I keep reading about cutting shellac and putting light coats on the piece. I am finishing a maple hanging shelf that I am going to hang on the wall using a french cleat. I have put two coats of 1# cut on the piece but it does not feel like I have put anything on. I am using the bulls eye shellac.
What do I do next, sand and if so what grit should I use? And when I apply additional coats what cut should I use to build up a good finish.
Also as I apply additional coats should I sand between each one.
And finally should I use a wax to finish. I have some of the minwax wax. Is this product any good?
Thanks
Replies
Johnny, As you can tell, there have been lots of opinions about applying shellac. frenchy has been the chief proponent of "ultra-thin" shellac applications - 1# cuts and sub 1# cuts. I do not agree with the advice of applying it that thin. In theory, applying 4 applications of 1# cut solution should result in as much final dry resin as two 2# cut applications. It doesn't really work out that way. I find that once you use a solution more dilute than about 1.5-2# cut, the brush seems to take away as much as it puts down. I always spray, so I don't have to deal with any brush problems. At any rate, I recommend about a 2# cut as the most dilute to use. This gives you enough resin on the surface to level sand. And it is level sanding, using a rubber or felt sanding block that prepares the shellac for the beautifuly look it is capabable of delivering. Level sand the shellac film you now have with 320 grit. Go very lightly, taking off onle the tops of the ridges and "mountains" that the weight of the block is able to abrade. Then apply a 2# cut. Let that dry for several hours and scuff sand again. Apply another 2# cut, allow to dry - about 2-4 hours and scuff sand again. Each time you apply a new coat, the scuff sanding will result in a more and more even abraded surface. The shiny, untouched shellac valleys will get smaller and smaller, and the abraded areas will get larger and larger. Each coat will take longer and longer to dry to the point you can sand. Never sand, unless the process produces a fine, dry powder, effortlessly. Eventually, you will need to let the new application dry overnight. After many coats (5-8), it will vary with your technique, the surface will easily sand to a perfectly even ground-glass appearance with 320 grit on the block. There will actually be much less shellac on the wood than you has applied with all the brushings or sprayings. The multiple sandings removed quite a bit. But the uniform abraded surface tells you you're finished, and you can now go on to "rubbing out" to the final desired sheen. This can be the result of 4-0 steel wool, or all the way up through 400, 600, 800, 1200, 1500 waterproof paper lubricated with mineral spirits, then automotive rubbing compound (red), polishing compound (white) and swirl remover for the ultimate glass-like polish. Rich
Rich
Thanks for your very good discription of what to look for. Also thanks for the paper tip, I'll use 320 and see how it goes. ALso will go to Home Depot and get some steel Wool
Thanks Again
John
Johnny,
You keep reading Frenchy talk about putting ultra-thin cut shellac on. What method of application are you using? Spraying? Brush? Wipe-on? In most cases a 2# cut is plenty thin. The super light coats you have put on have mainly been absorbed by the wood, which should now be sealed, so you can apply a heavier cut coat. What cut depends on the method of application. You shouldn't think of shellac like a varnish though, in other words more coats isn't necessarily better.
As far as sanding goes you should sand out any major brush marks or defects, but you don't need to sand for a mechanical bond like you do with some finishes. I usually sand with 400 grit between coats if any sanding needs to be done.
Wax is a personal choice. I like to use it because I think it evens out the gloss level, provides a little more protection and gives the shellac a soft and touchable quality. But once you start down the wax road you have to stay on it, with re-applications every year or so depending on the abuse the piece gets.
If you like the shellac finish think about mixing your own from flakes. It works better, is more moisture resistant and opens up a wide range of options that you can't get with Zinsser.
Rob
Here is how I do it:
I use a "tampon" or pad, a small bundle of linen with wool inside wrapped tight, I load the pad with 2# cut, I apply 2 or 3 drops of mineral oil on the face of the pad and I go at it doing circles and figure 8. usually when you are at the end you can start again depending of how big the piece is. (when the pad gets "heavy" I squeeze it to release more shellac)
After about 4 passes I sprinkle the surface pumice stone,(easy there !) I lubricate a little more and rub it with the same loaded pad till I have a smooth surface.
The pumice cuts the "hair" of the wood and fills the pores with a mixture of shellac and wood "hair".
Now with a new loaded pad I apply another 4 of 5 coats with the grain going out of the piece like a plane taking off and landing.
Be careful when you reach the edge not to scrape shellac on it !
No sanding between coats.
At the end if you want high gloss you can rub with rotten stone.Try it is not as hard as it sounds, the result is noticeably better than anything else.
If you are nervous about it use a lighter cut, no less than 1#.C.
this may be a little diffucult because the piece has alot of fixed shelves. I could do this on the outside but I think i'll continue with the brush at a 2# cut
I'll try this on my next project though.
thanks
thanks Rob
I am brushing on the shellac. I will try to use 2# cut and see how it comes out. I can't get the flakes from my paint store but when I order from Lee Valley next time I will get some flakes. Is there any brand that is better to use or are they all the same.
By the way the piece is for my mother in law so I would like to make it nice.
Edited 4/15/2007 4:36 pm ET by Johnny Dee
I wouldn't worry to much about the brand, I think they all come from the same processor in Germany for the most part. I would suggest that you try this site for a better selection and price than L-V.
http://www.shellacshack.com/index.php?ccSID=d7915e9d5b5703bfc018403f4c24708a
Rob
Thanks
I'll order some later this week
johnny,
Rich and Steve's replies are right on the money. Frenchy may be proponent of shellac but the methods and arguments he proposes should be taken with a major grain of salt.
I use shellac on a daily basis and constantly read about restoration, conservation of coatings, application methods of finishes etc. I have never, ever seen the method he consistently describes anywhere. You would think if it's "the way" somebody in the last couple of centuries would have stumbled on it and described it in publication.
The innuendo that application methods other than his will result in catastrophic results is patently false. I went so far as to do a test with his ultra ultra thin method vs. normal methods and reported back to him. It was dismissed as "flawed and not real world"
You know the old saying " if someone is selling something that's too good to be true......."
He likes the results he gets. More power to him. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
I urge you to listen to the common sense put forth by many others.
Peter
Johnny:Of all the opinions here, you should pay closest attention to Peter's. Peter is one of the designated experts here at the FWW web site (look in the ask the experts section), and wrote the cover story for the current Fine Woodworking. He also teaches finishing.Several of the other guys are either tradesmen or craftsmen (in a gender inclusive sense) of a high order. I mean no disrespect to anyone. However, with Peter you can read his work, read his bio, and know exactly why you shold pay attention.Joe
thanks Joe fo the heads up
Shellac does come in qualities. Some of it is refined in India, some is further refined in Germany. there are a couple of companies who deal wholesale in it and they usually have different grades. Now I don't mean differences like amber and garnet, I mean for example German refined vs Indian Garnet. I don't think however the source of the shellac effect drying as much as overall clarity. So tHat being said mixing it up fresh is about as important as it gets and fresh shellac dries fast. That and a proper brush. A good shellac brush will give you a 4 or 5 foot stroke with no drips, no breaks over edges, and NO BRUSHMARKS even when you are using a standard 2 lb cut. Joel
http://www.toolsforworkingwood.com
hi Rob
I bought some flakes and am wondering how long does it take for them to melt. I put 2 oz of flakes in a container with 8 oz of denutured alcholol. After 5 hours I still have some residue on the bottom which I know I have to strain.
Is this usual
thanks
John
Johnny, If flakes don't COMPLETELY disolve in 48 hours, discard them. They're not fresh enough and even straining out the undisolved residue will leave you with shellac in solution that won't properly harden. Usually, fresh flakes will completely disolve overnight. Also alcohol that has absorbed moisture will fail to properly disolve even fresh shellac. I have a little electric coffee grinder I use to grind my flakes to a fine powder. The powder completely disolves in 15-20 minutes. Rich
Actually, Rich, that raises an intetesting question -- what is a reasonable shelf life for dry flakes, and what storage conditions lengthen or shorten that . Ihave never kept any on hand for any appreciable period, and so don't know, but you never know, the occasion might arise to do so.Peter -- are you still reading, too? Anyone else?Joe
Joe, Shellac will last for a very long time if kept cool and DRY. That means sealed in a container such as a can or plastic bag under dry conditions and kept at 70 or below. I have had shellac become unuseable as fast as 6 months after purchase (it probably had gotten "old" before it was shipped) and have had some stock still behave as it did when first bought 3 years later. Rich
Presuming an airtight dry container, is there an advantage to freezing or refrigerating as I do with photo film?
Joe
Joe, I would assume there is as all chemical processes slow down the colder the material. But I have no data to prove it and the advantage over simply keeping it below about 60-70 degrees may be minimal. Also, opening a cold supply of flakes, without letting them come to room temperature could result in condensation on the shellac which is probably the last thing you would want to happen. Rich
Rich,
I've also had very good results with flakes that I've had for a long time. They're de-waxed orange shellac and have been in a cardboard box wrapped in paper. I have them stored in a small cabinet with other containers of shellac. I just made some last week and all went well. I use this shellac to tint blonde or to get a " fire" in the finish.
You should see these flakes. They are almost jewel like and produce a very clear solution.
Personally, I grind my flakes when making a fresh batch. I'll aslo keep the solution very warm in a hot water bath (about halfway up the shellac container). You just have to be very sure the top is well sealed ( don't want any water to ruin the batch) and shake it from time to time. I guess in Arizona all you need to do is put them outside to warm up.
One of my favorite solutions is blonde as the base tinted with de-waxed orange and de-waxed ruby. I don't need much of either to get a real glow.
My website is in the final stages of being ready. I'll let you know when it's up because there is a mahogany hand rail and newell post on there that got french polished with this solution. I used no other color in the wood other than the shellac. That was a fun job.
Peter
Peter, I've used a water bath also to get shellac to disolve faster - always with the mason jar conatining the alcohol/shellac tightly closed! But grinding to a fine powder gets them to disolve VERY fast even at room temperature. Here in northern Arizona it's gone down to freezing every night for the last week and only up to 60 in the daytime, but I guess in Florida I won't have to worry about cold shellac solutions! But I sure will have to take extra precautions against moisture when storing dry stock. Rich
Rich:
Oddly enough, winter in Ocala will be cool, with the very occasional threat of frost. Summer is warm to hot, but usually cooler than here in North Texas. It rarely exceeds 100 d.
J
"It rarely exceeds 100 d." How moderate!!!!
Rich:
By Texas standards, that is balmy. And I remember flyng nto Phoenix a few times when they couldn't take a full load of passengers back out because the aircraft couldn't lift that much weight in 106 d - 112 d heat.
Actually, 100 d would be unusual in Ocala, but low to mid 90s would not be surprising in July and August.
