What Finish on Wood

Signed-In Members Don't See This Ad
jttheclockman

jttheclockman

Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
19,898
Location
NJ, USA.
I did not want to hijack Monty's thread so I started this one. I do not make many wood pens but yesterday at my craft show I had a person looking for wood pens. They wanted pens that felt like wood and not with the plastic feel you get with a CA top coat.

My question is for those that do wood pens, how are you finishing them and why??? It has been a proven fact that woods with little or no finish start to look grundgy because of the oils in the hands. But with that said some woods such as burls may look fine or even develop a better patina with age and handeling. How do you feel on this??? I know from using woods that are in the rosewood family have alot of oil in them and can actually be polished to a very high shine with little effort and maybe just a Danish oil finish. The feel of a fine wood is certainly different than a plastic feel and look. I notice alot of people like the feel of my scrollsawn projects and clocks because of the way I finish them and they all have no poly or other plastic finish on them so I am thinking this may or may not be the way to go with pens also. Looking for thoughts.

What is the wooden pen buyer thinking and what have you found to be a better seller when making your wooden pens??? Thanks for the replys. Hopefully the ones that answer can please go into a little detail and maybe add a few thoughts which I have not asked questions about. I am wanting to add some wooden pens to my line for next years shows.
 
Last edited:
Signed-In Members Don't See This Ad
+1 on the friction finish.

My everyday pen has a friction finish, HUT crystal coat. It's been three years, and is now starting to look great.

You're the first person I've seen who used "grundgy" and "patina" in the same paragraph. The difference between them is largely semantic. I've seen people here (and other boards) bemoan patina as being dirt and filth. That's exactly what it is, of course, but it's part of what makes antiques beautiful.

Call it whatever you will. But to a tactile person nothing feels more authentic than well used wood.
 
I use CA for most all my wood pens. I have started using High Build Friction polish and it seems to be well liked by my customers.

I too agree that sometimes the CA gives a shiny plastic look, but it also gives a deeper looking finish like fine higher end Hardwood floors.

I haven't gotten a friction polish to look that deep. But I'm working on it. I did one using a sanding sealer first and liked the depth I got. I also prefer Mylands over HUT polish. IMHO the Mylands builds faster and dries quickly even at lower rpm's on the lathe.

Either finish I still wrap it up with a coat of Ren wax.
 
fishlux said:
+1 on the friction finish.

My everyday pen has a friction finish, HUT crystal coat. It's been three years, and is now starting to look great.

You're the first person I've seen who used "grundgy" and "patina" in the same paragraph. The difference between them is largely semantic. I've seen people here (and other boards) bemoan patina as being dirt and filth. That's exactly what it is, of course, but it's part of what makes antiques beautiful.

Call it whatever you will. But to a tactile person nothing feels more authentic than well used wood.
Click to expand...


Well I used the words patina and grundgy in different context because I feel they do have different meanings in this case. I will give you an example. Here is a couple celtic knot pens that are all wood and they have a CA finish on them. I feel surely that if they did not and only had a friction finish they would become grundgy. The details or the lighter woods would have dark spots which would in my opinion detract from the details. Lighter woods would be tougher to claim as patina. With burls you have variations of light and dark throughout the blank so it is not as noticable and like I say may even enhance it. Just a thought. But this is why I am asking.


comboknots-1.jpg
 
Woods that are naturally oily, like Cocobolo, react well to body oils and develop a nice patina, but as you said, most woods tend to look pretty grundgy with no finish. BLO, tung oil, walnut oil and other more natural finish materials will do a good job, but will not last long, same with friction polish and other wax based finishes.

When someone asks me for less plastic-looking finishing I tell them that I don't make anything with a finish that does not last. If I wanted to give them what they asked for I would spray it with a dull sheen lacquer, I know it lasts if applied well, I just don't like applying it because I don't have the time to let it dry.
 
I know a lady who wanted a pen with a natural wood finish and I told her it would change color over time because of the hand lotions women are apt to use on their skin. She said that was fine with her. If you were to describe her pen as "grungy" you would probably get a tongue-lashing you would remember for a long, long time!
 
And since you asked, I use a lacquer-based sanding sealer between the last few grits of sandpaper, and then MM to 12K and buff. Can't see much difference between the shine from that and CA glue.
 
HSTurning said:
I started this thread a while back.
http://www.penturners.org/forum/showthread.php?t=57143
didnt get the info I was looking for.

