I think it is mostly for fun, and also as an exercise. Sometimes taking things to their extreme, while not practical, can teach you a lot.Originally Posted by Clark Christenson
Member
I think it is mostly for fun, and also as an exercise. Sometimes taking things to their extreme, while not practical, can teach you a lot.
Member
No, because you'd lose control over part dimensions and surface flatness. It wouldn't be easy to get those 1/16" strokes lined up "just so". Too much of a good thing in this case.
A plane that's capable of a glassy surface at any thickness up to 1/16" would be awesome though, as it would remove quality constraints from the choice of shaving thickness.
Member
The next question becomes, what about accepting a finish? Wouldn't it be like sanding somewhere above 320 grit where the finish would bead up on the wood?
You never get the answer if you don't ask the question.
Joe
Member
Some surfaces are meant not to be finished. Quite common in Japanese woodworking/carpentry.
Best wishes,
Metod
Member
Metod,
Thank you for reminding me how Japanese woodworking is not finished. I lived there from 1966-1968 and got involved with some of their woodworking. It was a wonderful experience watching some of their good woodworkers. I did not get to meet their best however.
The question still stands though; What would happen if one wanted to, say, stain said wood?
Have a blessed day,
Joe
I just took a look at Normand Leblanc's thread on this very subject.
Thank you Normand,
Joe
Last edited by Joe Tilson; 10-21-2016 at 3:14 PM.
You never get the answer if you don't ask the question.
Joe
Member
After reading this thread, I now see what you mean. I should have posted the video here.
Normand
Member
It's very finish-dependent. Even within "stain" there are a huge range of variables to consider (oil- vs water-base, dye vs pigment vs mixed, washcoat vs conditioner vs nothing, gel vs liquid, etc). In my experience some will work on a smoothly planed surface, others may need thinning or a flow additive, and some won't work at all. The same applies to finishes in general, with water-base and film-building finishes being more problematic overall, though I've successfully used both on freshly planed wood.
I believe that Stanley said in another thread that he uses poly on finely planed surfaces, it might be interesting to hear what he's using.
Of course if you're going down the film-building route then it might be a "don't care" anyway, as the surface of the wood matters less the more you build your finish up.
Also keep in mind that sanding with very high grits tends to "close" the pores, which planing doesn't do, so the usual prohibitions against sanding too high aren't necessarily relevant to planing.
Contributor
FWIW I have shellacked and recently dyed finely planed surfaces. I would imagine maybe water based finishes might be trouble, but otherwise it has not been a problem.
Bumbling forward into the unknown.
Member
Older water-based finishes would be a problem IMO. The newer ones that I've tried recently for both brushing and spraying have better flow-out characteristics and work reasonably well. They're still more finicky than many oil-based finishes, though, in that you can't add mineral spirits or lacquer thinner (both of which wet out much better than water) until it works.
Shellac also wets out extremely well, especially in light cuts. I bet an alcohol-based stain (another variation that I forgot to list) would work nicely for the same reason.
Going back to my previous comment, a lot of the problematic finishes (higher-solids varnishes and water-based finishes for example) arguably don't make much sense on a freshly planed surface anyway. You're not going to be able to tell the difference between planed and sanded by the time you're done building up that sort of film.
Last edited by Patrick Chase; 10-21-2016 at 6:45 PM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote