Some time ago I had read about a new enamel product that is
hardened by exposure to ultraviolet light. Does anyone have a name
and source for this product ?
This kind of product should not be called ‘enamel’. In this context
what we call enamel is glass and that product is a coloring agent
used on metal.
Enamel is vitreous and melts and fuses to the metal at a temp of
approximately 1450’ (or more). Lower temp if you are using enamels
for aluminum. Louise
Some time ago I had read about a new enamel product that is hardened by exposure to ultraviolet light.
Hello Robert, : )
It seems that there have been several posts lately about products
which add color when applied onto metal and “cured” in a variety of
ways. These coloring systems often seem to be mistaken for, and / or
misnamed “Enamels” when they are in fact not the same materials as
enamels at all, and the finished appearance is achieved in a very
different process to enameling.
Does anyone have a name and source for this product ?
There are many color system products available which become “cured”
in a variety of ways. You can search for on the Orchid
Archives with search terms & product names such as… “Cororit,”
“Ceramit,” or “Durenamel.” And other types of color systems like,
“Colores Epoxy Resin,” “Resin,” “Epoxy,” or “Epoxy Resin.”
One of the products, and the one you may be inquiring about, is a
color system product known as “Colorit.” It is photosensitive – it
is cured with a blue light. There is a VERY informative post on the
Orchid Archives regarding “Colorit’s” properties and application.
Orchid Archives Link:
And you can probably email the person who made that post for
additional
I believe that Gesswein Co. Inc. www.gesswein.comTel: 1-800-544-2043
x287 in CT: 203-366-5400 sells the product. There may be other
similar products that would be of use to you and hopefully you will
receive additional posts to your inquiry. Hope you find the product
that will best serve your needs!
Very Best Regards!
Sharon Scalise
Ornamental Creations
@Ornamental_Creations
http://users.netconnect.com.au/~sscalise/
I agree with Sharon and Louise, these kinds of products should not
be called enamel. This is very misleading, and amounts to false
representati on.
A true enamel is a vitreous product, of ancient and honorable
lineage, and will last indefinitely. During the Renaissance a
piece of enameled jewelry was more highly rated than many precious
stones. Today, epoxy, resins, other products are called enamels,
and the buying public is unaware that they are not what they are
what they are advertised to be… Prior to the 1920’s, an enamel
always referred to the vitreous material we use today. Then a
paint manufacturer developed a glossy paint, named it enamel," and
confusion has reigned rampant ever since. . Time after time, when
I am doing a show, I have to explain that my cloisonne enamels
did not come out of a paint can, and I did not paint them on with
a paint brush. It has gotten now that every time I do a show, I
have printed handouts explaining what a true enamel is. Alma
Anytime I’ve talked about it to other jeweller’s I’ve described it
as a low temperature curing, hard enamel. My instructor’s knee jerk
reaction is that it is not safe for food products, like covering a
copper goblet sample so that it can actually be used. Anyone who
can hazard a guess I would like to hear from, and for those who are
traditionalists in the enamel field, how do you suggest such a
product be described so as not to insult those that engage in
traditional enamelling methods?
Kindest Regards,
David Woolley
4th Year in a Bachelors of Applied Arts
Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada
Hi David,
Anytime I've talked about it to other jeweler's I've described it as a low temperature curing, hard enamel."
Why not call it what it is: epoxy resin, acrylate, or polyester
resin? Artists state that they use acrylics, oils, water colours or
mixed media. Similarly, art jewelers state quite clearly what
materials are used (any issue of Metalsmith or Ornament will support
this assertion). So why not follow suit?
As you might guess, I find this issue really bothersome.
There is a very well respected jeweler here in Victoria who works
with gold. I saw one of his pieces ornamented with a white pigment. I
asked him what it was and he said it was the “new enamel” that is
epoxy resin. I mentioned the traditional method of enameling and he
rationalized his use of the epoxy stuff by stating that his customers
didn’t know the difference so why not use the easier approach.
I am slowly making headway in producing and selling “fired glass on
metal” (meaning enamel) jewellry in this town. It’s hard and I have
many failures. I just hate to see this ancient craft with its long
tradition in Europe, the Middle East, and Asia degraded by quick
fixes.
It is for this reason, that if there is an opportunity to show how
the craft, I take it, doing both in-store demonstrations and
participating in craft fairs as a demonstrator.
So if you will be in or around Victoria, BC come and see real enamel
work either at the Rock and Gem show this March, or at the Filburg
Festival in August?
