Replies

1. 
   SteveSchoene | Jan 26, 2010 08:50am | #1

   Peter Gedrys points out that Sherwin Williams pore filler contains almost entirely silex as it's filling material, which gives it a lots less shrinkage. Only problem, it only comes in gallons. Other brands may have more shrinkage. Remember, with any oil based pore filler, you need to give it plenty of time to cure before applying a top coat. I like to give it as close to a week as I can, especially if temperatures will drop below 70° during the curing period.

   Another alternative that may prove better since you have inlay and aren't staining the wood is to fill the pores with finish, with shellac being the obvious choice since it dries so quickly. You would brush on about half a dozen coats of 2 lb. cut shellac, and then sand it back until you reach the point where there are no "shiny" spots in thepores where the sand paper doesn't reach. Since you haven't stained you will speed the process and avoid building an excessive thickness by sanding to the point where you just start observing "cut through". Repeat the process until you can eliminate the shiny spots without cut through.

   For a formal piece like a Federal tea caddy, you could also follow the finish formula used in many of the period pieces--French polish. The pumice used in the bodying up stage will aid in filling pores until you have a wonderfully smooth high gloss finish. It's work, but a tea caddy isn't very large, and French polish would be the historically appropriate finish.

1. 
   kentmich | Jan 26, 2010 04:43pm | #2

   I would LOVE to French polish it. But... I'm one of those people who cannot, for the life of me, French polish. I've read every article and watched every video, and it still comes out rough or streaky. My closest simulation of it is sealcoating with shellac then finishing with a few coats of oil-varnish such as Minwax Antique Oil Finish. It's a no-brainer and allows the grain to shine through.

   I think I'm going to fill the grain as you suggested with boiled linseed and pumice, allow it to dry, then seal it and finish it as above.

1. 
   Rich14 | Jan 26, 2010 05:36pm | #3

   Ken,
   Don't use BLO and
   Ken,

   Don't use BLO and pumice. Unless you have used that brew many times before, it's a very iffy way to fill wood. It gets recommendations here and there, but I've seen very poor results from it. I don't think those who recommend it have really used it. The most common problem is that the pumice turns white long after the finish has been applied.

   Behlen's Por O Pac is a professional-grade silex filler.

   http://www.woodcraft.com/catalog/family.aspx?id=2004492

   http://www.garrettwade.com/product.asp?pn=99P03.11&bhcd2=1264545221

   http://www.meritindustries.com/rst.htm

   It's very easy to use. Follow the directions on the can. Apply as a thick paste, let dry partially, scrape off the excess with a scraper, then coarse cloth. Repeat if necessary. It will give a very even surface to porous woods. It doesn't shrink. It can be tinted any color you want - usually looks best somewhat darker than the wood. Thin with mineral spirits.

   I've used it for a long time without any problem.

   Rich

1. 
   SteveSchoene | Jan 26, 2010 10:03pm | #4

   I've used Pore O Pac with
   I've used Pore O Pac with success, though it seems much thicker now, and to shrink more (though still not much, not like water based fillers) than when I first used it many years ago. But it only has some Silex. There are four filler ingredients listed all showing between 10-20% content. First on the list is Calcium Sulfate--likely plaster of paris or similar; then comes the Silex; followed by Tremolite (presumably the non-fiberous kind); and finally magnesium siliate hydrate (talc). The S&W shows only Quartz (with the silex CAS) as the filler material. I think the silex will also ddry to give you a more translucent filler, with less need for pigment to cover the creamy color of Pore-O-Pac. Might be worth an experiment.

   And I agree with Rick not to use BLO and pumice. I don't think I recommended it. Pumice is used in French polishing, but it, and a bit of swarf from the abrasion, is basically bound with the shellac--linseed oil, if used, is only a lubricant.

   Brushing on shellac and sanding it back makes for a very clear filler. Brush marks, etc. don't matter, they will just get sanded away.

1. 
   Zahn2 | Feb 08, 2010 09:54am | #5

   I would like to know what the inlay is. If you have a holly inlay

   and wipe on some colored filler you will lose the contrast that is the reason for doing inlay. In that case you will have to either use a clear filler or seal the inlay and mask it off before applying the filler. I use polyester as a clear filler but it isn't for a home shop. French polish is an excellent suggestion and maybe some more practice will allow you to add it to your bag of tricks...