John Arnold's method of pore fill

[Dave Bagwill]

From a mandolin website:

Q: Is paste filler good for grain/pore filling ?
A: (from John Arnold) The water base pore filler I have used for over 20 years:
Elmer's Carpenter's wood filler, colored with latex paint and thinned with water.
The most flush fill is obtained by letting the filler dry, then sanding it with 220. But I tend to favor the more expedient method of removal by wiping with denatured alcohol.

Well I hear something new everyday - he gets great finishes!

[ken cierp]

Why??? Guess work? no ratios?

John needs to update and get with the program so he can get even better, more durable finishes like the top tier of makers. Many of us were experts with the DOS computer operating system so what? Windows, through versions 7 and 8 has made life easier producing faster better results, so do the modern chemicals -- time and tech marches on. $.02

[Herman]

Pore filling still is not satisfying to me. I tried several. Stewmacs waterbased filler (sands out the pores again too easily), ordinary woodfillers (too dry), O'Brien's plastermixture (colors the wood) and Z-poxy (I gives nice results when ready, but too messy while applying, and tough on sanding high spots).

Now I will try some on laquerbase that is used in modelmaking. See what that does.
I would like to have stuff that applies easy, fills in one pass and sands like a dream.
Too demanding?

[ken cierp]

I've tried the Hood lacquer based filler -- easy to use but looses clarity (gets white) when enough is applied to fill Rosewood. The water borne fillers to me "kill" the reflective nature of the wood. The Tru-oil and shellac saw dust methods seem to be pretty easy. Also somewhere I posted that old timey fine furniture makers used hot hide glue --- very easy.

[Dave Bagwill]

Also, I did start a 'these woods don't need pore-filling' thread. Just sayin'...

[Lonnie B]

Let me preface this by saying I'm an amateur. I have finished quite a bit of wood. Mostly Walnut. In gunschool back in the sixties I not only finished wood but watched many others' project's as well. I was not happy with the pore fillers that I saw being used by others. I chose to not use them as they imparted a look of falseness to the wood. Seemed to actually cover the figuring of the wood. So I chose to use the Tru-Oil straight. No pore filler at all. I just continued to press the finish into the pores until I could no longer see them.
However.with that said on my last build I re-stored a cheap old guitar for a little girl. Her first guitar. I built a neck out of Honduran Mahogany. I did buy some pore filler (Behlen's). I have to say that I was not necessarily unhappy with it. I'm sure it saved me tons of coats of finish. It did not give a false look. I was able to see the figure of the wood. Also I didn't have any open pores that I could see. I will probably use it again. Just my 2 cents.

[TonyinNYC]

I am sticking with Z-Poxy finishing resin. It works well, and really adds to the beauty of the wood.
I have used TimberMate with great success in the past, but it needs to be left only in the pores or it will not look as good as it could. I tend to use timbermate on headstock veneers because I don't want to mix up a batch of Z-Poxy for such a small piece, and because I seem to forget to fill the veneer while I am doing the rest of the box every single time!
On my first guitar, I filled with lacquer. I put on a dozen coats and then sanded back when it was all dry. However, because lacquer takes a long time to fully gas off, a year after the guitar was all perfectly flat and shiny, the pores began to show up again due to the lacquer shrinking as it gave up the solvent that was still present. Now my #1 looks like I did not pore fill it...which, technically, I didn't.
Lesson learned.