Sanding your work

[egsiegel]

I wish I could tell you that from day one I was doing a great job of sanding my pieces. Truth is, sanding is an acquired skill. I'm amazed when beginners bring their work to the meetings. The scratches are so obvious and deep. If I don't explain to them what's wrong, they would be happy with it. I could write a book on sanding techniques, for different items. I have at least 6 or 7 different sanders, angle drills, inertia, extensions, pads, soft pads, dense pads, on and on. For my big urns, the outside of most bowls I prefer, my to-go tool is a 5 in Festool rotary sander. Today I purchased a Festool RO 125 FEQ rotary and non-rotary sander. I seem to be in the minority with the 5 in discs. I used to keep it a secret. No real woodturner would use such a large sander. When I mentioned this to my good friend Steve Worcester, owner of turningwood.com, where I buy my sanding supplies, he said that I was right, that I was in the minority. He then added, only me and David Ellsworth buy the 5 in discs from him! That's when I felt that I could come out of the closet, that I could open my doors and let everyone know that sometimes if the works call for it, I use 5 in discs. They really speed up my job, especially with my large Koa and or Milo urns. I figure that if it's good enough for David, is good for me.
I have asked Steve Worcester to do an IRD about sanding your work for our club. He is putting things together and hopefully, soon he will be ready.

I'd be interested in getting this IRD scheduled for out club also

 

[robo hippy]

Well, essential to sanding one time, and not having to go back, good glasses, and good lighting. I prefer natural spectrum. As a turner over at Woodturner's Resource said, similar to Emeliano, "Never take a finished piece from the shop to the house on a sunny day. Sunlight causes scratches." I don't like the white lights. The 'therapy' lights seem to work best, the natural light spectrum is what we have evolved to see in. The lights I use are Blue Max. They are intended for doing hand quilting or needle point work. The top is heavy and it starts to droop, and the base is heavy, and the stem/pole is light weight metal, but I haven't found any better light source. Ott lamps are another one, but they don't match the output of the Blue Max. Note, if your significant other does fine needle point work, do not ever even think of 'borrowing' the lamp....

My sanding progression, once in a while starts at 80 grit, but 80 grit can leave scratches deeper than tool marks. Some times 100, grit, and some times 120. Never higher, on bowls anyway. 150, 180, 220, 320, and 400. I spend more time with 100 and 120, and maybe 150, than I do with the rest of the grits. The coarser grits are more for eliminating tear out, rather than leveling things out. Any leveling should be done with tools, just more efficient. Pretty much the same with tear out, at least reduce it to minimal, and as far as I am concerned, on side grain bowls, there is ALWAYS tear out. You can not cut against the grain and not get some tear out. If you can't see it, you sure can feel it. I prefer the shear scrape for finish cuts, and leveling. Scrapers work fine for across the bottom of the bowl, same with NRSs. In the transition and up the walls, they don't work as well, and this can vary hugely depending on the wood. Both are scrapers, and will pull on the fiber more than a shear cut with a gouge, and result in some tear out.

As near as I can tell, over sanding is mostly about the higher grits. The coarser grits, say up to 180 or so are more for preparing the surface for the next grit. Once you get above 220, you are more 'polishing' out the sanding scratches from the previous grits, rather than cutting. Some people tend to spend as much time with the polishing grits as they do with the cutting grits, and to me, that is over sanding. The really fine grits can burnish the surface. Fine for pens, but it can cause some problems with spray finishes, but I don't do either of these.

"Mystery Scratches". This is a term I use for 'I had it sanded out perfectly, and then saw these deep scratches', which we have all experienced. I had heard of some people saying that you need to blow off the surface between each grit to remove bits of abrasive grit that is stuck in the wood. Well, noticed that this blew more dust around in the shop and didn't like that idea. So, I would wipe the pieces off between each grit, by hand, and NEVER felt any grits stuck in the wood. This was done to thousands of bowls. So, where to they come from? I have found a couple of things that can cause them. One is a stiff abrasive, which is thick paper or cloth backed discs. The edges of these discs will leave 80 grit scratches. I also found out that if I use a 3 inch disc on a 3 inch interface pad, the interface pad will also leave 80 grit scratches. And, some times, you just didn't get all of the 100 grit scratches out with 120 before you stepped up to 150. 150 can get them out, but 120 works far better. I have found that wiping the bowl off by hand can push some of the saw dust into deeper scratches and tear out areas to high light them.

And again, good lighting and good glasses!

robo hippy

 

[hockenbery]

just about every demo I've seen uses wet, or otherwise easy woods to turn. For sure, there are a few demos out there that use difficult woods, but most everything done for an audience, the demonstrator avoids these.

Being invited to do your first demo is both a great compliment and a terrifying experience. Imagine the good feeling you get knowing someone likes what you do enough to want to see how you do it. Imagine the terror of turning in front of an audience and having to complete the presentation in 90 minutes.

My rule of thumb is that it takes me 3x the time I can turn something to demo it. So if I can rough a bowl in 10 minutes I need 30 to demo it. Other parameters are requests to minimize dust and Minimize sanding. Turning a bowl in 10 minutes requires a dependable wood to work with.

When Mike Mahoney cores 14-15 nested bowls from a blank - he cheats by using a burl cap. He doesn’t have to core into endgrain.
When I’ve see Stewart Batty demo the Negative Rake scraper he uses dry exotic hardwood because it scrapes nicely.
When Al Stirt demos platters he uses dry cherry or dry mahogany because he needs the wood to accept paints.
Jimmy Clewes does lots of dry wood demos.


One advantage of live demos is being able to see the superb tool finishes most of the demonstrators achieve.

 

[Richard Patrick]

For those of you who u a 5” RO sander, what paper are you using? I’ve heard that Festool has their own proprietary sandin discs and that other brands won’t line up properly for dust collection. I’ve also heard contrary to this.

 

[Dennis Weiner]

I remove my 120 grit scratches with 150. 150 is by far my favorite grit. I know some people go from 120 to 180. I would think that if you skip 150, it would take double the amount of time and paper to move out of 180...

Just bought some Abernet which was sold in 80,120,180,220,320 and 400. On the first bowl, I really missed not having the 100 and 150 grits.

I had to backtrack to get it right.

5" ROS is a nice secret. On the other side of the spectrum don't disregard the 1" ROS. Sometimes a 1" random orbital sander will help you out of a jam.

Recently, my car headlight lenses were milky and needed replacement. I acquired on amazon a 3" automotive detailing variable speed random orbital polisher and saved money. The tool was much cheaper than new lenses. I immediately saw a home for it with my woodturning sanding arsenal. I bought additional 1" and 2" mandrels and made some extensions. Sanding Inlays or cracks filled with epoxy and stone on the inside of the bowl or a form r with the 1” ROS greatly reduced my sanding time. The sanding was in a smaller area over the inlay. Probably would work better on knots, bark inclusions…etc.
Picture shows the extensions I made for the 1”,2” and 3” discs. I also made an adapter for Vince’s 1 1/8 round mandrel that is attached to the sander. The 1/2” rod of the adapter had threads 1/4”-20 on Vince’s side and 6mm threading for the ROS.

