I'm refinishing a parlor table. Dark stained ash was sanded lightly and
restained. Topcoated with a stain/tung mix and then wetsanded with 600 grit
using same mix. Nice and smooth, good color. Now for the final finish, I
used shellac (premixed clear out of the can) and it almost immediately
started to crinkle and looks like an orange peel..a really wrinkly orange
peel.
What did I do wrong? Think I can sand lightly and recoat with shellac? Do I
have a serious incompatability of finishes here? Help.
Thanks,
Patrick Fischer
Olalla, WA
Might your shellac have too much wax (if it's not too old)? I know wax
content affects how well it sticks to other finishes. If you didn't
buy it dewaxed, you can let it sit for a few weeks and then pour off
the top (clear) layer. (If you happen to have access to a centrifuge
and some 50mL tubes in a biology lab, you can dewax your shellac much
more quickly - it works like a charm).
On Wed, 6 Jul 2005 20:00:07 -0500, Hax Planx
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Tim Douglass says...
>
>> The oil, any oil, tends to bring out the grain. I like the Danish oil
>> because it drys better. The shellac provides a surface film that (if I
>> ever manage to get good at it) can be polished to a mirror-like shine.
>> Shellac by itself doesn't "pop" the grain the way the oil does. Oil
>> finishes don't have the glossy look of shellac.
>>
>> It's just a way of getting the look I want.
>>
>
>You can get the same effect by applying BLO very sparingly and
>completely wiping away the excess. You don't even have to wait to apply
>the shellac. See Jeff Jewitt article:
>
>http://www.assoc-restorers.com/r-articles/padding_shellac.html
I'm going to have to try that one of these days. I've always applied
oil on the "flood it on until no more soaks in" basis. It's given me
good results (better than my padding/French polishing technique gives)
so far, but as I keep looking to better woods I want to explore
different techniques.
--
"We need to make a sacrifice to the gods, find me a young virgin... oh, and bring something to kill"
Tim Douglass
http://www.DouglassClan.com
On Sat, 09 Jul 2005 00:46:23 -0500, Patriarch
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Tim Douglass <[email protected]> wrote in
>news:[email protected]:
><snip>
>> Just FWIW, MDF looks pretty cool french polished.
>>
>THAT's an image that will take a while to get out of my head.
Heh, heh. I make my zero clearance inserts out of MDF. A couple months
ago I was working on how to French polish (with limited success) and
decided to wipe some shellac onto one of my inserts just to seal it
and make it a bit smoother. After a couple of coats and a touch of wet
sanding I decided to see how it would all polish out, so I wasted a
bit of time getting a pretty nice polish on it. The important thing is
that it gave me an insert that is slicker than glass and definitely
doesn't look like it came out of a store!
--
"We need to make a sacrifice to the gods, find me a young virgin... oh, and bring something to kill"
Tim Douglass
http://www.DouglassClan.com
On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 20:14:32 -0700, "Patrick Fischer"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>I'm refinishing a parlor table. Dark stained ash was sanded lightly and
>restained. Topcoated with a stain/tung mix and then wetsanded with 600 grit
>using same mix. Nice and smooth, good color. Now for the final finish, I
>used shellac (premixed clear out of the can) and it almost immediately
>started to crinkle and looks like an orange peel..a really wrinkly orange
>peel.
>What did I do wrong? Think I can sand lightly and recoat with shellac? Do I
>have a serious incompatability of finishes here? Help.
I think that all you did was apply the shellac before the oil was
thoroughly dry. I've been using shellac over Danish oil (which has
dryers) and I generally allow 1-2 weeks before applying the shellac. I
think that a pure tung oil or a mix with an oil stain like you used
would require even more time.
I've never tried it, but I've heard that if you shine a heat lamp on
your piece and any oil appears as it warms it still needs to dry
longer. I'm into letting things dry longer than really necessary just
to be on the safe side.
--
"We need to make a sacrifice to the gods, find me a young virgin... oh, and bring something to kill"
Tim Douglass
http://www.DouglassClan.com
"Tim Douglass" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 6 Jul 2005 20:00:07 -0500, Hax Planx
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >You can get the same effect by applying BLO very sparingly and
> >completely wiping away the excess. You don't even have to wait to apply
> >the shellac. See Jeff Jewitt article:
> >
> >http://www.assoc-restorers.com/r-articles/padding_shellac.html
>
> I'm going to have to try that one of these days. I've always applied
> oil on the "flood it on until no more soaks in" basis. It's given me
> good results (better than my padding/French polishing technique gives)
> so far, but as I keep looking to better woods I want to explore
> different techniques.
