Obsessing over details

[Zebra]

I had to take one of the joists out in my living room ceiling/bedroom floor a long time ago as it was eaten away, and I stuck in a piece of dark-stained softwood from the shed - it's nothing special but it doesn't look out of place and you don't notice it next to the originals. I am now plastering the ceiling sections in between the joists and have come to the dilemma of whether to replace it again or not.

If I were to replace it, it would be with a piece of oak which I cut down from my Mum's tree many months ago - cut it down and planed it to size. Similar to the original joists, it isn't quite straight and has the curved edge where the bark used to be. It's a lot of upheaval though, I'd have to take the entire bedroom floor up again, two layers of floorboards, get this piece of oak to fit, and plane it so that the top is flush with all the others, following the bowed line of the floor, refit the floorboards, and then refit the laths.

Should I get on and do it so that I don't later wish that I hadn't cut corners and installed a piece of manufactured softwood? Or am I obsessing over nothing, as it doesn't seem out of place? I could make that piece of oak from my Mum's tree into something else.

I'd post pictures, but my camera and laptop have fallen out and won't speak to each other.

What do you think? Thanks,
z

 

[Sonyaclegg]

Will you look at it every time you go into the room and be irritated by it? If so, change it!

 

[Keithj]

Do it right, I always say. I wish I did what I say, but...

If this is oak from the layer immediately under the bark, doesn't that make it weaker and susceptible to infestation? Probably still better than softwood, though.

 

[LadyArowana]

I agree with Sonya, if you wish it wasn't there every time you see it then it needs to go. If you happily remember how well the repair worked with a serendepitous find of a piece of spare wood and that it saved you loads of work then it can stay. Either way it's unlikely anyone else is going to notice, and even if they did it's not their house is it? Really just personal preference as to what annoys and what doesn't.

 

[Lime]

If you are questioning the softwood I think you know the answer already.

The only worry I'd have is that the oak you replace it may warp if it hasn't been stacked and seasoned.

 

[Keith Bowman]

And if the oak from your mum's tree has some sort of sentimental value, you might want to save it for something special.

 

[JoceAndChris]

I wouldn't - I was just looking at some beams over the weekend limewashed a soft sludgy pastel hue and thinking how much nicer than the typical brown, or black and white combination. (and I also don't believe the way beams are presented nowadays is authentic) I'm quite tempted to give the same treatment to ours here, which would usefully blend old and new, and I believe if I used a soft distemper it could be very easily washed off if future occupants wanted to reveal the wood. The others are very right in their comments about personal preference though.

I'm amazed and astounded you can do this sort of work and think nothing of refitting laths or planing oak, what a zebra!

 

[DJH]

I know what you mean Zebra, if it plays on your mind then you have to do it! However there's nothing wrong with a good honest repair and you have to think which way it would have been done in the past before we all fell under the spell of period properties...

Doug

 

[Lime]

I know what you mean Zebra, if it plays on your mind then you have to do it! However there's nothing wrong with a good honest repair and you have to think which way it would have been done in the past before we all fell under the spell of period properties...

Doug

Yes, however the problems most of us have on here are caused by "good honest repair" in the past.
What is good and honest is subjective depending on your point of view and should not be confused with methods appropriate and suitable that have been tested over time.

IME if you fret today about a repair being unsatisfactory it will not go out of your mind no matter how hidden or covered up it may be and altering it later will always be more inconvenient albeit satisfying.

 

[dans]

You've done everything else properly Zebra, so would be a shame to miss this off.

Oak is cheaper than you think, so personally I would get a nice green oak joist (mine are roughly 4x3) from your local sawmill and put that in properly. They do move, but mine have nicely twisted into their joints. I've then added a dark oak stain to the beeswax to make it blend in with the old joists. You can tell the difference, but I think that a nice honest repair is a good thing to see...

 

[Penners]

I'd have to take the entire bedroom floor up again, two layers of floorboards, get this piece of oak to fit, and plane it so that the top is flush with all the others, following the bowed line of the floor, refit the floorboards, and then refit the laths.

