I was reading a comment on another thread this morning, one we've all seen some version of a thousand times, about someone disliking poly because it looks like plastic. It started me thinking about whether this is a fair criticism, or maybe just a bias based on how poly gets used sometimes.
Granted, some folks think every project should be finished with globs of high-gloss poly, and the result is not always pretty. Some projects are just better if you leave the natural texture of the would exposed to the eyes and hands. But if you're going to put some sort of topcoat on a piece, is there really that much aesthetic difference between, say, a glossy lacquer finish and a glossy poly finish?
There are many factors that go into choosing a topcoat: ease of application, durability, water resistance, to name a few. But purely from the standpoint of appearance, is "plastic-looking" a valid criticism of poly, or is it more about how a finish is applied rather than which finish is applied?
I'll go pop some popcorn and wait for the fireworks to start.
Granted, some folks think every project should be finished with globs of high-gloss poly, and the result is not always pretty. Some projects are just better if you leave the natural texture of the would exposed to the eyes and hands. But if you're going to put some sort of topcoat on a piece, is there really that much aesthetic difference between, say, a glossy lacquer finish and a glossy poly finish?
There are many factors that go into choosing a topcoat: ease of application, durability, water resistance, to name a few. But purely from the standpoint of appearance, is "plastic-looking" a valid criticism of poly, or is it more about how a finish is applied rather than which finish is applied?
I'll go pop some popcorn and wait for the fireworks to start.