>
French polishing really only requires the oil as lubricant. Since oil and
water, or it's polar counterpart alcohol mix so poorly, the oil comes up
through the film and is normally removed. For that reason, non-curing oils
like mineral, olive, or grape are better choices for padding.
"Tim Douglass" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> The oil I'm talking about isn't for the French polishing, it is to pop
> the grain before I begin the polishing process. Maple seems to need
> something more than just the shellac to give it character and the oil
> first seems to fill the bill. I flood it and sand it in with 600 grit
> wet or dry. Let sit for 30 minutes and wipe off the excess. Generally
> I repeat the process the next day then let it dry for anywhere from a
> week to a month before starting the shellac process. So far, aside
> from the fact I can't seem to polish on a smooth enough finish, I've
> been getting essentially the look I want.
>
> Mineral oil is my choice for the padding.
I like thinner oils, but you have compared a French polish with and without
extra oil? Mostly what oil does is cut down on light scatter. Which the
clear finish will do as well. Try it, you'll like it. Maybe even better'n
oil plus. Keeps the maple whiter, too.
I don't believe in slurry sands, either, so I guess you'd have to do without
that, too.
Patrick Fischer says...
> I'm refinishing a parlor table. Dark stained ash was sanded lightly and
> restained. Topcoated with a stain/tung mix and then wetsanded with 600 grit
> using same mix. Nice and smooth, good color. Now for the final finish, I
> used shellac (premixed clear out of the can) and it almost immediately
> started to crinkle and looks like an orange peel..a really wrinkly orange
> peel.
> What did I do wrong? Think I can sand lightly and recoat with shellac? Do I
> have a serious incompatability of finishes here? Help.
>
> Thanks,
> Patrick Fischer
> Olalla, WA
You can't apply shellac over wet oil. What you got was predictable.
You can use shellac over oil (tung or boiled linseed), but you must use
the bare minimum of oil to coat the wood and immediately and
aggressively wipe away the excess. If you soak the wood, your shellac
won't stick. You definitely soaked the wood, so yes you have a basic
incompatibility. I think you need to strip the shellac. Sanding it all
off will be a royal pain. Then you need to reconsider your top coat or
not use one.
Tim Douglass says...
> The oil, any oil, tends to bring out the grain. I like the Danish oil
> because it drys better. The shellac provides a surface film that (if I
> ever manage to get good at it) can be polished to a mirror-like shine.
> Shellac by itself doesn't "pop" the grain the way the oil does. Oil
> finishes don't have the glossy look of shellac.
>
> It's just a way of getting the look I want.
>
> --
> "We need to make a sacrifice to the gods, find me a young virgin... oh, and bring something to kill"
>
> Tim Douglass
>
> http://www.DouglassClan.com
You can get the same effect by applying BLO very sparingly and
completely wiping away the excess. You don't even have to wait to apply
the shellac. See Jeff Jewitt article:
http://www.assoc-restorers.com/r-articles/padding_shellac.html
"Graham Walters" <graham@**aceglow**.demon.co.uk> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> Please excuse the dumb questions, but I thought each was a finish in
> its own right.
>
> Why coat with Danish Oil first, why not just use shellac?
> Why put shellac over Danish Oil?
>
The oil 'wets' the wood, and gives a different character to the finish,
with the shellac over coats, than does the shellac alone.
'Danish' oil has some, usually quite small, varnish/resin properties,
beyond that of a 'pure' oil. Note that all of these terms are relative,
not absolute.
But previous posters are correct in that the oil(s) need to cure, before
the shellac is applied. This goes beyond 'drying', or solvent evaporation,
and deals with the oxidation & crosslinking of the molecules. Chris Minick
authored an excellent article in FWW from about 3 months ago on the
subject.
Don't give up on shellac. Don't hurry it, though. Woodfinishing takes
patience, if done correctly. Screwing up, not so much.
Patriarch
Tim Douglass <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
<snip>
> Just FWIW, MDF looks pretty cool french polished.
>
THAT's an image that will take a while to get out of my head.
Patriarch
On Wed, 6 Jul 2005 23:14:01 +0100, "Graham Walters"
<graham@**aceglow**.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Please excuse the dumb questions, but I thought each was a finish in its own
>right.
