Matte vs gloss

[Cuprousworks]

I thought I've read where gloss finishes are clearest. For both oil and water based poly I've been using matte, and then wet sanding and polishing for a smooth and shiny surface. I rub with 0000 wool if I want to tone down the gloss.

It's time to restock both finishes, is there an advantage to pick up gloss this time?
Mike

 

[David Turner]

I am probably the wrong one to ask as I don’t do anything shiny. Finish all my period furniture with shellac and rub out to matte/satin.

 

[Henry W]

I thought I've read where gloss finishes are clearest. For both oil and water based poly I've been using matte, and then wet sanding and polishing for a smooth and shiny surface. I rub with 0000 wool if I want to tone down the gloss.

It's time to restock both finishes, is there an advantage to pick up gloss this time?
Mike

Mike - Here's my best description.

The reflectivity (i.e. gloss) of a finish is really a characteristic of both the base material (i.e. the polyurethane or the tung oil etc.) and the formulation (what else is mixed in). In order to achieve lower gloss than the base material has without modification, 'flateners' are added; these are particles that reduce light reflectivity (they disperse rather than reflect light). Many times these particles will settle in the can (and can be visble there as a whitish sludge), which is one reason that you are advised to 'stir frequently'. Anyways if you build up multiple layers of the matte products, the finish itself can start to look less 'clear', which many people describe as 'muddy'. So many people build up the base coats using the gloss product, and use a final top coat of the matte or semi-gloss; all you need is one coat of that to control the level of gloss.

Your described method sounds like they work for you - and that is the most important part of finishing - finding a products and processes that work for you. Sound like your materials and methods are worked out.
Whatever I choose to do does not really matter that much (but my go-to is a sprayed Target coatings 'lacquer' on most of my furniture projects).

You don't describe what types of project you are doing. Small turned iterms or large bookcases might have very different requirements.

 

[Cuprousworks]

Mike - Here's my best description.

The reflectivity (i.e. gloss) of a finish is really a characteristic of both the base material (i.e. the polyurethane or the tung oil etc.) and the formulation (what else is mixed in)...

Thank you for a clear and complete answer! I should have been clearer that my work is very small scale (boxes) so I can afford hand sanding and polishing not practical on furniture.

Your response made my real question clear: if I can create any matte or gloss finish from my sanding/polishing, is there any advantages to using either gloss/matte. You've convinced me, so buying nothing but gloss now...

 

[Henry W]

Thank you for a clear and complete answer! I should have been clearer that my work is very small scale (boxes) so I can afford hand sanding and polishing not practical on furniture.

Your response made my real question clear: if I can create any matte or gloss finish from my sanding/polishing, is there any advantages to using either gloss/matte. You've convinced me, so buying nothing but gloss now...

Well if I can be that clear and convincing - that's gratifying.
More often I get that "huh?" expression that makes it clear that I am neither clear nor convincing

 

[mike_wood]

I noticed a new (to me) finish by Minwax called Warm Satin. I got a spray can & have used it on a few small projects. I like it. I got it at Lowes & I saw they had it in pints too.

 

[Henry W]

I noticed a new (to me) finish by Minwax called Warm Satin. I got a spray can & have used it on a few small projects. I like it. I got it at Lowes & I saw they had it in pints too.

@mike_wood : Can you describe the use characteristics? What did you like about it? 1 coat and simple use? Or you liked the amber tone (implied by the 'warm' label they used)? What sorts of wood did you use it on and was it clear and colorless? (I doubt it, I expect the coating to impart some 'warmth' or yellowing).

EDIT - I found a can listed on a hardware store page - listed on the label as oil based polyurethane, Fast drying. Then in the product description on the webpage it says - 24 hours dry time. Hmmm? seems like 24 hours is defined as fast in their timelines. I happen to disagree, but that's just me - END EDIT

Is it called quick dry? Recoat in X minutes? Or is labelled as 'Super-duper durability'? Any clues as to whether it is shellac based, acrylic, polyurethane, lacquer? EDIT - see above edits - END EDIT

So many questions! Let us know what you liked or did not like. Any similarities/differences to other products you have may have used as a spray?

Thanks

 

[Gofor]

With clear coats, I too have heard that high gloss is the most clear, and that when going with a final matte finish, it best to build up the coat with gloss, and then use matte for the final coat. Supposedly the gloss will prevent the coating from "muddying" the grain and color as you build up to the final coat. I have tried it both ways with clear coatings and cannot see an appreciable difference at my level of expertise. however, I have never polished out a matte coat to gloss. I will say that the gloss coats will show any defects much more readily in the build-up coats, allowing easier identification for correction.

However, with pigmented coatings, I can definitely see an advantage to using gloss for the base. With pigmented coatings, the glossiness is derived from how the pigment particles lay in the paint. On end is flat. Mixed is Matte, and all pigment leaves laying flat is gloss. Because of this, the gloss coating is superior in protection from moisture and UV. So even as the undercoat, will extend the life of the coating.

 

[Henry W]

... However, with pigmented coatings, I can definitely see an advantage to using gloss for the base. With pigmented coatings, the glossiness is derived from how the pigment particles lay in the paint. On end is flat. Mixed is Matte, and all pigment leaves laying flat is gloss. Because of this, the gloss coating is superior in protection from moisture and UV. So even as the undercoat, will expend the life of the coating.

Interesting - I had not heard that explanation for pigmented coatings, but I am skeptical. Not a challenge, it just doesn't make sense to me. Here's the way I might explain it.

The SW (Sherwin Williams) process is to choose the can of gloss/satin/flat from the shelf (in the right tint base), then add the pigment as desired. Each type of paint gets pigments form the same dispenser. So I suspect the same or similar flattening agents are used in pigmented paint as are used in clear coatings - and are already in the can as it sits on the shelf.

So to me the explanation makes sense if you don't specifically call out pigments - just the different flattening agents are used for different levels of gloss reduction. I always assumed they just mixed in MORE of the agent to get more gloss reduction, but it certainly makes sense that different flattening agents may be used for different levels of gloss reduction.

 

[Gofor]

Henry, you are most likely correct. My thoughts were from what I remember from a technical article I read evaluating coating longevity and efficiency. (It was over 10 years ago and I cannot find it again and to be honest, much of it was over my head). It stuck in my mind, because in the 50+ years I have been involved in painting of some sort, it was the first time I had seen information on the effects of pigment orientation. At the time, I was looking for info on durability concerning my deck, and realized that any non-pigmented coating is not going to withstand UV for an appreciable amount of time. Your comments make me think I remember that the flattening agent is the means of controlling the orientation of the pigment flakes. IIRC, the shaping of the flattening agent particles is also a means of dispersing reflectivity.

I think of it like this:

If you take a bunch of poker chips (the pigment) and throw them in a pan and shake it, they will all lay flat (glossy). If you through some dice (flattening agent) in there and shake it up, some of the chips will be leaning on the dice (semi-gloss). Throw in a lot, and the chips will be leaning on the dice as well as standing on edge (matte). If the "dice" are pyramid shaped, that will affect the chip orientation even more as well as have more affect on light reflection, which could explain how it works in clear coatings.

I am not a chemical nor coatings engineer, so forgive me for not fully understanding the physics of it, and my memory isn't as good as I would like to think (Just ask my wife, who insists that my memory is wrong more often than not, especially if it contradicts what she remembers!).

 

[Henry W]

@mike_wood : Can you describe the use characteristics? What did you like about it? 1 coat and simple use? Or you liked the amber tone (implied by the 'warm' label they used)? What sorts of wood did you use it on and was it clear and colorless? (I doubt it, I expect the coating to impart some 'warmth' or yellowing).

EDIT - I found a can listed on a hardware store page - listed on the label as oil based polyurethane, Fast drying. Then in the product description on the webpage it says - 24 hours dry time. Hmmm? seems like 24 hours is defined as fast in their timelines. I happen to disagree, but that's just me - END EDIT

Is it called quick dry? Recoat in X minutes? Or is labelled as 'Super-duper durability'? Any clues as to whether it is shellac based, acrylic, polyurethane, lacquer? EDIT - see above edits - END EDIT

So many questions! Let us know what you liked or did not like. Any similarities/differences to other products you have may have used as a spray?

Thanks

See edits in my post 2 above this one. I have seen at least a few clues on a webpage as to what this product is: an oil based spray (or wipe-on) poyurethane. Whether it is "Fast Drying" or not depends on your definitions I guess.

 

[mike_wood]

@mike_wood : Can you describe the use characteristics? What did you like about it? 1 coat and simple use? Or you liked the amber tone (implied by the 'warm' label they used)? What sorts of wood did you use it on and was it clear and colorless? (I doubt it, I expect the coating to impart some 'warmth' or yellowing).

EDIT - I found a can listed on a hardware store page - listed on the label as oil based polyurethane, Fast drying. Then in the product description on the webpage it says - 24 hours dry time. Hmmm? seems like 24 hours is defined as fast in their timelines. I happen to disagree, but that's just me - END EDIT

Is it called quick dry? Recoat in X minutes? Or is labelled as 'Super-duper durability'? Any clues as to whether it is shellac based, acrylic, polyurethane, lacquer? EDIT - see above edits - END EDIT

So many questions! Let us know what you liked or did not like. Any similarities/differences to other products you have may have used as a spray?

Thanks

Sorry I have not replied. It is a softer look than satin. The 24 hr recommendation has always been on the MinWax sprays. It means give it time if you are going to put the object into use.

 

[danmart77]

Years ago I was talking to a guy who goes around NC sanding and finishing gym floors around the state. He told me they don't use any varnish with "crap" in it. The particles have an effect on adhesion.
I use oil based varnish and I add some Japn dryer to the mix to accelerate the dry time. For the last 2 years I have been experimenting with water based varnishes. Final answer: they are faster drying but they are not durable.

Like David said above, I use shellac for most things I make then rub it back if its too shinny.