Subject:
|
Re: Did they have paint?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.castle
|
Date:
|
Tue, 25 Apr 2000 13:46:27 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
wubwub@wildlink.com*antispam*
|
Viewed:
|
507 times
|
| |
|
|
"Bryan Wong" <green_paper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Did they have paint back in the medieval ages?
>
> I'm thinking of making a gray building for example, but parts of the wall will
> have red "bricks" exposed. I don't think that would be correct for that time
> period though... Right?
...They had whitewash mixes usually, tho painting large structures was not common except
real rich people. What would be (semi) common though was a brick wall with plaster
covering (bricks were not as durable/weathereable, so the plaster helped protect them and
made the whole thing look much better). Where the plaster chipped or aged, the bricks
would show through in patches.
(PS: Don't quote me on this! I'm trying to remember things long forgotten :-)
...you can go back to ignoring me now...
wubwub
stephen f roberts
wamalug guy (http://wamalug.org)
wildlink.com
lugnet #160
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Did they have paint?
|
| I'm trying to Remember my medieval Architecture class but what you said sounds right. They had paint but generally not for buildings. A stone structure was a stone structure they just made the stone structure look good (aprox 1100ad to 1300ad) (...) (24 years ago, 25-Apr-00, to lugnet.castle)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Did they have paint?
|
| Hi, Did they have paint back in the medieval ages? I'm thinking of making a gray building for example, but parts of the wall will have red "bricks" exposed. I don't think that would be correct for that time period though... Right? Bryan (24 years ago, 25-Apr-00, to lugnet.castle)
|
6 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