>
>Why coat with Danish Oil first, why not just use shellac?
>Why put shellac over Danish Oil?
The oil, any oil, tends to bring out the grain. I like the Danish oil
because it drys better. The shellac provides a surface film that (if I
ever manage to get good at it) can be polished to a mirror-like shine.
Shellac by itself doesn't "pop" the grain the way the oil does. Oil
finishes don't have the glossy look of shellac.
It's just a way of getting the look I want.
--
"We need to make a sacrifice to the gods, find me a young virgin... oh, and bring something to kill"
Tim Douglass
http://www.DouglassClan.com
Please excuse the dumb questions, but I thought each was a finish in its own
right.
Why coat with Danish Oil first, why not just use shellac?
Why put shellac over Danish Oil?
Thanks
Graham
"Tim Douglass" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 20:14:32 -0700, "Patrick Fischer"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>I'm refinishing a parlor table. Dark stained ash was sanded lightly and
>>restained. Topcoated with a stain/tung mix and then wetsanded with 600
>>grit
>>using same mix. Nice and smooth, good color. Now for the final finish, I
>>used shellac (premixed clear out of the can) and it almost immediately
>>started to crinkle and looks like an orange peel..a really wrinkly orange
>>peel.
>>What did I do wrong? Think I can sand lightly and recoat with shellac? Do
>>I
>>have a serious incompatability of finishes here? Help.
>
> I think that all you did was apply the shellac before the oil was
> thoroughly dry. I've been using shellac over Danish oil (which has
> dryers) and I generally allow 1-2 weeks before applying the shellac. I
> think that a pure tung oil or a mix with an oil stain like you used
> would require even more time.
>
> I've never tried it, but I've heard that if you shine a heat lamp on
> your piece and any oil appears as it warms it still needs to dry
> longer. I'm into letting things dry longer than really necessary just
> to be on the safe side.
>
> --
> "We need to make a sacrifice to the gods, find me a young virgin... oh,
> and bring something to kill"
>
> Tim Douglass
>
> http://www.DouglassClan.com
"Patrick Fischer" <[email protected]> wrote:
>I'm refinishing a parlor table. Dark stained ash was sanded lightly and
>restained. Topcoated with a stain/tung mix and then wetsanded with 600 grit
>using same mix. Nice and smooth, good color. Now for the final finish, I
>used shellac (premixed clear out of the can) and it almost immediately
>started to crinkle and looks like an orange peel..a really wrinkly orange
>peel.
>What did I do wrong? Think I can sand lightly and recoat with shellac? Do I
>have a serious incompatability of finishes here? Help.
>
>Thanks,
>Patrick Fischer
>Olalla, WA
>
Bad shellac? Check date on can. And paint a little on a piece of
glass. If it crinkles or stays gummy, you need to get fresh shellac.
Clean off the old with alcohol and lots of rags. (I'd worry that light
sanding may leave too much of the old bad finish on.
Oil not dry? Pure tung oil is very slow drying (actually, curing).
Much slower than BLO, in my experience. E.g, a cloth used to wipe off
BLO will usually be stiff within a few days, while for tung, it takes
a few WEEKS. (My approach to avoiding spontaneous combustion is to lay
out rags INDIVIDUALLY, allowing the oxidation but denying the heat
build-up needed for spontaneous combustion.)
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.
On Thu, 07 Jul 2005 12:22:07 -0700, nospambob <[email protected]>
wrote:
>I read words on French polishing and read words again but something
>was missing. Got the Hand Applied Finishes (or similar words) video
>by Jeff Jewitt and thought OH, THAT'S WHAT THE WORDS MEANT! Different
>folks have different needs in understanding concepts, some like words
>and some like visuals.
And some of us really need to be able to find the shop time to apply a
finish more often than about twice a year. It seems like I forget
everything I knew from time to time.
--
"We need to make a sacrifice to the gods, find me a young virgin... oh, and bring something to kill"
Tim Douglass
http://www.DouglassClan.com
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005 14:01:46 -0400, "George" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Tim Douglass" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Wed, 6 Jul 2005 20:00:07 -0500, Hax Planx
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >You can get the same effect by applying BLO very sparingly and
>> >completely wiping away the excess. You don't even have to wait to apply
>> >the shellac. See Jeff Jewitt article:
>> >
>> >http://www.assoc-restorers.com/r-articles/padding_shellac.html
>>
>> I'm going to have to try that one of these days. I've always applied
>> oil on the "flood it on until no more soaks in" basis. It's given me
>> good results (better than my padding/French polishing technique gives)
>> so far, but as I keep looking to better woods I want to explore
>> different techniques.
