Revisiting poplar

[Alex Liebert]

Hi all! I'm pretty new here but have been "lurking" a long time and gained a lot of helpful information in the finishing section here.

I've read many, but not all, of the threads discussing poplar finishing. Usually they focus on blotch / uneven absorption control- I was hoping for some input on a different issue.

Sorry if this is long- I'll try to include pictures and explain well what I'm going for!

I have intermediate experience with refinishing, and repairing finishes. My go to finish is usually vinyl sealer, toner, lacquer. I've never had a problem with blotching or contamination, it's fast, and I can do light layers of toner for a lot of control on color matching.

Before embarking on my current from-scratch furniture project with poplar, I did some finish tests on poplar rosettes from the home center. One was a poplar rosette with actually pretty impressive figure- here's what I got with my usual seal / tone / lacquer schedule:


tonedd.jpg

Still images don't show it but very 3D looking in person.

At this time I also took another poplar rosette with regular grain and less figure, and did a quick wipe on / wipe off with an oil pigment stain (varathane):

stained.jpg

Not beautiful on its own of course, but worked as I hoped- although the grain is is very fine, the pigment mostly lodged in the grain lines. I called this experiment complete, as a good way to accentuate the grain lines with a dark color so I could tone over it later with a lighter color for some contrast.


Now fast forward a few months later, and I'm preparing to apply a finish to my actual project. Also poplar, and I love the grain pattern in the raw wood. But I'm having some trouble finshing it how I'd like.

(Please excuse poor pictures / use of tiny scraps- I'm hoping to do a proper sized test board with your input and post back):

With just sealer / toner / lacquer, I get a nice even shimmer as expected, but the grain definition gets lost - also expected:

testpiece1.jpg


So I went back to try some wipe on oil stain, hoping to darken the grain only when I wiped it off as in the earlier rosette picture. But all I'm getting is a light layer of mud- the fine grain lines aren't capturing the pigments.

Mostly I use rattle cans, but I have a collection of liquid dyes I've applied by hand. (For me, this is usually for touching up small areas, or quickly altering the tone of a bit of veneer to be used in a repair.) A few threads here talked about good results with dye directly on poplar to pop grain, so trying that out.

I've got a few colors of the Mohawk Ultra Penetrating Dye, and also the Behlen Solar Lux, which I'm pretty sure are the exact same thing. I wiped them on wet and wiped off, and this is the result:


upsdye.jpg

Left shows the raw wood scrap, right after applying the Mohawk dye. The wood has never been sealed. I'm getting less penetration than I expected, and the grain is getting lost.

Next I tried some water based dye (general finishes). Forgot to take a picture on this one, but it absorbed much more readily and evenly- but I also didn't find it enhanced the grain contrast any.


-

So, here's where I'm at: I'd like to get a fairly light in tone, but even orange brown hue on the whole piece. That part's not a problem, but I want to keep those beautiful grain lines and they're just getting lost. Oil stain doesn't seem to be accentuating them here as it did in my past experiments. I was considering trying to glaze it and selectively wipe off glaze around the grain, but at that point I'm just painting the grain in.

Any tips for darkening the grain lines before toning? I've never tried shellac (except as an aerosol sealer)- would it be worth giving a go? Since I will want to use lacquer over it in the end, I assume I'd have to buy dewaxed flakes and mix myself?

Thanks for reading all that

[Jim Becker]

You could try using a darker dye first and sanding it back with the hope of it staying in the grain for more definition. This is a popular technique with figured maple, sometimes with more than one application and sanding back before proceeding further. Try it on some scrap of the material you're using to see if that works.

[Wayne Lomman]

When staining, you don't get the colour back until it is clear coated. Your samples need a clear coat to show off their colour and effect. All dye and pigment stains 'grey off' shortly after application and don't refresh until the first clear coat. Toners don't do this.

Jim's suggestion is a good way to go. As an alternative I would mix a darker pigment stain with a dye that is about the background colour you want. This mixture is hand applied with a rag and wiped off. The pigment stays in the grain and the dye is the overall colour. Cheers

[Alex Liebert]

Thank you Wayne! I realize that but the thing I'm seeing on the new samples is that the pigments aren't collecting in the grain the way they did in the second sample image of the rosette above- instead it looks like I glazed a sealed piece of wood, except the wood is raw.

