[USFRIENDINVICTORIA]

To modern eyes, natural stone looks impressive; while painted stone is hard to distinguish from a tacky fiberglass lawn ornament. Natural stone was everywhere in the ancient world; colour and ornamentation were a probably a welcome break from the norm.

In more recent times, fine wooden furniture was usually painted. Now, we want the natural wood exposed — in part to distinguish the pieces from cheap utilitarian objects made from plywood, Formica, or plastic. We also appreciate the wood grain, and the visible joinery. When the common man had natural wood furniture, with visible joinery — fine furniture was painted or enameled & joinery hidden, as a mark of quality.

[Little Bill]

People, at least in my experience, love color and texture, gives depth and contrast.

[TheThirdRuffian]

” We also appreciate the wood grain, and the visible joinery. When the common man had natural wood furniture, with visible joinery — fine furniture was painted or enameled & joinery hidden, as a mark of quality.”

I just spent serious bucks at the behest of Mrs. TTR covering brick with stucco/sanded material (in part, bricks going through), putting rough rock or rough-hewn bricks in place of brick, wooden “board & batten” shutters in place of refined shutters, and gas lamps in place of electric lamps —— all in a rather successful attempt to make our nice suburban house (with a slate roof, though) look like a house an old English cottage circa 1500.

It’s very pretty, but funny.

[SonOfDarkSkies]

I remember reading somewhere that, according to Homer's (probably pseudepigraphical) writings, color perception of ancient Greeks was quite limited compared to that of modern man (actually limited to a narrow band of color spectrum perception--or something like that). Makes me wonder if this ultraviolet process isn't a bit off base.

Not sure if this is still held to be true...just thought it was worth mentioning.