What would you use on a crib?

[david babcock]

But hard and protection aren't the same. Shellac is very hard--also a bit brittle and capable of being scratched fairly easily. That's why it rubs out so well. Traditional resin varnishes are somewhat softer but stand up better to abrasion and in particular perform well against household chemicals, Polyurethane varnishes (the consumer single-part kind) are actually softer than the traditional resin varnishes, they are about the same with respect to protection as the traditional resin varnishes except for superior resistance to heavy abrasion--they are well suited for floors. But for furniture, they give up a bit of clarity, are more finicky with respect to what they adhere, and less UV resistant. Their abrasion resistance actually is a major defect for furniture since it makes it harder to rub out polyurethane varnish to an even sheen. It is the softness of the polyurethane varnishes that allows them to yield to hard objects without scratching, where the harder finish is more brittle and has to scratch rather than deform and bounce back.

The really soft finishes, oils and oil/varnish mixes are so soft that they can't allowed to form a film, the are applied allowed to penetrate and then all on the surface is wiped off. If those are just used for coloration effects, such as grain popping, then they can be coated with film finishes. The hard ones go first--such as shellac which may be used as a barrier between certain woods or certain treatments, or which may be chosen for particular coloration. If these aren't deemed protective enough then a varnish can be applied over them. But putting the hard over the soft makes the hard even more vulnerable to damage by backing it up with a soft surface rather than a firm one. Also, it's putting its weakness, suseptibilities to household chemicals (ammonia is a true solvent for shellac) on top instead of being protected by the varnish.

I think I finally understand what you are saying about hardness and durability. Thanks for your patience with me.
Steve, my wife prefers the warmth of the liquid stains (on samples) over that of the gels that I tried. Initially I was really seduced with the idea of being able to add gel coats to darken or help match my red oak rail to the rest of the white oak crib. However, I didnt notice much of a difference in:
1. the stain on white v red oak OR
2. comparing multiple layers of gel stains on the same sample of white oak

I think Im going to go with a water based stain like general finish - and try to topcoat with arm-r-seal topcoat. I think the waterbased gives me the best of my needs all in one. More depth of color, faster curing time and supposedly some minor ability to darken with multiple coats.
What do you think? Would you also recommend a basecoat, like "sanding sealer?

[Steve Schoene]

Deepening with multiple coats is mostly just painting with the pigment of the stain and obscuring the wood grain to a greater degree, so I wouldn't want to do that. If the pigmented stain, waterborne or oil based, doesn't get it dark enough in one coat, then instead of trying to add additional coats over an already sealed surface, I would change the program. When I am going for a medium or dark finish I almost always start with a water soluble dye mixed from powder. By adjusting the concentration of the mix the darkness is easy to control.

I would definately not use any product called a Sanding Sealer. In general sanding sealers weaken the finish. (There are some exceptions where certain particular sealers are desirable under specific finishes, usually catalyzed spray finishes.) The best sealer is the same finish as used for the top coat, though thinning it to help it dry more quickly and sand a little easier won't hurt. Sometime shellac is used as an undercoat when two types of finish are best kept separate.

[Joe Chritz]

On tack cloths. I use the micro fiber reusable ones with great success. If wipe down with thinner is in reference to getting rid of dust, I like VM&P Naptha as it dries much faster and leaves no residue. In between sanding I use a foam sanding sponge. It takes longer to write about it then to sand a cabinet door between coats.

For a very nice fast finish it is hard to beat spray equipment but some of the wipe on finishes are fantastic when done correctly. Waterlox is a favorite of mine.

Joe

[david babcock]

Deepening with multiple coats is mostly just painting with the pigment of the stain and obscuring the wood grain to a greater degree, so I wouldn't want to do that. If the pigmented stain, waterborne or oil based, doesn't get it dark enough in one coat, then instead of trying to add additional coats over an already sealed surface, I would change the program. When I am going for a medium or dark finish I almost always start with a water soluble dye mixed from powder. By adjusting the concentration of the mix the darkness is easy to control.

I would definately not use any product called a Sanding Sealer. In general sanding sealers weaken the finish. (There are some exceptions where certain particular sealers are desirable under specific finishes, usually catalyzed spray finishes.) The best sealer is the same finish as used for the top coat, though thinning it to help it dry more quickly and sand a little easier won't hurt. Sometime shellac is used as an undercoat when two types of finish are best kept separate.

Steve and everybody,
what dye to you recommend (not pigment- right?)
And if im adding a dye to my water based stain- does it matter if I seal AND top coat with GF high performance top coat OR GF Arm-R-Seal?

[david babcock]

Deepening with multiple coats is mostly just painting with the pigment of the stain and obscuring the wood grain to a greater degree, so I wouldn't want to do that. If the pigmented stain, waterborne or oil based, doesn't get it dark enough in one coat, then instead of trying to add additional coats over an already sealed surface, I would change the program. When I am going for a medium or dark finish I almost always start with a water soluble dye mixed from powder. By adjusting the concentration of the mix the darkness is easy to control.

Steve, I read your post and then went to woodcraft. They have a transfast or transtint powder dye (and other pigments that I assume I will not want to use) Can I add this trans-powder to a water based stain? There were no instructions and the store associate was not familiar with the product.

[Jim Becker]

David, the TransTint powder comes in both water soluble and alcohol soluble versions. You need to buy the correct one for your intended application. In general, I recommend the water soluble dyes if you are going to hand-apply. The alcohol soluble dyes are best sprayed as the alcohol flashes off so quickly, that you cannot really work out any lap marks.

The TransFast liquid colors are "universal" and can be used in a variety of mediums.

