Thread: A magnified comparison of many honing results

Originally Posted by Str8RazorSerg

Boo!! Can we give a thumbs-down to comments??

The guy is only expressing an observation. Never did he state that his observation is a direct correlation with quality of shave/hone. Let the man share his observation.

But as #1 in gssixguns post states these aren't really HIS observations! they are pictures from a different web site that the OP has linked to but before I clicked on the link (which I did AFTER seeing gs's post FWIW) I assumed the pictures were the OPs and and the link was to HIS web site including the same information of HIS findings.

I think also what is being said is that while looking at a magnified edge/bevle is all well and good you never really know how or how well a stone performs until you put the steal to the skin! So use the photos not to judge how well a stone has done at honing but if you are on the right track and done have burr's and other anomalies. (glen please correct me if I am wrong/misinterpreted your post)

Originally Posted by Str8RazorSerg

Boo!! Can we give a thumbs-down to comments??

The guy is only expressing an observation. Never did he state that his observation is a direct correlation with quality of shave/hone. Let the man share his observation.

The problem with many newbies is that they see some pictures of flawless looking bevels and thing this is the holly grail of honing a razor.
No it is not, because if you take pics at different angles to the bevel you will see different scratch pattern on every one of them. I am not saying the pics were intentionally taken this way to mislead people, but there is more than one side to the coin.
I understand the fascination with the shown results on those pics, but sometimes post like that just reinforce the false notion that the bevel has to be flawless after it comes off the stones. That is impossible to achieve in reasonable amount of time, and also not what makes the shaves great.

Originally Posted by BenjamanBarker

But as #1 in gssixguns post states these aren't really HIS observations! they are pictures from a different web site that the OP has linked to but before I clicked on the link (which I did AFTER seeing gs's post FWIW) I assumed the pictures were the OPs and and the link was to HIS web site including the same information of HIS findings.

I think also what is being said is that while looking at a magnified edge/bevle is all well and good you never really know how or how well a stone performs until you put the steal to the skin! So use the photos not to judge how well a stone has done at honing but if you are on the right track and done have burr's and other anomalies. (glen please correct me if I am wrong/misinterpreted your post)

An observation is an observation, regardless of where it was observed from. I agree that it doesn't mean squat until proven by putting steel-to-face, so it's a given that people should take it for what it's worth. I think the OP was just sharing what he found...nothing more.

One thing that I always like to see with pictures is the other side of the bevel..........

Agree that the lighting and angle can change a lot of the perception.

Follow up comments regarding any particular pics of the bevel from a particular stone and their correlation to shaving with that bevel would be nice. But then you have to take into account all the individual variabilities and preferences.

To me, always worth the exercise for that individual.

Have fun.

Originally Posted by Str8RazorSerg

Boo!! Can we give a thumbs-down to comments??

The guy is only expressing an observation. Never did he state that his observation is a direct correlation with quality of shave/hone. Let the man share his observation.

I think you just did,,, Which by the way is excatly what I did, but somehow you didn't like my observation just like I didn't agree with the OP's observation...
Mostly because it isn't his work so he has no basis to compare these edges, which makes them just pretty pics that mean nothing to honing...
But when you toss the pics up, you get responses like in post #7 from another newer guy who just assumed he needs to go back to the hones and try for a mirrored bevel... Which won't make a bit of difference to how the razor shaves...
Then you get respones like mine and Mainaman trying to clarify the situation which you didn't like ...

I often use a 10x and 20x loupe to check the bevel during honing. But can never really see the edge which when perfect disappears from view.

My college science classes help me to appreciate that light microscope images like these are tricky to obtain. These are very nice depictions of the bevel and edge, albeit from one side. An electron microscope is even better. The Complete Guide to Sharpening by Leonard Lee confirms results similar to these optical images. The electron microscope revealed that the 8000 grit followed by CrO was near perfect on chisels. Yes, the woodworking guys are almost obsessed with sharpness as we SR guys.

These and other images confirm that there is a difference in the results expected from various stones. However, I bet in experienced hands most can yield good shaving results. I for one welcome more objective evaluation of blade sharpness. Thanks for sharing Lynn.

Originally Posted by gssixgun

2. The scratch pattern means nothing to the shaving comfort
4. The sides of the bevel are only a very small part of the equation
5. Once you strop on linen and leather all this changes

I agree completely with what Gary says in 2,4 and 5.

My comments were directed to the edge on the C12k and the Cro2.

Originally Posted by Lynn

One thing that I always like to see with pictures is the other side of the bevel..........

Agree that the lighting and angle can change a lot of the perception.

Follow up comments regarding any particular pics of the bevel from a particular stone and their correlation to shaving with that bevel would be nice. But then you have to take into account all the individual variabilities and preferences.

To me, always worth the exercise for that individual.

Have fun.

And by way of kissing up, I agree with Lynn also.

Above all, as has been pointed out by so many others in the past. It's your personal experience with the shave after honing and stropping.

I have a tough face and almost never get a rash or tenderness, but I am a baby if I feel the blade pulling on the hairs.

I am magnification man. I post this link in all microscope threads!

http://straightrazorpalace.com/advan...ent-light.html

Originally Posted by Str8RazorSerg

Boo!! Can we give a thumbs-down to comments??

The guy is only expressing an observation. Never did he state that his observation is a direct correlation with quality of shave/hone. Let the man share his observation.

"The guy" has shared his (or rather someone else's) observation (with appropriate attribution I might add, but someone else's work nevertheless). Now others are sharing their observations to help put the original observations into context.

James.

EDIT: OK, I see I am late to this party. However, I fail to see what the hoo-haa is. This is a forum, things get discussed. Rather than discussing how we discuss things, why don't we try debating the actual thing itself? For example, are any of Glen's points invalid? If so, why?

On the topic of whose work is whose, the OP, IME, gave very fair and open attribution to Zowada and never claimed the pictures as his own. His wording might not have been as clear as it could have been, but when read carefully (not just reading the title and jumping to the pics) he has referenced the originating author of the material appropriately.

This has been in our library since February, 2009: Bevels produced by various hones - Straight Razor Place Wiki