 

[odie]

One advantage of live demos is being able to see the superb tool finishes most of the demonstrators achieve.

Hello again, Al.....

Superb tool finishes are not as difficult on woods that are more prone to yielding it.....the real trick is to get that superb tool finish on difficult dry dense hardwoods.....and, this is why those who teach, avoid these kind of woods...and when they do, they don't bring the surface finish to a point of completion where it's ready to apply a finish without the use of power sanding. It's a great thing to be able to say to yourself, I no longer need to do any power sanding, and my geometric integrity allows me to do things (on the lathe) that I never knew existed before. As I've always said in our exchanges between the two of us......the only thing that matters, is the results, and I mean to differentiate between the results of a demonstration, and the results of an individual's personal gallery of finished works.

Ever wonder why those "masters" never, or almost never join in the forum discussions? When they do, it's akin to a "drive by"....now you see him, and now you don't! Sure, we can say "why give it away, when you're that good".....or they're too busy with their teaching schedules to bother with forums. I believe there are other motivations for this, which I may go into at some other time.....but not at this juncture.

....And, while we're at it, let's not confuse pure "lathe skills" with embellishment skills. Some "master turners" are known for their expertise off the lathe, but what really impresses the heck out of me, is what a turner can do with a piece of wood while it's spinning on the lathe.......sort of like those lathe skills that were admired before the explosion of all the mind boggling gadgetry. No question that embellishment skills are a separate world of their own, and to be admired for the exemplary skill levels they exhibit, but these things only confuse the simple issue of how well, an extremely well shaped and sharpened lathe tool can be manipulated into performing precision cuts that only a skilled individual is capable of.

It's not likely that I'd ever do a demonstration, but if I did, it would probably take a couple of days to complete a bowl! Unlike many of those who do demonstrations as a source of income, my focus would be entirely different. I'd want to give the audience something they'd never known was possible, and I won't do that, because my personal philosophy doesn't allow me to serve two masters. I wish to concentrate on turning, and not instructing.....two entirely different ways of consuming your available energy. I suppose you could say I have a selfish interest in being the best I can be, rather than expending the necessary effort to significantly help others to be better turners.

-----odie-----

.

 

[Kevin Jenness]

For those of you who u a 5” RO sander, what paper are you using? I’ve heard that Festool has their own proprietary sandin discs and that other brands won’t line up properly for dust collection. I’ve also heard contrary to this.

I use Klingspor 9 hole discs on my Festool sander. Rhyno also makes them, then there are mesh discs and discs with large numbers of small holes that will work.

 

[hockenbery]

Ever wonder why those "masters" never, or almost never join in the forum discussions?

No. First off the AAW has 15-16,000 members. Maybe a hundred are active on this forum.
I know a few of the masters. While a few post here most don’t even know the forum exists.

There are 50-100 masters - tier 1 turners in the AAW.
I’m a tier 2 turner….

One thing you will see in demos is modest size pieces.
I generally do 11” bowls in demos. Smallish bowls are quicker to turn and easier to get a good surface on.

I can turn the face of a 3” disk for an ornament or pendant and get a surface I can hand sand with 320 every time using woods like cherry, red gum eucalyptus, camphor. I have to sand the 11” bowl with 220 or 180.

Turning a flat is easy for the first inch. Turning a 6” flat is darn difficult. Tom Wirsing can do it. I can’t with reliability.

Turning the interrupted cut for a natural edge bowl is difficult. I’m pretty good at that.
Watching Ellsworth do it is still enjoyable.

an oh wow moment watching a master in a demo is a terrific experience.

 

[Clifton C]

There is a path, from the soles of your feet, up your legs, though your torso, down you arms to your hands, out to the tip of the tool where it meets the wood. From there, the path continues though the wood to the headstock and on to the lathe bed, continuing down to the floor you are standing on.
This is the circle. I like the feeling of knowing this, I think it makes me a better turner. Does it make a difference? In the grand scheme of things probably not, in my own little world, yes it does. I enjoy helping anyone who wants to learn. I don't mind if they don't see what I see. Eventually they might. Getting too much information too fast can be frustrating for the new turner. Showing an audience something they'd never known was possible means you had better know your audience...

 

[Gerald Lawrence]

Ever wonder why those "masters" never, or almost never join in the forum discussions? When they do, it's akin to a "drive by"....now you see him,

-----odie-----

.

I don't want to get between you and Al but on the forums I can say as Al pointed to there is not a good percentage of turners on forums. In our club of 55 to 60 maybe two on forums sometime. And it is like pulling hens teeth to get all of them to even look at our website.

 

[robo hippy]

I had a friend point out to me that when I demo bowl turning and use Madrone, I am cheating. It cuts like butter, and works wonderfully with pretty much all tools. I now will demo with big leaf maple, if I have any, or myrtle wood. The maple always seems to have some tear out, though I can tame it pretty well, after years of practice. The myrtle can be the same way. Did a demo in Salem a few months back and used some big leaf maple that for reasons unfathomable, or maybe 'totally and in all ways inconceivable' it had tear out in only one quadrant instead of the normal two....

As for the Festool discs, what they have available for their sanders is very low quality. I talked to Vince Welch, and had him punch me out discs in 120 to 320, with the Festool holes, and he said minimum order was 50 discs of each grit. FAR better than their standard stuff..... I may have to try some of the Abranet.

robo hippy

 

[odie]

I had a friend point out to me that when I demo bowl turning and use Madrone, I am cheating. It cuts like butter, and works wonderfully with pretty much all tools. I now will demo with big leaf maple

Funny how you mentioned that, Robo....

I just finished the exterior on a twice turned Madrone bowl (minus the foot). It's now in the queue waiting to be finalized......in about another month, or so.

You are right that Madrone is a complete joy to turn.

-----odie-----

 

[Bob Sheppard]

I don't want to get between you and Al but on the forums I can say as Al pointed to there is not a good percentage of turners on forums. In our club of 55 to 60 maybe two on forums sometime. And it is like pulling hens teeth to get all of them to even look at our website.

We have 70-80 members in the NJ Woodturners group, but the only members I see here are Tom Gall & myself.
I'm not sure how many of them are even aware of this forum.

 

[Dennis Weiner]

We have 70-80 members in the NJ Woodturners group, but the only members I see here are Tom Gall & myself.
I'm not sure how many of them are even aware of this forum.

and me

 

[Dave Hulett]

I remove my 120 grit scratches with 150. 150 is by far my favorite grit. I know some people go from 120 to 180. I would think that if you skip 150, it would take double the amount of time and paper to move out of 180...

oh oh. I had just decided based on the grits available from my sources that I would stop using 150 and start with 120 then moving to 180, 220, 320 etc,,,, I'm just about out of 150 but it looks like I'll be reordering!

 

[Gerald Rutledge]

I suppose you could say I have a selfish interest in being the best I can be, rather than expending the necessary effort to significantly help others to be better turners.

-----odie-----

.

And yet here you are, off the lathe (I hope you don't post while turning), making long, enlightening posts on a forum and helping dozens of other people be better turners.

I, for one, am grateful for it, as I am sure many others are too.

 

[odie]

And yet here you are, off the lathe (I hope you don't post while turning), making long, enlightening posts on a forum and helping dozens of other people be better turners.

I, for one, am grateful for it, as I am sure many others are too.

Hello Gerald.....

Well, I never did consider it quite like that, and if I've managed to help anyone else become better turners.....it's likely to be in an abstract sort of way, and not a direct influence! Certainly, I'm glad to be of some help to others, and come to think of it, these forums have been a great help to me over the years.

Although, sometimes the participants on these forums have certainly changed the way I do a few things at the lathe, the most significant thing of all for me, is it allows me to sit here and ponder issues, techniques, methods, and general woodturning knowledge and philosophy. Sometimes, this results in my experimenting in my shop, so that I can form my own "hands on" opinions. When I do this, I've noticed that within my own mind, things are in a continual state of change. Although sometimes my long held beliefs become altered, other long held beliefs become much stronger, and more focused than they ever would have been otherwise. These things, I see as a great benefit to my own little personal world of lathe turning!

Thank you for an even higher awareness, sir.....

-----odie-----

 

[Gerald Rutledge]

IMO:

Like "seeing the curve", sanding is very much an experiential and existential thing, and in a lot of ways it cannot be taught but can only be learned by doing. I've found, and others have alluded to the fact that there are no hard rules, only guidelines. It's great to share these, and some of the tips here will make more sense to people who have more experience and a better context to think "ah, good tip, I'll try that when it is needed", or "ah-ha! that's why I get in a rage when X happens and I just can't fix it." Then they go try it and it works like a charm, or use that input somehow with whatever individual instance of whatever species of wood or other material, with whatever abrasive, using whatever machine (or not), running at whatever speed, moving in whatever vector in relation to the work and it's sub-parts (grain orientation, hardness variability fromone band to the next, band width, etc.), using whatever lubricant, in whatever light, with whatever dust control, with whatever PPE that impedes their vision, using whatever pressure they decide at that moment.

The inexperienced can be told all those whatevers, and the 50 others I didn't mention, before they start. They might get overwhelmed, but they might follow all of it or some of it, and learn "whatever" they learn from that one experience with all those whatevers. They might make the mistake of forming a mental rule they have to discard later, or it might apply almost all the time. They will surely gain some level of enlightenment if they are paying any attention at all, but they will not become experts even if the results are miraculously perfect (they got very lucky, most likely).

The experienced woodworker will already know many of those whatevers by having experienced them ins some context at least once before, even if they have never been in that exact context -- like with walnut or poplar, for example, nor ever used a 1" RO sander, but have three 5" sanders in the shop, etc. The experienced woodworker will sometimes still be surprised and baffled that after fifty-X years of sanding thousands of pieces of hundreds of different raw materials with hundreds of abrasives and lubricants... surprised that they just now found a piece of maple that only tears out in one quadrant while the visible grain is consistent with the first quadrant but still doesn't even agree with what its own sanding behavior is!

The only thing the experienced person has that the novice does not is, well, experience. This instructs them where to start or what is the thing I should change that will probably make the difference I want, and that's all. With a harder wood, for example, they will know that they should start with Whatevers Combination 347, where that infuriating soft fuzzy poplar should be Combo Zero: sand it with fire. The experienced woodworker knows what I mean there instantly, and a beginner can hear it, heed it, and still not truly know what it means until they sand a piece of poplar that just laughs at the idea of becoming smooth in a completely different way than a freak-of-nature piece of hard maple with a Rockwell hardness in the diamond range ("it shouldn't be this damn hard, even for hard maple!").

An example I will come back to: A worn piece of 100 is about as aggressive as a new piece of 150, but there are times I would choose the worn 100 over the fresh 150, and I cannot put it into exact words or give you a hard rule, nor suggest that the same rule applies to someone else's experience and current context. Sometimes I would just try both and quickly figure out which one works better for what I am trying to do, knowing that all those other "whatevers" are still in play, including the edge cases where a certain material just isn't behaving like almost every other instance of that material has in the past. Perhaps a more experienced person also has an ability to pick up the effects of making the switch between the tired 100 and the perky 150 much faster than a novice, or be able to see some other new thing emerge that would override the otherwise better choice (like conforming to the shape, which I will harp on quite a bit, since it is a fresh-is-best dogma-killer).

Having tips from others is great, don't get me wrong. But there is no substitute for experience and no true shortcuts to gaining it. Advice from others is just a shortcut to the proper starting point, but gaining the actual experience is still something that just needs the effort. "Transferrable skills/knowledge", or Context, builds on existing context exponentially until one "knows everything". After that, the only variables left are, eh, well, still all of them. Muscle memory and "feel" are a big thing here. These are experience too, but not of the cerebral variety. Pressure is a perfect example. What is "gentle pressure"? The only thing oen can know for sure is that it is less than "firm" pressure. The rest must be learned through experience, and yes, always in the midst of all the other whatevers.

The experienced can react faster and get to the things they should try right here and right now when the usual stuff isn't working or they are trying a new thing they just heard. The inexperience might never get to one of the "correct" combinations at all, but the ones who persevere will come back and ask, keep trying, and so forth. It is not terribly difficult, you just have to put in the hours.

As for some of the things I have learned, none of which are earth-shattering but might help someone just starting out:

I don't disfavor worn paper as much as a lot of others here, but I certainly respect and agree with their opinion as well, and fresh paper cuts faster than worn paper without a doubt. As I said, I have found that sometimes a worn piece of 100 is "better" than a fresh piece of 150 in certain circumstance, and this applies across the grit-size spectrum. Is it slower? Usually. Except for the times when that new 150 has a piece of 120-ish sand in it and makes a nice scratch the very first time it is used until it wears down that first little bit. The worn 120 you just left has given you a 135-ish finish. The new piece of 150 (grits are average sizes) and the 120 grain in it actually takes you backwards. I typically hate those first few swipes with ANY abrasive, aside from the very first grit. They are often a step backward, a little too aggressive. Does worn paper generally conform to a profile or curve better? Absolutely! Add that to the list of whatevers - the paper and its current condition matter a great deal too. That said, there is a time in every abrasive's life when it's just over.

When hand sanding, folding the paper into thirds keeps it folded up neatly and behaving far better than a piece folded in half and if one is meticulous it presents a more durable sharp edge at the fold. The half-folded piece lacks friction between the two sections, but the one folded into thirds stays put because the abrasive keeps the interior sheet from slipping around. It also makes the flat surface less flexible, which is useful sometimes. If that's not desired, just skip the fold altogether and use a single sheet.

You can skip grits. Really, you can. You can skip five grades if you want to. But it doesn't save you all that much labor and generally costs more time and abrasive in the long run if you skip more than one grade and that depends on which one it is. The "Dont skip grits" advice is a dead horse, but there are also costs for all that task-switching too, and that fresh piece of the next grit may surprise you by leaving a worse surface than the previous grade's worn paper did. I already mentioned that above; this is a slightly different context. With that said, I haven't seen a whole lot of benefit from doing a round of 120 between 100 and 150. Same goes for using 180 between 150 and 220. Experience is once again the best teacher here. If I only had one (of 100, 120, and 150, that is), I would use 120. This personal axiom is fluid throughout the range; that is to say that if I could only choose 150, 180, or 220, I would pick 180. Worn 180, to me, is the same as 220. Taking this all the way full-circle, my experience tells me that *i* can skip a grade, pretty much anywhere along the spectrum. That soft rule does break down a bit with the lower, larger grades, however. There is always going to be a significant difference between 32/36 and 80. 60-grit is not as skippable between 32/36 and 80-grit the same way that 180 is a viable skip on the way from 150 to 220. One of the firmest rules to me is that if you have a scratch at a certain grade, you simply are not done with that grade, but that's academic.

You can stop sanding and increasing the grit when it's done. I can't tell you when that is. I can say that I have had very good results stopping at 400, 600, or 1000 wet-or-dry paper lubricated with oil, depending on the polish I am after.

Clogged paper is the worst. Clean it often if it can be cleaned at all or chuck it and figure out how to change things up to get less clogging if possible. No-brainer, but sometimes it is hard to toss a piece of paper you've only used for five minutes. Always value your time, that makes it easier. I have a hard time with this one. I wish I knew a trick for cleaning cloddeg paper. The rubber things help, but aren't worth the effort for inexpensive disposable papers.

Hard blocks work much better on end-grain than soft ones do, but they also wear out the paper super fast. A loose rule of thumb I have come to is that you should always use a backing that is harder than the hardest part of material (grain is almost always variable within the piece) that you are sanding. This is difficult to achieve when sanding curves, especially 3D ones where you need a soft backing just to conform to the work. In that case, a gentler pressure will do better than firm pressure. Gentle pressure will push more evenly on uneven hardnesses within a material and tend to want to dig out the softer stuff less dramatically while still eating at the hard parts. Grit size selection helps here too. Think of the grit appropriately as tiny shovels or saw teeth; a small shovel only digs a small hole. Once again, the combination of worn paper (for the conformity, AND the shallower shovels) on a hard block might work better than fresh, stiff, non-conforming paper on a soft block. The soft block will not prevent fresh paper from creating a ton of little folds as it wraps around a curve, and those will scratch the hell out of the piece and unevenly.

There is no shame in hand-sanding, it just hurts. Sometimes it is all you have available. The more experienced woodworkers might think all the way ahead when conceiving a piece and realize that hand sanding, a LOT of it, is the only way to be able to finish it, and decide that the fire needs a bit of fuel instead. On the other hand, finishing off with hand sanding is almost never a mistake.

Lubrication is your friend, heat is the enemy. Someone else mentioned that, I echo it here. If the paper is warming up, it is either time to change grits or ease up on the pressure and/or speed. Generally speaking, like all the rest.

Abrasives are a cutting tool just like a saw or drill bit. "Let the tool do the work." Usually, gentle pressure is "always" better, but there is a sweet spot and it can vary with all of the whatevers.

Lots of woods are toxic and/or carcinogenic. Some can cause allergies with sustained exposure. I'm looking at you, WALNUT. If it smells rank or it makes you a bit nauseated after a while, you should probably stop and do some research if you don't already know it is harmful. If you do already know and you got that far, you're just bringing it on yourself. I find that it is easier to just stop breathing while I work. When that is not possible, I just avoid that kind of wood and even fine walnut is not worth the cost of working with it, but that's just my opinion. Sometimes it's pretty, but it is always just so RANK. All wood is toxic/sickening to some degree, though, and dust particulate in the lungs is bad even when it is chemically inert, so the rules of respiratory PPE are always in effect anyway. It is sad to have to use dust control for health reasons when working with cherry, though.

Patience is a virtue. Two or three extra minutes at each grit, not just the final one, will produce remarkably better results and almost paradoxically it will not take notably longer. It takes a lot longer to sand out scratches than to just get through a grade. I don't like sanding any more than anyone else seems to, but I really don't like being disappointed in my work. That, I cannot stand, and I am a tough critic that never excludes himself. When you think you are done with a stage, take the time to give it a bit more love before moving on. If you are the type that enjoys the overall woodworking process, learn how to love, or at least not despise sanding. It's hard to love, but hating it ruins the whole vibe, and considering it a necessary evil still gives it that ruinous power. This easier said than done and involves some self-trickery. I find that these kinds of mundane tasks pair with music rather well; it is a distraction from the drudgery and improves my mood, but doesn't distract so much as to cause a hazard. I second the notion that sanding is a make-or-break process just like everything else leading up to it and it must be done so try not to waste energy actively hating it. And, it is the penultimate riskiest process, since it builds on nearly all of previous effort.

The very best way to sand is to not have to sand at all. In a perfect scenario, which never happens but still informs reality, you would only sand your cutting edges, not your materials. Sanding will not [efficiently] remove chatter marks, tear-out or similar injuries to the wood, those are most efficiently tooled away. Unless you just like sanding for hours and actually re-shaping the piece with sandpaper. If so, you should not want any of this advice anyway, toss your chisels and sand-shape the finish right from the start. And have fun with that!

 

[Tim Tucker]

I see the various long-held traditions and philosophies of turning as almost an opportunity to first- learn the way your mentor teaches tou to do things. A good mentor IMHO is omeone that can not only demonstrate thru their body of work that they know ehat they are doing and in a well crafted manner… but can also teach from a safety first perspective - and how you can do what he/she does with dedication to practice.
But I believe that biggest growth for me in sanding and tool handling has come from much of what I read on this forum, weighing the various opinions and philosophies and allowing myself to try different techniques- even some I have not seen elsewhere, but I am sure they are being employed by other turners. My point is that there NEEDS to be a continual challenge to “ conventional wisdom”. Without such personal exploration a new or different method of any and all aspects of turning….. we would all still be using treadle lathes after all. It is natural for us to be resistant to accepting other’s methods once we have a degree of confidence in our own. But it may also be stifling our progress. The continual challenge is our ability to remain flexible in first our thinking and trying to be open minded enough try things that may be counterintuitive to our strongly held convictions of the definition of “ good methods “

 

[Doug Freeman]

I view “conventional wisdom” as a challenge:

1. learn what it is in the various areas
2. Practice it to become at least competent
3. How else can the result be accomplished - faster, cheaper, easier, better result

Continuous improvement was something I practiced as an athlete, student, and ~40 years in manufacturing, so it naturally carries over to my other interests. The process aspect of turning comes very easily to me due to my experience.

The “art” side has been a continual learning experience, as my life experiences don’t tie. But, its still a skill to be learned through increasing knowledge and practicing the techniques. I look at my turnings from 4-5 years ago and see a lot of improvement, but I still have a ways to go.

 

[Tim Tucker]

I view “conventional wisdom” as a challenge:

1. learn what it is in the various areas
2. Practice it to become at least competent
3. How else can the result be accomplished - faster, cheaper, easier, better result

Continuous improvement was something I practiced as an athlete, student, and ~40 years in manufacturing, so it naturally carries over to my other interests. The process aspect of turning comes very easily to me due to my experience.

The “art” side has been a continual learning experience, as my life experiences don’t tie. But, its still a skill to be learned through increasing knowledge and practicing the techniques. I look at my turnings from 4-5 years ago and see a lot of improvement, but I still have a ways to go.

Exactly!

 

[Gerald Rutledge]

My sanding secret? Put your glasses on!

Funny, I am at an age where I have to take my glasses off to see anything within three feet. Even with a brand new pair, or almost new and one's eyes have adjusted to the change (all of you bespectacled turners know what I mean), I still see better when I take them off. Bifocals, no bifocals, it doesn't matter. I thinks it is more of a muscle thing. I don't have to squint to get the glasses working, but it is more fatiguing in some way and I spend more time trying to simply see, rather than trying to see the subject, if that makes any sense.

Another reason I take them off is that they slowly get dusty, and it is not always noticeable immediately, so the increasing effort to compensate also causes fatigue.

I will probably wear my glasses when using cutting tools, however, since I'll also have a face shield on and the rules change in that setup -- glasses are not the fatigue sources anymore, the face shield has far more of a detrimental impact.

Now to the other side not really covered is beside what is your last grit ( for me usually up to 400 to 600) . On my last two grits may be used on a power sander but are also used manually. This use of the last two grits manually sanding with the grain will remove swirl marks and hide the last scratches with the grain lines. AND yes there are still scratches no matter how high a grit you use , they are just smaller and smaller and smaller.

I forgot to mention in my earlier wall o' text, for the true beginners, that sanding with the grain is always going to yield the smoothest results, hides scratches better and so forth. Cross-grain sanding is incredibly prone to leaving scratch marks, and end grain just sorta cannot be sanded at all.

I knew the grain direction transition is where you get tear out, but more instinctively than anything else.

Perhaps a really great exercise for the complete novice is to grab a piece of softer wood -- a piece of soft pine 2x4 dimension lumber would be good, preferrably with consistent grain, but there are lessons to be learned near the knots too -- clamp it to something solid and grab a wood rasp and just play at it with every angle they can think of (the circular motion of the lathe presents essentially ALL of those vectors in an infinite spectrum around the axis of rotation). The rasp exercise is a very good demonstration of how sandpaper will act and accentuates how the intersection of the plane of the tool and the grain orientation will behave. Where it grabs, it makes tear-out. Where it slides more easily (a rasp doesn't do anything "easily"), along the grain, there will be no tear-out, just long, thin shavings and a smoother-looking finish. End-grain just fights back... hard.

You could to this with a shur-form too, but those things really enjoy the taste of human blood, and they bite so hard you cannot achieve the tear-out as easily because it will just get stuck whereas a rasp will tear out across the grain, so the shur-form would not make as effective a learning tool, but if that is all the novice has (and some gloves!), it is better than nothing. Using a simple sharp point would demonstrate it too, but the multiple vectors could be a bit more difficult to envision. The learner also does not get as much of a lesson about cutting the grain uphill versus downhill with a pointed tool as opposed to a planar one. (Robo Hippy's freaky wood he mentioned that only jerks out in one quadrant might be displaying some form of secondary grain direction that is letting the odd quadrant that ought to jerk out actually stay smooth becasue it is more of a downhill cut than the one that is jerking out, but he is in a better position to see the grain on that piece than we are.)

Then just take the rasp lesson down to a smaller scale in your mind.

As for smaller and smaller scratches, what happens when the scratches get smaller than the actual grain fibers?

I watch the dust coming off the piece as it flows into my dust collector, when the volume of dust starts to drop, I move to another spot on the paper, or discard it for a new piece of paper.

I agree that directly observing the results is a great way to judge the effectiveness of the current abrasive, but I respectfully point out that doing this takes your eyes off the work. An analogy is something along the lines of backing up a car using the rear-view mirror (not a camera) instead of turning your head around and looking at where you are going directly. With the mirror, you are not watching your action and getting direct feedback, you are watching the interim results of your action and reacting to that input. There is a lot of mental gymnastics happening when using the mirror, including a second reversal of directions aside from the one that is forced by simply going in reverse, and that extra effort causes brief delays between action and reaction in the hand-eye-brain-hand-foot feedback loop that results in delays and errors. Using a mirror also narrows your field of view severely and puts any peripheral vision you have leftover facing in the wrong direction. Turning your head to back up still allows a much wider field of critical peripheral vision, AND in the right general direction, so you don't back over the neighbor's kid or your dog, your mailbox, etc.

You be you, of course, but I just want to put that out there for the discussion. If this idea interests you, of course: If you aren't actually using peripheral vision for that dust stream monitoring, maybe try to make that a habit and still focus on what's going on right at the point of contact. The stakes are lower with sanding, but if someone said they watched their chips instead of watching the piece and the tool as it removes the chips from the piece, I would recommend more strongly that they did not do that without it being peripheral attention to the chips (if they must watch the chips at all) and primary focus ALWAYS stays on the cut.

Who has a story of launching a tool or getting a massive, armor-soiling* catch because they looked away from Point Zero for just one tiny fraction of a second? No need to share a story and we all know how that goes, it's just a rhetorical question and a cheap nod to The Python.

*

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTPfOIsWF5g

 

[Gerald Rutledge]

And one more tip I forgot. If you want to see if you have any scratches, you can lightly wet the piece with water. The scratches, if any, will show themselves immediately. Even the best light may not reveal them, and indeed what might be considered good light for virtually everything else will fail to show scratches that will show up later during finishing. This does not work 100% of the time, but is pretty effective. I would guess that with the pieces people are proud of and bring out to show, that their pride formed before the piece was finished, the scratch(es) were not detected until after finishing, and it is hard to then become un-proud of the piece and even more difficult to put it back on the lathe or hand sand it (or burn it), but the rest of it is still pride-worthy in their mind at least, if not in reality. That's tough.

Scratch shadows on dry wood are hard to see at finer grits, and those also require certain light angles, but a scratch will very often have left some small amount of exposed end-grain, or some other deviation that takes up the water faster or differently than the smoother wood around it, and it will generally darken a bit more that the surrounding wood. This process doesn't work all that well with the truly grain-parallel scratches, but there are plenty of others. Besides, truly grain-parallel scratches are overwhelmingly invisible anyway -- unless they were made with a rasp.

Water also raises the grain, and that can be conducive to a really slick surface when one gets to the higher grits if they then go back and very lightly sand away the fuzz. It raises the grain of the scratch too, making it a little closer to the surface and a little easier to remove through additional sanding at the same or the next grade. This is a well-known procedure that I won't cover here [OK, you simply wet it lightly with a rag or spray it if the immediate area is not rust-prone, you let it dry out completely, you sand it again] but the above method of wetting for scratch detection integrates nicely into something that benefits the whole sanding process anyway. Spraying is preferred, since a rag can pull at the wood fibers or embed cloth fibers into the wood. It's another one of those judgement calls, maybe someone can chime in to share a better application method.

It is not a free lunch, but being able to see the scratches while getting a better surface is a free bagel at least. I would use the wetting at mid grades too where scratches start to become a challenge to see, but at that early stage I just don't care about the light-touch fuzz removal step if a finer grade is coming right behind it. Wetting just lets me know if I can move up to the next grade or work on a nasty new-paper-induced scratch that was just revealed by the water. The piece can be dried quickly with compressed air before moving on if you don't over-do the water application. You don't want to be sloppin' water all around the lathe anyway.

Dean, I have observed how a smoother surface does not take up finish as readily as the rougher ones. It's a real thing. It is not crippling, though. You just have to understand it and be wiling to work with it. It just takes more love, but resistance is not the same as full prevention, and the glassy-surfaced wood will eventually take a finish. Wiping across the grain speeds it up, but it is more abrasive and may cause a bit more splotchiness in certain circumstances. Grain-parallel wiping is the gentlest, and generally results in the most consistent application. "Generally".

Perhaps what over-sanding refers to is simply putting too much shine on the piece for what they feel it deserves. That is in the eye of the beholder, the creator, and the materials themselves. Next time someone says that, tell them you'd just like to know what the heck they mean. There might be more than one kind of over-sanding. Clearly, over-sanding is simply when you sand a piece after it is done.

 

[Brian Gustin]

I agree that directly observing the results is a great way to judge the effectiveness of the current abrasive, but I respectfully point out that doing this takes your eyes off the work.

Not quite watching the flow of dust , it is more of a peripheral vision thing - your dust collector and your vision is typically within the line of sight even while focusing on sanding.. As well, generally one isn't going to focus exclusively on the sanding (save when placing hands and sandpaper in precise locations) but rather monitoring the top of the spinning piece to observe the *effects* of the sanding (It comes more with experience as you get comfortable with sanding and not having eyes directly on the point hands & paper are contacting the work)

You be you, of course, but I just want to put that out there for the discussion. If this idea interests you, of course: If you aren't actually using peripheral vision for that dust stream monitoring, maybe try to make that a habit and still focus on what's going on right at the point of contact. The stakes are lower with sanding, but if someone said they watched their chips instead of watching the piece and the tool as it removes the chips from the piece, I would recommend more strongly that they did not do that without it being peripheral attention to the chips (if they must watch the chips at all) and primary focus ALWAYS stays on the cut.

Not really - Primary focus of the cut should actually be the "result" of the cut (top surface on outsides, opposing face on inside of a bowl) - It is far better to learn the muscle memory of how to hold and position your tool to the work, and use the observed results to follow the cut (It's like throwing darts - You're gonna focus on the target and trust your muscle memory/instinct to aim the dart to get it where you want it to go) Focusing on where your tool is contacting the work piece is a bad habit that should never be developed (and most any good mentor or instructor will teach you that point as well) If you are focusing too much on the cutting edge of your tool, you quickly lose sight of where you are going with it. Like with sanding techniques. You're peripherally aware of where the chips (dust) are going while concentrating on your shaping of the piece, trusting to muscle memory/instinct to guide your tool (sandpaper) where it needs to go, while being aware of other hazards (rims of natural edge bowls, chuck jaws, etc, etc) without focusing on those things.. It all boils down to "it comes with experience/practice" but even as a beginner, one should be aware of that being the ultimate goal..

 

[Gerald Rutledge]

Not really - Primary focus of the cut should actually be the "result" of the cut (top surface on outsides, opposing face on inside of a bowl) - It is far better to learn the muscle memory of how to hold and position your tool to the work, and use the observed results to follow the cut (It's like throwing darts - You're gonna focus on the target and trust your muscle memory/instinct to aim the dart to get it where you want it to go) Focusing on where your tool is contacting the work piece is a bad habit that should never be developed (and most any good mentor or instructor will teach you that point as well) If you are focusing too much on the cutting edge of your tool, you quickly lose sight of where you are going with it. Like with sanding techniques. You're peripherally aware of where the chips (dust) are going while concentrating on your shaping of the piece, trusting to muscle memory/instinct to guide your tool (sandpaper) where it needs to go, while being aware of other hazards (rims of natural edge bowls, chuck jaws, etc, etc) without focusing on those things.. It all boils down to "it comes with experience/practice" but even as a beginner, one should be aware of that being the ultimate goal..

That's going to be a difficult habit for me to learn. I would instinctively (and wrongly, it seems) want to keep the shape in peripheral and focus on point of contact, then focus more on the shape after taking away the tool, but what you say makes sense. I like the darts analogy, and yes, one's brain does all the behind-the-scenes compensation for the way that darts fly in an arc if you focus on the bulls-eye and become One with it, but I think the analogy is backwards... or I just look at it backwards. The bulls-eye of the target is the equivalent of the point of contact between tool and wood, but by looking at the edge of the piece, it is akin to saying you say I should "aim for" the area above the bulls eye (the edge of the bowl or whatever) because I expect the dart to drop because of gravity. Oddly enough, you do this very thing when shooting a gun or bow using sights, but not with thrown objects. Maybe the brain wants to "do the math" with gravity effects because you'll also be using a specific amount of strength in your arm to cast the projectile, knowing that the muscle memory will be there to assist. Not much muscle memory is needed to pull a trigger or release an arrow. Now that I've sliced and diced that difference, I am not sure turning more resembles shooting or throwing. Perhaps neither, since there is muscle memory involved, like darts, but a different form of object focus that is more like aiming off-center to compensate for wind, gravity, and angle like you would have with shooting. Let's get a golfer in here and see what they say.

I am not bickering here, and I appreciate the way you patiently refuted my trying to carry over instinctive approaches that I would use with other tools. Consider me schooled, but I will be hard-pressed to not be nervously looking dead square at the point of contact the first few times I put steel to wood. But I'll keep it in mind, like you say, that it is a bad habit once the terror fades and work my way towards the proper procedure. This must be one of those reasons everyone keeps repeating that a mentor is "basically required, and ASAP".

 

[hockenbery]

. I would instinctively (and wrongly, it seems) want to keep the shape in peripheral and focus on point of contact, then focus more on the shape after taking away the tool

That seems to be the instinctive thing to do. 99% of my students wanted to do that. One told me he couldn’t watch the other side. I had to hold a card over the tool so they had to watch the other side.

I watch r
The cut start the switch my focus.
I watch the other side of the bowl from where I am cutting. By doing this I can see the depth of cut and how it is changing the curve.
I can see the curve and the depth of cut.

Here are a couple of screen shots of video where I’m using an Ellsworth roughing cut to shape the bowl.
This leaves a rough surface so I will come back later and take a 1/4” off to a clean surface with bevel riding cuts
Here I need to take more wood

Here I take a shallower cut

Here I take a bit deeper cut

 

[Brian Gustin]

That's going to be a difficult habit for me to learn. I would instinctively (and wrongly, it seems) want to keep the shape in peripheral and focus on point of contact, then focus more on the shape after taking away the tool, but what you say makes sense. I like the darts analogy, and yes, one's brain does all the behind-the-scenes compensation for the way that darts fly in an arc if you focus on the bulls-eye and become One with it, but I think the analogy is backwards... or I just look at it backwards. The bulls-eye of the target is the equivalent of the point of contact between tool and wood, but by looking at the edge of the piece, it is akin to saying you say I should "aim for" the area above the bulls eye (the edge of the bowl or whatever) because I expect the dart to drop because of gravity. Oddly enough, you do this very thing when shooting a gun or bow using sights, but not with thrown objects. Maybe the brain wants to "do the math" with gravity effects because you'll also be using a specific amount of strength in your arm to cast the projectile, knowing that the muscle memory will be there to assist. Not much muscle memory is needed to pull a trigger or release an arrow. Now that I've sliced and diced that difference, I am not sure turning more resembles shooting or throwing. Perhaps neither, since there is muscle memory involved, like darts, but a different form of object focus that is more like aiming off-center to compensate for wind, gravity, and angle like you would have with shooting. Let's get a golfer in here and see what they say.

I am not bickering here, and I appreciate the way you patiently refuted my trying to carry over instinctive approaches that I would use with other tools. Consider me schooled, but I will be hard-pressed to not be nervously looking dead square at the point of contact the first few times I put steel to wood. But I'll keep it in mind, like you say, that it is a bad habit once the terror fades and work my way towards the proper procedure. This must be one of those reasons everyone keeps repeating that a mentor is "basically required, and ASAP".

One of the things I taught myself (via ideas from watching Youtube) is, lathe off and practice your cuts (and body movements) for a while.. focus on getting the bevel to "float" along the surface with one hand while turning the wood by hand with the other, and you eventually start to get a "feel" for where the tool and edge is at (and where it is POINTING, more importantly) - One trick I used for a very short while - When I got the bevel floating "perfectly" and turning the wood by hand I was able to peel off whisper-thin shavings of wood from the bowl blank, I froze my right hand (holding the tool) and took a couple pieces of masking tape placing then right in front of my thumb and knuckle of first finger such that when I naturally gripped the handle, the flute and gouge would be at or near the needed orientation, and I found I could just about by feel get the bevel back pretty close to where it needed to be - The rest was just "feel" of the whole thing as the lathe was spinning - You get to be able to feel the difference in the cut when your (sharp) gouge is cutting properly and floating the bevel, you almost don't feel the tool cutting (I.E. lack of resistance/vibration in the handle) while you watch the curve take shape on the top far edge (the "shadow" when it isn't perfectly round) and helps you "look ahead" to the curve you want so you can guide the bevel in the direction you want to go - If you are focusing on the cutting edge, you can't see where you want to go.

(like driving a car - if you are focusing in front of you trying to keep in lane, you don't see what's ahead to avoid, or curves you come up on unexpectedly) It takes practice to develop the skill and paying attention to the differences in how things feel (for me) and sound (for those that can hear) but if you can practice a little with the lathe off just getting the tool in position where it'll cut almost effortlessly (provided the tool is sharp!) and float along the bevel (which points you in the direction you want to cut) then you can develop that sense that lets you look ahead to the curve/shape of the object (or the rim of natural edge bowls) along with awareness of where your "hazards" are without having to put too much brain power into it...

Basically you'll want to train your body and senses to get in tune with the lathe (Some turners can even literally "show off" by making a nice smooth cut with only one hand on the gouge all the while looking out at the audience and talking about it, without even looking at the wood, lathe, or tool... I have not progressed to that ability yet, but every day of practice, I get a little closer to being able to just put the tool on the rest and start a cut with hardly even having to think about it, or look...)

*edit to add* if at all possible, I'd encourage you to find an experienced mentor to work with you, I spent nearly 3 times as much time getting to where I could do relatively good work (Meaning, I can turn a bowl and not have to sand away the transitions, tool marks, and uneven surfaces with 60-80 grit papers) - because I had to un-learn bad habits that I picked up by instinct. (I only learned they were bad habits after countless hours of watching various youtube instructors that knew how to explain things to complete beginners) Perhaps that may be why I keep thinking of these analogies (throwing darts, car driving) to try and get a point across... Plus what I've personally learned through experience, thinking how I'd explain how to do it to others...especially if they were deaf like me (all the instructors - even the ones teaching hand planes/flat work - talk about how things "sound" , I have to translate that to how things "feel"!) If I'd had a good mentor/instructor to work with (not out here in the middle of nowhere, P.A., unfortunately) I'd probably be far and away ahead of where I am at now..

 

[Bob Sheppard]

and me

Oops. Sorry, Dennis.

 

[David Propst]

For most of my sanding, I use inertia sanders. I have six I've acquired from Rudy Lopez when taking classes with him. Once I learned the right touch and approach they do a wonderful job.
When completing with a grit, a last pass with very little pressure is like going to an intermediate grit. I try to start at 180 on side grain pieces, but that does not always happen. I always go at least to 400, usually 600.
I too like to use 150, the difference in grit size from 120-220 is dramatic compared to the higher grits. Additionally, I have the Woodturner's Wonders 2 in and 3 in yellow hand sanding pads which are very handy, along with a Metabo ROS and a right angle drill that I rarely use.
I obsess over my curves, but when people pick up one of my pieces, the feel is just as important. You can see in how they hold it and move their hands over it. My wife is uber constructively critical about this.
I HATE to pick up a piece in a gallery and feel a roughness to a finish. Recently I was in a very nice gallery with turnings that were way out of my league, but almost every piece would have benefited from progression through a couple more grits.

 

[odie]

One little note here...... Probably more often than not, there is a little spot that needs additional sanding with the grit you're working on. It's tempting to sand the entire circumference under power to get that little spot sanded out, but most of us learn the best way to handle it, is to lock the spindle, and hand sand that little spot with the same grit you're using. By alternating between directions, or random orbit by hand. It's overall quicker, and better than doing it under power.