[Steve Schoene]

Jim has got it almost right. It's the TransFast is the powdered dye, TransTint the universal liquid concentrate. You want the powdered dye, in the water soluble version to mix directly with water (distilled is best). It is the first step in the process and goes on bare wood to establish the basic color. By varying the dilution rate, you vary how dark the wood is dyed. You have to establish this by experimentation as woods do vary in their receptiveness to the dye. By the way, you can't tell the fioutcome by how the dyed wood is when dry. You have to have a top coat on it to see the ultimate color effect. (You can get a pretty good idea however by wetting the dyed surface with mineral spirits or naptha.)

[david babcock]

Jim has got it almost right. It's the TransFast is the powdered dye, TransTint the universal liquid concentrate. You want the powdered dye, in the water soluble version to mix directly with water (distilled is best). It is the first step in the process and goes on bare wood to establish the basic color. By varying the dilution rate, you vary how dark the wood is dyed. You have to establish this by experimentation as woods do vary in their receptiveness to the dye. By the way, you can't tell the fioutcome by how the dyed wood is when dry. You have to have a top coat on it to see the ultimate color effect. (You can get a pretty good idea however by wetting the dyed surface with mineral spirits or naptha.)

JIM/STEVE,

Can I not add the transfast directly to a waterbased stain? Or must I add it to boiling hot distilled water? In really dark colors, will I notice a dramatic difference between the transfast dye and the pigment? (I Guess the pigments are exponentially larger and dont penetrate as well but on a dark dark brown/black- will I really be able to notice a difference?)

[Jim Becker]

Dissolve the dye first in its base before adding to an existing finish...or use the liquid form. You do NOT want to add the powder directly to the finish...you'll be lucky if you ever get it dissolved and mixed evenly. Adding a liquid to a liquid helps accomplish that.

[david babcock]

Dissolve the dye first in its base before adding to an existing finish...or use the liquid form. You do NOT want to add the powder directly to the finish...you'll be lucky if you ever get it dissolved and mixed evenly. Adding a liquid to a liquid helps accomplish that.

AHA, awesome Jim- so the can says 10-20% water can be added to thin. To confirm- tHis means I can add the powder to boiled distilled water then add THAT to the stain.
Thanks.

[Steve Schoene]

Can you do it? Yes, exactly as Jim described. But do you want to do it. I don't think so. You give up a very large degree of control and make the entire project more difficult when you try to combine two steps into one. By separating dye from pigment, particularly with an intervening light seal coat, you can get a greater apparent depth of the finish and avoid potential blotching, depending on the wood, that could result if a pigmented stain, with or without the dye, is applied directly to a blotch prone wood. When the wood is sealed after dying, it reduces the potential for blotching from pigmented stain dramatically.

By the way, the water doesn't need to be boiling, or really more than room temperature warm, though it will dissolve a bit faster the warmer the water.

[david babcock]

Can you do it? Yes, exactly as Jim described. But do you want to do it. I don't think so. You give up a very large degree of control and make the entire project more difficult when you try to combine two steps into one. By separating dye from pigment, particularly with an intervening light seal coat, you can get a greater apparent depth of the finish and avoid potential blotching, depending on the wood, that could result if a pigmented stain, with or without the dye, is applied directly to a blotch prone wood. When the wood is sealed after dying, it reduces the potential for blotching from pigmented stain dramatically.

By the way, the water doesn't need to be boiling, or really more than room temperature warm, though it will dissolve a bit faster the warmer the water.

Steve, you are a veritable encyclopedia captain. But I thought that white oak was very porous and not prone to blotching. I assume I dont need a sealer or conditioner at all.

[Steve Schoene]

I had forgotten white oak. It doesn't have a blotching problem. But I still advocate separating the dye and the staining steps. For that matter, oak, including white oak, does require a decision about how to deal with the pores as far as whether they should be filled or not.

If you first dye, and then stain, you can get the basic color using the dye, and then tint the pores a slightly contrasting color either a little lighter or more usually a little darker, to increase the depth. By sealing the dye, you allow a pigmented stain, or a pigmented pore filler, to provide color for the pores, and have a much less impact on color on the surfaces in between. Trying to do it all at once just gives you a mush of color that comes out "homogenized" instead of the deep vibrant color of the subtle color variations between pores and surface. Sometimes even more dramatic effects can be achieved, such as dying the surface yellow and filling the pores with purple. (Not my idea, but something from one of the true masters, the late George Frank.)

[david babcock]

[quote=Steve Schoene;767663]I had forgotten white oak. It doesn't have a blotching problem. But I still advocate separating the dye and the staining steps. For that matter, oak, including white oak, does require a decision about how to deal with the pores as far as whether they should be filled or not....


Fellow creekers,
I started to do some experimenting- I like the rich color of the gel, the depth and penetration of the oil and the ease of the water. However, Im finding that none of the finishes are penetrating on my sample of white oak (the picture shows a red-oak strip that I used to compare my W.O. against).
The strip of wood felt smooth so I just hit it with some 150.
Could I have sanded too much? Or with too fine a grit too soon?

[nick kaplan]

i have been doing a lot of research on non-toxic products and have found that indoor air is typically 3x's more polluted than outdoor air. the difference, they claim, is due to wood finishes and paints. if u google "non toxic wood finish" you will find companies that sell soy based and other "green" products. jim becker from a thread i posted about non toxic exterior sealant wrote:

"All finishes sold today are "non toxic"/safe once fully cured. Be careful about paying extra for a product that the label makes claims unless you review the MSDS and compare it to similar products not so labled. Right now, there is a lot of marketing focus on words like "non-/low-tox", "green", etc., and I'm sceptical about the percentage of claims that are truly valid."

i am sceptical about how safe all finishes are after they have cured. if it was my baby i would make sure it was safe enough to eat and lick. is sanding to a super duper smooth surface not an option? what about butcher block oil only as it is supposed to be food safe? -nick