Microscopic photos of different edges YG Escher, Coticule, Translucent Arkie and more

Fisrt of all I would like to apologize for the quaulity of the Photos, I use a student type cheap german Microscop it's great and lightweight but it has a very premetive Camara on it :td


1. King 6k
Progression: King 1k > King 6k
Attachment 199900


2.Ardennes coticule selected
Progression: King 1k > King 6k > coticule ( Slurry to clear water )
Attachment 199901


3.Translucent Ark
Progression: King 1k > King 6k > Translucent Ark ( 250+ Laps with water)
Attachment 199902


4. New 30$ German Thuringain
Progression: King 1k > King 6k > Thuringain ( impressive for cheap underlooked hone ) ( Slurry to clear water )
Attachment 199903


5. Yellow Green Escher
Progression: King 1k > King 6k > Escher ( Slurry to clear water )
Attachment 199904
( The picture is reversed left to right, after taking the photo I realized that I have tilted the camera to the opposite angle so I have reversed it for better viewing )


If you can tolerate image quality, I can photograph B BG DB YG Eschers edges, SRD Droeschers Edges, LD LV Coticules, Jnats... and whatever stones I have.

all Photo are of the same razor a filarmonica, all are from the same angle, lighting, camara ( execpt the last photo ), and magnification power is X160.

Note that all photos are off the stones no stropping at all.

Happy honing

I know you were working with a control progression, but that is not a true representation of the Arkansas capabilities. It should be led into at least 10k level and use oil or another honing solution.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kcb5150

I know you were working with a control progression, but that is not a true representation of the Arkansas capabilities. It should be led into at least 10k level and use oil or another honing solution.

---

True, I was working with controlled progression, and yes it has affected the dimensions of the translucent Arkansas capabilities... I consider this particular stone my finest finisher. Here is some photos I took using my phone camera for the edge its produce...
[Attachment 199905ATTACH=CONFIG]199905[/ATTACH]
Attachment 199906

Progression:
Coticule > Thuringain > Translucent Arkansas 500- laps

Using water gives a finer edge than smith honing solution, I have confirmed it myself under the microscope, even using smith honing solution after water will downgrade the edge. I planning the revisit this subject and compares Smith & Dans honing solution vs. Water in another thread later on.


Regards,

Get some plain glycerin, put 4 drops on the hone, water, rub and hone. Works great.

I rate a perfectly done trans ark edge above any thuringian edge, but it is a lot of effort to get there....

Water on a finely polished Ark is burnishing a lot more than with oil, that's why the finish looks so much better. Any stone that mostly burnishes will produce what appears to be a very near perfect mirror finish. I never use water on an Ark myself.

I would pretty much rate a well done Ark edge top of the heap personally. Other good stones can get pretty darn close - almost indistinguishable - but I think my very best edges have been Ark edges.

The only hone I have that soundly defeats it is my vosgienne, but I can't just buy another with identical properties ever so it kind of gets disqualified on those grounds. I still want to find one of the ultrafine charnleys just so I can compare, but they seem few and far between and importing hones that are usually over a foot long is too costly for unknowns...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eKretz

Water on a finely polished Ark is burnishing a lot more than with oil, that's why the finish looks so much better. Any stone that mostly burnishes will produce what appears to be a very near perfect mirror finish. I never use water on an Ark myself.

I would pretty much rate a well done Ark edge top of the heap personally. Other good stones can get pretty darn close - almost indistinguishable - but I think my very best edges have been Ark edges.

---

Totally agree with you on the mirror edge of an Arkansas stone, but for me Escher hones are supreme finishers in term of speed, finesse and consistency.

Not all translucent Arkansas are the same, also depending on the steel of the razor Arkansas stones tend to chip the edge microscopiclly due to their hardness, while Eschers refine the edge to a very straight line even under 640x magnification power.

For me all the above edges are comfortable, but consider that I am a trimmer only not I full shaver.

I don't like thuringians with Sheffield steel too much. If I were forced to, I'd use a dark blue, but the softer ones are a really imperfect match imo. For speed, I like my La Lunes. They cut aggressively and you can get an edge a bit keener than a thuri.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AljuwaiedAK

Totally agree with you on the mirror edge of an Arkansas stone, but for me Escher hones are supreme finishers in term of speed, finesse and consistency.

Not all translucent Arkansas are the same, also depending on the steel of the razor Arkansas stones tend to chip the edge microscopiclly due to their hardness, while Eschers refine the edge to a very straight line even under 640x magnification power.

For me all the above edges are comfortable, but consider that I am a trimmer only not I full shaver.

---

When I look at your edges, the trans ark (ignore the scratches) edge looks better than any of the other edges. I'm not surprised.

I haven't had any trouble with edge chipping on any razors, except on synthetic stones, no matter how many passes.

I think that studies like this are useful, but are really hard to standardize properly.

Even with the hone progression standardized, it is really difficult to get the lighting perfectly even for all the photographs. I used to have access to extremely high-quality microscopes, and even then I had issues with consistent reflected light.

People are going to accept the data that agree with their own observations, and they'll ignore the data that don't.