J
I use a lot of shellac, it's the only finish I apply, for the past 2 years I have bought my flakes in Germany http://www.dick.biz definitely the best money can buy !C.
C.,
What makes their shellac superior? The name of the website is certainly catchy.
Rob
Yes, the name is catchy but it's the owner's last name, lucky him !
I find his shellac superior because it's absolutely free of impurities, dissolves quickly and without residues, it seems to dry faster as well.
It's expensive now because the dollar is so low !C.
citrouille,
That's an interesting site. I'd like to see some of their shellac and compare it to others.
What in your opinion makes it superior? It seems like the price is superior also.
There are some interesting resins there also. You can find even more of them in New York City at Kremer Pigments
The store is a block away from one of the schools I teach at and I head over there every chance I get. I feel like a kid in a candy store.
Peter
Thanks to all and they did disolve in about 7 hours. There was a big difference in using the fresh stuff versus the Zinzer. I bought the flakes from Tools for working wood, thanks Joel. I also got a very nice brush as well which made the application very easy.
I found that even after I had gone over an area I was able to touch it up shortly after I had made the initial application.
My mother in law is getting very excited as I will be able to hang the piece next week
Thanks to all for your help
John
John,
To add to what Rich said, how fast they dissolve depends on how warm an area they are in. They dissolve a lot faster in 90 degrees than 70 degrees. You also need to mix them up occasionally. Five hours isn't that bad.
Rob
Johhny Dee,
Rich and I simply differ in opinion about shellac.. He normally does color sanding while I normallly don't.. (frankly I would rather apply it fast and smooth than the method he chooses to use)..
Rich isn't wrong..... for him.. But I just tried to use a 2 pound cut yesterday and can tell you that for me it created far more problems than saving the extra gallon of denatured alcohol cost.
First it took forever to dry, it sat in the sun for almost eight hours. the first coat took nearly two hours to dry enough to sand and the second coat took six hours and was still tacky when I barely got it out of the rain that poured down. Second it simply didn't flow very well. There are all sorts of spots on it that I will either have to strip back and reshellac or sand like crazy.
My normal method has me sanding the first coat within 15 minutes of application.. the second coat within a half hour and the third and normally the final coat within the hour.I usually don't need to sand the second and third coat..
Usually I don't need to sand because shellac that's overly thinned out tends to flow so well that all I do is the first coat sanding to removes the nubs that are raised.
Now I have admitted that I don't exactly use a 1 pound cut for my second and third coat.. what I do is pour the old unused shellac back into the container and treat that like pure alcohol.. shellac is normally extremely forgiving so if it's a pound and a quarter or whatever it really doesn't seem to matter, keep it thin and flood it on is my technique.
You may not feel comfortable doing that.. I know Rich doesn't but then we are differant people and it's natural that differant people wind up using differant techniques..
Frenchy,What I didn't like about your post was the part about being 8 hours in the sun !
It's snowing here ! Sick of burning wood.C.
frenchy, Your shellac is old. Sorry, shellac does not take that long to dry. A fresh batch will behave like a different material. Please don't try and portray 2# cut shellac as some monstrously hard finish to deal with. It is anything but. You go on and on about how you want to encourage people to use shellac and get over any fear they may have had about any real or perceived difficulty about it. Your solution is to insist on ultra-thin dilutions and you constantly warn about problems with mixtures more concentrated than 1# cuts. You are introducing a completely new and unneeded fear and totally untrue story about shellac mixtures thicker than your "over-diluted" brew, based on your self-admitted clumsiness with brushing. It's time to stop telling people that the "secret" to shellac application is "over-dilution." It's your answer, but it is by no means THE answer, and it introduces many of its own problems. You are swimming upstream against every other proponent of shellac here. It's nice to have the entusiasm that you show for the stuff, but you've gotten away from extolling a method that works for you to overtly insisting that "normal" dilutions are THE problem, and getting very close to re-starting that old, nasty, absolutely untrue rumor that shellac doesn't dry and is "gummy." Rich
Rich,
I'm sorry the same can of shellac when applied with my overly thinned approach dried inside the normal 15 minutes/30 minutes/1 hour that I've suggested. (I have 250 panels to put up in my tower and only space to do 32 at a time)
I'll tell you what Rich, you can go right ahead using your approach. I'll go right ahead using mine.. those who read this are free to choose whatever they want. I will not bad mouth your approach. You are correct in that it is the mainstream approach I've found a differant approach that works for me and many others so far. However my approach simply does not fit in with those who are extremely fastidous and compulsive and thereforeis not for everyone..
Sure, overly thinned will dry faster than normal shellac, but a first coat of two-pound-cut will be sandable in a half hour if it is not over-the-hill or mixed with bad alcohol. What you've told us about your experience using the shellac at heavier cuts is a clear indication of bad materials. You shouldn't base any recommendations based on experience with sub-par materials.
Perhaps the material problem derives from your practice of returning unused shellac to the original container. Generally that is a bad idea since it also returns contaminents picked up on the brush to the pot. It may also expose the very thin shellac to more air. Alcohol picks up water directly from the air, so you may have been adding back extra water into the mix. I know it seems wasteful, but not returning finishes to the original container its one of those standard practices that hundreds of finishers have developed over a very long time. To avoid waste, just estimate the amount of finish that will be used. If there is any left over it should be set aside to be discarded or used for unimportant uses.
