David, David and John,
I see a basic situation here that really the best solution might come down to whether you are an independent consultant or whether you are in-house specifier. I am the later.
In the former, you need to deliver your product, and not have a situation where people are constantly returning for changes to something in the spec. Moving colors out of the project manual to the drawings is a natural solution. But I dont think that has to be done, and I dont think that it necessarily is the easiest or best way to do it. It works though.
There is something else here that I think is getting tangled up in the discussion that does not need to be. The substrate preparation issues that John brings up. Those are correctly specified in the specific section. You know for drywall whether you have painted surfaces, paper covered surfaces or whether it is serving as a backup for wood paneling or some other finish. The same with concrete slab finishes, they are best in the concrete series. And there is a true finish schedule (not colors, just generic finish information) on the drwaings.
This discussion is acctually a return to a topic that was discussed here almost 2 years ago I think, maybe longer. A number of people then commented that they used a division 1 section to cover color selection.
And I think that could work equally well for consultant specifiers as it has for me for the past 20 years (and 2 months) that I have been doing it. Why? Because where you might deliver all of your product as pdf files or as paper for the architect to print, deliver the final version of the color schedule section as a unlocked word processing file. This lets them modify it as the project progresses.
This lets you for color go through the entire project manual referencing a single section. If the architect does not know the color selection at the time, then its carried in the color schedule with as selected by the Architect.
I use 01620, Product Options, as essentially a color schedule.
I have 3 formats for this, depending on the preference of the project manager, they all work.
One is a format where it tours the outside of the building listing all exposed to view items and their colors. Then it goes inside the building and tours the building space by space. This seems to be favored by architects and owners for commercial office buildings and high rise residential where there are not a lot of individual spaces, or where many of them are identical back of house type spaces.
The second format is preferred by interior designers for small to medium (we have an interiors department) and that lists surfaces (walls, floors, bases, ceilings, doors, frames, etc.)
The third format is a listing of materials followed by the color and this is favored for large complex projects like hotels, corporate headquarters, any project large or small where there are a lot of different materials and many rooms are all different from each other.
I actually use this section as a final check to see if the project manager has originally told me all his materials. What I do is actually give this section to them to edit, telling them they can use it as a tool sending it back and forth with the Owner with DRAFT rather than a date for the document. Then I have them send it to me 4 days before the project goes out the door. In going through it I look for things that they have added that they forgot to tell me about, or things that are missing that they have deleted. I check back to make sure if the are really in or out and update my side of things.
This has worked very well, owners that are seeing it for the first time really like it, contractors have never complained, and I have made some converts where we work joint venture with some different architects and they say they find it easy to work with.
William