Still, as more and more data are collated from these finishers, we'll have a chance to cut through the noise for a more accurate description of the finishes from these hones. Of course, the look of the finished edge is only one factor that determines what a good shaving edge may be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yohannrjm

I think that studies like this are useful, but are really hard to standardize properly.

Even with the hone progression standardized, it is really difficult to get the lighting perfectly even for all the photographs. I used to have access to extremely high-quality microscopes, and even then I had issues with consistent reflected light.

People are going to accept the data that agree with their own observations, and they'll ignore the data that don't.

Still, as more and more data are collated from these finishers, we'll have a chance to cut through the noise for a more accurate description of the finishes from these hones. Of course, the look of the finished edge is only one factor that determines what a good shaving edge may be.

---

The hand of the honer is also a variable to be considered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaveW

When I look at your edges, the trans ark (ignore the scratches) edge looks better than any of the other edges. I'm not surprised.

I haven't had any trouble with edge chipping on any razors, except on synthetic stones, no matter how many passes.

---

Hello Dave,

Nice observation my friend, true the Arkie edge is the most straight edge of the above, but that might be because I honed the razor 180 laps more than the other hones.

It's good to know that you haven't encounter any microscopic chips in your razors, for me soft steel and Japanese extreme hard steels are prone to chip microscopiclly more than mild( Sheffield) to hard(fillys, most german razors) steel. These chips can't be spotted sometimes even under 40-60 x, does these affect shaving God knows, but seeing the chip even under 1000x makes you feel that this ain't good:/

I forgot to say, also, that if there are any foreign particles at all on a trans or black ark, chipping will occur, of course. So I wouldn't say that it's not something that can happen on an ark.

What I've noticed with the very very hard steels is that the ark stones are a little less aggressive than sedimentary stones like jnats and they quit cutting them sooner. Whether that's because novaculite is slightly less hard than untransformed siO2, I don't know.

Ditto on the passes, it takes a lot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yohannrjm

People are going to accept the data that agree with their own observations, and they'll ignore the data that don't.

Of course, the look of the finished edge is only one factor that determines what a good shaving edge may be.

---

Yep right there is the truth of the "Look at my pretty Bevel pics"

Pressure is such a huge factor it isn't even funny..

If you want to really do a more convincing test of the actual Rocks then set the razors to the side..
Get your self about 20 small squares of Hardened steel all cut from the same billet and a well set up way to take the same pic over and over..
Set up a mechanical stroke that applies the same pressure and start testing just the Rocks, that way you are eliminating as much of the variables as possible..

But the pretty pics of bevel scratches mean next to nutin


Seems that is at least the twentieth time I have posted that exact same thing :rofl2:



ps: It has been my experience that watching people hone to eliminate "Scratch Patterns" has them producing Harsh, Fragile edges...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yohannrjm

I think that studies like this are useful, but are really hard to standardize properly.

Even with the hone progression standardized, it is really difficult to get the lighting perfectly even for all the photographs. I used to have access to extremely high-quality microscopes, and even then I had issues with consistent reflected light.

People are going to accept the data that agree with their own observations, and they'll ignore the data that don't.

Still, as more and more data are collated from these finishers, we'll have a chance to cut through the noise for a more accurate description of the finishes from these hones. Of course, the look of the finished edge is only one factor that determines what a good shaving edge may be.

---

I agree with you on the difficulty of getting a controlled test especially when it comes to light reflection, but honing beside microscope help you to learn the changes that you introduce to the edge during the process of honing. Measurement of sharpness is almost impossible at least to my knowledge.

To Dave

The chips might occur due to grit particles on the hone, but it's consistent with the type of the razor the I use with the Arkie. I know that you don't like to slurry your Arkansas stones, but I would like you to try it with the hard steel that you mentioned it would be interesting to know if a type of steel can resist the cutting powers of slurried Arkie.

I am planning to obtain a Japanese razor that made from tungsten steel to test it with different stones especially the Arkies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gssixgun

Seems that is at least the twentieth time I have posted that exact same thing :rofl2:



ps: It has been my experience that watching people hone to eliminate "Scratch Patterns" has them producing Harsh, Fragile edges...

---

I think you are allergic to microscopes Glen :rofl2:

Yes, some steels degrade a lot after the frist shave especially when I hone the to the point that they become like a mirror but I never suspect that is the reason I remember checking one of the soft steel razors after shaving the edge looked like old foil when I stropped the razor the edge chipped microscopiclly, but never had this issue with the filly razor. It make sense since the more you refine the the more it become weaker.

What I'm doing is more like learning than testing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kcb5150

The only hone I have that soundly defeats it is my vosgienne, but I can't just buy another with identical properties ever so it kind of gets disqualified on those grounds. I still want to find one of the ultrafine charnleys just so I can compare, but they seem few and far between and importing hones that are usually over a foot long is too costly for unknowns...

---

Next time I am in the city, I can bring a couple of CF stones for you to play around with if you care to journey to Brooklyn. My absolute finest is not that big. 6 inch maybe. but its my favorite of all even over my arks