h a l f b a k e r yThis would work fine, except in terms of success.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
I don't know if this has been baked, but here goes:
Basically, it's a dye designed specifcally for covering stains. It comes in a wide variety of colors, like touch-up paint for cars, in different bonding formulas for different materials (jeans, khakis, flannel, silk, cotton, wool, etc.), and it's
specially
formulated not to run or wash out.
Got a stain? Simply cover it with the Liquid Clothes Patch of the color closest to the article you're wearing, and never worry about eating barbeque in your sunday best again.
Tide To Go
http://www.tide.com...site_howtouse.jhtml
Procter and Gamble suggests that this instant cleaning product is a better answer than a paint patch, and easier for color-blind people to get right. [jurist, Jan 31 2006]
[link]
|
| |
But the stain will remain...
|
|
| |
I really shouldn't try to rhyme...
|
|
| |
(I initially thought - from the title - that it might be a spray-on fix for ripped clothes. Maybe one for another halfbaking day) |
|
| |
Basically...you change the stain to a color you want. Or make it look like it's not there. |
|
| |
Regualr dyes don't bond well with certain materials, and end up running in the wash or coming out. |
|
| |
Given that it'd need to be opaque, I think "dye" is the wrong term. "Paint" comes closer.
|
|
| |
Matching the paint to the fabric seems hard and likely to create a more unsightly patch than the stain. |
|
| |
More unsightly? How do you figure? A spot of slightly darker or lighter blue on a pair of jeans would be a lot more "sightly" than a black oil stain. |
|
| |
Deepends on who you are, [21 Quest]. I would think if you're a mad scientist you like those reddish-brown stains that just...won't...COME...OUT!!!!! |
|
| |
"A spot of slightly darker or lighter blue on
a pair of jeans would be a lot more
"sightly" than a black oil stain."
|
|
| |
One looks like I've spilt oil on myself and
the other paint. |
|
| |
//One looks like I've spilt oil on myself and the other paint// oh come now, st3f.
|
|
| |
fabric paint is quite baked. |
|
| |
Yes, fabric paint is baked. The problem with normal fabric paint is that it bleeds through, so if you apply it to clothing while you're wearing them it'll stain your skin and/or give you a nasty rash. I've tried it. What I'm going for is something that soaks into the top layer, but doesn't penetrate deeper. |
|
| |
I think *soak* is the wrong word then. |
|
| |
I prefer Procter & Gamble's approach to resolving these problems. [link] |
|
| |
I thank you for pointing out my lack of tact in not mentioning my inspiration, desertfox. [iPatch], however, was not my inspiration. It was [Stain Labels].
|
|
| |
And I think you're right, po. What do you think would be a better word for that? |
|
| |
Whether it soaks, grips, is lightly absorbed, or is merely dusted on, unless you have the patient and unerring hands of a fine art conservator the resulting patch is still going to look very crude when you try to remedy the spot affecting closely abutting colors in your favorite glen plaid suit, foulard or paisley tie, or even a simply striped seersucker. |
|
| |
I actually do this with magic markers. I once got white paint on a pair of black pants. Even though the "patch" is somewhat noticeable, it surely does not look as bad |
|
| |
[jurist] gets it, as usual. |
|
| |