Oh dear, my stripey friend, I really can't believe that you're even considering this! Lift two layers of floorboards - and damage how many in the process? Remove the ceiling laths and damage how many in the process? Fit a piece of sapwood oak which still shows the wane?

You've said that the existing joist doesn't look out of place. How much will you really notice it, a month, a year, ten years down the line?

I'm sure others will disagree vehemently with me, but I think you've got much more important work to tackle.

 

[Zebra]

Ah, there it is, the full range of responses, which reflect why I can't make up my mind! I have no idea whether it will bother me in time to come. Some things which are huge worries at the time are never again thought of once completed. And other things which seemed insignificant at first sometimes persist and annoy.
Dans, I do have some 4x3 oak left over, but as it is larger than the originals, you would notice that it is straight and new next to the old ones. The originals are approximately 3x2, which is what the softwood replacement is. I could of course get a piece of new 3x2 oak...
Penners, I can see why you would be against the upheaval as potentially causing damage. I'm not too worried about that. The top layer of floorboards not a period feature and is already loose. The old original boards I lifted once already to put the softwood joist in, without damage, so I reckon that would be OK. The laths are not original, I fitted them anyway, so no worries about damage there. But I would be interested to know why the objection to oak which shows the wane.

 

[Penners]

I don't really object to the oak that shows the wane, Zebra, provided it sits alongside the other joists reasonably sympathetically. The wane does, of course, show that this is sapwood as opposed to heartwood, so will not have the durability or resistance to infestation of heartwood.

 

[88v8]

Some of our elm shows the wane from 400 years ago, and looks the better for it. Yes, the sapwood is more prone to beetle, well let someone worry about that in 2113.

I guess you'd better do it. It's obviously bothering you to an extent or you wouldn't have flagged it up in the first place. After all, your'e not a builder, who can bodge and walk away.

It's true, imho, that when one has completed something, after a while one ceases to notice the detail, or at least not to notice it all the time. But myself, I find if I've done something wrong or not well, I do continue to notice it and wish I'd done it better or properly.

Joce... I'm not sure there is a unique 'authentic'. Originally, some beams would have been left bare, some limewashed or distempered. In our house, some beams have been whited and were sandblasted in the 70s, some downstairs have never been touched and are treen. Personally, I would never paint or white an old beam, it can be a nightmare getting coating out of the grain.
I do agree though that the barn-black & white presentation of the exterior is not authentic, but perhaps it's more durable that the nothing & limewash that preceded it.

Ivor

 

[El Greyo]

Hi Zebra

I don't think you need to worry much about whether the oak is mostly sapwood rather than heartwood. Although sapwood isn't as strong and or as resistant to rotting and infestation as heartwood, my understanding is that it is still better in those respects than the softwood alternative. Just keep it dry.

How about I toss a coin for you? Here we go - heads or tails?

Ooops, it's rolled under the desk. Be back in a minute.

 

[El Greyo]

It was tails.

Does that help?

 

[LadyArowana]

It was tails.

Does that help?

:lol:

 

[steveb]

my past experience is that the ability to notice imperfections is highly sex dependent.

I never notice them, but she does. :shock:

 

[Penners]

If you're talking about imperfections in the ceiling, Steve, then there could be a simple reason why she notices them and you don't. "Sex dependent" sums it up quite well.

 

[Zebra]

If you're talking about imperfections in the ceiling, Steve, then there could be simple reason why she notices them and you don't. "Sex dependent" sums it up quite well.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

I don't really object to the oak that shows the wane, Zebra, provided it sits alongside the other joists reasonably sympathetically. The wane does, of course, show that this is sapwood as opposed to heartwood, so will not have the durability or resistance to infestation of heartwood.

Yes, that's exactly what the originals are like. Many are simply individual branches squared off on four sides, which is what my new one is. That's the only way I was going to be able to get a joist from a tree, perhaps the original builders faced the same issue. Some of the originals have square edges on one or both sides, but not one is straight. I suppose that rather rules out the argument about sapwood as opposed to heartwood, does it, if we're talking about a whole branch.

El Greyo I read your second post first. G'oh!