David Popham,
Artist-in-Residence, Filburg Festival
Hello K. David W. & All in this discussion thread, : )
Well this has opened up the discussion of the correct use of the
term “enamel” over the marketing driven misused of the term for
resin, epoxy, polymer, & compost products" again hasn’t it?
Anytime I've talked about it to other jeweller's I've described it as a low temperature curing, hard enamel.
Well really I wouldn’t call it a “hard enamel” it’s not. A hard
enamel is a “vitreous glass enamel” that is hard firing and is fired
in a kiln at between aprox. 1300 degrees F. to 1550 degrees F.
The “low temperature curing” part is correct, but it is a
“low-temperature-curing Resin” which after being subjected to low
temperature has a fairly tough or hard surface. Or perhaps if you are
speaking of a different product it may be… a “photosensitive
curing ceramic-reinforced composite material” which after being
exposed to a light ends up having a fairly hard or tough surface.
I would not suggest that the word “Enamel” be used in regard to the
“Color System” products being marketed to the jewelry field these
days. They are purposely trying to market these products under the
image of a very different material & process. One that has been
around for centuries, and has come to hold a certain position of
respect as a fine craft, for the degree of precision, technical
requirement, & difficulty there is to the process.
Also “Vitreous Glass Enamel” has vastly different properties to any
of the other non vitreous “Resin” or “Composite Color System”
products. ( Would you call an apple – a fish? Or a piece of plastic
– a piece of metal? : ) That is how very different these materials
are from each other!
I suggest that when talking about epoxies, resins, photosensitive
cured ceramic-reinforced composite material, or
low-temperature-curing resin, ( which are often liquid two-part
systems, catalyst and color that are mixed together, then heated or
baked at low temperatures,) it would be best to describe the
material or product with the appropriate material terms. Instead of
just calling it something it’s not.
For example when talking about a “low-temperature-curing resin” I
believe it should be called a “Low-Temperature-Curing-Resin” When
talking about a “Photosensitive Curing Ceramic-Reinforced Composite
Material” then call it that! Or call it by it’s product name… but
don’t call it another material or product. Don’t call it
Enamel/Glass On Metal, it’s not.
There are many color system products available which become “cured”
in a variety of ways. Products & materials like… Cororit, Ceramit,
Durenamel. And other types of color systems like, Colores Epoxy
Resin, Resins, and Epoxies, none of which are enamels.
I find it odd, and really a bit frustrating that some people, and
sometimes even the manufacturers of these type of materials, want to
call these materials inaccurate names. Or at least compare them to,
blur the image of, and confuse their properties with “Enamels.” It
only serves to create confusion for craftsmen simply trying to find
& use products that will best suit their needs. I have no problem
with these produces, they are useful for many processes. I only find
the confused use of the term “Enamels” for them frustrating. We don’t
want to call silver – gold, or a Nissan a BMW… Why would anyone
want to call a resin,-- glass enamel?
and for those who are traditionalists in the enamel field, how do you suggest such a product be described so as not to insult those that engage in traditional enamelling methods?
Good question David! It isn’t really quite a case of traditional
enamelling verses a modern “enamel” technique… these products in
question really aren’t “Enamels.” Not in a traditional sense, and
not in a modern sense, they are not the “New Enamels” they are
different materials entirely.
Without distinction in terms to specify separate things, we would
call everything a “thingy-ma-bob.” There would be no distinct
names for plants and animals, it’s would be… a “gray animal” no
matter if it were a whale or an elephant…salt & fresh water would
just be called “water” & when you asked for a glass of it you might
get a surprise…
I see that there have been many posts on this subject in the past,
mine included, : ) I hope that eventually people will be able to
easily find on which ever product that they wish to use,
and use a term for it which best describes it’s properties.
With Very Best Regards To All!
Sharon Scalise
Ornamental Creations
@Ornamental_Creations
http://users.netconnect.com.au/~sscalise/
I’m not an enamelist. I purchased a used kiln before the holidays
and am gearing up to give it a go. After reading as much as I could
get my hands on it’s obvious that good enameling is a challenge.
I can understand why so many enamelist are upset by the term
"enamels" when referring to epoxy because they clearly are not
enamels. Yes, they mimic enamels in that they add color to a piece.
But they are not enamels. They are epoxy resins.
In response to the comment made by the goldsmith “my customers don’t
know the difference anyway” well here is the perfect opportunity to
educate your consumer! I work quite a bit with expoxy resin and find
customers are amazed that I can take such a mundane substance such as
"glue" and turn it into something so beautiful.
