Thread: Interesting Blog about Edge Development.

Originally Posted by BobH

One thing for certain is that those photos contain a lot of info if they can be interpreted properly. Like anything it can be interpreted many different ways.

You really have to stop and ask yourself if all this info is necessary to achieve shave ready edge? Do you really need more info than a good 10X-20X loupe will give you to that end?
Bob

Sometimes. I actually just went through a bit of an issue the other day. Touched up a Germania Cutlery Works that was shaving A-OK when I set it aside a few months back. Well, it didn't look bad under a 30x loupe, so I touched it up on a Translucent Arkie. Shave improved, but still not really good. Inspection under a 60x magnifier really didn't reveal anything new either. Edges were meeting. No pits/chips/foiled edges. I did another touch up, and never did figure out just what was going on with that thing...but it shaves OK now so, I'll take it I guess?

Originally Posted by Marshal

Sometimes. I actually just went through a bit of an issue the other day. Touched up a Germania Cutlery Works that was shaving A-OK when I set it aside a few months back. Well, it didn't look bad under a 30x loupe, so I touched it up on a Translucent Arkie. Shave improved, but still not really good. Inspection under a 60x magnifier really didn't reveal anything new either. Edges were meeting. No pits/chips/foiled edges. I did another touch up, and never did figure out just what was going on with that thing...but it shaves OK now so, I'll take it I guess?

You seem to be saying that the increased magnification did nothing to help you assess the problem - and that seems to be the point that others are making - if a problem is not obvious at, say, 20 times magnification, then what is 500 magnification going to add?
N

I could be wrong, but I would imagine there would have to be some sort of visually identifiable flaw that kept that razor from shaving 'right.' The fact that I couldn't identify it at 30x, and again at 60x doesn't mean higher magnification than I have on hand wouldn't more readily reveal what was wrong with the edge.

I guess you could say that, because I got the razor to shave properly without it, no - higher magnification isn't needed.

But I would really like to know what it was I was missing. If I knew that, it could be avoided in the future. Since I don't really have a clue, I learned nothing from the experience outside of 'Doesn't shave, back to hones.' So there's a significant chance I'll see a similar problem in the future.

Originally Posted by Marshal

I could be wrong, but I would imagine there would have to be some sort of visually identifiable flaw that kept that razor from shaving 'right.' The fact that I couldn't identify it at 30x, and again at 60x doesn't mean higher magnification than I have on hand wouldn't more readily reveal what was wrong with the edge.

I guess you could say that, because I got the razor to shave properly without it, no - higher magnification isn't needed.

But I would really like to know what it was I was missing. If I knew that, it could be avoided in the future. Since I don't really have a clue, I learned nothing from the experience outside of 'Doesn't shave, back to hones.' So there's a significant chance I'll see a similar problem in the future.

I would look at it this way. If I can see a problem with a 10x-20x loupe then there is a problem. If I see a problem at 500x then it is not really a problem in any practical sense. Tied to that is that I must be able to interpret what I see at 10x-20x mag correctly in order to see a problem. There in lies the rub, thank you Will Shakespeare.

Bob

Originally Posted by BobH

I would look at it this way. If I can see a problem with a 10x-20x loupe then there is a problem. If I see a problem at 500x then it is not really a problem in any practical sense. Tied to that is that I must be able to interpret what I see at 10x-20x mag correctly in order to see a problem. There in lies the rub, thank you Will Shakespeare.

Bob

This is true. But the foil to that is, if I see something that catches my eye at high magnification, then I drop back down and look at the same spot under 20x. Now I see something amiss that didn't catch my eye the first once over at 20x. I've identified that there IS a problem because it can be seen at low magnification. I know where it is. And I know what to look for in the future under both levels of magnification.

I view it as another learning tool. Viewing various issues at varying magnifications will train your eye to spot the problem just like feeling an edge that won't shave and comparing it to one that will can calibrate your thumb and train it to feel a problem area without a lick of magnification. It helps to see that problem area under magnification before you put your thumb pad against the edge, as well as having a good edge to compare it to. Just like it helps to see an edge at high magnification, then step back down to see if you can spot the reason it won't shave at low magnification. Maybe in a few months you don't need/want high magnification often, in a couple of years you don't need/want any for most blades. No shame in having a set of training wheels to fall back on until you've learned to ride comfortably without 'em.

Originally Posted by Marshal

This is true. But the foil to that is, if I see something that catches my eye at high magnification, then I drop back down and look at the same spot under 20x. Now I see something amiss that didn't catch my eye the first once over at 20x. I've identified that there IS a problem because it can be seen at low magnification. I know where it is. And I know what to look for in the future under both levels of magnification.

I view it as another learning tool. Viewing various issues at varying magnifications will train your eye to spot the problem just like feeling an edge that won't shave and comparing it to one that will can calibrate your thumb and train it to feel a problem area without a lick of magnification. It helps to see that problem area under magnification before you put your thumb pad against the edge, as well as having a good edge to compare it to. Just like it helps to see an edge at high magnification, then step back down to see if you can spot the reason it won't shave at low magnification. Maybe in a few months you don't need/want high magnification often, in a couple of years you don't need/want any for most blades. No shame in having a set of training wheels to fall back on until you've learned to ride comfortably without 'em.

Yup, those are good points. I have seen beginners jump on the high magnification bandwagon from the get go and drive themselves crazy trying for the perfect edge under high magnification. In some cases when you see something under high magnification that you believe looks like a problem may not, in reality, be a problem. I have gotten smooth comfortable shaves from blades that when looked at under 10x-20x mag reveal some very slight imperfections in the edge. Sometimes good enough is good enough.

Bob

Just take your best shaving razor and look at it under high magnification, more then likely you will be very surprised at what you see.

Originally Posted by BobH

Yup, those are good points. I have seen beginners jump on the high magnification bandwagon from the get go and drive themselves crazy trying for the perfect edge under high magnification. In some cases when you see something under high magnification that you believe looks like a problem may not, in reality, be a problem. I have gotten smooth comfortable shaves from blades that when looked at under 10x-20x mag reveal some very slight imperfections in the edge. Sometimes good enough is good enough.

Bob

Agreed, and that is why the shave test should always be the guide and definitive factor. If it shaves, let well enough alone.

Originally Posted by Marshal

This is true. But the foil to that is, if I see something that catches my eye at high magnification, then I drop back down and look at the same spot under 20x. Now I see something amiss that didn't catch my eye the first once over at 20x. I've identified that there IS a problem because it can be seen at low magnification. I know where it is. And I know what to look for in the future under both levels of magnification.

I view it as another learning tool. Viewing various issues at varying magnifications will train your eye to spot the problem just like feeling an edge that won't shave and comparing it to one that will can calibrate your thumb and train it to feel a problem area without a lick of magnification. It helps to see that problem area under magnification before you put your thumb pad against the edge, as well as having a good edge to compare it to. Just like it helps to see an edge at high magnification, then step back down to see if you can spot the reason it won't shave at low magnification. Maybe in a few months you don't need/want high magnification often, in a couple of years you don't need/want any for most blades. No shame in having a set of training wheels to fall back on until you've learned to ride comfortably without 'em.

Referring to your comment in the first paragraph - if a problem is restricted to just one 'spot' that can only be seen at 60 plus magnification, then it's unlikely that this is the cause of a poor shave. The issue becomes one of relevance - if your bevel is good at 20 magnification, it's good to go. If, on the other hand, you can see a problem at 10 or 20 times magnification, then you may be able to identify the problem. To my mind, it doesn't need any greater magnification than this, purely because my skin can tolerate imperfections of this magnitude.

I don’t think it is so much revealing a problem, that SEM edge photos show, but the effects of technique and honing practices, like different grits and types stones, stropping and polishing with paste have on an edge, that are most illuminating.

Locating issues, causes and repairs, are still left to the interpretation of the viewer. We see that all the time here, at much lower resolution where members, see different issues and offer varied solutions.

In some ways is it much like a Dyno, the car that produces the most torque or horsepower, does not always win the race, but it does tell the builders if they are headed in the right direction.