How do you finish your bowls?

[Harvey Ghesser]

I am wondering what types of finishes most of you use on bowls.

I sand to 600 grit, then apply wipe on poly (about 4 or 5 coats), then buffed with tripoli and white diamond and Ren waxed. I like a high gloss finish but this kinda gives a "plastic" finish.

How can I give the grain greater warmth yet still retain a high gloss look?

Thank you!

[Nathan Hawkes]

Harvey, I sand to 600 or 800 depending on the wood, and use Minwax Antique Oil for most of my turnings. Its technically a wiping varnish, but is quite thin and penetrates quite well. I typically wait a week or more to sand my bowls, which I turn green to final thickness and let warp. Depending on how the wood feels, sometimes I wait longer. If the wood is dry, it soaks up lots of oil and develops a beautiful deep sheen. In my experience, the "chatoyance"-- a big word for shimmer, is better when you have dry wood and really soak in the oil. After the first coat I use 3M synthetic steel wool in gray, yellow, and white abrasive levels depending on how rough the dust nibs are. Sometimes there is a lot of "bleed out" after the initial wiping off of the excess finish. I usually apply at least 3 coats, one to flood the surface, and two thin finish coats. Spalted woods take more to get a shiny surface. By applying thin coats, you can achieve a glossy surface and still keep the integrity of the grain surface without looking too plastic like. I usually don't buff the bowls beyond the white 3M woven abrasive, which is about equal with 2000grit paper. Buffing with white diamond and wax will get you glossier, but I like a softer satiny sheen. I'm picky! Great question, and one that comes up often.

[David E Keller]

I usually sand to 500 because that's the finest grit paper I have currently. Generally speaking, I put on a coat of thin shellac as a sealer then antique oil finish for 3 or more coats. I generally don't buff. Sometimes I cut back the shine with a scotchbrite pad if I'm looking for less gloss.

Looking forward to hearing some of the others answers as well.

[Allen Neighbors]

If the bowl is going into my house, it goes naked... no finish. :eek:
Danish Oil makes a good permeating, finish. I've started soaking the piece, overnight, and allowing it to drip for a while, then wiping off the excess. Then it goes back into the oil overnight... so far, three nights in the oil, and a week or so to cure, and buffing brings it to almost a high gloss. No telling what this might turn into. :D

[Matt Hutchinson]

First of all, if you want the 'warmth' without the build-up, your gonna have to be satisfied with also seeing the grain. On a high gloss finish, you will most certainly see the pores unless you build it as you have been.

Beyond that, I had been using your basic method and kinda feel the same way. So lately I have been using shellac for the first two coats. I follow that up with wipe on poly, but instead of 4-6 coats, I usually can get away with 2. It still buffs great, but the build is slightly less.

Also, when I have tried straight shellac with only 3 coats, that seems to feel much warmer/wood-like. It buffs very nicely, but you definitely will see the pores (which I think adds to the wood feel).

Hutch

[Nathan Hawkes]

If the bowl is going into my house, it goes naked... no finish. :eek:
Danish Oil makes a good permeating, finish. I've started soaking the piece, overnight, and allowing it to drip for a while, then wiping off the excess. Then it goes back into the oil overnight... so far, three nights in the oil, and a week or so to cure, and buffing brings it to almost a high gloss. No telling what this might turn into. :D


Allen, do you let the bowl dry during the time between soaks? I've thought about doing this after watching a video of Elmer Adams soaking his hollow forms. Also, do you have a sealed container that you use or a bin with a loose top? Thanks!

[John Keeton]

This is an interesting thread! I was just at an art fair and a turner that was exhibiting had some very nice utility bowls. I spoke with him about his finish (very soft and natural looking and "touchable") and he uses pure tung oil. I have admired the finish used by Leo Van Der Loo, which I recall as being the polymerized tung oil from Lee Valley. Perhaps Leo will chime in here and correct or clarify if I have mistated.

Personally, I have not done very many bowls, but I have used BLO, shellac, and brush on lacquer. Recently, I did one with the AO, and it did very well, but with a fairly high gloss.

I am not familiar with what will sell best, but the turner I spoke of above was getting more interest in his bowls than the other turners exhibiting, and at higher prices. Not sure what that says?!?!

