Billy Flitch
Established Member
The traditional way to lap a edge tool is across the palm of your hand and then slide the tool through the end grain of a piece of wood . I don't see where flat edges come into that.
Flattening sh***pening stones
- Thread starter deema
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
No it won't! What on earth are you doing to mess the back of the blade up? We are referring to removing a wire edge, not deliberately trying to make a gouge out of a plane blade with 40G ! You aren't understanding the concept of averaging or randomness.
Not sure why some are so against keeping a stone flat. With a waterstone it's a doddle and makes the rest of the sharpening process easy. I am not going to bash away at this one I have said my bit and it's a system that works for me. Each to there own I guess.
Beau
Beau
Yes, but you mustn't forget that water stones are infinitely inferior to oil stones. 
Jacob
New Luddism. Awake and resist!
Not against it - just against the obsessive insistence that it is essential.Beau":2q7ypcbh said:
And I thought we were referring to oil stones, not waterstones.
Waterstones (at least Kings) dish as soon as you look at them. In fact it's extremely difficult (maybe impossible?) to maintain any degree of flatness by using random strokes. They go out of whack too quickly. I've switched to using a slate razor hone, a Tam o Shanter. It's a small hone but in 6 months of use there is only the slightest of dips along it's length. Whenever I have a small blade to sharpen I purposely use the ends of the stone. I haven't flattened it once in those 6 months and it's not exactly a hard stone type. Nowhere near as soft as the Kings though.
Waterstones (at least Kings) dish as soon as you look at them. In fact it's extremely difficult (maybe impossible?) to maintain any degree of flatness by using random strokes. They go out of whack too quickly. I've switched to using a slate razor hone, a Tam o Shanter. It's a small hone but in 6 months of use there is only the slightest of dips along it's length. Whenever I have a small blade to sharpen I purposely use the ends of the stone. I haven't flattened it once in those 6 months and it's not exactly a hard stone type. Nowhere near as soft as the Kings though.
Beau":1nbc29mz said:
It's not that difficult. If it was necessary, most of the old stones we find would be dead flat, and they rarely are. All you need is one edge of the stone to work past to keep from bellying tools.
Strangely, working over the edge of a stone will bring the stone back closer to flatness, and is what you do to avoid having a stone go out of flat in the first place (at least appreciably so).
The reason we don't do it all the time with oilstones (flatten them) is because it makes them cut more coarsely, and that's not very desirable. It also creates an unnecessary mess.
Most of the need for flattening has to do with trying to come up with paint by numbers things so that beginners can have success. I was in the same boat, it certainly works to flatten stones. I hope to never do it again on anything other than newly acquired stones.
Jacob
New Luddism. Awake and resist!
It's also due to jig use - they don't work if things aren't flat enough - hence the scary sharp system and all that nonsense about granite slabs, plate glass etc.D_W":1s5k225s said:
Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)
Established Member
Hi David
I cannot agree with you here.
While the method you mention may (or not work) with oilstones, it would do so extremely slowly. I suspect that most just put up with out-of-flat oilstones as it is so bloody hard to flatten, and since you can sharpen a bevel on a curved surface. I would argue that "good enough" is no longer optimal in our changing world. The blade backs would largely be left as is or, at best, the rear 1/2" - 1" could be honed on such a stone. This would explain so many vintage blades with untouched backs.
The fact is that the practice of curved sharpening surfaces has never been part of Japanese woodworking. Waterstones are easy to keep flat, and this is one of the reasons why they are the medium of choice for many inside and outside Japan. One does not find Toshia Odate ridiculing anyone who flattens his waterstones and saying that this is unnecessary.
Regards from Perth
Derek
Completely agree, Derek. However, in the end what is important is what works for you and what the individual is comfortable with. I'm certainly not in favour of ridiculing people just because the person posting happen to think their way is a waste of time.
Jim
Jim
Assuming that one should work the flat back of a cutter being sharpened along the entire length of a stone is a fundamental misunderstanding of the process. It is neither necessary or desirable, one reason being the premium this places on flatness. One works backs in short strokes at the ends near the corners of a stone. Mind the ends and corners and the middle will take care of itself.
One can also leave the stone loose in its box, let one side get grooved and dished depending on purpose and use the other side for backs.
This whole stone flattening hoo-ha, with regard to oilstones, is practically absurd.
One can also leave the stone loose in its box, let one side get grooved and dished depending on purpose and use the other side for backs.
This whole stone flattening hoo-ha, with regard to oilstones, is practically absurd.
Derek, I can't agree with it being slow. I've been doing it for several years now (sharpening with a stone that's not perfectly flat). when i started with washitas, I troubled over them for a little bit because I certainly can find they're not perfectly flat after some use just by rubbing a DMT on them. what charlie said is the case, the back of the tool is worked on smaller areas, and not thrust over the entire length of the stone in the case of a stone that's got some sway.
Japanese tool sharpening is a different case, and one that if done traditionally, I find to be kind of a waste of time. There's some pride in some sharpening videos from folks sticking a plane iron by suction to the top of a stone, but it doesn't really have anything to do with preparing a good cutting edge. It's like demonstrating that you can walk from work to the bank taking exactly one step per second the whole way.
I don't know that much about Odate's interests, I think he's a straightforward guy, but I doubt he knows more than history does about sharpening western tools. Finer stones were available as were the means to make them flat pretty easily (corundum was widely available and not expensive, and the side of a sandstone grinder is readily accessible). With oilstones, especially, it's just not necessary. I don't find it necessary with waterstones any longer, but they have undesirable characteristics when they become loaded as opposed to oilstones which have desirable characteristics if left alone.
If you ask people why they need more than washita sharpness (which easily shaves hair), it would be interesting to see why they'd say they do. I made the comment in another thread that I like to chase the burr off of my carving tools using a hard arkansas or jasper, but I don't know that it really makes too much difference in use over good bare leather stropping. What I failed to mention is that the stone I linked in another thread (a washita, middle of the road, not particularly fine - those are slower) was used by a professional carver in a furniture factory in indianapolis. It had been used only for carving tools, and the left side of it is bellied from sharepening flat tools (and maybe flat knives) on the edge instead of on the face where the carver had worked profiles into the stone. I ground them all out. I know that, because he took great care (or one of his kids did) to put a hand written note in the stone in 1914 to state who had the stone and what they used it for.
(i'm strawmanning that I think most people think a 1 micron surface is needed for good chiseling or especially for final finish planing, but that's definitely not the case. I can get a semi-reflective finish on a board with a plane iron sharpened only with a washita - it is shockingly good, and more than capable of sub thousandth shavings if someone is testing initial sharpness).
Jacob
New Luddism. Awake and resist!
The big test would be for all concerned to be under pressure to produce lots of finished things fast (as in the bad old days!). Then all the fancy methods and kit would soon be out of the window and everybody would be doing it the quick and easy old fashioned way.
I'm inclined to find a stone with significant sway (a washita, of course), but I can't find any online at this point. I have, as a matter of courtesy to myself, taken stones like that and blasted the ends down when I've gotten them.
I do a fair amount of hand work compared to a lot of people with better equipped shops than I have, I could put dozens or more sharpenings on some irons and chisel (including paring chisels) with a swayed washita stone and not affect the flatness on such stones, but I haven't gotten a swayed stone around to prove it (though I have sharpened with some out of curiosity).
The only disadvantage that they have is that if an iron is horribly out of flat and you want a good mated surface for a cap iron, they are not the stone to do it easily. Then again, the washita isn't good for that in general, it's better done with loose abrasive or something else that has the ability to dig deep.
After that, the only thing required for a very sharp edge is that some part of the stone can touch the iron all the way to the edge to thin out the wire edge before you strop it off.
The same is true of waterstones. It's not necessary for a free hander to use even king waterstones and flatten them. Bevel work can be done on the red stone and the whole surface worked, and the fine stone is the least important in a rotation for perfect flatness. It just needs contact at the back on the edge (supposing a japanese stone that doesn't load and will allow you to continue sharpening without refreshing the surface).
There's a knife maker here who keeps his stones flat by sharpening on the high spots. King stones, too. I thought at first that he was being very ridiculous and stingy for refusing to flatten his stone, but in the end, I think his method takes less time. It's harder (for me at least) to keep a stone flat with knives than it is with tools.
(there is only one vintage stone that I read about being trued often - other than a sandstone wheel with soft spots - and that's the turkish oilstone - a friable stone that gives up novaculite readily - I've never seen one in person - they are black but look like an arkansas stone made of compacted flakes.)
I do a fair amount of hand work compared to a lot of people with better equipped shops than I have, I could put dozens or more sharpenings on some irons and chisel (including paring chisels) with a swayed washita stone and not affect the flatness on such stones, but I haven't gotten a swayed stone around to prove it (though I have sharpened with some out of curiosity).
The only disadvantage that they have is that if an iron is horribly out of flat and you want a good mated surface for a cap iron, they are not the stone to do it easily. Then again, the washita isn't good for that in general, it's better done with loose abrasive or something else that has the ability to dig deep.
After that, the only thing required for a very sharp edge is that some part of the stone can touch the iron all the way to the edge to thin out the wire edge before you strop it off.
The same is true of waterstones. It's not necessary for a free hander to use even king waterstones and flatten them. Bevel work can be done on the red stone and the whole surface worked, and the fine stone is the least important in a rotation for perfect flatness. It just needs contact at the back on the edge (supposing a japanese stone that doesn't load and will allow you to continue sharpening without refreshing the surface).
There's a knife maker here who keeps his stones flat by sharpening on the high spots. King stones, too. I thought at first that he was being very ridiculous and stingy for refusing to flatten his stone, but in the end, I think his method takes less time. It's harder (for me at least) to keep a stone flat with knives than it is with tools.
(there is only one vintage stone that I read about being trued often - other than a sandstone wheel with soft spots - and that's the turkish oilstone - a friable stone that gives up novaculite readily - I've never seen one in person - they are black but look like an arkansas stone made of compacted flakes.)
Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)
Established Member
David
The problem with being adamant about what suits you as a recommendation for others is that it may not suit others. There is nothing inherently wrong with anything you stated, except that I cannot see many wanting to go along. For example ...
I keep my waterstones as flat as possible by using the surface as evenly as I can. I am clearly shocking at this since I still need a diamond stone.
I have a couple of sets of sharpening stones. One set is for demos at wood shows. These stones are tiny, but I have no difficulty working with them. They are similar to using the end of an oilstone, as you describe. Still, I much prefer using the full length of a flat stone since this is more efficient and reliable, especially when it comes to working the back. Yes, only 1/2" of the back needs to be worked, but it is actually easier to register more than this.
Using one stone? I guess so. I use a strop at times to refresh a blade. I stop sharpening after a Medium and Ultra Fine Spyderco, and that is up to, what, 6000, perhaps 8000 grit (- my impression ... Syderco say much less)? That is sharp enough for most work. However I was carving Fiddleback Jarrah today, and the best of this was not good enough to cut without forcing the blade into the wood (not a good idea).
Regards from Perth
Derek
The problem with being adamant about what suits you as a recommendation for others is that it may not suit others. There is nothing inherently wrong with anything you stated, except that I cannot see many wanting to go along. For example ...
I keep my waterstones as flat as possible by using the surface as evenly as I can. I am clearly shocking at this since I still need a diamond stone.
I have a couple of sets of sharpening stones. One set is for demos at wood shows. These stones are tiny, but I have no difficulty working with them. They are similar to using the end of an oilstone, as you describe. Still, I much prefer using the full length of a flat stone since this is more efficient and reliable, especially when it comes to working the back. Yes, only 1/2" of the back needs to be worked, but it is actually easier to register more than this.
Using one stone? I guess so. I use a strop at times to refresh a blade. I stop sharpening after a Medium and Ultra Fine Spyderco, and that is up to, what, 6000, perhaps 8000 grit (- my impression ... Syderco say much less)? That is sharp enough for most work. However I was carving Fiddleback Jarrah today, and the best of this was not good enough to cut without forcing the blade into the wood (not a good idea).
Regards from Perth
Derek
"...It's like demonstrating that you can walk from work to the bank taking exactly one step per second the whole way."
PRICELESS!
PRICELESS!
I still separate carving (even though my stone was used by a carver). I'm working my way through Hasluck's carving book, slowly, and this morning I noticed that he suggested a washita stone (not surprised there) as the only bench stone, and slips in washita and hard arkansas if someone is so inclined, and included a recommendation for a strop treated with emery (which I'm sure was a blanket term).
Everything flat is a different story. I'm not trying to make the point of what's technically possible, but rather what's practical. But it's not a great thing for wood shows because most of the people floating by aren't so inclined to want anything other than paint by number, and three synthetic stones combined with a gadget and a diamond hone is an excellent paint by number recipe. It's also limiting when one wants to go to curved tools, skew tools, narrow tools - things that are all extremely easily sharpened freehand and require a lot of screwing around to plan to not go freehand.
These things all go together, even though it seems like they don't. I have three skewed iron planes I use regularly. They don't all have the same skew. I can't imagine sharpening them any other way than by looking at the bottom of the plane, checking to see if they are in need of adjustment (which they never are because you carefully keep them in shape by this observation) and sharpening the same way accurate sharpening is usually done - grinding just short of the edge and maintaining the proper angle a little at a time with honing. Sharpening a single iron skew plane is a minute or two. If you have to break out systems akin to legos, then it's not convenient and it leads to things like Larry Williams recommending a square rabbet plane to people when skew rabbet planes are far superior for general work.
Personally, I don't see a need for people to use out of flat stones. But I also don't see a need for them to insist they need flat ones or that it will save time (it won't, if it did save time, old stones would all be flat).
When I see people with a lot of experience still using a jig, I still am a little confused. I'm disillusioned with the wood show and publishing industry because what they offer just isn't very interesting at this point, and it's often needlessly tedious and long-taking to make sure that everyone who could only otherwise earn a participation ribbon is still pleased with what they can do. And i'm not that far along as far as folks go, I'm excited to read stuff like Hasluck's text - it's dense and $2. A recent thread about dropping the ball on another forum if you don't go and see something like amana's show has me wondering what it is exactly that people need to see. I'm confused by that whole spread of shows (WIA, etc) except for the fact that folks can indulge and socialize. The conversion rate from going to things like that and then doing good work at a later date has to be pretty low. Finding something you really want to make and then figuring it out in a simple and competent way, the conversion rate there is pretty high.
Maybe that's a different issue. I'm differentiating with what I said above to be for people who want to understand how to sharpen things quickly. The type of people who will show up at the bench with a pair of scissors, a couple of knives, some tools, etc, and then sharpen everything freehand. Vs. the type of person who runs everything through the planer and router and at the end wants to smooth plane something and then still follow it with sandpaper. The latter's never going to appreciate the subtleties of really mastering metal and abrasives in a way that doesn't involve a recipe.