Thank you Jim. I will try sanding back (with both a dye and a pigment test) and see if that takes it off the surface and leaves some in the grain.

Doing a long sample board and will post results here for those curious.

[Jim Becker]

Alex, you might also "do a double" with the sanding back technique using both the dye and the pigment stain. Sometimes, the combination works better than either one or the other, at least on woods that have grain/pores that can take pigment.

[Wayne Lomman]

Alex, a couple of other things.

Don't sand the job too finely. Anything finer than 150 glazes the timber too much. If you must go finer, finish with sharp new paper and let the paper do the work, not any applied pressure to the hand or machine, preferably hand.

The other thing is the oil based pigment stain. If it is a urethane/varnish based pigment stain, it is still a toner and will just look like your fine layer of mud with no grain definition. A pigment stain needs to be purely solvent borne whether hydrocarbon or water based. This type of pigment stain is what is required. Cheers

[Alex Liebert]

Alex, a couple of other things.


The other thing is the oil based pigment stain. If it is a urethane/varnish based pigment stain, it is still a toner and will just look like your fine layer of mud with no grain definition. A pigment stain needs to be purely solvent borne whether hydrocarbon or water based. This type of pigment stain is what is required. Cheers

Thanks Wayne, it certainly makes sense- what are some specific product examples here? Obviously any "gel" stain is urethane based, but what's a pigment stain in an oil solvent only? My closest shop with pro stuff carries all mohawk, I'm guessing it's their "penetrating stain" or "wiping wood oil stain"? (These are a tough buy for me because carried only in gallon sizes, could I mix artist pigment into some other kind of oil?)

[Wayne Lomman]

The mohawk wiping wood oil stain is the kind of product to try. According to their website, it should be available in small cans. An alternative is to get their pigment powders and mix your own. Cheers

[Alex Liebert]

Here's some of the more interesting results from further experimentation. Photo quality not great, cropped for better clarity.

Experiment 1: Sand back NGR Dye

sandbacktest.jpg

I prepared a dark-ish dye from the behlen solvent based dyes, mixing a light brown and a black. Then sanded it back, and a light dye.

Observations: Two main observations- the acetone based dye took to the heartwood and sapwood almost exactly the same. Also, the lines that got accentuated were not the grain lines that were dark in the raw wood. Presumably what we're seeing here is that the most absorbent lines are those that are lighter in color in the raw wood. Did not continue to topcoat on this test.

Experiment 2: WB Dye, Glaze

dyeglazetest.jpg

Slightly more promising, tried a water based dye. I did do a wash coat first of gel urethane heavily thinned (3.5 : 1) with mineral spirits. When dry this did pop the grain some. I did a light wash with a damp rag the next day, and the grain raised to a heavy fuzz. I did a diagonal scuffing with 320 to knock down the fuzz, which also lightened the value of the grain back to raw wood look. Applied the water base dye. After drying, a heavy medium brown glaze applied then wiped off very aggressively across the grain.

Observations: deeper penetration and much more clarity than with the solvent based dye. Also observed marked different tone in the sapwood (compared to the NGR dye.) The glaze darkened the grain lines I'm trying to accentuate pretty well, and also put some dark flecks into the pores of the background that I'm ambivalent about.

One more image worth looking at:

wbdyetoner.jpg

Outdoor shot of test board. On the left is the portion that got the glaze, then was followed with a light coat of medium brown toner. This got way too dark too fast. Middle section, top, is a medium amber toner over the water based dye. Interestingly, the toner over the water-based dye maintained a lot more clarity of contrast in the grain, than the toner alone.

Conclusions:

None really yet, but I'm thinking the key is to keep all the values extremely light. Based on the above, I may try either mixing water based dye to get closer to the hue I'm aiming for, followed by a glaze and lacquer, or a very light in value toner over the light water based dye. End goal is to control hue while maximizing the light / dark contrast of the grain.

I will be sourcing a resin-free oil stain as Wayne suggested when possible and post back.

Your comments and suggestions are welcomed!!