>>
>
>French polishing really only requires the oil as lubricant. Since oil and
>water, or it's polar counterpart alcohol mix so poorly, the oil comes up
>through the film and is normally removed. For that reason, non-curing oils
>like mineral, olive, or grape are better choices for padding.
The oil I'm talking about isn't for the French polishing, it is to pop
the grain before I begin the polishing process. Maple seems to need
something more than just the shellac to give it character and the oil
first seems to fill the bill. I flood it and sand it in with 600 grit
wet or dry. Let sit for 30 minutes and wipe off the excess. Generally
I repeat the process the next day then let it dry for anywhere from a
week to a month before starting the shellac process. So far, aside
from the fact I can't seem to polish on a smooth enough finish, I've
been getting essentially the look I want.
Mineral oil is my choice for the padding.
--
"We need to make a sacrifice to the gods, find me a young virgin... oh, and bring something to kill"
Tim Douglass
http://www.DouglassClan.com
I read words on French polishing and read words again but something
was missing. Got the Hand Applied Finishes (or similar words) video
by Jeff Jewitt and thought OH, THAT'S WHAT THE WORDS MEANT! Different
folks have different needs in understanding concepts, some like words
and some like visuals.
On Thu, 07 Jul 2005 08:48:11 -0700, Tim Douglass
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Wed, 6 Jul 2005 20:00:07 -0500, Hax Planx
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Tim Douglass says...
>>
>>> The oil, any oil, tends to bring out the grain. I like the Danish oil
>>> because it drys better. The shellac provides a surface film that (if I
>>> ever manage to get good at it) can be polished to a mirror-like shine.
>>> Shellac by itself doesn't "pop" the grain the way the oil does. Oil
>>> finishes don't have the glossy look of shellac.
>>>
>>> It's just a way of getting the look I want.
>>>
>>
>>You can get the same effect by applying BLO very sparingly and
>>completely wiping away the excess. You don't even have to wait to apply
>>the shellac. See Jeff Jewitt article:
>>
>>http://www.assoc-restorers.com/r-articles/padding_shellac.html
>
>I'm going to have to try that one of these days. I've always applied
>oil on the "flood it on until no more soaks in" basis. It's given me
>good results (better than my padding/French polishing technique gives)
>so far, but as I keep looking to better woods I want to explore
>different techniques.
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005 19:24:15 -0400, "George" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Tim Douglass" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> The oil I'm talking about isn't for the French polishing, it is to pop
>> the grain before I begin the polishing process. Maple seems to need
>> something more than just the shellac to give it character and the oil
>> first seems to fill the bill. I flood it and sand it in with 600 grit
>> wet or dry. Let sit for 30 minutes and wipe off the excess. Generally
>> I repeat the process the next day then let it dry for anywhere from a
>> week to a month before starting the shellac process. So far, aside
>> from the fact I can't seem to polish on a smooth enough finish, I've
>> been getting essentially the look I want.
>>
>> Mineral oil is my choice for the padding.
>
>I like thinner oils, but you have compared a French polish with and without
>extra oil? Mostly what oil does is cut down on light scatter. Which the
>clear finish will do as well. Try it, you'll like it. Maybe even better'n
>oil plus. Keeps the maple whiter, too.
The oil significantly darkens the end grain portions of the figure,
making them stand out a lot more than shellac alone. I am trying to
get a slightly amber color anyway, so the oil is good for that too. I
find the shellac alone on the maple is rather characterless to my eye.
Next time I do a project with some figured maple I think I'll do some
experiments - one of which will be going to a darker (not dark, just
not super blonde) shellac. Unfortunately I'm not likely to get to
another "real" woodworking project for at least 6 months or so, since
I have a bunch of built-in cabinets to make from ply and MDF first.
Just FWIW, MDF looks pretty cool french polished.
>I don't believe in slurry sands, either, so I guess you'd have to do without
>that, too.
Maple doesn't really *need* the slurry sand, so it is just a matter of
habit I guess.
--
"We need to make a sacrifice to the gods, find me a young virgin... oh, and bring something to kill"
Tim Douglass
http://www.DouglassClan.com