Just my two cents…
Pam from cloudy and cold Massachusetts
From a semantics point of view, I think the term ‘enamel’ is a
rather loose one, at best. Myself, I have always assumed that it
means vitreous fired material when we are discussing jewelry, but
something else when I buy paint for my kids model cars or I go to the
paint store. Thanks to our wonderful English language. One point on
which I have developed a rather sensitive attitude, though, is
performing repairs on epoxy resin type pieces. Many customers have
bought pieces believing they have genuine, vitreous enamels. Another
related situation is a material that resembles black onyx, which the
customers also believe is the case. Any heat applied to pieces with
the epoxy type resins can lead to disaster where genuine vitreous
enamel will be uneffected and onyx can be easily removed first, if
necessary. On the bright side, it is also easy to replace the
material if you have some ceramit or similar stuff.
I would not suggest that the word "Enamel" be used in regard to the "Color System" products being marketed to the jewelry field these days. They are purposely trying to market these products under the image of a very different material & process. One that has been around for centuries, and has come to hold a certain position of respect as a fine craft, for the degree of precision, technical requirement, & difficulty there is to the process.
Also "Vitreous Glass Enamel" has vastly different properties to any of the other non vitreous "Resin" or "Composite Color System" products. ( Would you call an apple -- a fish? Or a piece of plastic -- a piece of metal? : ) That is how very different these materials are from each other!
I suggest that when talking about epoxies, resins, photosensitive cured ceramic-reinforced composite material, or low-temperature-curing resin, ( which are often liquid two-part systems, catalyst and color that are mixed together, then heated or baked at low temperatures,) it would be best to describe the material or product with the appropriate material terms. Instead of just calling it something it's not.
For example when talking about a "low-temperature-curing resin" I believe it should be called a "Low-Temperature-Curing-Resin" When talking about a "Photosensitive Curing Ceramic-Reinforced Composite Material" then call it that! Or call it by it's product name.... but don't call it another material or product. Don't call it Enamel/Glass On Metal, it's not.
I do agree. I am a hobbyist, not a production jeweler. I make a
lot of pieces for my historical reenactment friends. I always make
a point of calling it “resin inlay” or “faux/fake enamel”. I have
actually went though the effort of doing a small amount of vitreous
enamel using historical techniques. It was a right bear, and I will
not disparage vitreous enamel by foisting any other process off in
it’s name. In my research, I did find that everything from wax to
colored varnish was used to emulate the look of true enamel in a lot
of pieces from the roman era on. So faking the difficult process of
enameling is nothing new.
Just call it what it really is…
Ron Charlotte – Gainesville, FL
@Ron_Charlotte1 OR afn03234@afn.org
want to call silver -- gold, or a Nissan a BMW... Why would anyone want to call a resin,-- glass enamel?
Cause it’s easier to say to customers than
“Low-Temperature-Curing-Resin” or “Photosensitive Curing
Ceramic-Reinforced Composite Material”?
I’m not trying to be facetious, but naming things ‘easier’ seems to
be pretty common in jewelry as well as a lot of aspects in life. Not
all of them are purposefully dishonest, just simpler. Like trying to
teach a neophyte how to use the computer, it’s easier to start out
with saying “Don’t touch that button ever” and explain yourself later
than “Well, in certain cases you may want to use that, but blah
blah…(technical issues)” and watch his/her eyes start to glaze
over. 
Resin-enamels are meant to look like their glass-enamel
counterparts, just designed to be easier to use…unfortunately
sacrificing durability and other factors. :
And I think to people who aren’t involved with the actual process of
jewelry-making, a lot of them care less about how it’s made, and
more how it looks and how much it costs…at least, till ya educate
them as to why it’s worth it to do it the better, but more
labor-intensive way. ;D And not all people will find it “worth
it”…products like the ‘easier’ enamels seem to be meant more for
the people who want to buy their diamond rings from Walmart because
they can get them bigger for cheaper.
Besides, when I hear resin, I start thinking of tree sap…darn
language ambiguities. 
–M. Osedo
http://www.studiocute.com
I’d just like to make two points on the “resin vs enamel” issue.
-
There is precedent far calling things other than
glass-fired-onto-metal enamel. Go to the paint department of any
hardware store! -
And more important: My personal opinion is that resin "enamels"
should not be looked at as a imitation vitreous enamel any more than
PMC should be regarded as imitation casting. Yes, the materials can
be used that way, but each is, in fact, a material/process on its
own. As such, each offers creative opportunities that did not exist
before. With resin enamel, new non-heat-resistant materials can be
incorporated, for example. The colors can be inlaid into wood (or
vice versa), found objects, all kinds of things that vitreous cannot
touch. I’m sure this is not even the tip of the iceberg.
Of course no one should mislead others about the nature/identity of
materials. But we will all have more opportunities for creativity if
we try to keep our minds open.
–No�l
Noel suggested that
With resin enamel, new non-heat-resistant materials can be incorporated, for example.
There is, in fact, quite a lot of heat given off in the chemical
processes involved , and I would hate for anyone to accidently ruin
a precious object. It is, of course, nothing like as hot as
kiln-fired vitreous enamels, but this would be little consolation in
such circumstances. You need also to consider the potential
corrosiveness of the resin; if it takes the skin off your fingers,
and the lining off your lungs, then it’s a fair bet that it is not
going to do much for fine wood …
I very much enjoy working with resin, but doing it well requires a
great deal of time, effort and systematic attention to health and
safety issues. best wishes
Stevie
My personal opinion is that resin "enamels" should not be looked at as a imitation vitreous enamel any more than PMC should be regarded as imitation casting. Yes, the materials can be used that way, but each is, in fact, a material/process on its own. As such, each offers creative opportunities that did not exist before. With resin enamel, new non-heat-resistant materials can be incorporated, for example. The colors can be inlaid into wood (or vice versa), found objects, all kinds of things that vitreous cannot touch. I'm sure this is not even the tip of the iceberg Of course no one should mislead others about the nature/identity of materials. But we will all have more opportunities for creativity if we try to keep our minds open.
This is an important point, Noel; thanks for bringing it up. We
should remember that vitreous enamels themselves were developed (by
the Ancient Egyptians) as a cheaper substitute for the precious
stones they used for jewelry inlays. I’m sure there was much
grumbling heard from traditionalists and lapidaries at the time…
Andrew Werby
www.unitedartworks.com
There are definitely some resins and epoxies that put off too much
heat for fragile materials; but have you ever seen the resin with
scorpions embedded, or the resin with dandilion “fluff ball” seed
stems within? Lots of people embed fairly fragile items (like
photographs) in epoxies.
"Noel suggested that
With resin enamel, new non-heat-resistant materials can be incorporated, for example. There is, in fact, quite a lot of heat given off in the chemical processes involved , and I would hate for anyone to accidently ruin a precious object. It is, of course, nothing like as hot as kiln-fired vitreous enamels, but this would be little consolation in such circumstances. You need also to consider the potential corrosiveness of the resin; if it takes the skin off your fingers, and the lining off your lungs, then it's a fair bet that it is not going to do much for fine wood
Stevie, it actually sounds like you are using fiberglass resins,
which are flammable and toxic. There are some much milder resins
and epoxies out there.
–Terri
There are definitely some resins and epoxies that put off too much heat for fragile materials; but have you ever seen the resin with scorpions embedded, or the resin with dandilion "fluff ball" seed stems within? Lots of people embed fairly fragile items (like photographs) in epoxies.
Indeed, it would be difficult not to; such items are churned out in
ever increasing numbers. I specifically referred in my post to the
dangers of damaging precious objects.
It actually sounds like you are using fiberglass resins, which are flammable and toxic. There are some much milder resins and epoxies out there.
Well, here in England sculptors and jewellers use a variety of
resins but glass fibre is an additive usually used in a general
purpose polyester resin either to provide reinforcement to a casting
or to produce a more lightweight casting where weight would be a
problem if a solid cast were to be made. Are you are referring to
polyester resins? The properties of these vary, and if you want
clarity then you won’t be using GP polyester resins, but none are
risk-free. There are indeed other resins used, though polyurethane
resins are normally considered, at the very least, as no less
hazardous than PRs. Epoxy resin isn’t this bad, but it also has its
drawbacks. The safety data at the Rio Grande site on Colores make it
clear that mechanical extraction (or full respiratory kit in a
confined space) protective gloves, clothing and eye protection are
needed, none of which leads me to believe that epoxy and fine woods
are a sensible combination. And since skin sensitisation may occur
I’d make sure that the protective clothing really does cover
everything. Here in the UK we can buy epoxy resin by the kilo, and
colour it with the same lead-free pigments we use for polyester , for
a very wide range of effects, but there is the question of quality. A
first class polyester resin properly cured will achieve the
refractive index of glass, which makes it a fascinating medium to
work with. There are vast numbers of shades which can be created from
scratch using pigments, and I can poach metal and stone fillers from
sculptors to broaden my range. I even use it to set semi-precious
stones, to cross-connect with the recent ‘modern way of setting
stones’ thread. If people are interested, for example, in inlaying
wood without metal then there is a whole range of products used by
restoration experts which can be explored. I’m certainly not trying to
curb creativity; I’m emphasising the need for careful research, and
trying to protect precious things, whether they be objects or people.
best wishes
Stevie
Lots of people embed fairly fragile items (like photographs) in epoxies. Indeed, it would be difficult not to; such items are churned out in ever increasing numbers. I specifically referred in my post to the dangers of damaging precious objects.
It is unclear what you mean by precious. I was merely responding to
your post where you said that fragile objects cannot be imbedded in
resin.
...none of which leads me to believe that epoxy and fine woods area sensible combination."
You wouldn’t want to use Great Grandma’s 17th c. buffet table as a
work surface, but even as you state in your post:
If people are interested, for example, in inlaying wood without metal then there is a whole range of products used by restoration experts which can be explored."
I am certainly no expert in resins and epoxies – having only used
about seven different types that I can think of. I research to find
the appropriate product for my needs, and make use of proper safety
precautions for whatever chemical product that I decide to use. I
encourage everyone else to do the same. Jewelers should be used to
safety precautions, since many of the tools used (physical and
chemical) can be harmful when not used properly.
It seemed to me that there was a departure from the original subject
of this thread “Ultra violet set enamels” when you were speaking of
both resins and epoxies. It surprised me when you went back to
referring to Colores as if it were what you were speaking of all
along. I have no experience with Colores, and have not researched
it, so it may not be compatible imbedding objects. Some resins and
epoxies are quite suitable for imbedding fragile, precious objects,
though.
There are actual resins that are used particularly for marine and
automotive fiberglass fabrication. Yes, there are polyester resins,
but also epoxy resins and vinyl esters resins; and they can also use
styrene thinners. Pretty toxic, pretty flammable, especially in
large quantities.
When you were emphasizing the “danger” of resins and epoxies, I
really thought that you were referring to something really
dangerous, like the fiberglass resins they use out here in boat and
surfboard production. Colores, from the MSDS that you linked to in
your other post, is mild in toxicity and flammability compared to
many resins. Since Colores are used mostly as a surface treatment,
quantities are very small. From the familiarity with resins that
you displayed in this more recent post, I would have thought that
you realized that there are many, many different levels of “danger”
out there when speaking of chemicals.
My post was a much more moderate stance. I hesitate to panic people
unneccesarily, though safety is the primary consideration.
If an object is considered too precious to risk creative
manipulation, then by all means, it should be left alone. Assessing
the risk of destruction is the responsibility of the individual
artist.
Regards,
Terri
It is unclear what you mean by precious. I was merely responding to your post where you said that fragile objects cannot be imbedded in resin.
Since I have never said that fragile objects cannot be embedded in
resin I am getting more and more confused by your comments. I think
you would find it helpful if you actually read the posts in this
thread.
It seemed to me that there was a departure from the original subject of this thread "Ultra violet set enamels" when you were speaking of both resins and epoxies.
Epoxy is in fact a resin; see pages 88-9, Theory and Practise of
Goldsmithing, (thank you, once again, Charles!) Incidentally, I can
wholeheartedly recommend this book to anyone, not just those who
want to put their work on a scientific footing. It’s magnificent!
It surprised me when you went back to referring to Colores as if it were what you were speaking of all along.
I simply used Colorese as an example of an epoxy resin. I can see
that, since you don’t understand that epoxy is a resin, this may
have been difficult for you to follow. But it does underline the
importance of the Orchid project; what is obvious to me is clearly
news to you, and, no doubt, vice versa. Long may our exchange of
continue!
best wishes
Stevie
Hi Stevie, this is a secondary response to your most recent post. I
went back through the Orchid archives (when you accused me of not
reading what you wrote), and found your original post, then re-read
the thread. You are correct, you never said “fragile”. Below is
what you actually wrote:
"Noel suggested that
With resin enamel, new non-heat-resistant materials can be incorporated, for example.
There is, in fact, quite a lot of heat given off in the chemical
processes involved , and I would hate for anyone to accidently ruin
a precious object. It is, of course, nothing like as hot as
kiln-fired vitreous enamels, but this would be little consolation in
such circumstances. You need also to consider the potential
corrosiveness of the resin; if it takes the skin off your fingers,
and the lining off your lungs, then it’s a fair bet that it is not
going to do much for fine wood …
I very much enjoy working with resin, but doing it well requires a
great deal of time, effort and systematic attention to health and
safety issues. best wishes
Stevie"
I have worked with primarily epoxy, urethane, and natural resins.
