Replies

1. 
   Paul_Snyder | Mar 27, 2004 08:52pm | #1

   BG,

   Some finishes that look good on walnut may not be to your liking on maple. For example, if you use linseed oil or a varnish that contains lineed oil, it will look quite yellow on maple. There are some varnishes that are made with a light colored oil (safflower or soya) that will do a better job of retaining the maple's natural color; a couple varnishes in this category include McCloskeys Heirloom and Pratt & Lambert #38.

   Orange and garnet shellacs do a nice job of bringing out the warm color tones in walnut, but you may not like the color om maple.

   Lacquer is a good "all-around" finish and is easy to repair if it gets damaged.

   Do some samples on both woods and see what looks best to you.

   Paul

1. 
   BG | Mar 27, 2004 10:20pm | #2

   PaulS,

   Thanks, I never would have thought about the yellowing of the maple....

   I'm going to get some shellac dissolving so I'll can do some tests.

   I'm thinking about a BLO followed by a coupla coats of shellac (orange) followed by at least three coats of gloss lacquer...rub out to desired sheen.  I've never worked with filler and am kinda nervous about that.

   I'm currently working on another piece using Watco...fine sanding between coats it is prodcing it's own filler.  What if I used the Watco for a few applications instead of the BLO...and followed up with lacquer...would that work?

   Maybe I need to read a bit more..

1. 
   Paul_Snyder | Mar 28, 2004 06:57pm | #5

   BG,

   Watco contains a lot of linseed oil and will give you the same look as the oil alone. Watco also contains some varnish resins making it a "Danish Oil" type finish. Minwax "Natural" stain is basically a thinned Danish Oil and will also give you the same look.

   Here's a curly maple sample with 3 finish options. The top section was colored with linseed oil (the same look as Danish Oil, Minwax Natural, and many varnishes); the bottom section was dyed; and the entire piece was sprayed with lacquer leaving the center section with lacquer alone.

   View ImageMaple - 3 Options

   The biggest difference in the 3 sections is the color. The addition of the color, whether from the oil or dye, creates greater contrast that accentuates the figure in the wood. The oil is limited to some shade of yellow; the dye can be any color you like. Light brown dyes work well with both maple and walnut.

   Let me ask what effect/look you want when you're done. What is the purpose/goal of using the oil/danish oil and the shellac (considering that you're topcoating with lacquer)? Start by defining the results you want and that'll make it easier to figure out the finish that will get you there.

   Paul

   Edited 3/28/2004 12:01 pm ET by Paul S

1. 
   BG | Mar 28, 2004 08:54pm | #8

   Paul S,

   That picture is really great, I can see clearly the yellowing effect of oil/lacquer or lacquer alone.

   I am still very much in the developmental mode with regard to a finish.  Initially, my thoughts were a classic look with a hint of red and durable surface.  I spoke to a finisher over at Woodcraft and he showed me two pieces of Walnut: one with amber stain, one with no stain.  They were both highly polished ...a bit more thick than I would perfer.  He shared with me his process...something like...conditioner, stain, sealer, clear filler, 4-5 coats of lacquer...I may have left out a step.  I'm not sure what the conditioner does and I have never used a filler.  So I started thinking maybe I could fill the pores by sanding in Watco and put some red into the finish with some Shellac and  finish up with brush on lacquer (high gloss) and rub out.  Also, SWMBO stopped by and let me know she does not want any red..hmmm.  So maybe I just skip the shellac....unless it is necessary to transition from Watco to lacquer, then I'd use blond shellac.  

   The other issue that you raise is the yellowing of the maple.  I do want as strong a contrast as possible between the maple and walnut squares...but that is only on the top.  So maybe I finish the sides differently than the playing surface?..or would it look funny?  thanks for the help. 

1. 
   Paul_Snyder | Mar 29, 2004 02:43am | #10

   BG,

   Filling the pores with a sanding slurry is an option. It's kinda tedious and the combination of maple with walnut may pose some unexpected problem like walnut dust slurry discoloring the maple, cross-grain scratches, etc.

