Shellac question for 18th century minds

Re: Shellac question for 18th century minds

Sam Simpson

>Hi Y'all,

Patrick, I'm not sure I have a grasp of the problem? Shellac shouldn't raise the grain?

I wonder what method you are using to apply the shellac, and what sort of shellac is it? If I read this correctly, you prepared the surface of the wood to your satisfaction, but after applying the shellac you have a less than acceptable result?

All I can say is, when the surface of the wood is prepared to an acceptable level and the shellac is wiped onto the surface, continuing to wipe until dry, then the results rendered are normally an improvement on the smoothness of the surface. This is repeated until a full sheen is acquired. As a body of shellac is imparted to the surface, an oil is required to assist in the building of the film. (French polishing)

Preparing the surface of wood with a cabinet scraper will impart a much smoother surface than any that can be given by sandpaper alone. I'm therefore lead to believe that there is a defect in your method of shellac application.

Swing by my shop some time 8564 Katy Freeway suit #134, Houston, TX. (NW quadrant of Bingle and I10) and I can help you with a hands on lesson. (713-827-8063)

Regards Sam Simpson

correction (NE quadrant)

Sam Simpson

>

Re: Shellac question for 18th century minds

Joe Rogers, Northern Virginia

>Hands on...Some people are lucky. Nice of you Sam!JR

Re: Shellac question for 18th century minds

Patrick Gibbons, Houston, TX

>Sam, let me apologize for misspelling your name. I wrote this fast this morning as my wife reminded me just how late I am. I applied dewaxed garnet shellac, freshly made from flakes, with a brush. My second coat was done by rubbing it in with a cloth last night and it does seem to be much smoother. I appreciate your offer and will drop by to visit. Thank you so much.

Re: Shellac question for 18th century minds

Adam Cherubini, NJ

>Patrick,

I guess whether or not they used abrasives is debatable. So just to clarify, I'm not sure its true that they wouldn't have used an abrasive the same way you are using it.

That said, (and as you know) I'm skeptical about abrasives. Like Sam, I don't see a lot of grain raising with shellac. I usually apply shellac over boiled linseed oil. I've also mixed in brick dust (with the oil) to impart some color and fill mahogany pores. I think brick dust from original soft clay bricks is a very poor abrasive for wood- it might work better for metal- dunno).

I also think original surfaces lacked the uniformity and smoothness of both our reproductions, and the surviving pieces.

So to answer your question:

1) I'm with Sam regarding technique.

2) You should try a sample over linseed oil.

3) Most importantly, you should challenge your own expectations and assumptions about a "quality" surface finish.

Adam

Re: Shellac question for 18th century minds

dave caudill

>In the last couple of months I have spent a lot of time experimenting with shellac. And it sounds to me that you have a normal first coat finish. I think just about anything you read tells you to lightly steel wool with #0000 after the first coat and then go from there. I had the same experience and followed this procedure and ended up with a great finish. I think after you apply additional coats you will find that your finish will smooth out. I'm guessing the first coat did not fill all the pores and high and low spots but additional coats will take care of this.

I just finished too large benches for a built in booth in my kitchen and did a lot of experimenting with colors and application methods before I tried it on the final project. I also tried a lot of different shellacs from different sources. I definitely found that the quality of the finish was not a product issue. It was me and the techniques I used. I did both brushing and padding depending on the size and complexity of the surface and had good luck with both. A good brush is required as well as good padding material. Once you apply the shellac you have to avoid the impulse to go back over it or if you do you have to do so immediately after applying the finish. I had better luck with multiple coats and allowing it to fill in on its own.

Like anything my results got better as my skills and knowledge improved with experience.

Good luck.

Dave

Re: Shellac question for 18th century minds

Barry Va Beach

>Patrick, at a conference on building tall clocks in Col Williamsburg 2 years ago ( the FWW conference ) Mack Headley did a demonstration with shellac over a 3 day period. He applied over a dozen coats ( letting it dry in between each) of a dilute mixture ( I think 2 lb or maybe 1 1/2 lbs ) and in between coats he used an 18 th century scraper ( about the size of a jigsaw blade so it didn't flex as much as a card scraper) to knock off the nubs. At the beginning he was using a very rough brush to just flood the surface and didn't worry about how neatly it went on. Towards the latter stages, he applied the shellac with a cloth like a wiping varnish ( though I don't remember any oil) and in the later stages the alcohol softened the prior coats and let him "drag" the finish around. The end result was extremely smooth and certainly on a par with a conventional finish today. While he discussed the use of brick dust, the wood was walnut so he did not use any dust because it wasn't needed. He said you could follow with rubbing compounds but the sample board looked great to me.

Re: Shellac question for 18th century minds

John Aniano, in NJ...

>Patrick,

You could try one of my favorite abrasives, the horsetail rush. You take a small section of the horsetail rush, split it open and use it like a small piece of sandpaper. I guess the stuff I have roughly approximates around a 300-400 grit abrasive. I also use the finer-stemmed horsetail rush plant whole (dried) and it roughly approximates a medium/fine steel wool in cutting "grit".

For finer "sanding" try using felt and various grades of pumice, garnet, or tripoli powders.

The firm of Kremer Pigments in New York City sells all of these materials (except the finer stemmed horsetail which I grow in the garden - it's a real weed and spreads way too easily...). No affiliation to Kremer, just a satisfied customer.

Hope this helps,

John

Re: Shellac question for 18th century minds

Patrick Gibbons, Houston, TX

>Horsetail is native here I believe. Anyway it is a stealthy little plant. It spreads by underground stolons I believe its called. I had heard many years ago about its use as an abrasive and had forgotten about it. Thank you for reminding me. When my mother was alive, we couldn't get rid of it out of her yard. Now I don't know anyone with it. Maybe I'll plant some in a tub for woodworking use.

Re: Shellac question for 18th century minds

Warren in PA

>Many eighteenth century surfaces still show the marks of a smoothing plane. If you do a good job with the smoothing plane you will have a slick surface that has no need for scraping or sanding and there will be no fuzzy "grain" to "raise". You can apply oil with a cloth or shellac with a pad or brush.

Good advice.

Michael R

>I can only add a couple of comments:

Shellac didn't come into common use in Europe as a finish until some time around 1820. It was known and used as a dye for at least a century before that.

I did some research a while back and found that these abrasives were commonly used in the 18th Century: Horsetails, as mentioned above, shark skin, pumice, and various kinds of rock dust.

Sheraton describes his finishing process as rubbing with brick dust and linseed oil.

There are references to glasspaper going way back, ground glass adhered to paper with hide glue, but it doesn't seem to be too commmon.

I know I'm forgetting something, but that's all I can remenber for now.

Michael R