Micro-Chipping and Magnification

My understanding of micro-shipping is that it is a chip in the blade's edge that is noticeable under magnification, but not with the naked eye. As the magnification increases, so does the observable presence of micro-chipping. So I am wondering if we can arrive at a consensus where if the edge as viewed, if continuous, might be said to be ready to apply to the face.

From my experience, I would place it at 10x, as viewed with a Bausch & Lomb Hastings triplet loupe.

I don't use 100x anymore, but when I did, if I saw chips at 100x I went back down a stone or two to get them out. At 400x very few finishers can leave you without chips, particularly on lower grind angled razors, but you kind of get a sense for when a chip is "too big" at that resolution.

I can usually pick up serrations, or micro chips at 4x.
I don't spend a lot of time viewing at 10x, only when something feels wrong.
I think Proscope is sending me a 100x lens though.. haven't had a high-mag objective for the scope in a very long time.
Hopefully - I won't let it drive me nuts..

It bugs me when I see a chip under 100x, granted my 100x is a $6 eBay contraption so I am not sure the magnification is all there.
I've had a few problems with chipping on 8K stones that are visible under 100x, but not often.

10x loupe for me. If its clean then its good.

Definitely the higher the mag the more likely hood of actually seeing something.

I use a cheap amazon loupe for honing, it says the mag is 30/60x, i bet is is half that on both accounts, if the edge looks good on that the higher mag doesn't matter for shave quality.

buca3152 said:

10x loupe for me. If its clean then its good.

Click to expand...

Now that's interesting ... the chips I mention in another thread are seen (and hard to see) at 80x. Am I being too worried? Still, the reason I looked was because the shave degraded.

Well alot of chipping can mean a lot of things. Im not going to even try to figure out why, but what I do is the 10x loupe. I have a veho 400x that I dont use much anymore. If you can get to clean steel at the bevel setting stage and check the progress with the loupe between grits, I think you will be able to spot where it happens. Diamond plates IMO can create chipping. No scientific proof or anything, but I dont normally use them for that reason. Dont get me wrong now, lots of people do with no issues. Use what you have and see how it goes. If you have alot of trouble, I would be willing to hone it for you for postage. Let me know how you make out.

While I was at Alex's we used a 400x. The difference between a serrated microchipped edge and a perfect smooth line at the edge was a little palm stropping.

Just 20 strokes on the palm brought edges from serrated to smooth at 400x.

So I say, when in doubt, strop!

Okay ... so here's a basic question: Can you over-strop? I mean before your arms wear out?

IMO no, Proper stropping that is. I find that 60 laps on leather is perfect for me anyway.

I'll just add that I've only used 10x to 20x Hastings triplets thus far and that I'm perfectly happy with them. Why add to the confusion by magnifying further? In following an old account from "the day," which advocated crazy things by our standard, like bread-knifing to remove chips, I read that a 5x magnification is to be recommended, causing me to wonder if it might be better to move in this way. Off 10x, for example, I can locate the problem area, and then go by the feel on the stone and the glint of the reflected light afterwards.

Alum of Potash said:

I'll just add that I've only used 10x to 20x Hastings triplets thus far and that I'm perfectly happy with them. Why add to the confusion by magnifying further? In following an old account from "the day," which advocated crazy things by our standard, like bread-knifing to remove chips, I read that a 5x magnification is to be recommended, causing me to wonder if it might be better to move in this way. Off 10x, for example, I can locate the problem area, and then go by the feel on the stone and the glint of the reflected light afterwards.

Click to expand...

I can only answer why I have been using such high magnification. I'm new at this so the comparison of visual presentation and "three finger feel" is a learning process for me. I suspect that once one is more experienced, such a thing will not be necessary.

Alum of Potash said:

My understanding of micro-shipping is that it is a chip in the blade's edge that is noticeable under magnification, but not with the naked eye. As the magnification increases, so does the observable presence of micro-chipping. So I am wondering if we can arrive at a consensus where if the edge as viewed, if continuous, might be said to be ready to apply to the face.

From my experience, I would place it at 10x, as viewed with a Bausch & Lomb Hastings triplet loupe.

Click to expand...

I am sure that the 10x level would work for me, based on my experience with cheap loupes labeled 10x, but seem lower. I would not doubt others who's skin type required a higher level of refinement though.

LBussy said:

I can only answer why I have been using such high magnification. I'm new at this so the comparison of visual presentation and "three finger feel" is a learning process for me. I suspect that once one is more experienced, such a thing will not be necessary.

Click to expand...

Does this degraded edge look good at 10x? Nothing wrong with looking at higher magnifications, but we know that the most perfect shaving edges will look terrible if the magnification is high enough.

bluesman 7 said:

I am sure that the 10x level would work for me, based on my experience with cheap loupes labeled 10x, but seem lower. I would not doubt others who's skin type required a higher level of refinement though.

Click to expand...

The B&L Hastings triplet is not a cheap loupe, so 10x is what it is, 10x. My sense is that it would be enough irregardless of skin sensitivity. Beyond the edge itself, a lot has to do with the lather quality, this being half the shave according to the oft-quoted Wm. Hone.

bluesman 7 said:

Does this degraded edge look good at 10x? Nothing wrong with looking at higher magnifications, but we know that the most perfect shaving edges will look terrible if the magnification is high enough.

Click to expand...

Bis. Exactly.

bluesman 7 said:

Does this degraded edge look good at 10x? Nothing wrong with looking at higher magnifications, but we know that the most perfect shaving edges will look terrible if the magnification is high enough.

Click to expand...

It does mostly. I can pick out maybe 5 tiny chips down the edge but they are very small at that level. I did not look at it with higher magnification before the shave went to hell. I do know it shaved well the first time, the second time not so much and required a trip back to the strop.

Now I KNOW everyone says they have a tough beard but the other variable here is that I had a 2-day beard.

I'll just have to pay more attention as things happen and change and pay special attention to the shave angle and see what happens.