   Another way to fill the pores, without using a Pore Filler is to use shellac or lacquer. If you apply one coat of shellac or lacquer a day and sand it back almost to bare wood (don't worry about bare spots; just stop sanding that area), you can fill the pores in 2-3 days (2-3 coats). You have to wait the day between coats to allow the finish to cure and shrink. A drawback to this technique (as well as the sanding slurry) is that the finish will continue to cure for a number of months and there's a chance the pores will transmit through the finish as dimples in the surface.

   I don't see any problem with having a full-filled (pores filled) finish on the top and a semi-filled finish on the rest of the piece; it's not an uncommon practice. If you wanted to stick with just lacquer or shellac, you could use the same finish on all the surfaces and use the sanding back technique on the top only.

   Walnut takes dyes and stains well; there's no need for a conditioner.Paul

2. 
   BG | Mar 29, 2004 01:25pm | #12

   Paul S,

   I'm going to try your suggestion and go with the full-filled pores on the top and sand the sides (CharlieD suggestion)to a high grit.  I'll use a 1.5 lb. cut of shellac (orange) on the sides and can add a bit of Trans-Tint to subsequent coats if I want more color.  The top I'll use lacquer...which I'll probably need to cut a bit and sand that back as you suggest....won't add any color to that...

   Do you see anything wrong with that plan? thanks

3. 
   Paul_Snyder | Mar 30, 2004 04:04am | #18

   BG,

   I don't see any problem with your plan. I'd recommend you do a sample of the techniques you plan to use on scrap, the larger the better, before starting on the project just to make sure there aren't any surprises.

   I look forward to seeing the pictures when you get done.

   Paul

4. 
   BG | Mar 30, 2004 01:25pm | #19

   Thanks Paul, and thanks for your help. 

2. 
   CharlieD | Mar 28, 2004 09:50am | #3

   I will probably sound crazy here, but here is my favorite finishing technique, and it looks great, especially on walnut:

   When I first started finishing I thought erroneously that Gillespie Tung Oil was really tung oil. I sanded the living crap out of the piece I was working on (walnut, as it happens). I sanded that sucker to 1500 grit, because I didn't know any better, and I like the way it felt--silky smooth. Then, I started rubbing in the Gillespie's with--yes--my bare hand, thinking that I would achieve the lauded hand-rubbed oil finish. In accordance with what I had read, I rubbed with the grain until the piece got hot from the friction, applying a lot of pressure. I always kept my hand moving, kind of like a wierdo french polish technique.

   Now, Gillespie's was really a wiping varnish, as most of you know. As the solvent left the varnish, and as the stuff was warmed from the friction, it thickened and put up more of a fight; I had to work harder to get my rubbing done. As this occurred, the finish began to smooth out, and after 4 or 5 coats done the same way, a beautiful film built up, smooth as glass and not at all plastic-like. It's a very warm and inviting finish that encourages touching, and doesn't disappoint when touched.

   Gillespie's is no longer in existence, alas--I've never gotten any other finish to work quite as well, but I'm still experimenting. Also, the product has to be WRONG for my skin, so I'm looking for another way to do this; rags and shop towels just don't cut it. I'm thinking of trying a chamois, but that's a little pricey, since it'd probably be impossible to clean.

   Anyway, there's my favorite finish. I hear a knock at my door; it's probably the finishing police...

   Charlie

   I tell you, we are here to fart around, and don't let anybody tell you different. --K Vonnegut
1. 
   BG | Mar 28, 2004 01:30pm | #4

   charlieD,

   I gotta laugh, I did the very same thing with Waterlox on an Ash coffee table...6 coats, rub with bare hands till sticky, suppress feelings your killing yourself(throat was swelling up) from the finish....came out really nice.  The only problem I had was I had used a water based stain on the piece only two hours before applying the first application of Waterlox....half the stain was removed with the Waterlox...which gave it a special color too.  I used it a coupla times since then with a respirator, it's a nice finish.  I'm laughing because the very same thoughts went through my mind....french provencial polish...lol.

   One of the things I like about "our" secret technique is the texture of the wood in addition to the grain is very apparent....at least that is my perception.  What it dosen't have is a 'hard wood'(my term...don't know the real words) look which is something I'm after with the chessboard. I suspect that hard wood look comes from using filler...or maybe sanding in each application using finer grits as you go along....maybe...  Finally, if after all is said and done, I want to add a bit of film finish...can I use lacquer on top of the oil finish? 

1. 
   CharlieD | Mar 28, 2004 07:21pm | #7

   I don't know about the laquer. And actually, my version leaves a very smooth film-like but somhow unique surface. You don't feel ant pores or grain under the fingertips for example. Maybe the difference is the sanding? I really sand to 1500 grit, no kidding, and like you say, sometimes I sand the finish into the wood. the film builds faster that way, but ity gets there eventually in any case. And, one thing I left out: after the last coat is really dry, I give a nice buffed out coat of paste wax. I also never had any struggles with the air, but I know it's gotta be a bad idea for my skin. FWIW, I clean up my hands with automotive hand cleaner, like Goop.

   Charlie

   I tell you, we are here to fart around, and don't let anybody tell you different. --K Vonnegut

1. 
   BG | Mar 28, 2004 11:24pm | #9

   CharlieD,

   Is it possible to sand away the need for filler in Walnut?  I mean, I really don't know.  I just spent about 2.5 hours sanding the box ..that is, four sides of cove 17"x3.5"...took it up to 400 just for fun...could go higher...but there is no tearout left on that box, its perfect...and the pores look small....am I kidding myself?

1. 
   CharlieD | Mar 29, 2004 09:06am | #11

   Worked great for me. And the finish I described looks great on everything (to me, anyway), even on a prototype A & C armchair I made out of pine 2x4's and Doug Fir 2x6's. I'll attach a photo of the piece I've been talking about.I tell you, we are here to fart around, and don't let anybody tell you different. --K Vonnegut

   
2. 
   BG | Mar 29, 2004 01:44pm | #13

   CharlieD,

   Very Nice stuff, thanks for sharing.  I think I'm going to try your sanding technique on the sides of the box and sand back the lacquer on the top (Paul S sugesion)(chessboard) for a full-filled pore look.  Using shellac on the sides I can add color and back up the process and sand if necessary.  The top will have a lacquer (brushed on) and sanded to provide its own filler...but if it doesn't work..I can back up that process too. 

   If I used the high grit sanding technique and wipe on varnish (your beautiful box)...I don't think I could back it up as easily..but I'm going to try it on some scraps for future reference... 

3. 
   CharlieD | Mar 29, 2004 07:55pm | #14

   Good luck. Sure like to see it when you're done...

   Charlie

   I tell you, we are here to fart around, and don't let anybody tell you different. --K Vonnegut

4. 
   BG | Mar 30, 2004 12:20am | #15

   Charlie,

   Yup, maybe when the first born honors us with his presence..he's got the camera...it's nice being single...I'll ask him to take a picture I can post. The way he usually works it is to say "Gee dad, the camera is back at my place....I'll take the piece with me and e-mail you some pictures"....kiss that piece good-by.

   I just got finished morticing the hinges, for the first time they came out perfect for me.  I was wondering why the top was not sitting flat....one of the top boards has bowed.  sigh!   

5. 
   CharlieD | Mar 30, 2004 12:32am | #16

   Wow, I had a similar issue with a walnut top on a kid's toybox. You have my empathy; I dealt with it by handplaning down the corner of the box that was too high. Maybe not a good long range solution, but best I could come up with.

   CharlieI tell you, we are here to fart around, and don't let anybody tell you different. --K Vonnegut

6. 
   BG | Mar 30, 2004 01:00am | #17

   CharlieD,

   It appears there might have been some internal stress in the walnut that did not show up till the TS released the top portion from the sides of the box.  Even if I could plane it, with the decorative groves running parallel to the top and bottom, it would only look worse.  What bothers me is it kinda kills the inspiration to work hard for a terriffic finish.... 

2. 
   joinerswork | Mar 28, 2004 07:09pm | #6

   Charlie,

   Carlyle Lynch told me a story once about an acquaintance of his who put MOTOR OIL on walnut for a finish.  He laughingly said it was beautiful, but then told me that you could probably put anything on walnut and it would still look good. 

   Regards,

   Ray