Clear Black

10 hours ago, kandlekrazy said:

no it's Universal Soy Additive.  It hardens the wax a bit, supposed to help with adhesion (not so much) and tops are smoother.

Ok thanks.  I use 444 and its rather hard in its natural state and I have no issues with ugly tops so I do not think USA would benefit me. Thanks for the info  

@birdcharm  Like I said above, if you start watching at the 1:50 mark you can hear and see them adding FO when the batch in the stockpot is cloudy. No mention of actual temps, but when soy gets cloudy its typically below 110*. Mine gets cloudy at 105* and no way in heck am I adding my FO at that temp

@Trappeur I already supply the customer with uncolored natural ones, but was asked to do colored as well.  If I cannot provide them she will look elsewhere for another brand but still carry my natural soy ones. Oh well.

@kandlekrazy Is USA the same as UV inhib?

@Crafty1_AJ Even with the UV do you still get the bloom/frosting? I might just offer this customer a paracoco alternative to the colored soy.

Thanks all

How do you combat the frosting and discoloration issues? Ive never colored my soy (444) but have been asked to by a customer. I have been at it for a while now and now matter what I do the colors start to whitewash and frost. Are you folks using additives to help reduce the natural frosting that occurs in soy? Any suggestions would be much appreciated. 

There is also another company on youtube that suggests the same thing. Skip to about the 1:50 mark in this and have a listen.

Video: 

I have thought about this as well. If you actually watch another of their videos he goes on to explain that if you add your FO at higher temps and let cool before pouring, you are essentially burning off all of your fragrance during that cool off period. His advice is to cool the wax THEN add your fo when it begins to set up which to me sounds opposite considering that the wax will be too cool for the oil and wax molecules to combine properly on a scientific level. I really wish TT could watch this and chime in and  science the snot out of this for us, since she knows the actual SCIENCE involved in this.

Video: 

On 7/20/2018 at 4:20 PM, ncraiders said:

Yeah i saw that and was like what has that driver been smoking or taking to not have noticed that.

As a truck driver who drives that exact same setup of a truck ( just not for FedEx)

It is quite feasable that the box is empty and was either placed there at his previous location or ended up there by accident. Most truck drivers do not even get out of their cabs during off loads and will just jump in the seat and start driving once delivery is complete. On a long nosed Freightliner like that, the front end of that truck is a complete blind spot for us. So the driver literally cannot see that box there. Nor could he feel it. We haul 100,000lb loads up hill and our trucks are very powerful. That box in the front there has the same effect a fly would have on the driver. So he most likely could not even tell he was pushing something. 

Most people dont realize the true nature and danger of these trucks and all the blind spots we have. With that said, he should have done a proper pre trip before heading down the road. If he had done so he would have seen that box stuck to his front grill! 😂😂

1 hour ago, Trappeur said:

7 hours ago, Clear Black said:

OMG!  Clear Black!   "go and ask TT cause she can "science the f....out of it" ....lol, lol Your killing me here!   I haven't laughed so hard since I don't know when....the poor girl or guy just got here with 1 post and I'm wondering if he/she even knows what your talking about like the rest of us do.   But your right...TT is a rocket scientist and knows her stuff that is for sure.  When she explains things my little pea brain just can't grasp so much of what she says....I swear so I just sit here looking dumbfounded which I am and go click on a thread that is more my speed...That was a great one Clear Black...

 

Trappeur

HAHA!! It hurts my brain to Trap!

On 7/20/2018 at 11:01 AM, weisend24 said:

464 can handle up to 12% FO load, which would be 1.92 oz FO per lb of wax (or most just round to 2 oz).  I use 464 and 12% and not having much luck with my HT at the moment, so I need to start adjusting wicks, pour times, blending with another wax, etc.  

It is suggested to cover your containers.  If it doesn't have a lid, there's dust covers for candles you can buy, or you can basically make your own out of paper/card stock type material.  This will keep the dust (flies, etc) off your tops.

You may not be having great luck with your HT because of using 12% FO load. I learned this here years ago when I first started that more does not equal better. You wick may not be able to handle that much FO load and act as if it were drowning. Best bet is to ask TT and she can science the f*** out of that situation for you regarding FO load and no HT. There are many factors besides FO load like container, wick size, cure time, pour temps etc etc. 

Just because it can hold 12% does not make it a great idea to use 12%. Speaking from experience I thought that at the beginning more FO=better candle. Not only is that not true AT ALL, but if you plan on selling these down the road at fairs or markets, using 12% FO load will ruin any profit you may get. It wont ruin all of it, but its just not needed.  Most people here use around 6% FO +/- 1%.  Fragrance oil is the single most expensive cost in making a candle.  At 12%, you are now using 2x the amount actually needed to make a great candle.  If you stay around the 6% target, you not only make a great burning candle but you save money and that will mean more in your pocket.

Also, I use 444 so if you want this information and much more as Trap or TT.  I know they both use 464 and can explain more on your wax. But the above statement holds true for most waxes anyways.  Unless of course you want to market your candles as holding as much fragrance as humanly possible then by all means go ahead.

Best of luck. -Cheers

On 6/22/2018 at 11:00 AM, TallTayl said:

The reason I ask, if you don’t trim that wick, the burn will be much different. As little as 1/8“-1/4” longer starting wick makes a huge difference. If you burn that identical candle without trimming perfectly every single time how deep will that mp get? 

 

If I dont trim perfectly the mp gets about 1/2” deep rather than what you see in the photo. The side effect being that the untrimmed wick will begin to soot. Ive learned after this to be ok with the mp as long as its throwing the way it should

9 hours ago, Trappeur said:

The more I look at your picture Clear Black I'm almost inclined to think with the melt pool as it is, you might have to drop down to a cd 18 if that melt pool depth gets any deeper.    The melt pool looks pretty perfect to me at this point.   For my large quart 32oz canning jars I use a cd20.  They are 3 3/4" at the widest part of the jar.  But only you can decide upon that.  Just be on the lookout for black soot starting at the top of the container the lower it goes.  But you have I see that wick clipped to a nice height.   Then again the cd 20 just might be perfect for you.  Let us know what you decide on.  What jar is that and how wide is the widest part?  I am curious....what did you mean when you say your jar doesn't have a full full melt pool?  Are you talking about the depth?

 

Trappeur

Hey Trap. The jar is basically a 16 oz mason type with a slight shoulder.  So standard wide-mouth opening for that type container.  What I meant by "full full MP" is that even though the wick is centered DEAD ON im still getting a deeper MP on one side vs the other. One side of the jar has about 1/4" deep MP and the opposite only an 1/8" deep MP.  There is maybe only about an inch of wax to be burned and I will be at the wick clip, so I was figuring the MP would be noticeably deeper at this stage of the container. Scent throw is about where it should be, but I would like a bit more of course, which is why I was questioning if it was getting a full enough pool to really throw the scent up.

I think I will stick to my CD-20 for now since after reading comments here I feel most are correct in assuming the CD-22 would be too hot and too much.

8 hours ago, TallTayl said:

How diligemt have you been about trimming that wick?

if you do not trim, and light, is the MP deeper?

 

Yes the MP is much bigger but I am pretty dang dilligent on trimming the wick. I usually test in phases where I wont trim the wick like most customers unfortunately and then another phase where I trim it like it should be. Its always a bigger MP when not trimmed but also gets hotter naturally. 

Im currently using a CD-20. I feel as if I need to go to a 22 because I am down near the bottom of the container and still struggling to get a decent FMP going.  You cant really tell from this angle, but if you look close enough on the opposite side near the label, there is still the wax hanging up on that side. The wick is perfectly centered, so thats not my issue. Its just not getting to a FULL FULL melt pool this far down. This picture is of the 2 hour mark after being lit.  So after 2 hours, this far down in the container, I should have a bigger melt pool I would think. Problem is, even with the current wick my temp readings are at 150* near the neck of the jar. I feel going up a wick size would only add to the heat reading.  Thoughts?

44 minutes ago, moonshine said:

Just got an email from them about a 8% increase across the board but they are not going to increase prices, instead they are doing away with the 2- 3 and 4% cart discount effective June 25

 

I think we are going to start seeing this with all suppliers real soon 

 

That is still a significant increase in prices even if we do jot see it change the actual cost of the products. How soon after they remove the cart discounts will they raise the actual product prices is what I am curious about. Hmm

20 minutes ago, bfroberts said:

There are several things about WSP that bug the heck out of me, but I won't go into that.  Their stuff is good though.  I have a couple of their FO's that I use faithfully, but thankfully they are not very expensive ones. I also love their silicone molds and have purchased several.  They package things very well. And you gotta love FO's in glass bottles.

So far they seem like an overall solid supplier other than not offering 1 oz sample FO's.  I dont think I will be able to get the 2 oz bottle at $7+ just for testing. Not in my current budget anyways

2 hours ago, moonshine said:

For me a 1 pound bottle of BRV from CS shipped is 29.72

WSP being 35.95 shipped to me is about a 6.00 difference which is roughly 38 cents more an ounce and that is way worth it to me as the quality of Wsp doesn’t compare 

 

Believe me I have done the math on most fragrances I use from them and when I try another supplies version I’m usually greatly disappointed 

I have also found I can use a less percentage of Wsp so I tell mysel it balances out 

I know a lot of people balk at the prices of Wsp because the shipping is included but for myself it’s worth it, comes down to what your willing to pay and what works well in your wax 

 

I just did the same thing and for BRV WSP vs Candle Science it was a $6 difference as well. Which makes it WAY more easy to swallow and maybe better knowing that they may perform better than the cheaper retailers.  Lets hope I can locate some CC brand 1 oz samplers now 

9 hours ago, TallTayl said:

Wsp factors in the “free” shipping, those offering crafters Choice brand pay hefty licensing fees to sell the brand. Crafters choice brand products are offered by other resellers, sometimes you can get better prices. Wait for wsp sales to get nicer prices. 

 

I have found crafters Choice brand FO Perform better in my products than other scents by the same name. Those I have used are more concentrated, nuanced, and long lasting than the cheapie retailers I’ve tried for the same type of fragrances. 

 

Edited to add the crafters Choice distributor program application. http://www.crafters-choice.com/PDFs/Crafters_Choice_Agreement.pdf

 

Good point on the shipping. Had not thought of that factor.  Next problem I am having is how to start testing fragrances when they do not offer 1 oz sample bottles. Is there another supplier that carries CC brand FO's in the 1 oz samplers? 

As always thanks TT

Do any of you know what makes Crafter's Choice™ brand FO's so much more expensive than other brands that suppliers offer?

Take Black Raspberry Vanilla for example.  Candle Science offers their version in a 16oz bottle for $19.97.  Wholesale Supplies Plus sells Crafter's Choice™ brand in a 16oz bottle for $35.95. I guess I am confused as to why there version is nearly 2x the cost. Is it a concentrated FO or are they just re-sellers marking their end up and selling to people like me?

Take Monkey Farts FO again as an example.  The Flaming Candle sells a 16oz bottle for $18.99. WSP sells the Crafter's Choice™ brand of Monkey Farts FO in a 16oz bottle for $36.95.  Again, nearly 2x the cost.

I ask this because there are some Crafter's Choice™ brand FO's that I really like and cannot find elsewhere but I cant get myself to pay nearly 2x the cost of normal FO prices. 

Thanks all so far!! Very good suggestions and I am playing with the idea now of just keeping the font black and just changing up the flame color. Good input, appreciate it!!

Also coming in late on the barcode issue. I use all mine from https://www.barcodesmania.com/   The prices are good and it was instantly available to me. I cannot confirm yet, but they also are registered with G1 to work instantly on Amazon.  I was referred to them by a friend who had been using them for years with no issues.

1 minute ago, Tokoo said:

Looks pretty good, but I would try and stick with one color scheme to make it easier, but I guess it would depend on what color paper your using as well. The 2 in the middle seem to catch the eye a little more the the others. 

Just to clarify, I have currently 25 different fragrances I carry seasonally. Each label has the exact same design and logo, I just interchange the colors to match with the fragrance. So these are all the same logo, just the color will be different for each label. I only added different colors to show you or rather ask you if it works as different colors or not.

Hope that clarifies that for you and thanks so far for the critique

Im not a logo designer by any stretch of the imagination. I need to update my current logo and am leaning in this direction. Depending on the color scheme for the particular label, I can swap the colors out depending on that labels color pallette. Its just something I came up with in Adobe Illustrator while adding some info into my current labels. Let me know what you think if you dont mind  

On 1/11/2017 at 10:36 PM, TallTayl said:

Relieved I got to do it all in one take. Always nice when the subject cooperates LOL

Old post I know TT, but has this recipe held up for you over the year or so it was filmed for us? I just looked at Duba Diesels site and ordered 5lbs of the citric acid to test out. Free shipping so why not  

13 hours ago, Jcandleattic said:

I give a business card with every sale I make, whether that be in person or online. And I carry them with me, because when I tell people I make soap and candles, they ask the obvious of where I sell, and how they can buy, so I whip out a card that has all that info right there on it, without me having to try and find pen and paper to write down the same thing for them. 

This exactly. And what TT said as well. I get people at trade shows who dont buy but will ask for a business card. I fugure the 3 cents i payed for the bc is worth the potential sale if they decide to shop online or phone an order in.