My wife and I are having our hardwood floors redone. The first photo is how they used to look. They were originally done in the '50's. The second photo is how they look now after the floor guy stained them.
I wanted them to look like they did originally. We had to redo them because there were spots that were damaged that needed to be fixed.

My problem is that I wanted it to look like they used to, not grainy as they do now. He said oak naturally stains this way. But the photo shows they didn't stain grainy originally.

In your opinion, were they done correctly?

http://i576.photobucket.com/albums/ss20 ... troom.jpeg

http://i576.photobucket.com/albums/ss20 ... _9164.jpeg

Sanding and staining a floor with modern finishing techniques and materials will show more of the characteristics of the grain patterns of an oak floor than a floor finished with the old varnish that was used long ago. The effects of light on wood will tend to diminish the grain patterns as it will fade the pink colors and become more yellow over time. Your floor may have also had a grain filler which will even out the finish and keep the color more even. Modern finishes do not need a grain filler. You may have been able to get samples before the work started that showed what the final product would be. With care and time the color will even out as a patina is developed.

Thanks for explaining that to me, Pete. I feel better about the floors.

I do have one question out of curiosity. We have red oak floors. Does red oak need to be conditioned before staining?

All oak floors do not need to be conditioned to get a splotch free effect while staining. I have never seen an oak floor that has been conditioned, but it would be possible to minimize the difference is absorption between the early and late wood which may be a more uniform color after stain has been applied. One of the beauties of " The King" of hardwoods is the difference between the hard and soft grain of the wood which brings out the oak grain pattern after finishing.

Thanks again for explaining that, Pete. I appreciate it.