[Matt Hutchinson]

That's interesting John. I recently saw some bowls at an art fair that were finished in a similar manner. I really liked their feel, but the only thing that I might be concerned about is losing the chatoyance, as pure oil tends to deaden the "shimmeriness". I know when I tried Danish oil I was very disappointed with the results.

Also, I should probably qualify my earlier post. I don't think you would have to have an open pore look on a "wood feel" gloss finish. It might require a pore filler or something, but they tend to strike in funny unless you build a lot of layers (which, of course, defeats the purpose).

But I certainly hope to learn something about this too. I am looking to get a different feel to my work.

Hutch

[Thom Sturgill]

Mostly lacquer, outside buffed to a high shine and inside rubbed out with steel wool (or substitute) to give a satin finish. I have used poly, same treatment.

[Allen Neighbors]

Allen, do you let the bowl dry during the time between soaks? I've thought about doing this after watching a video of Elmer Adams soaking his hollow forms. Also, do you have a sealed container that you use or a bin with a loose top? Thanks!

I take it out of the oil around 6:30 or so in the AM. I let it drip for an hour or two, then wipe it off, and just let it set throughout the day... if I leave the shop at 4:00, I put it back into the oil... If I go in late, say around 6 or 7:00, I put it back into the oil. So, I guess to answer your question, it dries a little, but not thoroughly... After the third night in the oil, as I wipe it off, I can tell that it is smoother and a bit heavier than when I started.
My container is a large metal coffee can, with a plastic lid. So far all the pieces I've experimented with have been small enough to go into this can. When I first put a piece into the can, I try to get it submerged with the end grain down, so the air will come out at the top, and the oil will enter the wood at the bottom. Sometimes pieces are still bubbling after being in the oil for an hour or more. I do have to add some more oil quite often, so I know the oil is permeating the wood. DO is a polymerizing oil, so it takes about a week or longer to cure.

[Jack Tyree]

I sand to 600 or 800 depending on the wood and then apply a coat of Tried and True which is polymerized linseed oil and beeswax. You can get it at Woodcraft and it is fairly inexpensive when you consider how far it goes. It is best wiped on in VERY thin coats and can be done with the lathe on or off. If you dislike a plastic looking finish as I do, you should give it a try. Three or four coats will build a very nice gloss but will not hide the wood's character or quality. Another suggestion would be Mike Mahoney's walnut oil finish followed by his wax for the same reasons.

[Richard Madison]

Lacquer sanding sealer, followed by multiple coats of lacquer sufficient to fill the grain and build to a smooth and level finish. Brushing lacquer may be used to "build" the finish, followed by a few spray finish coats. May be buffed if going for glossy, or wet sanded with 400, 600, 800, or even 1200 if going for a softer look.

[John Keeton]

That's interesting John. I recently saw some bowls at an art fair that were finished in a similar manner. I really liked their feel, but the only thing that I might be concerned about is losing the chatoyance, as pure oil tends to deaden the "shimmeriness". I know when I tried Danish oil I was very disappointed with the results.Hutch, I think you are right on the chatoyance. Generally, most of this fellows bowls were of walnut, box elder, and some maple - none of which had much or any figure.

As I progress in this journey, I prefer to save my figured wood (curly maple, crotch, burl) for more "artsy" pieces, and for bowls use the straight grained woods. In that situation, the tung oil would do OK. Of course, that is just my personal taste.

[Mike Minto]

Finishing is tough - partly because I'm impatient, and partly because I'm not so good at it. I've just become aware that not all pieces need to be high gloss (even though I see that the standard here seems to be thin walls and shiny). Looking at some pro's work, I see there is plenty of room for rough / muted / colored pieces, as well as those that are shiny. One needs to choose the finish to accentuate the look of the piece, and be flexible.

[Bernie Weishapl]

Harvey it depends on what they will be used for. My utility bowls are sanded to no more the 400 grit. To me for utility it is IMHO no need to go higher. I finish with Mahoney's walnut oil or minwax antique oil. Show bowls, Candy or Fruit bowls are finished with several coats of wipe on poly and sanded to 400 or so grit.

[Leo Van Der Loo]

I am wondering what types of finishes most of you use on bowls.