The urethane resin that I use most is opaque and fast cure, for a
quick de-mold time. (I am a commercial sculptor, and I make
prototypes for a living. I also try to keep a “low toxicity”
studio.) Gloves are a necessity before curing due to the
possiblity of absorbtion, but a respirator is not required for the
exact resin that I use (very very low VOC rating). The commercial
company that I purchase from also makes a line of water-clear
urethanes that sound much less “dangerous” than what you work with,
with what sounds to be similar properties. I may be totally
misinterpreting your description of the resin that you work with, so
I apologize in advance for any misunderstanding.
Whatever resin that you may be using, if it “takes the skin off your
fingers, and the lining off your lungs”, you may want to reconsider
and look in to using a different product. Most definitely not all
resins have these very scary hazards. I can understand why you are
afraid for both the objects and people that might be exposed to such
a fearsome product, but in the contemporary world (in America at
least) there are many many less “dangerous” resins that could be
substituted.
To clarify my error in believing that you meant “fragile” when you
said “precious”:
I projected the idea of fragile on to your idea of “precious”,
because a “precious” piece of mild steel or “precious” copper or a
“precious” rock would not be affected even by the ensueing
temperature of the higher-temperature curing resins. So I reasonably
assumed that you were referring to something of a more fragile
nature, to make your statement have meaning at all in reference to
imbedding items in resin. I apologize for trying to make your
statement make sense by assuming that you meant “fragile”.
Also, in order to make sense of what you posted, I assumed that you
personally were working with one of the more flammable and toxic
resins, and were unaware of the milder resins. I thought that you
might be working with a fiberglass resin, I was wrong, you were very
clear that you were unfamiliar with them.
My referral to both “epoxies and resins” was more of a distinction
between epoxy resin and other types of organically based resins, both
synthetic and natural. I apologize for my lack of clarity. Since
Colores is an epoxy resin, and you cited its MSDS as your “proof” of
danger, it merely appearred that you were indicating that you were
working with Colores. As I posted before, Colores is way down the
line in both toxicity and flammability from the most hazardous of
resins.
Epoxy resins can be nice to work with, since they can have low VOC
and are not necessarily particularly hazardous. The Devcon 5 Minute
Epoxy package says "WARNING! EYE AND SKIN IRRITANT. POTENTIAL SKIN
SENSITIZER. Contains epoxy resin and polymercaptan amines. This
product contains a chemical known to the State of California to cause
cancer. Avoid contact with eyes and skin. Avoid breathing vapors.
Use with adequate ventilation. Wear suitablle protective clothing.
Do not take internally. FIRST AID: For skin contact, remove with
soap and water. For eye contact, flush with water for 15 minutes and
get medical attention. KEEP OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN! See Material
Safety Data Sheet for more "
When you consider the rather mild warnings associated with this type
of epoxy resin (For skin contact, remove with soap and water), pehaps
you can see why I take a much more moderate stance on the prospective
“danger” of resins. Like any tool that we might work with, it is
important to know the range of possible hazard to life and limb, and
choose accordingly. I prefer less toxic, but that’s just me.
–Terri
Hi Stevie, I’ve been out of town for a few days, so I wasn’t able to
read your most recent post until now. Too bad you don’t remember
what you originally posted, because then you might understand my
responses.
I can see that, since you don't understand that epoxy is a resin, this may have been difficult for you to follow.
After reading this quote from you about me, it is apparent that you
must skim posts, and respond to them quickly and impulsively. In my
last post, I listed for you just a few types of resins (including
epoxy resin) that are used specifically in boat and surfboard
manufacturing, known as fiberglass resins (if you still doubt that
some resins are actually termed “fiberglass resins”, please do an
internet search for “fiberglass resins”).
I responded to your original post because you were stateing that all
resins are dangerous, and that nothing fragile or precious (your
example of choice was wood) could be imbedded in resin because the
resin chemical cure produced too much heat.
Though I believe all resins are exothermic in their chemical cure,
many are mild in both temperature of cure and levels of toxicity.
Because your claims of both danger and heat in association with all
resins, I made the assumption that you personally must only have been
familiar with some type of dangerous and toxic resin (like marine
resins). Since there are less toxic and less flammable (and less
exothermic) resins out there, I merely stated that fact. Please
don’t take it personally.
–Terri