors are identified/confirmed), the final choice is best to wait. I think all three of yours look good, but #1 and #2 are the best.
I’ll be awaiting your next update!
Thanks, Seth! I wish I could do nothing but work on this house and post about it… it’s that much fun! It’s going to be a long winter (waiting to explore the siding) but I’ve learned that with old houses patience really is a virtue! I’ll have an update about some recent discoveries within a week or so…
I like #1. It draws the eye up to the beautiful details. You’ve done a fabulous job!
Thank you, Julia! That’s an excellent point; one of my disappointments about the original color scheme was that the cornice was so monotone. The original color (almost a chartreuse!) more than compensates for that and allows the individual components to still shine. I keep trying to guess the original clapboard siding color, but nothing seems to make sense with colors like these (except maybe the lighter brown). The suspense is killing me…
I think #2 is most livable. But. . .will await further discoveries. Did I hear somewhere that bondo is water wicking? If so, beware. Can’t remember where I saw that, and don’t know if it is true.
The white primed version looks so nice and neat – color will be fun, but it is so nice to see it looking so good!
Thanks, Derek! I hadn’t heard that about Bondo, so I’ll look into it. Fortunately, I smothered my Bondo repairs (after shaping and sanding) with more wood hardener, so they should be protected from any potential wicking (I hope!). I personally think that Bondo is easier to use than Abatron’s WoodEpox (and it’s less expensive). The downside is that the working time, once the two parts are mixed, is much shorter so I have to make really small batches.
I have not used Bondo for wood repair, but I have not heard of the water problem. If the wood is well-consolidated with epoxy, and the Bondo is sealed under caulk/paint, I wouldn’t expect it to be an issue.
I have used the 2-part epoxy from Rot Doctor and been very pleased. It’s not cheap, and it can be challenging to work with (it’s VERY sticky), but I’ve yet to see any failures in the work I’ve repaired (going on 5 years now).
I did learn one trick in sculpting the sticky epoxy paste: After fighting with shaping it using a putty knife, I sometimes will use think plastic wrap or a thin plastic film (like a grocery bag) on top of the putty, and then squish and form it into the shape I want, leaving it all a bit high. Then, after it cures, I peel the plastic off and do final sanding to smooth it off and get the final shape. For smaller areas, a putty knife still works well, but thick areas, and areas with a complex profile work well with the plastic barrier. Sometimes the plastic wrinkles and leaves low spots in the creases that take a second light application, but otherwise, it works pretty well.
Thanks for the tip on shaping epoxy paste! That sort of battle is one reason I like to use Bondo; it seems to me to be much more cooperative during application than other similar products which I have tried. Since it is designed for automotive use, I would also assume that it would be somewhat impervious to moisture, but haven’t looked into that issue yet.
I’m a bit late to the party, but I like #1 the most.
The bay is looking marvelous after all the work you have put into it. I too have a fondness for the more ordinary houses. The fancy houses of the wealthy are certainly pretty to look at, but the more common houses have a special character that is rarely preserved.
Looking forward to spring to see where you go with the colors.
This party never shuts down… it’s impossible to be late! Thanks for your input on color. Given that there will be at least five (and maybe more) colors on the house, I think that they will make the house feel bigger — and fancier — than it actually is (probably the original intent). But I’ll make sure that it never loses its modest, vernacular, character!
AO, I like #1, it has a jewel like brightness, but has the nice darkness. I agree with Julia about drawing your eye up.
Not only does it draw the eye upward, but it is also just a fun color! I like it because even though it is historically accurate, it will still surprise a lot of people who are not familiar with color trends of the period. I’m going to guess that if we do end up using that color, some of our neighbors will be less than thrilled!
Go Back To The Original!
I’m working on another sketch for the front porch… and will request opinions on that, too! No matter what happens, the house is shaping up to be colorful… Thanks for your vote!