I was thinking something along the lines of what "phillywood" was doing with the wood bios. People didnt understand and got deffensive quick.
Click to expand...



This is actually a very good thread and it does address these questions. There are many different ways of accomplishing the same thing. My question is basically what is the customer looking for and have there been any customers that have returned to the seller complaining about their finish one way or other. You can not compare shines when you first finish a pen. I can put a deep high gloss shine on rosewood and you would swear it was polyed or CA finished but time will eventually show through. I am not looking for arguments as to what is the best finish because we all have our favorites but rather what is the customer looking for??? Thanks.
 
I was only looking to find out how the different finishes worked over time and how long they took to apply. Having only done friction and CA finishes I would like to know how the others are before I try them. I am the type of person when I get into doing something I like to know many of the options for how to get the job done.
 
I carry a pen and pencil every day. The pen is spalted red oak with the worst CA finish ever attempted. The pencil is plum with the CA finish not that much better. They have been in my pocket over two years and have sole a few other units for me, not because of their finish but the shape of the pen/pencil. The oak is, ok, grungy at the nib while the plum has actually turned shiney. From my very limited experience, most people prefer the shiney finish, but, people being different they like different things. Most are used to plastic and want shiney while some like natural. Do some of each. Let the market chose for themselves. Just my $0.02.
Charles
 
This is an important thread. All too often, the answer to the question about pen finishes is a quick and automatic "CA", followed by a long lecture on the responder's particular method for applying CA. Sorry - that's not helpful to newbies.

Several years ago, my wife gave me a pen made by the husband of one of her coworkers. I've never spoken to the man and can't confirm my suspicion, but I'm reasonably sure that the finish is not CA. The wood is some kind of dyed burl, and the finish is a very smooth, soft matte. I suspect that it is either a friction finish, or else some kind of stabilized wood and the finish is simply the polished impregnant. But the fact is that it's about four years old, and just as beautiful as the day she gave it to me.

Last week, I found a web site (http://www.woodworkersinstitute.com/print.asp?p=1261) that listed the relative durabilities of various finishes. On a scale of 0 to 5, Epoxy was assigned a 5, CA was listed as 4, lacquer-based friction finish was a 3, shellac-based friction finish was a 2, lacquer was 3-3.5, and wax was a 1/2. A simple oil finish was rated 2-4.5. I don't know the basis for assigning those values, but having a quantified comparison is much more useful to me that to have someone merely assert that there is only one acceptable answer..
 
Last edited:
Do not assume....

If someone wants the natural feel of wood, don't assume that "wear" is going to bother them. I used to make "cottage" furniture and took great pains to make it look worn when it was acturally brand new. People who like wood, tend to LIKE wood and all that goes with it including the ravages of time and use. My personal pen is a Sierra with cocobolo wood. It often shares my pocket with my pocket knife, zippo lighter, loose change and my car key ring with it's 7 or 8 keys. I don't expect it to look like it just came out of the store.

What looks "grungy" to a "plastic" guy might look just great to a "wood" guy. If I wanted my pens to look like they had plastic barrels, why on earth would I make them out of wood?
 
jttheclockman said:
fishlux said:
+1 on the friction finish.

My everyday pen has a friction finish, HUT crystal coat. It's been three years, and is now starting to look great.

You're the first person I've seen who used "grundgy" and "patina" in the same paragraph. The difference between them is largely semantic. I've seen people here (and other boards) bemoan patina as being dirt and filth. That's exactly what it is, of course, but it's part of what makes antiques beautiful.

Call it whatever you will. But to a tactile person nothing feels more authentic than well used wood.
Click to expand...


Well I used the words patina and grundgy in different context because I feel they do have different meanings in this case. I will give you an example. Here is a couple celtic knot pens that are all wood and they have a CA finish on them. I feel surely that if they did not and only had a friction finish they would become grundgy. The details or the lighter woods would have dark spots which would in my opinion detract from the details. Lighter woods would be tougher to claim as patina. With burls you have variations of light and dark throughout the blank so it is not as noticable and like I say may even enhance it. Just a thought. But this is why I am asking.


comboknots-1.jpg
Click to expand...

Hey John, didn't Barry Gross patent those pens? No, wait a minute, must have been someone else. :biggrin:
 
I typically do a CA finish. People I've shown/ sold my pens to love the deep shine and gloss. It really shows the wood, though at the expense of the feel.

I have done other finishes, including lighter CA finishes, and they've turned out well too.

The problem I have with a non-CA finish is getting consistency in the final diameter. In a CA finish, I can build up 0.010" up pretty quickly to get to the final dimension I need. But with other finishes, you should be only 0.002" or 0.003" away from your final dimension- or less!

But I've actually thought about moving to some alternate finishes for some pens/ woods, just to give the customer a choice. So I'm going to experiment with poly (including water-based), lacquer, and other combinations.
 
If you want a more "natural" finish that's still pretty durable, try maybe 2 coats of thin CA and stop there. No further working needed. People like the texture that comes through. The split for me seems to be about 50/50 on "natural" vs. high gloss. I like high gloss better.
 
I posted this over in Mannies thread but it also belongs here as well .
"I have a slimline pro that I made when I was just starting out . It was a piece of beautiful Camphor burl , it had lots of eyes and a golden chatoyance , I used Mylands on it and it looked wonderful ..... for about a week . Then it started to get that wonderful "Patina" you all seem to love so much . As time went on the "Patina" kept building and the fricton polish was replaced by that wonderful "Patina" . The once beautiful burl had now been covered by a brownish "Patina" , the eyes weren't so visible anymore and the golden chatoyance was almost completely gone . I took the pen apart and refinished the top section with a CA finish . The CA finish doesn't feel like wood anymore but the golden chatoyance is back and you can see the eyes and figure of the wood again .
When I make a High End wood pen and the customer states that they want it to feel like wood I show them that pen and ask which finish they want , guess which one they ALWAYS pick ? If someone is spending big money on a pen they want it to look good no matter how "Tactile" a person they are , heck even if they are only spending $35 for a slimline they want that pen to look good and I have never gotten an argument for a "Patina" .
Personally If I'm spending good money on ANY wood item I want to see the color and figure that is in the wood , not some grime that is passed off as "Patina" . If you don't like the shiny gloss of a polished CA finish there are several ways to cut the gloss without loosing the durability of a CA or other good finish . Just my $0.02 ."
 
Larry in Harrow said:
jttheclockman said:
fishlux said:
+1 on the friction finish.

My everyday pen has a friction finish, HUT crystal coat. It's been three years, and is now starting to look great.

You're the first person I've seen who used "grundgy" and "patina" in the same paragraph. The difference between them is largely semantic. I've seen people here (and other boards) bemoan patina as being dirt and filth. That's exactly what it is, of course, but it's part of what makes antiques beautiful.

Call it whatever you will. But to a tactile person nothing feels more authentic than well used wood.
Click to expand...


Well I used the words patina and grundgy in different context because I feel they do have different meanings in this case. I will give you an example. Here is a couple celtic knot pens that are all wood and they have a CA finish on them. I feel surely that if they did not and only had a friction finish they would become grundgy. The details or the lighter woods would have dark spots which would in my opinion detract from the details. Lighter woods would be tougher to claim as patina. With burls you have variations of light and dark throughout the blank so it is not as noticable and like I say may even enhance it. Just a thought. But this is why I am asking.


comboknots-1.jpg
Click to expand...

Hey John, didn't Barry Gross patent those pens? No, wait a minute, must have been someone else. :biggrin:
Click to expand...



Larry I am sure it was Barry. Don't tell him we stole his idea. I think he is working on inventing the wheel next.

I agree there are ways to knock back the shine even when using CA which will still give you the durability of the finish which to me is important. I may start carrying a few done both ways with a high shine and a low gloss and let the customers decide. Thanks everyone for the input.
 
I know there is a oil finish that is durable. We have a pine (hardwood) floor at work. 1 inch pine boards, available in various stains. 25 year wear warranty, and the oil application is a once a year stipulation to keep the warranty in force.

The oil must have some protective property to last a year on a pine board floor and still maintain a 25 year warranty. I don't recall the name of the oil, but it smells like linseed oil.
 
I've had a couple of people say that they liked the "feel" of wood over the "plastic" of a CA finish, AFTER I gave them a pen as a gift. And after I pushed them to give me their "true impression" of the pen, help me improve them, not just say "I love it" ect. ect. ect. In both cases, I took the pen in question back to the shop, took one apart and masked off the metal on the other, and knocked the finish down with 0000 steel wool then a super quick buff with wd, then gave it back. Both loved them. Might not be the only answer, but it worked for me. I have yet to sell one that was done that way straight out of the display, but that's probably related to the fact that I only have one in there. Time may tell.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom