Shellac under tried and true varnish oil

[Rangefogger]

Is it okay to apply shellac to a curly maple stock and then finish with tried and true varnish oil? I also plan to apply amber or lemon yellow trans tint and was wondering if I should apply it on its own, mix it with the shellac, or mix it with the varnish oil. Thanks

[Martin S.]

Transtint is usually mixed with shellac, distilled water, or alcohol.

https://homesteadfinishingproducts.com/transtint-liquid-dyes/

Website above lists what it can be mixed with, including alcohol, water, shellac, water-base finishes, solvent lacquers, and catalyzed varnish or lacquers.

I am not sure about T&T over shellac. 

Email T&T here:

https://www.triedandtruewoodfinish.com/contact/

They will let you know what is best.

I think T&T looks better when it soaks into the wood to pop the grain (chatoyance).

[Hawg]

You can use shellac as a pore filler but sand it down before you use the tried and true.

[Scota4570]

What is the reason for using shellac?  Why not use the actual finish? 

[rich pierce]

What is the reason for using shellac?  Why not use the actual finish?

Long but chuck full of good knowledge.
https://youtu.be/q_gTjaetGRY?si=l-UQY13SJS8C-JMd

[Dphariss]

BIll Knight told me shellac, the real stuff, made a good sealer over stain then varnish over the top. He sent me some flakes to make some up but never got around to it, yet. Real shellac, from the color of the flakes I have will have some color anyway and these alcohol based finishes were called “spirit varnish” back in the day as I recall. I would try some test pieces before putting it on a stock especially if adding color to it. I don’t know if the store bought stuff is really shellac or some modern concoction that looks kinda like it. If its got petroleum in it is a modern concoction.

[Dphariss]

What is the reason for using shellac?  Why not use the actual finish?

Long but chuck full of good knowledge.
https://youtu.be/q_gTjaetGRY?si=l-UQY13SJS8C-JMd

Good video for the most part.
But he gets a little too involved for me. I tend to fall into the KISS idea for stain and finish. Doing too much is not always good. He is right about the various dye stains and such and I can often tell what the wood finish was from a distance if its plastic as many of the modern varnishes people insist on using are. His comments on shellac are surely correct about aging. Bill Knight old me that the real Shellac will absorb humidity until “loaded” then no more and would not pass it on. Then low humidity would dry it again.  Back in the day LS oil varnishes (tung oil was unknown) that were made in shop were in small batches. Usually using a lead oxide or acetate or maybe carbonate (would need to refresh my memory on this) for a drier. Thought there were perhaps some other options as well. But I ned to make a small batch of Ferric Notrate with some of the old wagon tire I have. Assuming its “iron”. But back in the day almost anything that would not harden was “iron” and if it could be hardened it was steel. 1010 is low carbon steel, 1008, two “points” less is iron in the modern world. So thinking that old iron is a lot different than mild steel? Maybe not. But then the 1010 might have been made with old Buick bumpers and might have other stuff besides iron and carbon in it. Since nobody really cares much about mill run mild steel, user or maker. I suspect the old wagon tire I have is mild steel or iron, Its forge welded any way and could be from 1880 or 1920 Found it on an abandoned homestead years ago in Montana while hunting. But after watching his video I will try it again though I saw no difference the first time between it or nails from the HW store. But will try bigger chunks maybe. But I can’t just leave it outside to cool so I tend to use smaller chunks to get ti done faster. Maybe that is the issue, heat? But now I need to make another batch just to see. I would not use store bought “Aqua Fortis” except for browning or rust blueing steel. Works good fro that if mixed 50-50 with the yellow label browning stuff. Or did back when I was doing more of it.

[Scota4570]

Firstly, I am not telling anyone they are having fun wrong or that their results are not good.  Clearly there are many very talented and experienced people posting here and doing better work than I could ever hope to achieve.

The reason given in the video is to seal the acid in the  the stain from contaminating the varnish top coat. 

I do have a chemistry and forensic background.  I have finished hundreds of stocks and was paid good money to do so at one time.  As a scientist, I like to do test the premise when things seem off to me.  I question mixing finishes. I am not saying the idea is good or bad. 

How much acid remains in the wood?  I did the experiment.  I tested the pH of my water, the water on sanded maple, water on AF on the same stained sanded maple, and white wine vinegar.  Scientific grade test strips were used.  My AF is prepared by me from Ferric Nitrate nonahydrate crystal CAS No. 7762-61B.  IF a guy is using nitric acid and iron my experiment is irrelevant. 

Results:
pH of my tap water, 6
pH of tap water rubbed into the maple 4.5
pH of tap water rubbed into stained maple 3
pH of white wine vinegar, 3.5
pH of Lemon Juice , 2.5

My intuition is the remaining acidity is not strong enough to matter.

I have never "neutralized" stained wood.  I use spar varnish, no shellac.   I have never had any rusting of my steel parts on any of my rifles that I could associate with acid in the stain. My conclusion it that many finishing procedures give good results, it is not a critical process. 

I have also gathered that a gunsmith in 1780 used the best materials he had access to.  His choices were very limited.  Those exact materials are not easily available today.  As living history exercise I think making finishes  and reproducing the exact procedure  that was once used is great.  I am not that deep down the rabbit hole.  I make due with what I can get to do a good job that will last.  I wonder what a 1780 gunsmith would think of 2024 spar varnish? 

[c deperro]

I have always been told you are ok to use a softer finish over a harder finish. But not ok to use a harder finish over a softer one.

[Habu]

As a general rule, yes.  However one way of applying shellac is to basically rub it on as if French polishing, then cutting it back to the surface.  Used this way it can slightly modify the color while accentuating the chatoyance of the wood.  Topping it with oil-based varnishes seems to have been a period practice, at least by ~1840.   

[Eric Kettenburg]

...while accentuating the chatoyance...

Had to google that one!   

[Eric Kettenburg]

Firstly, I am not telling anyone they are having fun wrong or that their results are not good.  Clearly there are many very talented and experienced people posting here and doing better work than I could ever hope to achieve.

The reason given in the video is to seal the acid in the  the stain from contaminating the varnish top coat. 

I do have a chemistry and forensic background.  I have finished hundreds of stocks and was paid good money to do so at one time.  As a scientist, I like to do test the premise when things seem off to me.  I question mixing finishes. I am not saying the idea is good or bad. 

How much acid remains in the wood?  I did the experiment.  I tested the pH of my water, the water on sanded maple, water on AF on the same stained sanded maple, and white wine vinegar.  Scientific grade test strips were used.  My AF is prepared by me from Ferric Nitrate nonahydrate crystal CAS No. 7762-61B.  IF a guy is using nitric acid and iron my experiment is irrelevant. 

Results:
pH of my tap water, 6
pH of tap water rubbed into the maple 4.5
pH of tap water rubbed into stained maple 3
pH of white wine vinegar, 3.5
pH of Lemon Juice , 2.5

My intuition is the remaining acidity is not strong enough to matter.

I have never "neutralized" stained wood.  I use spar varnish, no shellac.   I have never had any rusting of my steel parts on any of my rifles that I could associate with acid in the stain. My conclusion it that many finishing procedures give good results, it is not a critical process. 

I have also gathered that a gunsmith in 1780 used the best materials he had access to.  His choices were very limited.  Those exact materials are not easily available today.  As living history exercise I think making finishes  and reproducing the exact procedure  that was once used is great.  I am not that deep down the rabbit hole.  I make due with what I can get to do a good job that will last.  I wonder what a 1780 gunsmith would think of 2024 spar varnish?

Interesting experiment and I for one appreciate the scientific approach.  It's also interesting (to me) as it confirms what I have generally thought to be true, i.e. that using an aquafortis stain made from the crytalline powder very likely retains much less acidity than that made by individuals using acid, water and iron.  Many rifles finished with homemade stain via that process (not the crystals) will over time go extremely dark if not neutralized; it may be a combination of the stain continuing to darken the wood as well as perhaps the acidity interacting with a linseed oil finish, but that is just suspicion on my part.

I would disagree (with a caveat) with your statement "His choices were very limited."  Period advertisements out of population centers present an enormous range of materials available suitable for a variety of woodworking, varnishing, painting, artistic trades etc.  Now, the caveat is that it's relatively unknown just how far 'out' some of those materials may have traveled.  However, using SE PA as an example, it is clear that there were regular stages being run between Philadelphia and upstate locations such as Easton, Allentown, Reading etc.  The Moll family in particular clearly had access to some form of very hard (probably fossil copal, imho) varnish with coloring agents added to the varnish.  This is a relatively complicated finish to make as opposed to simply using linseed oil.  Were they making it themselves, or purchasing?  Impossible to determine, but the point is that whether purchased or shop-made, material access was not limited in all cases.

Back to shellac, one of the primary advantages of using it as a sealer is the extremely rapid drying.  No need to really overthink it.  The stock can be sealed and the initial coating of oil finish can be applied in a matter of an hour or so.  Using a drying oil or varnish (such as linseed oil base with dryer) there likely was nor is any need for more than two top coat applications at most.

[Robby]

A member here, I think 'Doc' seals all his guns with shellac before finishing. Hope he weighs in, seems he wrote quite a bit about it some time ago.
Robby

[Scota4570]

I am not very knowledgeable about commerce in the 1700s.  I was imagining a smith working in a small settlement, not a big city.  He was making varnish out of linseed, copal, rosin, lead oxides, and turpentine.     

One other thought.  pH needs water to be a thing.  Is has to do with ion content in an aqueous solution.  IF the wood is @ 10% water  is that enough to make pH relevant? 

An other thing I have done.  For filling the grain I have used wood dust and paste fillers.  Over that lacquer.  Lacquer flashes off super fast.  The carrier is a non polar solvent, like the varnish top coat.  I would expect those two to bond together better than shellac.  The carrier in shellac is alcohol and is not very soluble in the solvents used in varnish. 

Not to sure about sealing the wood.  You can not really seal off the wood unless you use modern finishes that encase the wood in plastic.  Fullerplast, epoxy,  and such........

French polish is a finish that uses linseed and shellac together.  IT works fine.  Is  it the shellac that builds up or a combo of both? They are clearly compatible.  Shellac can turn white if exposed to water. 


Anyway, don't have fun wrong. : )

[Eric Kettenburg]

I am not very knowledgeable about commerce in the 1700s.  I was imagining a smith working in a small settlement, not a big city.  He was making varnish out of linseed, copal, rosin, lead oxides, and turpentine.     

One other thought.  pH needs water to be a thing.  Is has to do with ion content in an aqueous solution.  IF the wood is @ 10% water  is that enough to make pH relevant? 

An other thing I have done.  For filling the grain I have used wood dust and paste fillers.  Over that lacquer.  Lacquer flashes off super fast.  The carrier is a non polar solvent, like the varnish top coat.  I would expect those two to bond together better than shellac.  The carrier in shellac is alcohol and is not very soluble in the solvents used in varnish. 

Not to sure about sealing the wood.  You can not really seal off the wood unless you use modern finishes that encase the wood in plastic.  Fullerplast, epoxy,  and such........

French polish is a finish that uses linseed and shellac together.  IT works fine.  Is  it the shellac that builds up or a combo of both? They are clearly compatible.  Shellac can turn white if exposed to water. 


Anyway, don't have fun wrong. : )

I don't know if the residual moisture in the stock is enough to be relevant, but practical experience with homemade aquafortis over 30+ years has proven to me that *something* will cause it to go very dark if not neutralized.  Many older rifles finished with this as a stain are almost black.  Probably something worthy of a real scientific study, because I'm just guessing based upon observation and experience.

Why would the solvent utilized to dissolve the shellac matter?  I should preface this with stating that I do definitely believe it better to use straight grain alcohol as opposed to hardware store 'denatured' mystery mix, but the solvent evaporates, correct?  I'd assume that it isn't measurably adding any water content to the stock.  So, when you speak of 'lacquer' vs shellac, are you talking about nitrocellulose?  I.e., the 'in' retro finish for guitars nowadays.  That stuff tends to check/crack fairly easily and quickly and I don't believe it was available in the 18th century.  At that time, it's my understanding that the term 'lacquer' would have indicated a base of various resins dissolved primarily in alcohol - just like shellac - or sometimes in turp.  Of course a wide variety of pigments were added as well for color but I don't believe this was ever applied to a firearm, at least not an American firearm.

I agree the wood is not being "sealed" as if encased in plastic but the idea behind the sealing process if the term 'seal' is used somewhat loosely is to provide a hard and relatively impermeable (immediately, not necessarily long term) base so as to be able to quickly apply a layer or two of an oil/oil varnish as a weatherproofing agent.  Without sealing whether via shellac or various dissolved resins, or the much longer process of simply using thinned oil/oil varnish, a single or two coatings of the top coat will end up looking very blotchy and uneven because particular areas or raw/stained wood will suck up finish like a sponge regardless of whether thick or thin, while other areas will not do so to the same degree.  So, I always viewed the 'sealing' process as something akin to gesso or "canvas" preparation to ensure that the top coating appears evenly all over the piece in question.  I've used shellac or seedlac as a sealer for probably close to 30 years now and never had any problems with it, and I have seen pieces I've done close to that age with no negative effect.

It's unfortunate that historically, pretty much every period text dealing with wood finishing is directly applicable to virtually every other woodworking trade but gunstocking!

[Habu]

French polish is a finish that uses linseed and shellac together.  IT works fine.  Is  it the shellac that builds up or a combo of both? They are clearly compatible.  Shellac can turn white if exposed to water. 

French polishing is a process rather than a product.  Successive thin coats of shellac are applied using a pad lubricated by various oils (I've used olive oil since I was a child)--is this where the thought that linseed oil is part of the process comes from?

On the originals I've seen (all 3 of them!) where the process I wrote of was used, it looked like a base stain was applied to the wood, then a probably 1# cut of shellac was applied with a pad (I say this because I was able to see a streak in the shellac on one rifle).  The shellac appeared to have been cut back to the surface of the wood using an alcohol pad rather than abrasives.  This coat highlights the wood's figure, levels the surface, and provides a base coat for the colored varnish.  I've experimented with various stains in the alcohol used to cut the shellac but never really liked the finished product (other than when it let me match the original finish on furniture I was restoring).  Colored varnish such as a red violin varnish was applied over this shellac coat.

A process like this would probably work OK with Tried and True varnish oil, as the OP asked about. 

[tallbear]

   Late to the discussion here as I was away flyfishing for salmon, but since I am the guy in the video(Thanks Ethan  ) I thought I should comment.
  I don't have any fancy degree's,(heck I don't even have a high school diploma ) but what I do have is 30+ years of working/owning a high end cabinet /furniture business serving the celebrities and Fortune 500 millionaires of the Hamptons who are some of the most difficult and demanding customers in the world.In addition I've been making longrifles for about 20+ years now.Over the years I've had experience with using most available wood stains and finishes.My customers have said they find my finishes pleasing and to date I've received no complaints about my gun finishing techniques.
  What I know about 18th longrifle finishing started with Eric Kettenbergs finishing classes at Dixons and includes several discussions with Bill Knight, Wallace Gusler who was not only a Master Gunsmith at Williamsburg but he was also Conservator of Furniture and Gary Brumfield who was a Master Gunsmith at Williamsbur.These are just a few who have shared with me,there are too many more to mention.My point in mentioning these folks is that the information shared is simply what has been shared with me and what I've learned through my own expermentation.It is through their kind sharing of information is how I came to learn what little I know. I don't claim to have all the answers but what's in the video is what currently works for me and I'm sure it will continue to evolve over time..Because others have shared with me I feel obligated to share what I've learned with others which is why I've given a gun finishing talk at Dixons/Kempton for the last decade or so.
                                                                                                         
   So......I only use seed lac that is recently mixed. I've haven't really used any other type of lac other than about a 1lb cut of seed lac as a sealer and barrier between the stain and my chosen top coat.
  For the most part I only ever stain with Iron of Nitrate stain that I make myself using acid.I've never used crystals so I can;t speak to their use.I tend to leave my stain slightly acidic as I find I get better results.Is it still acidic after blushing...probably not but I still use the Seed lac spit coat over it.It is my understanding that the acid can soften linseed based varnishes over time.In addition as Eric Kettenberg mentioned using it means I can put two coats of finish on in a day .I also find it very helpful when finishing American Walnut(and yes I often use my Nitrate of Iron Stain on American Walnut) as it freezes all the whiskers in place allowing them to be cut off with a Scotchbrite pad before finial finishing. A huge plus with American Walnut as the whiskers can be hard to tame sometimes.....
   So to answer the OP's question I have used seed lac under Tried and True Oil Varnish along with many other top finishes with no ill effects!!!

Mitch

[Robby]

Search shellac brings up a lot of good hands on information written by Mad Monk.
Robby