If you look at the factory paint, you can tell (from the light spots) the direction from which the paint was sprayed at the factory where the moldings were finished. Plus you have to also figure in that they did it with the least amount of labor possible to still get decent results. Think light, quick coats rather than "concours-level" application and then immediately wiping the ridges down (even if a stencil or making tape was used), I suspect. I suspect that such paint might have been lacquer rather than enamel, too?
Lacquer when the car was painted in acrylic enamel? Yes, lacquer dries quicker and probably can be unmasked easier and quicker. "Time is money".
I know, when we do these things years later, it is normal to want to do them "better than the factory did", implying "the factory" didn't do them right to start with, or as good as they could have been done. In doing so, we can also get into troubling situations we have to figure out how to get out of. Not condemning the "better than" orientation, just that sometimes we create other issues to get ourselves out of. Not unlike trying to apply and shine car wax in those recessed areas. In modern times, just spray on some water-setting ceramic coating on it, rinse it, done.
Which gets back to the "restoring it to how the factory originally did it", which to some, was not as good as it could have been, BUT well good enough to get the vehicle sold when new. Nothing the matter with over-restoration for a better feel about "improving the breed".
Y'all enjoy!
CBODY67