I sand to 600 grit, then apply wipe on poly (about 4 or 5 coats), then buffed with tripoli and white diamond and Ren waxed. I like a high gloss finish but this kinda gives a "plastic" finish.

How can I give the grain greater warmth yet still retain a high gloss look?

Thank you!

Harvey it all depends, if you chainsaw a piece of wood you can wipe a lot of finish on it, but I don't think you will ever get a nice gloss on that, on the other extreme a very nice and finely sanded piece of say Cocobolo doesn't need anything added, to get a nice gloss on it.

However, I personally like a soft woody look, but women, yes they are the buyers and decide what gets into the house by a large margin, and they seem to like a high luster more so than a soft woody look :).

So something turned for me/us (LOML) it is usually not very shiny, but unless I want to keep every piece I turn for us/myself (LOML), I will have to make my turnings a bit more attractive to the customers by getting a higher gloss on them, but I do not use varnish or lacquer or other paint-like finishes, they might be good on a floor or something :rolleyes:, but I do not put them on my turnings ;).

Some real small stuff I have used CA on as a finish, for the rest it is pretty well Polymerized Tung Oil, or pure tung oil (seldom).

There are several reasons for me using this, the oil does set-up fairly fast (it is not a drying oil) the tung does react with oxygen to change the oil into a hard tough film, and no you can't add any thinner to a dried finish to undo this, (a can of Tung Oil left open will get hard and you can't undo this either :eek:) so it is safe for contact with alcohol and other oils and not affected by it.

The film is safe to eat, after it is hard, it will just pass through your system without harmful effects, also the oil penetrates the wood and becomes part of the wood, so it doesn't chip off, if worn down or scratched you can just add a coat of tung to renew or repair the finish, just use some fine steel-wool and rub the finish for good adherence of the Tung Oil onto the finish.

Also the Tung does change/affect the color of the wood the least of the finishing oils as far as I know.

Now the only hard thing about this finish is that you DO have to follow the rules :eek: :rolleyes: or you will make a mess.

Make sure you sand the piece well, (the oil will accentuate any scratches) and then wipe on a liberal coat and let it sit for a few minutes, then wipe any excess off and now

............ you have to let the oil set up (polymerize) in a warm and dry place,......... this will take at least a day, maybe two,

then you add another coat and again wipe off the excess oil and again let the oil set-up, etc. etc. till you are satisfied with the look. (I usually put 2, or 3 and sometime 4 coats on)

Then before you start buffing this finish, if that's what you like to do, to get more shine, you will have to wait at least a week I'd say (longer is better here) to let the oil harden more, then you can carefully polish this up.

Yes it is kind of long winded, but like this finish it takes the whole story to do it right :D

[Harvey Ghesser]

Thanks to all for your feedback and finishing strategies! I always appreciate all the help I can get!

Thanks again!

Harvey

[Sean Hughto]

I'm hardly an old hand. I like to make utilitarian bowls and platters and such, and tend to finish them with walnut oil and beeswax. I've found that with most hardwoods, at least, if you sand to high grits - like 1000, you can get a nice polished look even with oils in many woods.

Things that are not intended for food contact - like candlesticks and such, I'll use hard wax sticks (liberon or the like) or friction polishes.

- just one guys approach ...

[Thomas Canfield]

I have been using a finish process based on call to Elmer Adams a couple of years ago and like it. I sand to 400, buff with tripoli (yes, even before any finish), wipe on with paper towl applicator and let soak 5 minutes a mix of 1 part polyurethane and 4 parts of danish oil, then wipe off with paper towel and let dry 24 hours. That is followed by additional buffing and coats (3 minimum and 5 or 6 sometimes) until the buffing with tripoli has the luster, and follow that with Renansiance wax. White diamond buff was recommended by Elmer, but I have been happy without it and the slightly duller finish. Elmer recommended Deft products, but I have not found them locally and other danish oil has worked OK but sometimes gives a little color to light wood. The tripoli buff before applying oil seems to fill the small pores and not cause any problem except again to add a little color to light wood.

[Steve Schlumpf]

I've used a number of different finishes but lately have been sticking to wipe-on poly.