Edited 4/16/2007 4:13 pm ET by SteveSchoene
Steve Schoene
Why is it that if I open a can and mix a overly thin mix I never have an issue? (never in the decade and a half I've been using shellac)
If as I did on Sunday mix per the standard recommendations there is drying issues but the drying issues go away as soon as I add enough denatured alcohol to make a 3 pound cut?
Everybody assumes that it's old shellac but I checked the date and it's well inside of Zinzzers guidelines. It was a new can never opened and every can I've purchased at that same time has been fine.. (this is attempt was a chance to see if I could learn something.. hey, I'm constantly learning something so it was worth the effort)
It took me a few moments to remove the shellac and put a properly thinned layer on.. far less time than I wopuld have spent color sanding.. So no big deal..
Maybe using the thicker cuts that you advocate calls for such waste and care.. My overly thin coats don't. I've done this for years without a problem..
What you have done for years does not create a furniture grade finish or even a cabinet grade finish, at best its suitable for shop jigs. What I do, and what almost everyone else does isn't fussy, it still takes less care that just about any other finish except perhaps an oil finish on a closed pore wood. It's merely a matter of having a small degree of pride of accomplishment that tells me to do a good job when I work on just about anything including putting a finish on a piece of furniture.
The original posters asking about shellac on this forum are generally not asking how to finish their tenoning jig. They've just spent a lot of time and effort on a piece of furniture and are asking how to do a good job on finishing the project. They don't need to be confused with advise on how to finish shop jigs. Or out of the way wood planks.
I'm conservative at estimating and most of the time am lapping the last of the shellac out of the can when I finish a project. Besides shellac is cheap compared to the hours spent on designing and making a furniture project, whether it's a simple foot stool, or a Newport highboy.
Edited 4/17/2007 12:30 pm ET by SteveSchoene
Steve,
Nicely said.
Rich
Steve,
I'll give you some allowance because obviously you haven't taken the time to read my posts. Now please pay attention..
I am building my lifelong dream of a home.. Pride is a major function of what I am doing.. I've posted pictures of my home and received many compliments. While it is a work in progress, the parts that have been finished to any degree at all reflect careful attention to detail, including the finish.
There is more burl wood in my home than you will work with in a lifetime. There is more fiddleback and There is more fine hardwood in my home than you've ever worked with.
Unseen planks? Not here! those 22 inch wide, 10 foot long burls will be highly featured right smack dab in the center of the great room in a manner which will show their beauty to the fullest..
If the goal is just to wet out the wood so it can be seen from afar then minimalist finish may work just fine. That's what I mean by "out of the way."
For wood closer to people I certainly wouldn't want such a thin, almost non-existent coating. It won't do much to protect these fine woods from being touched or used. Part of the reason for building a full film on wood is to protect it from the accumulation of dirt that is always with us. Such fine woods invite people to touch. Nearly bare wood collects the oils and dirt. On floors it may hide some dirt since the wood is darkened by being "wet out" by the shellac. Unless this is a socks only habitat ground in dirt will be a problem in a few years.
While shellac is among the very best finishes for slowing moisture transfer, its ability to do this is dependent upon the thickness of the film. The minimalist finish you describe will be of slight benefit, with the effect that greater provision for movement with the seasons would have to be made.
The sad thing is that applying three coats of 1 1/2 lb. cut shellac need only take a few minutes longer per plank, if that. If that is too much added time, then I'd recommend the use of sheet rock, or vinyl tile.
But the main point is that people aren't often looking for quick and dirty ways of dealing with excessively large amounts of architectural wood. Mostly they are doing furniture and what you are doing is not at all satisfactory for furniture. So why keep recommending something so unsatisfactory for the intended use.
Edited 4/17/2007 3:18 pm ET by SteveSchoene
Steve,
I have done fine wood work in the past. (I'm not doing it right now because 100% of my time is devoted to this house).
However you are absolutely wrong when you assume that somehow it's a minimalist finish.. as you enter my home and see those burls featured, it's not just off in the distance but closer to you than your face is to a table top. I carefully placed woods of fine character right at eye level where they could be seen and examined. I have only 9 beams with burl or other unique character on them so out of hundreds of beams 9 are right at eye level where you are forced by the design of the home to examine them..
While I could minimally gain visual depth with color sanding the finish to the sort of high gloss finish I see on my furniture the differance between that finish and what I produce with my over thinned technique is marginal.
I'm not stubbornly sticking with only one approach, I at least tried (again) to do the standard cut this sunday. I related my experiance. If I were to be forced to go back to spraying all my timbers panels etc.. I have the equipment and knowledge how to do it.. I could do so.. yet I haven't choosen to do so.
You might ask yourself why?
I mean nothing about this home is showing any sort of shortcut, Not only timberframed, but double timberframed! No plastic anything,, no cheap shoddy replacements, real crystal, real marble, real granite, simply the finest stuff I can put in this home..
Time certainly isn't a factor.. I've budgeted 10 years to do this and I'm at least a year ahead of schedule.
I know how to color sand, I've demonstrated that knowledge here several times and advocate it for others..
I'm clearly not lazy, not when I start with raw rough green wood and wind up with what I have..
You might do a little soul searching and decide that I honestly have something of value.. Something I've been willing to share with others..
It is not without a little regret and much trepidation that I respond to your posting. I simply do not understand the necessity of such acrimony.It is pedantic and faintly sophomoric.
