Question about shellac

[Paul K. Johnson]

I have no idea where I got this idea from. It's definitely not from my experience as I never used the stuff until recently and it's too soon to make any judgements about it.

What I'm talking about is I've always had the idea that shellac is a low-quality finish. Any time I see old furniture with a clear finish that's chipped and flaking/peeling off I've assumed it was shellac.

I've also always thought of furniture lacquer as a very high quality finish.

But it seems they're both made out of the same bugs and from what I can tell the difference is mostly the solvent.

So someone please set me straight on shellac in general (I've read all over the internet and haven't come up with anything that really rates its quality) and then shellac vs. lacquer. Is lacquer a superior finish assuming both finishes are used in appropriate circumstances?

Thanks,

- Paul

[Steve Schoene]

No they are in no way made from the same bugs. Lacquer is a product of chemistry and with nitro cellulose as the resin, and a mix of solvents. Shellac is in fact derived from secretions of certain "bugs". The solvent is generally alcohol. But with both shellac and lacquer the solvent is not part of the final finish having completely evaporated. The actual finish resin is not at all similar between shellac and lacquer. Lacquer was the cheap imitator of traditional shellac and was named lacquer to suggest the similarity in looks.

NC lacquer is a bit more durable than shellac initially, but after time same 20+ years lacquer can deteriorate and become less durable. Shellac can be much more long-lived, if not damaged by it'sd nemesis, alkaline solutions. I have seen plenty of antiques with original shellac well over a century old that is still in good condition. Shellac does scratch, about similarly to lacquer, so it isn't unlikely that many of the old furniture you have seen with peeling, cracked finish may be the result of refinishing using inferior oil based varnishes that became prevailent in the 19th century.

[Paul K. Johnson]

Steve - Thank you! That's good information. One thing I'm getting from your comments is that shellac is the better finish or am I reading that wrong?

[glenn bradley]

Choosing the "best" finish is like choosing the "best" chisel. The use application influences what might be "best". Those of us who have become 'one with the shellac' tend to favor it in places where it is a good choice due to its ease of use. I also use it as a sealer and generally as the interior finish for carcass work to avoid the odors of other finishes.

Shellac does not do well in high wear areas but, I have used shellac for something like a wall cabinet and then used a bit of lacquer for the pull and the surrounding area that may be handled a lot. Table tops that work for a living like dining, desks and so forth would generally benefit from something more resilient . . . even a poly may be the "best" choice there.

[Stan Calow]

Its not "better" it just has different properties, advantages and disadvantages. Shellac is easier to repair for example, but also easier to damage.

[Mike Henderson]

One of the disadvantages of shellac is the "white ring" issue when someone puts a wet glass on the finish. I think that's why you see coasters for glasses. The newer finishes don't have that problem.

Mike