Application process that I use: Once the form is complete and sanded (usually to 320 grit) I remove it from the lathe and apply the first coat of poly. For this first step I use a 1" sponge brush and try to saturate the wood just like I was using an oil finish. Let it sit for 15 to 20 minutes to soak in and then wipe off any excess. I let that dry for 24 hours and check for coverage. If the poly got sucked into sections of the form (usually endgrain), saturate the form once again and wipe off the excess.

After waiting for at least 24 hours to let the saturated coat set up, you can then apply the first of many thin coats. I use a paper towel folded up to make a small pad, wipe on a thin coat and let dry for 3 to 5 hours, depending on the temp and humidity. Usually the thin coats dry really fast because they are so thin and should never be thick enough to cause a run. If you miss a spot – try not to go back over as it will lift the existing wet poly. Just make sure to hit the missed spot the next time. The process is more like a French Polish as far as applying the thin coats. I normally apply 2 or 3 coats this way before doing the first light sanding using either a super fine sanding sponge or 600 grit wet/dry sand paper just enough to knock off the nubs. I repeat the procedure until I have the level of finish (or gloss) that I want - usually 5 to 7 thin coats.

I find the Minwax Wipe On works great when real fresh but starts to dry up as soon as the can is opened. When you notice it get thicker (and darker in color) - just add a little mineral spirits and you'll be good to go.

[Reed Gray]

For a utility bowl, I will not use a solvent based finish. Ran into a woman at a show who was allergic to tolulene (spell?), and she said it does not all evaproate away. I just don't want some thing that I would not eat put on my food bowls. Yes, I have read about how it evaporates and all that is left is 'inert materials', but still, I don't want it. This type of oil takes a week to cure, and a month before you can't smell it. I just use the Mahoney's walnut oil. Any soft oil (vegetable or nut) will do, or none at all, and let your foods season it. I will not use a surface finish either. I have seen too many that end up chipping, cracking, and peeling off after years of use. I do sand to 400 grit, and apply with a grey synthetic steel wool pad which will wipe out any 400 grit sanding scratches. I do sand Mountain Mahogany to 800 or so grit. It is very heavy and dense, and when you pick up a finished piece of it, you don't feel it, you fondle it because of the wonderful texture.

robo hippy

[Leo Van Der Loo]

Hutch, I think you are right on the chatoyance. Generally, most of this fellows bowls were of walnut, box elder, and some maple - none of which had much or any figure.

As I progress in this journey, I prefer to save my figured wood (curly maple, crotch, burl) for more "artsy" pieces, and for bowls use the straight grained woods. In that situation, the tung oil would do OK. Of course, that is just my personal taste.

I don't think I do agree with the thought, that an oil finish would fail to bring out the chatoyance, of course "danish oil" can be anything but oil.

The same with so called tung oil, these finishes often have no tung oil at all in them, you can peruse the product MSDS info on things like Minwax tung oil finish for instance.

I have all kinds of pictures, but I tend not to wait till I have a high gloss finish on to make my pictures, it is hard to make the pictures with a lot of shine on the turnings, and also, chatoyance isn't easy to capture on a picture, at least for me :o

But here are just a few pictures that do show some chatoyance at least, and they all have a Tung oil finish on them, but most only one or two coats, so you can see the polymerized tung oil will bring out the chatoyance if it is there.

[John Keeton]

Leo, those are some beautiful pieces, and wonderful examples of how the polymerized tung oil can really "pop" the figure in the wood. All of them have that wonderful finish that you achieve on your work.

The bowls I saw at the art exhibit did not appear to have been sanded much past 400, and they still had an "oil" feel to them, with no noticeable "build" in the finish. Very dull in appearance, and had the wood possessed any chatoyance, I doubt it would have shown well.

Is it possible that regular tung oil would produce such a finish? I have never used it, so I am unfamiliar with the possibilities.

I will admit, however, that I much prefer the finish you achieve - it brings out the beauty of the wood, but still looks very "touchable."

[Matt Hutchinson]

I suppose I should clarify a little. :)

What I was meaning to say was that oils don't result in as much chatoyance coming through as solvent based film finishes.

You're totally right Leo, "oil finishes" often have a high content of varnish and/or driers in them. But that would actually improve the chatoyance.

I am not saying there is anything wrong with oil finishes. This is not meant to be a negative critique.

Leo, I think your pictures actually prove my point. The figuring and grain in the pieces is greatly accentuated, but I really don't see a lot of chatoyance. They are great, and they are very beautiful, but the chatoyance would be blinding had a solvent based film finish been used.

Anywho, I think it would be cool to make some test samples to help show the difference. Although, it's actually already been done. There was an article in Fine Woodworking (I think it was that one :)) and the pictures were able to show the differences in chatoyance. It was really a great article. Unfortunately, I read it right after I finished a highly curly bowl with danish oil. :rolleyes:

Hutch

[John Keeton]

Hutch, I may want to side with Leo on this one! While it is difficult, if not nigh impossible to show chatoyance with a still pic (really need movement of the piece), I think the bowls Leo posted do show considerable evidence of chatoyance.

But, I think we are talking about two different finishes here - or at least, that is my perception.

While Leo has used an "oil" finish, it is polymerized, and therefore "sets up," or builds. The bowls that I observed had no build, and were very dull in appearance. Had the woods possessed any figure, I think chatoyance would have been minimized by the soft, oiled finish. It was very suited to the work that the turner did, but would not have been a very nice finish for the type of woods used by Leo in the bowls he has posted.

[Matt Hutchinson]

You're right, I think the polymerized oil is probably different than the product you saw used on this other fellow's bowl. I think I would like to try out both, but it would sure beat the non-drying mineral oil that I have used on utility bowls up to this point.

Hutch

P.S. So maybe I overstated things a bit. Movement of the piece in your hands would definitely be the best way to see the chatoyance. Photos are still 2 dimensional.

[Nick Mastropietro]

For those of us who have read the very informative thread and have learned a thing ot two about finishes but don't have a clue what the heck (Chatoyance) means:confused:, well thanks to Merriam-Webster - "French, from present participle of chatoyer to shine like a cat's eyes :having a changeable luster or color with an undulating narrow band of white light"

Thanks for the challange Hutch:)

One other note; next to The Lighter Side, Enriching your Word Power was the high point of Readers Digest, well at least for me.:D

[John Keeton]

And, that is what makes the Creek so great - who needs Reader's Digest!!:D
Merriam-Webster - "French, from present participle of chatoyer to shine like a cat's eyes :having a changeable luster or color with an undulating narrow band of white light"This was the basis for my statement that Leo's bowls showed "evidence" of chatoyance. IMO, without movement, it is nearly impossible to show chatoyance as one cannot show "changeable luster" or "undulations" (a wave like motion.)

But, in the end, I believe we are all on the same page when it comes to the various finishes discussed, and that was the point of the thread anyway.

Sorry to have drifted off topic!!:o

Now, back to the task at hand - what kind of finish do you use on your bowls!!:D

[Thom Sturgill]

David J Marks had a show 'Wood Works' for about three years on the DIY network. In that series he used a tung oil mix on *everything* for the very reason that it would bring out the grain. As the oil penetrates differently in the end and side grain, curl really 'pops'. By hand rubbing with rottenstone, and waxing with micro-crystalline wax (ren wax), he achieved a very high gloss finish.

In the turning world, the same is still true. We tend to use friction finishes to get immediate satisfaction, but I think properly applied, a buffed and waxed oil finish should give more chatoyance than a straight film finish.

[Leo Van Der Loo]

I suppose I should clarify a little. :)

What I was meaning to say was that oils don't result in as much chatoyance coming through as solvent based film finishes.

You're totally right Leo, "oil finishes" often have a high content of varnish and/or driers in them. But that would actually improve the chatoyance.

I am not saying there is anything wrong with oil finishes. This is not meant to be a negative critique.

Leo, I think your pictures actually prove my point. The figuring and grain in the pieces is greatly accentuated, but I really don't see a lot of chatoyance. They are great, and they are very beautiful, but the chatoyance would be blinding had a solvent based film finish been used.

Anywho, I think it would be cool to make some test samples to help show the difference. Although, it's actually already been done. There was an article in Fine Woodworking (I think it was that one :)) and the pictures were able to show the differences in chatoyance. It was really a great article. Unfortunately, I read it right after I finished a highly curly bowl with danish oil. :rolleyes:

Hutch

Hutch I don't take any of this in a negative way, we all can and do learn from others, and that's why I keep coming to the forum :D

Hutch I have very little experience with other finishes really, (tried several but quickly moved on to where I am now) but I think that yes a finish with nothing in it to block the light coming or going would give the most chatoyance.