I do not post this to elicit a response but simply to express the wish, however futile, that people within this forum conduct themselves with a modicum of civility.
xyloform, I think Steve's posts are a model of civility and restraint. He simply stated his opinion, gave good reasons for his advice, without a shred of personal attack. What did you find objectionable? Rich
I do apologize if my message came across as a personal attack. That's not my purpose at all.
I do object strongly to the ultra-thin method of applying shellac. I think it has too much potential to confuse people just coming to shellac as a finish. Using it may lead them to think of shellac as a weak, non-protective finish that when applied by the more mainstream methods can yield a finish both durable, protective, and extremely attractive. Ultra thin is only one method and there is nothing inherently wrong in using it, though one should recognize as an objective matter that it is very limited in its protective properties. Though it is purely a matter of taste, many, perhaps even most, would find it lacking as a decorative finish as well.
It is far away from the mainstream, long tested methods of using shellac, of which there are many. Those mainstream methods of brushing, padding and French polishing have yielded very nice results on furniture for two centuries, at least, and shouldn't be discarded lightly. And spraying of course.
Again, I hope that the strength of my objection to the method, is not interpreted as a personal attack on its poster.
Edited 4/18/2007 8:55 am ET by SteveSchoene
Edited 4/18/2007 8:56 am ET by SteveSchoene
This morning I timed the drying time of a batch of 2# cut mixed yesterday.
In my shop, with the wood stove going, the temperature at 68º F, when I was at the end of a 20" x 60" table top I could start again at the beginning with a couple of minutes rest.
A test piece was dry in 15 minutes.Can someone tell me what color sanding means ?A 1# cut has its merits though, it's perfect for learning it shatters the mith that shellac is hard to use and French polish something just for a select few. C.
C,
"Color sanding" is a term used mostly in the auto finishing industry as opposed to woodworking. The equivalent in woodworking is the process of scuff sanding, leveling the finish to a uniform, smooth matte surface at about 320 grit, then "rubbing out," using finer and finer abrasives, starting at 400, 600, 800, 1200, etc using a lubricant such as mineral spirits or soapy water, rubbing compound, polishing compound.
Rich
Thanks.C.
xylo:There has been quite a few threads recently on shellac; I know because I have copied much of the contents to a file for future reference. The first generation of post were more about frenchy's thin application approach. He is a keen proponent of shellac and wants other to enjoy its advantages. I was not aware that there was another point of view.This thread has provided a very informed alternative to frenchy's approach, which obviously works for him.As a newbie, I am going to apply some shellac to a piece. I have found this debate very valuable in understanding how to go about this and all sides of the argument have something useful to contribute.When we use a forum to communicate, we lose all the other non-verbal cues that help us modulate and interpret the words we hear, such as, tone of voice, posture, facial expression are all missing. All we have are the words.I am constantly amazed how different people interpret the very same words and come away with a totally different impression from my own. This thread was very useful because it was a spirited debate among people with a great deal of practical experience. I don't think it ever crossed the line into incivility or even came close.Let's not dilute our discourse to total blandness. None of us will learn anything that way.Hastings
Rich,
I read frenchy's reply to you and something struck me. The finishing he is doing is not furniture (at least here) and will not be touched or for that matter barely seen. The shellac is used as a minimalist sealer in this case. It doesn't need to stand any type of "eye level" scrutiny or wear from use. It really doesn't matter what he does. However for a furniture grade finish it just doesn't fly.
At least there was no put downs as he said. I'm just curious what he calls the compulsive and fastidious shot at the end.
Peter
peter,
I was going to respond, then just let it go. He's really been skating a thin line and it's been annoying recently to read posts implying that properly-prepared shellac mixtures are the problem.
It's also not just a little annoying to have standard, careful finishing techniques being dismissed in a very negative way, on a forum called Fine Wood Working.
Frenchy has repeatedly advocated slip-shod methods of shellac application as some kind of "answer" to non-existent shellac problems. I do agree that what works for him is fine for him to use. But he refuses to acknowledge that he's endlessly blasting any other approach. If I know anything at all, it's what constitutes a fine shellac surface. It's the "lick and a promise" method of application that gave shellac it's undeserved bad name in the first place.
How many people, exposed to nothing other than mystery dilutions of shellac, mixed with multiple additions of contaminated and old mixtures, flooded on cheaply-made furniture, or shop crates or even floors, and such, left to harden without level sanding and rubbing out would ever think of shellac as a quality product or finish?
Rich
Rich,
WELL PUT!
He told me he won't read my posts. I'm sure he'll see yours.
Besides narcissistic, there is another term that fits his bill; oppositional defiant.
Peter
PS: Did I see somewhere you are moving to Florida? Does that mean you'll miss the AWFS in July?
peter, Yup, I'm moving to the Ocala, FL area. The thoroughbred horse breeding capital of the world (according to their own proclamation). Yes, I will most probably miss the July show in Las Vegas. Rich
Rich,
Too bad you'll miss it. I was looking forward to being grilled. I'm sure someone will pick up the slack.
I hope you love humidity.
Peter
Central Florida is not as bad in terms of humidity as the coast where I used to live (Jacksonville). Still,it will be vastly different from the Southwest. It is a remarkable horse center, with miles of expensive fence along the roads in all directions and very fine broodmares loafinf around. Wonderful bass fishing. Be at the coast either direction in a couple of hours or less. All in all not bad, if you ignore hurricanes.J
Joe,
I was in Jacksonville last year and the humidity was unbearable. But then again when I have a Florida relative visit me in Connecticut they can't understand why I don't have a coat on when it's in the 40's.
What you described sounds idyllic.
Peter
Peter:
Humidity in Jax can be quite high, but not always. Most days are pretty nice, both for temperature and humidity, It is cool to somewhat cold but rarely freezes in the winter. It is warm to hot in the summer, but rarely tops 100 degrees, and is close enough to the ocean that the sea breezes are very moderating.
The problem happens on summer nights. The sea breeze is convection driven and goes away when the sun goes down. In the still air, the humidity comes up fast and it can really be oppressive. You need to be sure your a/c drain lines are wide open, because your unit will essentially pump water all night.
Still, north and central Florida are very agreeable places to live; far preferable to south Florida IMHO.
Joe
The countryside is as beautiful as it gets. Horse farm after horse farm literally for hundreds of miles in every direction. Hurricanes, tornadoes, hail as big as grapefruit, humidity off the scale in the summer, Palmetto bugs big enough to wear small horse saddles, mosquitoes big enough to carry away small cats, aligators, snakes. What's not to like? It sure will be different from Arizona.
Rich:
What you say is true, but noit the whole truth. Overall, life in central Florida is very nice indeed. Even when you get high wind, up on the spine of the state there you have no storm surge to worry about.
Word to the wise -- make sure you have GOOD surge suppression on all your sensitive electronics and tools. Surge suppression is a seasonal big seller (I used to run a large electrical distributor with branches all over the north half of Florida). Ocala is in the lightning belt. There will be quick thunderstorms many summer afternoons unless the drought continues. Surge and transient voltage suppression at the panel costs about $60 and will save you plenty -- but you should still have specific suppression for each sensitive device.
Heavy-duty grounding is also a good idea. Have your electrician use a standard that is better than code. Rex Cauldwell's latest publication is very good on this topic. Heavy ground wires tied to arrays of rods with exothermic welds (usually cadweld devices) is the way to go. This sounds expensive, but really is not.
Of course, your internal ground wires need to be right and if they aren't, it could get expensive.
Also, there are strong pollens there. If you have twitchy lungs, be ready for a struggle. I had the only two serious asthma attacks in my life in two consecutive springs in Jacksonville.
Joe
Thanks Joe,
I will certainly look into the electrical situation. I will demand good grounding and the best surge protection. I had already been warned about living in the lightning capital of the country. The Ocala area sure is pretty country.
As far as pollens and allergies, I never knew I had any problems until I moved to Northern Arizona. This used to be the place people moved to escape pollen. Now there are so many different varieties of trees it's impossible to escape the stuff.
Pollen blows off Junipers in thick clouds that look like smoke. It seems there's a different species pollenating each month. My nose never stops running! Lately, Claritin (sp?) has been a help.
Rich
Edited 4/17/2007 12:57 pm ET by Rich14
Not to belabor it, but many electricians will look at basic "code" grounding and say it is good. And they will be right. However, for sensitive stuff, you want BETTER than good, and well better than code.
J
Peter,
Let me explain, I started to use shellac at least a decade and a half ago about 1988 or so I think.. that was used for small little wooden stuff (I hate to use the word furniture because that clearly wasn't what it was) I didn't start to build this place until 2001
Yes the surface will be seen.. I've posted pictures of the timbers and some are magnficent burls that are in highly visable locations.. All Burl 10 foot long timbers that look like the dash board of a Rolls Royce (at least that's my goal)...
The flooring is highly visable wide plank either black walnut or hard maple and that too I seek to have very nice..
No I don't color sand! Which Rich and Steve both do.. Color sanding all the wood in my place would be a hurculean task to say the least. there are over 40,000 bd.ft of hardwood so far with another 10,000 yet to go up..
My overthinned approach yeilds a finish that doesn't require that level of effort (but in all fairness doesn't yield the same depth or gloss) To some that isn't important.. To others like apparently Steve and Rich it's criminal..
I have in the past color sanded, and on occasion do color sand some things.. Sometimes I need another coat to have enough finish depth to properly color sand..
This was a surprise. I remember you saying I was on your ignore option.
I had asked you why, in former posts, your over thin method contained three gallons of alcohol per gallon of shellac and then you changed to promoting two gallons per. I asked you why the change, was it too thin? You never answered me. Instead, you went off on one of your tangents.
Care to answer me? (Twenty words or less please)
I always shudder when someone asks a question about shellac because I know what's coming. Your schtick. God help anyone who tries to give that person a viable option afterwards.
The endless haranguing of others, here and in breaktime from what I've heard, is very tiresome. A case in point, I've met Steve Schoene(spelling?). He is a very very bright guy. Too bad you don't know more about him. He had the audacity to give you some intelligent arguments and was met with a narcissistic and condescending barrage. If only your posts weren't so constantly inflammatory. You are obviously an intelligent person, you can't be so naive not to see this.
As you say, your method works fine for you. Beauty is in the eye.
It will not produce a serviceable furniture grade finish. If it did, every book, from The Treatise of Japaning and Varnishing by Stalker & Parker(17th century) to all the finishing books on the shelves today, will need to be re written.
Peter Gedrys
BTW, What's your name?
Hi Peter
I want to thank everyone who has posted to my original post. I tried frenchy's method on my piece and did not like the results. It did not feel like anything even after three coats. I sanded everything with 150 grit paper, cleaned and vacuumed the piece and applied a 2# cut.
WOW what a difference in the piece. the maple I am finishing has some curly properties to it and they just Popped out, really looks great.
I just finished your article in fine woodworking on wax and am going to apply the libron bison clear wax to the piece.
Once again I appreciate everyone'e input into this debate and it has been very beneficial for me
John
John,
Don't dismiss the first step you did. The shellac you put on to start with was the sealer coat. You could have sanded it with 220 grit and followed up with your next coat. It's called "bodying" the surface.
The best part of this is you're learning. These types of samples will give you some very practical experience. It's how the rest of us learned.
The Liberon wax has a good "feel" when working with it. My only objection to the product is it has a heavy perfume(at least for me) I know many others that like it however.
Keep practicing and have some fun with it.
Peter
Peter,
Very simple, there is a gallon (or nearly so) of alcohol in a gallon of premixed Zinzzers add two gallons and you have a 1 pound mix. (sorry 27 words , But I hate to be told how many words to answer a question in, I find it offensive!) Which is listed on the side of the can..
As for your insistance on your method and dedication to what you read in books, that's fine,... for you!
I've tried it repeatedly in the past it's not worked. If it was so easy to do I doubt that wipe on finishes would have so much acceptance.. Myself and others had basically given up on paint brushes. I retreated to spray equipment. others to wipe on.
If you want to condemn all of them to wipe on products, that's fine. I intend to be proactive and create interest in a method which I found that produces acceptable results right from the start.
I've never said it's the only way I've always said that it's the way that works for me.. (and since it has never failed me it's the only method I will advocate)
Let's see where we agree,
Shellac is a wonderful product.
It's capable of great things and can be easily applied.
however we disagree
In that I use a one pound cut and you insist that a 1 1/2 pound cut is the only manner that can ever work in it's application ..
Peter, as to my name? it's right in front of you.
I understand, I get it, two gallons per. Why the switch from the three gallon dilution per that you were writing about? That's the question. Very simple. Forget it.
I want to condemn "them" all to wipe on products???? Amazing! No need to put words in someones mouth.
At times I'll use a three pound cut or a two pound cut or a one pound. Whatever the job calls for. I'm not locked into any one way and will use products to their maximum efficiency as required.
Imagine, you might learn something from one of the many manuals written over the centuries. When teaching should they be eliminated from the curriculum?
I had a university student a couple of years ago that was very difficult to deal with. Her hand skills in the lab were not bad, but her unwavering, know it all attitude .....
At the beginning of the semester I hand out a curriculum outline. It clearly states how attitude issues could have an effect on the final grade. All the students sign these. Can't be too careful.
This student made it the semester from hell. It's amazing how one bad apple (out of twenty) could make things so miserable. BTW, the class was Finishes and Restoration.
When final grades were due, I met with the chair of the department and let her know ahead of time what the situation was and why her grade would be a C instead of the A she thought she so richly deserved. The chair agreed and understood my position, but talked me into a B-. I didn't agree but relented.
Well she was aghast when grades were posted. She went to the chair, then the dean. Her whining was unbelievable. I got an email from her demanding an explanation. So I did (and CC'd it to the chair) Can't be too careful, right?
The chair got back to me and agreed with everything I said in my response. I'll leave you with the same thing I said to her at the end of it;
Your grade stands as is. I will have no further comment or contact.
peter,
I'm glad you teach about shellac. You share with me the pleasure that it can give as a finish.
We differ, I think, in only one real respect.
you are fixed on only one possible solution to a problem and I see another possibility.
Many people condemn themselves to wipe on finishes out of fear or poor past experience with a paint brush.
You solution as near as I can tell requires them to improve their brush skills..
My solution makes allowances both for their lack of skill and fear of the brush..When I discovered that Einstein failed math it gave me hope that the text book doesn't always contain all the answers.
When I taught, I accepted those who worked outside of the box as long as the results wound up correct. I didn't insist that everybody parrot me and regurgitate the text book back onto the test booklet. Tested against the standard, all of my students excelled. That occurred simply because I was willing to accept that no two humans learn or understand things in exactly the same way.. (terribly frustrating to administration who couldn't duplicate my results with instructors who correctly followed the curriculum)
I took woodshop once on school and my teacher flunked me. That F discouraged me completely from working with wood for much of my life.. A Grandfather clock which I made (and took great pride in) convinced me that I wasn't hopeless. The woodshop instructor was simply too rigid in his approach.
Since I've never attended any of your classes I don't know if you are guilty of a too ridgid approach, however the example you listed certainly has me believing you are..
Frenchy:
For heaven's sake, give it a rest. Everybody has heard about your method by now. Nobody doubts that it provides satisfactory results for you. Some people will probably agree fully, and some won't
I have experimented with very thin shellac. I don't like it for a finish, but for a seal coat, it suits me. But I am not you. I vary in what I apply -- use neighborhood of 2# for most uses, and have applied straight 3# out of the can to floors with excellent results. In fact, I have laid down a seal coat and three coats of 3# with great results except that the drying time gets fairly long with the final coats.
My conclusion? There are lots of good ways to use shellac. Yous is one, for the right applications.
You are a smart guy with a lot to offer, but overwhelming threads and insisting on your way as THE way really discredits you. Remember our debate over log cabin rot over on Breaktime? You had a point, but you took it too far (and I will NOT discuss tha again here). We finally came to a resolution, bnut I am sure everyone else was completely sick of the thread, and I kind of lost enthusiasm for Breaktime between that and a handful of the political discussions down in the Tavern.
