04-26-2018, 01:17 PM
This is a stretch, but paper with bias might be somewhat like cutting manila rope. You can go across the grain or with the grain. It could be the difference between cutting and separating fibers. I'm not sure. I think it can only be helpful to take that variable out of the equation though.
Also, there are different ways to cut paper. Push cutting is different than slicing. Angled cuts are different than straight cuts with bias paper. Roll up a piece of paper and slice it straight across and at an angle.
Cutting miles and miles of paper eventually involves your senses of hearing and feel more than your sense of sight. A coarse edge sounds and feels much different than a refined edge. An edge with a burr also doesn't cut straight, and one side of the cut looks cleaner than the other.
I don't have a magnifier like yours, Mr. Grepper. I bought a USB microscope, but I got frustrated quickly. My 60x magnifiers cost $5, and I can examine the whole length of an edge in seconds. It's most meaningful when you learn to recognize what you're seeing.
It's easy to observe the burr with each pass across a stone. That's what lead me to the conclusion that it's most efficient to remove the burr by working the burr side alone. That's something I simply learned by accident, due to being able to make the observation with the 60x mini-microscope.
As soon as you can see the last traces of a burr evaporate into a clean scratch pattern to the EOTE, the edge is remarkably clean. No wasted effort going back and forth creating more burr or chasing part of the burr.
With absolute due respect as always, Mr. Grepper, these are just my humble opinions, but also, I don't think it's possible to compare edge trailing on a belt to edge leading on a stone. The result can not be similar.
Also, there are different ways to cut paper. Push cutting is different than slicing. Angled cuts are different than straight cuts with bias paper. Roll up a piece of paper and slice it straight across and at an angle.
Cutting miles and miles of paper eventually involves your senses of hearing and feel more than your sense of sight. A coarse edge sounds and feels much different than a refined edge. An edge with a burr also doesn't cut straight, and one side of the cut looks cleaner than the other.
I don't have a magnifier like yours, Mr. Grepper. I bought a USB microscope, but I got frustrated quickly. My 60x magnifiers cost $5, and I can examine the whole length of an edge in seconds. It's most meaningful when you learn to recognize what you're seeing.
It's easy to observe the burr with each pass across a stone. That's what lead me to the conclusion that it's most efficient to remove the burr by working the burr side alone. That's something I simply learned by accident, due to being able to make the observation with the 60x mini-microscope.
As soon as you can see the last traces of a burr evaporate into a clean scratch pattern to the EOTE, the edge is remarkably clean. No wasted effort going back and forth creating more burr or chasing part of the burr.
With absolute due respect as always, Mr. Grepper, these are just my humble opinions, but also, I don't think it's possible to compare edge trailing on a belt to edge leading on a stone. The result can not be similar.