I also think that the better the wood is finished the more that shimmer will show, I also think that looking at a picture just doesn't show you much of the shimmer, at least not like you would have with a piece in your hand that you can tilt so the light does keep changing the bounce direction of it.

Most finishes will darken after some time and obscure the chatoyance, tung oil will not darken with age or yellow or change the wood colors, anyway I like Tung oil and think it is about as good a finish as you can get :).

Not to steer anyone away, but at Woodcentral you could have a look at Russ's finishing secrets or even search for Chatoyance and you will get some more info on what actually does cause chatoyance and how Tung oil stacks up as a turning finish, as that is not the same as the use on flat surfaces.

Anyway, have fun and take care :D

[Leo Van Der Loo]

Leo, those are some beautiful pieces, and wonderful examples of how the polymerized tung oil can really "pop" the figure in the wood. All of them have that wonderful finish that you achieve on your work.

The bowls I saw at the art exhibit did not appear to have been sanded much past 400, and they still had an "oil" feel to them, with no noticeable "build" in the finish. Very dull in appearance, and had the wood possessed any chatoyance, I doubt it would have shown well.

Is it possible that regular tung oil would produce such a finish? I have never used it, so I am unfamiliar with the possibilities.

I will admit, however, that I much prefer the finish you achieve - it brings out the beauty of the wood, but still looks very "touchable."

John to go and guess what this person used, is just that, a guess.

He might very well have used a Minwax kind of Tung-oil finish, or not applied the Tung oil properly, If you don't let the oil polymerize properly and keep adding coats on top you end up with a layer of Tung on it that is prevented from contact with oxygen and so is unable to polymerize :eek:

There is a difference in the final look of the finish on a piece if you would use pure Tung oil rather than Polymerized Tung oil, and it apparently is because the Polymerized oil has been heated (without oxygen present) and this process does a lot of the polymerization already, and this shortens the total final polymerization that still has to happen, now when the oil polymerizes normally the oil changes and starts to make long chained polymers and they are kind of bumpy, not a smooth finish/surface is the result (I just have to believe those people that did these studies and report this).

But the polymerized Tung has most of this polymerization already done, and this heating of the oil also thickens the oil, and so a thinner is added for workability and also driers to speed up the polymerization process even more, the result is a harder and smoother finish in a shorter time, A win-win except the oil now is not healthy to eat or drink anymore :eek:, until it has hardened and the thinners have evaporated.

When using the pure Tung oil, it takes longer to polymerize and doesn't get as smooth, unless you rub down the finish between every coat, but you do get a safe finish you could eat ;), so there's a chance he did use pure Tung oil and it hadn't polymerized yet, so yes, but just a guess and I can barely believe that :)

I'm getting sore fingers John ;), I think I should go and do some turning :D

[John Keeton]

David J Marks had a show 'Wood Works' for about three years on the DIY network. In that series he used a tung oil mix on *everything* for the very reason that it would bring out the grain.Thom, I notice David's website has changed considerably, but a couple of years ago, he had a page where he discussed his finish, and as I recall, he indicated that for the last several years, he was actually using General Finish Arm-R-Seal. There are a couple of threads on this in the Finishing forum I believe.

[John Keeton]

Thom, I found the link I was looking for, and realized I was the one that posted it a couple years ago!!

http://www.djmarks.com/stories/faq/What_is_the_mix_ratio_for_the_Linseed_Oil_Tung_Oil _and_Urethane_46687.asp

[Roger Chandler]

I really liked this discussion by all involved. Leo, thank you for enlightening myself and other turners to your technique, and Steve, I have tried your wipe on poly on a few turnings, and they have turned out well, and warping was definitely minimized compared to just using danish oil, like I did in the past.

Chatoyance? We might not know how to spell it, but we all know it when we see it, and we like it a lot! ;):D:):cool:

Thanks guys!

[Don Alexander]

for anewby turner like me this has been a very helpful and enlightening discussion

leave it tothe French to come upwith a word like "chatoyance" :D