I'm another one who will keep using 150 grit, instead of making the jump from 120 to 180.....

Matter of fact, although I have eliminated the need for power sanding on my bowl exteriors, I still use power sanding on the interiors of bowls. 150 grit is the point where I normally switch from power sanding, to hand sanding under power with 180 grit.

-----odie-----

.

 

[hockenbery]

I still use power sanding on the interiors of bowls. 150 grit is the point where I normally switch from power sanding, to hand sanding under power with 180 grit.

Two things that really helped me get a smooth surface on the inside are
1. The flute up Ellsworth shear cut with the leading edge of the wing. On a cut rim bowl, this cut needs to be rolled into with the bevel on the wood. This is a hard cut to master on your own. Easy if someone shows you.
2. A trick Jimmy Clewes showed me. Cutting the first inch inside with a 1/4” bowl gouge (3/8 diameter). I use a push cut Michelson grind. A 45 degree conventional grind works almost as well.

First inch inside
The tool. . Tool tip hidden but you see the wispy shavings coming off

Bevel on the wood rolling into the cut
Advance the tool and let it cut.
The key is a loose grip that lets the tool turn following the bevel down to the bottom
The wisps of wood being taken off are indicative of a smooth surface.
A tight grip forces the top of the wing into the sidewall for monster catch.

 

[robo hippy]

I think it is coming off the bevel rub that causes that catch. I have been playing some with this. Waiting for logs to come in and then into production for a bit..... My only show I do any more is coming up in July!

robo hippy

 

[hockenbery]

I think it is coming off the bevel rub that causes that catch. I have been playing some with this. Waiting for logs to come in and then into production for a bit..... My only show I do any more is coming up in July!

robo hippy

We may be talking about the same thing. If you hold the tool preventing it from rotating it makes a gap with the bevel and the wood drives onto the edge- monster catch. Letting the tool rotate a little keeps the bevel on the wood.

There is almost no bevel touching the wood. Just the leading edge of the wing an a bit of steel behind it.

 

[Clark Champion]

A phrase I'm still trying to eliminate from my vocabulary is, "That's good enough. The next grit will take care of it." It probably won't.

My Dad taught Industrial arts in the 50's and also made a lot of furniture, while I sat on the stool and watched. He rarely sanded against the grain, but when he had to, he would always end one grit with the grain, before moving on to the next finer grit.

I recently purchased a sanpler of 3M Exact sanding discs (mesh backing with ceramic granuals. I've only used it a couple of times but I have high hopes.

 

[odie]

Two things that really helped me get a smooth surface on the inside are
1. The flute up Ellsworth shear cut with the leading edge of the wing. On a cut rim bowl, this cut needs to be rolled into with the bevel on the wood. This is a hard cut to master on your own. Easy if someone shows you.
2. A trick Jimmy Clewes showed me. Cutting the first inch inside with a 1/4” bowl gouge (3/8 diameter). I use a push cut Michelson grind. A 45 degree conventional grind works almost as well.

First inch inside
The tool. View attachment 43695. Tool tip hidden but you see the wispy shavings coming off View attachment 43694

Bevel on the wood rolling into the cut View attachment 43697
Advance the tool and let it cut.
The key is a loose grip that lets the tool turn following the bevel down to the bottomView attachment 43696
The wisps of wood being taken off are indicative of a smooth surface.
A tight grip forces the top of the wing into the sidewall for monster catch.

I appreciate the pointers, Al......but, "brown and round", as in your illustrations, really isn't what I do. It's a different ball game when inward slanting walls, and extreme undercut rims come into play. Here, the finished refined surface needs to be the equivalent of the exterior, and tool access is entirely different. Because of that, the technique isn't the same at all. I could spend the time and effort to finish the interiors of my bowls the same way as I do the exteriors, but since I do not sculpt any refined details on the interior, making perfect geometry an unnecessary element.....it's to my advantage to speed things up a little, and use some power sanding for this.

I checked your recent works, works before 2014, and AAW gallery, and we have no similarities in the kinds of turnings we do. You are making assumptions, where the basis for the making those assumptions, are.....as they say, "apples and oranges".


-----odie-----

 

[hockenbery]

It's a different ball game when inward slanting walls, and extreme undercut rims come into play. Here, the finished refined surface needs to be the equivalent of the exterior, and tool access is entirely different. B

Actually that both cuts works extremely well on inward slanting walls and some undercuts.
The Michelson grind will cut to a line reliably.

The amount of undercut either can handle is when the tool hits the other side of the rim.

This happens on tight concave undercut rim.
A slight undercut is a piece of cake with this cut.

While our work is different. I do mostly hollowforms so our work is a lot different, tools work the same and whether you can use these tool is up to you. I sand NE bowls off the lathe after they have dried. If I hit the inside with my best cuts I begin sanding with 220.

I turn bowls in classes and demos because it is the starting point for most beginners.

 

[odie]

Actually that both cuts works extremely well on inward slanting walls and some undercuts.
The Michelson grind will cut to a line reliably.

The amount of undercut either can handle is when the tool hits the other side of the rim.

This happens on tight concave undercut rim.
A slight undercut is a piece of cake with this cut.

While our work is different. I do mostly hollowforms so our work is a lot different, tools work the same and whether you can use these tool is up to you. I sand NE bowls off the lathe after they have dried. If I hit the inside with my best cuts I begin sanding with 220.

I turn bowls in classes and demos because it is the starting point for most beginners.

Show me where your works have any similarities to my work......otherwise.....it's still apples and oranges.

Yes, of course, tools work the same, but access and expectations of refinement are different. Hollow forms are not finely finished on the inside.

You have no vision, beyond the boundaries your experiences have set for you......and, quite frankly.......don't comprehend.....specifically because you are unaware of where your boundaries are......or, where my boundaries are.

As is the usual between our exchanges where we disagree.....you are going to have the last word.

-----odie-----

 

[Emiliano Achaval]

Show me where your works have any similarities to my work......otherwise.....it's still apples and oranges.

Yes, of course, tools work the same, but access and expectations of refinement are different. Hollow forms are not finely finished on the inside.

You have no vision, beyond the boundaries your experiences have set for you......and, quite frankly.......don't comprehend.....specifically because you are unaware of where your boundaries are......or, where my boundaries are.

As is the usual between our exchanges where we disagree.....you are going to have the last word.

-----odie-----

I'm not really understanding this. @Bill Boehme might be able to shed some light. At first glance I said to myself, WHOA, this has to be deleted. The main rule here is to be Nice. English is my second language LOL
I think that this post has the most replies ever to any of my posts, might be a personal record.

 

[Lou Jacobs]

English is my second language LOL

I don’t think you’re missing anything in translation Emiliano. This has turned kind of snarky.

 

[Doug Freeman]

No insults, just differences of opinion. No reason to be alarmed, yet…