To fill or not to fill

Jeff Headley said.....
Jeff L Headley said:
"Walnut with its grain also needs to be filled. Back countries Mahogany above the fall line."
Click to expand...

   How do you do the fill process Jeff?
 
We have used a grain filler from Lawrence-McFadden which is no longer in business. With that said I have noticed over the last few years a chalking of the grain fillers. Whitening grain pores over the years. Pumice or fine silica is pulverized stone which has a colored medium added. The medium has the color added. Stone will not hold color. Clay on the other hand has color. Fine pulverized brick dust and gelatin might be a alternative. I love my cows but might think about rabbits. Flea bitten varmints. All this depends upon your final finish. Water, alcohol, or mineral spirits.  Gelatin is dissolved by water. The final finish surface might emulsify your grain filler which will cause dips.
I think that French polish is a modern finish. Not period! Lets see what you think!
 
There is no such thing as 'French polish'. French polishing is a process in which shellac is the polish. It gained popularity in the nineteenth-century and was responsible for the Victorian 'toffee apple' look. A French polished surface is fragile and vulnerable and not the best finish for daily use.

Shellac has been used for polishing furniture since at least the thirteenth-century and was the primary resin used during the seventeenth- and eighteenth-centuries.

As Jeff says, use self-coloured fillers. Brick dust was one medium that was broadly used on eighteenth-century mahogany. Earth pigments (straight or blended) in various mediums are my preference for ease of use and longevity.
 
William...thanks for the heads up on Peter G.'s class.....I'll keep an eye on Troy's website for Peter's return.

In the mean time, if I've read ten articles on French polishing, I've read ten variations on the same theme....very discouraging for a neophyte.  I decided to follow Peter Bohn's lead and seek out items written by George Frank.  Turns out he wrote a piece for FWW that appeared in their May/June 1986 issue, which is essentially the chapter on French polishing from Frank's book(s) on finishing.  I have used the technique he describes in the article with success. Interestingly, it not only incorporates pumice to fill the grain but continues its use throughout the bodying stage, albeit in decreasing amounts.  I would recommend it to anybody looking for an educational source on French polishing.

BTW, for those seeking Frank's books, note that "Classic Wood Finishing" and "Wood Finishing With George Frank" are essentially the same book/text.  In fact I'll sell you one for cheap. : )

Bruce
 
Let me add yet another query. I have built a very large kitchen table for my grandson out of red oak. I had not figured on filling the grain but after all of this discussion perhaps I should but how? Shellac makes no sense for such a table and I plan on finishing with varnish. Anyone have any strong opinions on filling red oak? It seems as though the varnish would be adequate.

Terry
 
  Thanks for the info Bruce.  There is a video of Peter Gedrys's polishing technique, on the FWW site, I believe.  He makes it look easy (but there's a learning curve, for sure). 

  Grain filling seems to involve a bit of medieval alchemy: pulverized brick dust, Knox gelatin mixed with earth pigments, bloodworms (in various media), and an eye of newt  thrown in (to get that special patina). Seems there should be a better way to do this    :)
 
When I first heard about using pumice, curiosity got the best of me so I did a simple experiment by shaking a little pumice on a glass plate and dropping a bit of shellac on the whitish powder and let dry. The look of powder simply disappeared! My thinking and after checking it with some chemical references is that the refractive index of the pumice is very close to the same as shellac. So in effect it sort of disappears into the film. I understand that pumice has been a traditional filler in French polishing for some time.

Chuck
 
Hi All
Jack , some years ago the Briwax Co. did market a product labeled French Polish, it was/is shellac in a bottle, shame on them!
Bottom line here is that if you intent to use a filler, find something that has a natural color that won't fade. It's been a long time since I pore filled but I understand the interest. I do use pumice and haven't noticed any problems in the last 30 + yrs. I also French Polish large oak tables with out fillers. In the polishing process there is a window in witch I turn the shellac in to a [ slurry ], It's like turning the shellac into a paste and moving it around to impact the pores quickly. Unfortunately, it's something you would have to see as my typing skills are not what I'm known for. Anyway, this is how a seasoned finisher is able to produce a  smooth finish on a porous surface fast. French Polishing can be a simple technique or a highly technical process depending where you are on the learning curve. There are many benefits that French Polishing can provide for placing color that other finishes can't come close to. And the ease of repair is like no other finish. Here is a video of Mitch K. polishing. He is a past instructor of mine and I'm a past assistant instructor of his. We were both taught by G. Frank but my process has changed quite a bit, mainly I cut back on the oil.   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ParX4-dOf1s
Do good work
Randy
 
With pumice used as an abrasive to carry dust from the original piece as a filler which needs no color on flat surfaces, how would you treat curved or carved surfaces? Most modern fillers are trying to fill the surface with a rub over paste. I am not a condoning a modern filler which seems inferior just asking. I still stand by my comment that a French polish is a modern finish.
 
Carvings were often just waxed, but in the hey day of French polishing, it was common to treat carvings with a slurry made of drying oil containing either pumice or wood dust or both, and then well brushed out with a dry brush to remove the surplus. When that had all dried the carvings were given a single coat of shellac of, say, a 1/2lb or 1lb cut.

In my limited experience with them, modern fillers are well formulated and work admirably. However, filling the grain with shellac and pumice is a far cry from using fillers and from which a fair comparison cannot be drawn.
 
I wood recommend a small hard fiber bristle hand brush to burnish carvings once carved and during the finish. Beeswax or a carnauba wax combination? What type of drying oil? Wood (would) you add Japan dryer? Grain filling is my least favorite part of building period reproductions. Again my father Mack Sr. always said you can make a silk purse out of a sow's ear with your finish!
 
Beeswax on its own is pretty useless for anything furniture related, but with the addition of harder waxes (carnauba, paraffin etc.) or resins, can develop a fantastic finish.

Linseed oil would really have been all that was (reliably) available to eighteenth-century polishers. Of course, we now have tung oil and walnut oil. I wouldn't recommend adding dryers to the oil (basically, a varnish) for polishing carvings as there would be the risk of it collecting and coagulating in areas, thus reducing the crispness. If plain oil is used, it will remain liquid and be easily brushed out. For all the oil that remains, it can reliably be shellacked over after a day or so.

I forgot to mention before; wax was also added to drying oil for polishing carvings. It doesn't clog up the finer details and can be reapplied until the desired effect is achieved.

Horses for courses and all that.
 
Jeff,

Amen to your father.

The interesting thing about this discussion:  We all pretty much agree on design and woodworking and completely disagree on finishing.  PSP
 
A horse is a horse of course of coarse. And no one can ask the horse of course. Unless you're on a steady course talk to Mr. Ed. People go yackidy yack the streets and ask the time of day but Mr. Ed will never speak unless he has something to say. So go to the source and ask the horse. He'll give the answer that you'll endorse. He's always on a steady course. Talk to Mr. Ed
 
Finishing was probably pretty unique from area to area. My guess is having furniture built before cameras went about like so:

Potential customer: "I saw a chest that had 5 or 6 drawers, was about 4 or 5 feet tall and a little wider than my arm is long. The wood was a redish color curly maple, and it was really smooth. Can you make me one for 2 pence?"

Cabinet shop: "Yes I can but it will be 3 pounds."

Potential customer: "3 POUNDS! I thought you were a Christian! It's just a few boards knocked together. Don't you do this for fun anyway, so it's not really work. And the wood grows on trees after all"

Cabinet shop: "It's a little more than knocking a few boards together, and I have to pay for the wood, buy candles, pay for the nails, sharpen my tools..."

Potential Customer: "I saw this guy Norm build one in half an hour, If I had all his tools I could just build my own! Hrumph Good day sir!"

2 days later: Customer "I guess I'll take it."

Cabinet shop: "Redish Smooth finish you say?"

Customer: "Yes red and very smooth"

And I'm guessing that's about how it went. So the shops did whatever they needed to get the finish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top