Thread: So...What Do You Think Of These Photos?

I've encountered a guy who is a self-proclaimed "honemeister extraordinaire." He claims to be using an 800X microscope and claims that his photos prove how well he hones.

So, given these before and after photos, what are your opinions?

Here's my amateur opinion, as I have only looked at a bug once under a microscope.

The two photos look like they were not taken with the same magnification setting & the bottom photo looks like the blade was positioned so the "shadow" would hide the edge & give it the appearance of smooth.

Do I win a prize now?

But how does it shave?

Sorry, his photos and reputation are all we have to go on.

What's your point Utopian? Who is this guy anyway? To put a positive spin on this thread if I can, I'd like to share ideas with this person. Apparently he has never been here and seen some of the much better photos at a much lower resolution. We might be able to help this person walk a straighter line with our help.....

Im not sure what all the fuss is about with the 1000000X microscope photos, they dont tell me much at all TBH.
They only show a fraction of the blade, you could have a perfectly polished bevel at the heel and at the toe it might not be set at all.

I swear by my scope .
It's loupes that baffle me ..

I think that guy is a Jokemeister not a honemeister

That is not 800 mag. Looks more like my 80 mag that I use when I hone.

As far as "honemeister" I think he has a way to go. There is too much stria for my taste. A little stria does not bother me but that is a lot for a supposed finished edge. I think that is about a 1000 grit stone stria pattern. I could be wrong.

Originally Posted by markbignosekelly

Im not sure what all the fuss is about with the 1000000X microscope photos, they dont tell me much at all TBH.
They only show a fraction of the blade, you could have a perfectly polished bevel at the heel and at the toe it might not be set at all.

Never seen the point in these either , unless someone has discovered a way to shave with a 6" x 4" print.

Well I don't like the magnification in these pictures. I'm sort of with John and they do not seem the same. They are much higher than I noemally would see.the second picture the bevel face does not seem to match the edge. In order to set a face of the bevel that is that pure the edge should be more straight with every notch there should be something on the face. You cannot take the face that clean without every scratch in the face having a corresponding tick in the edge and that works in reverse too. Unless of course the planes did not meet and then the edge would be its own plane or third plane. also in th e first picture the shoulder of the bevel is more refined than the area near the edge, meaning they have not yet honed to the edge.