Anyway, we all get the point now, and I, for one would love to see your house. It looks really nice in the pictures. But why not let the discussion of shellac be open and available to other voices?
BTW, Peter is a professional finisher at the top of his trade, and with a long resume. It is just silly to accuse him of being tied to discredited book theories. Some of the other guys here are also very accomplished. Maybe you could pick up some new ideas from them...
I am not one of them, more's the pity.
Joe
Joe,
I understand that my approach doesn't work for everybody. Those who are capable of getting satisfactory results with a paint brush can use the approach others recommend. I don't have any issue with that.
There is however a whole bunch of people who are forced to use wipe on finishes because their brushing techniques simply don't produce decent results..
I happen to be one of them and I've spoken with countless others since I stumbled upon this over thin approach. I used to have to spray everything to get satisfactory results..
Spraying has it's own issues.. preventing overspray is high on the list as is dealing with the fumes produced. In addition there is dragging out the gun, hose, and compressor assuming you do not have a dedicated booth. Plus clean up afterwards.
To finish a piece assuming that you cannot dedicate space for a booth means about two hours of work. Far easier to grab a brush and paint away.
So Joe, assuming you are speaking with someone who has a fear of the brush or extremely poor results from brushing, would you still insist that they do a 2# cut or simply let them do the wipe on finish route?
ps I have never discredited the approaches used in books.. I simply suggest that that is not the only way to get results.
frenchy, This is getting so d*mn tiresome. "I simply suggest that that is not the only way to get results. " Really? You GREATLY exagerate or create "problems" with every method other than yours. You claim that there are many people who are impossibly impaired when it comes to using a brush (as you claim to be) then claim that you are trying to decrease perceived anxiety about finishing with shellac. As far as spraying, I can set up and clean up in a few minutes - no problem at all. All you are doing is describing every shellac application method other than yours as fraught with problems and insisting that otherwise mechanically-able woodworkers can't use a paint brush. That's just not true! You're creating a nightmare about shellac use that never existed until you started touting your "over-diluted" formula. Please, stop it!
Edited 4/22/2007 7:01 pm ET by Rich14
Rich,
How many wipe on finish users are disatisfied with their brush results? I suspect most of them are.. That is the prime reason I advocate my method.. The results with the first coat don't include brush marks, the build up from runs, and some of the more common experiances many have with brushes.
I have repeatedly said that if you can get satisfactory results using other methods that's fine by me. Besides we simply are not that far apart! I advocate a pound cut you insist on a 1 1/2 pound cut. (or are you the one who insists on 2 pound cut? I am not trying to suggest a course that you don't advocate)
Too bad we aren't neighbors, you could stop over and see my experiances for yourself. But I repeat which is worse? Someone using a 1/2 pound less cut than you approve of or using some wipe on finish because they are afraid of their results with a brush?
Take my over thinning to an extreme, say 1/2 pound cut, or 1/4 pound cut,..... whatever? Can they put a heavier cut on top of it if they want to? Now assume they do a wipe on finish. Is there any way that it will provide the long term satisfaction that shellac will?
As for nightmares, I am not the one insisting that someone use a 1/2 pound heavier cut or disaster will strike..
Frenchy,
How about this method. Apply the body of shellac with a couple of coats of 2 or 3# cut without regard for the look. Sand just enough to remove any ridges or other defects. Apply final coat(coats) by wiping on a 1# cut. I've used this method before and it works quite well for the brush challenged.
Rob
Rob A.
That certainly may work. Frankly I'm not so hung up on the cut as most seem to think. I've found a way to achieve a decent finish and since it seems to work for me and those I've shown, plus several here I hope I'm allowed to continue to advocate it for those who are going to settle for a wipe on finish.
I love shellac, I think it's the most underated finish there is. While we may disagree on the exact method of application from what I've found shellac doesn't care..
Put it on thick and sand it smooth really works. I've never disagreed with that.. I just found that some are really reluctant to sand a finish.. If I can get someone to switch from a wipe on oil to a shellac I think I've done them a favor, once they see how nice even a thin coat of shellac can be I'm certain that at some point in their woodworking career they will grab a piece of sand paper with the ambition of improving the finish even more..
Frenchy:
No, I wouldn't. And I have no quarrel with your approach. I just think your point has been made pretty clearly by this time.
Joe
I'll add to what Rich said. If a first coat of 2 lb. shellac took two hours before being sandable you do have a significant materials problem, either old shellac or denatured alcohol with too much moisture. I don't recall such a first coat ever taking more than 30 minutes--tops.
1 1/2 to 2 lbs. cut has always been the best for me, whether padding or brushing. When padding the finish doesn't build as quickly as brushing, but those cuts work pretty well for me, and for just about everyone else I've talked to. Three coats of 1 lb. cut just don't do much for me, leaving the surface just barely sealed. Shellac can easily yield a full film and be rubbed to whatever sheen is desired. Within reason, how thick a shellac film one uses is an aesthetic decision, not really limited by the properties of the material as far as I can tell.
Lots of opinions here. What works best for me are thin coats. I love the Zinsser (sp) sealer coat dewaxed stuff. It's thin enough that you don't get much issue with brush strokes or overlapping, which IMO, is a huge plus.
I do not sand between coats. Two-three coats of this and you have a great sealed base to accept oil finishes. I let the final coat dry a day, then lightly and with the grain, sand with anything from 320-600 depending on what the shellac looks like.
Makes the final varnishing so much easier and quicker, lot less cure out waiting because of the shellac sealer.
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled