Sarah S

8 hours ago, Barbara AL said:

Indiana Candle Supply for Cinnamon Buns.

Her bakery scents are all so good!!! I really like her Sweet Bakery Dough, it is warm and yeasty and sweet but not overly so. Doesn't smell like a pretzel or a white bread dough though.

I hate trying to wick apothecary jars! Such a PITA! I'd suggest trying a double too. You could try a HTP1212 for a single wick, but that's. going to look like a tiki torch in a container that short. Try two HTP 62 if you like that series, or try a couple zincs as @bfroberts suggested.

I believe @Jcandleattic has a lot of experience with apothecary jars, maybe she has some tips!

I've used mason jars, but never the mug style ones. I've just never liked that look. Any glass container can shatter under the right (or wrong as the case may be) circumstances. This is my opinion only, but I feel like something thicker than a drinking glass should be ok, and I have used beer glasses for my own personal candles before. That being said, when it comes to making candles for other people, I am a lot more cautious about containers and only use those intended for high heat situations. FWIW! 🙃

It looks awesome! I love the industrial feel of the containers with a strikingly modern and colorful label. Outstanding job!

The shop is visually appealing with a sense of modesty that I find refreshing.

My only critique, more of suggestion really, is think of some unique or special names for your fragrances that resonate with your story or your brand. For example, I was immediately drawn to the Maine Blueberry candle because I know you are from Maine and I thought that was cool. Same with the campfire one. Not that they all have to be Maine-related. With the Bitter Lion name, they could be mane-related. Badump-Ching!!!😂😂 Ok, bad jokes aside, something to think about that will help set you apart.

Overall I am super impressed, you have been working hard and it shows!! Great job!!!

5 hours ago, xxxAlpha71xxx said:

I'm just starting down this treacherous path so I'm just drinking my FO, not mainlining it.  If you had to pick one FO supplier which would it be based on variety of scents and quality of fragrances?  I've ordered from CS and Flaming Candle so far.  Just wondering if there's maybe a quality supplier out there that isn't one of the top 5 on Google.

For variety my favorite is Nature's Garden. Holy moly, they have a zillion fragrances. Not all of them work in wax though, so testing is imperative.

For quality my new favorite is Pure Fragrance Oils. Their FOs are just amazing.

I am a binge FO shopper. 😶😶

I might need one oil, but you know you can't get just one, cause shipping! ...but then I shop around on price from other suppliers once  I spot a few that I want to try... but of course I can't not get the original oil even after I spot four more from another supplier that I want... and OMG there's a sale over there!! 😵😵

So for a week solid I'll have a package on my doorstep every day! 😂

Thank goodness the testing will keep me busy! Until I run out of wax and the process starts again!

I totally agree with @Candybee, she said it perfectly. I go as high as 7% with my paraffin, because that seems to be the FO sweet spot. Any more and the burn gets UGLY, less than 6% I'm not happy with the CT. Palm wax I use 5-6%, and for most FOs that is more than enough for great HT and CT. 

Why burn money, especially if it doesn't even make a better product?

That being said, I don't have much experience with soy wax, so that might be a different story. But even then, 12% just seems a ridiculous amount.

Just now, lovelyscents said:

Gotcha, I may beat you with ordering some haha!  It is all paraffin isn't it?

Yep. I sure do love paraffin wax! ❤️

Be sure to let me know what you think!

2 minutes ago, lovelyscents said:

@Sarah S you did end up ordering 133? How is the appearance?

Not yet, I try to wait until I know I'm headed up that way before I order wax from them. Saving that $40 in shipping is massive! I have to go up to Philly in a couple weeks for work, so maybe I'll do a detour and stop by CW then. 😁

@lovelyscents, @Ravens, you are rocking my world right now. 129 has better throw than 125? Why didn't I know about this?? 😱

I've been toying with revisiting the 129 for melts, clearly I need to order a couple slabs to make some candles too! Between this and  the 133, I'll be enjoying test candles straight through the holidays! 😂

@Ravens, do you ever mix 129 and 125 for candles?

@Sponiebr try makingcosmetics.com. They have the supplies, and some good recipes as a starting point.  Date night lipstick is tough, because you  need rich pigmentation with even distribution and as little settling or migration as possible. All without compromising slip or lubricity. Me, I’d try to convince the lady to go with a nice tinted lip gloss. 😂😂

@Forrest, From a consumer point of view, and coming from a family of artists, you are so correct when you initially said you were basically pricing art. Price high. Sky high. Your candles are beautiful, and they are being sold in a gallery. I don't think a retail price of $30 is out of the question. Heck, depending on your area and the other pieces in the gallery, maybe $50 wouldn't be out of the question.

Absolutley, TT and Milo know their stuff and their experience speaks volumes. I say factor in everything's they have said, and then adjust up in accordance with your gallery's client demographic. That is my .02! 😉

Thanks Jeana! I have been using and liking the one from Aztec, but it is definitely not that great. I will check CC out for sure! I've only gotten a couple FOs from them, but I liked what I got!

They seem pretty similar to me. I forget which site I got the PDS for the 4627 from...maybe Lonestar? The congeal point for both is very close. I could absolutely be wrong, and Candlewic certainly isn't being helpful, I'm just observing that they seem very similar in the way 125 and 4630 are similar, or 130 and 6006.

Whatever wax base they are starting with, Candlewic has undoubtedly customized their product to meet their specific specifications.

On 6/4/2019 at 3:23 PM, CandleRush said:

I love and tried some of their f.o.s but many just weren’t strong enough in my wax.

 

Belle was so nice but light as well as bergamot tobacco . Guinevere’s attraction was fantastic, medium throw in my wax. I cure my wax for a longer period.

 

I thought to but these lighter scents in perfume and sprays as to not waste them because they are so lovely. Maybe some of you have had better luck?

I haven't tried Bella or Guinevere, but Bergamot Tobacco is a strong thrower in my palm wax. Not the strongest oil I have, but definitely a good one. I noticed that none of the notes are "loud" the way a strong cinnamon or floral will punch through the other notes, but everything blends together harmoniously. I think the lack of a dominant single notes could lead to a perception of weaker hot throw. That's one I can burn all day long and never get tired of smelling it.

19 hours ago, bfroberts said:

Frustrating answer.
I do like the 125, and I am interested in trying the 133.  I'm using more 6006 lately so I kinda want to try the 130 too, but every single time I want to order from them, something I want is OOS.  CW is a pretty substantial outfit.  I chew my husbands head off if we run out of anything in our shop. I can't imagine why a candle supplier routinely runs out of wax.  
Do you have experience with the 130, Sarah?
This always deters me:  "CBL-130 is designed to evenly pull away from the containers walls to minimize or eliminate uneven separation."  I thought I wanted it to adhere to the container, not pull away.

I have used the 130, and I like it a lot. It is firmer than 6006, which is a positive to me. Yes, it does completely pull away, so zero wet spots! It's not enough to rattle in the container, just enough to create a visually even surface. The down side of that is, as it reaches a full MP,  the liquid wax will seep down the sides between the wax and the jar wall. So it creates wet spots as it burns, if that makes sense. It wasn't bad enough to really bother me, and I seriously doubt anyone but a chandler would even notice.

It is frustrating that they are so frequently OOS. I've never had a real problem with it, usually they get things back in stock quickly, and I've never been in an emergency order situation. But I can absolutely see how it would be an issue for business owners with high demand. Last time I got a case of palm wax from them, the pay were out of the giant bags of it, so they gave me (11) 5 pound bags instead. 😂 Worked out great for me!

I think tins absolutely can have a place in your lineup, assuming as TT stated, that they align with your brand and image.

I have just started testing tins myself, mostly out of curiosity, but also because I like the idea of a shatter proof candle. I do travel, and I like to take a candle with me sometimes. And having a shatterproof candle in the bathroom is a good idea!

So, right there, a couple good reasons to include them in your line. Something to think about though, the more variety you have in terms of vessels and materials, the longer and more complicated your testing will be. At a certain point you run out of flat surface area to hold your test candles! 😂

That's a ton of stearin with the palm and the pko. I'd say that's your quick trace problem there.

I don't know that I can offer much advice about your recipe, I honestly don't like soaping with any of the oils you're using, lol. Except coconut, I love that oil so much! ❤️❤️

If I were to take a stab at balancing out that recipe, I'd try:

20% palm

20% coconut

20% safflower

10% shea

5% pko 

5% castor

with a 5-8% super fat 

or

30% palm

20% coconut

30% safflower

15% shea 

5% castor

with a 5-6% super fat

Well, I sent them an email with less than satisfactory results.

The good news is I was assured that the 125 would be back in stock tomorrow. And the 133 was not developed as a replacement to the 125 (which was my fear).

However, they didn't answer any of my questions about 133 in comparison to 4627, or what the consistency of the 133 is like. I was told that  "the CBL 133 is not replacing the 125, just an alternative to a cheaper wax..." whatever the heck that means. Are they calling the IGI waxes cheap? 😶

I'm definitely curious, but they way they are stingy with their info is so infuriating! I don't think I'll be ordering any 133 to try until I need to replenish my regular wax supply from them. Maybe end of summer, unless I go crazy with the candle pouring this month. 😎

On 6/1/2019 at 5:12 PM, Dirt Roads said:

Trying to absorb everything I can about FO suppliers.   But  something like this from Bulk Apothecary's website, makes me question.

 

"Many people ask us what makes our oils so much different from the competition.  The little known secret is that many large suppliers of fragrances dilute their oils with cheaper carriers to increase their profit margin."

 

What I hear the most from potential customers is they want a "strong" scent.   Biggest complaint is a candle that "didn't smell".    Still trying to figure all of this out. 

 

 

 

 

Total hype and misdirection on the part of BA. Like @TallTayl has pointed out, "cutting" fragrance oils takes employee time, and ties up warehouse space with carriers. How does that increase profits? This kind of attack on the competition to make their product seem better by comparison is unimaginative and smacks of fear-mongering. Sadly we see this all too often these days, and tactics like this make it difficult to winnow fact from fiction.

Some suppliers (Save on Scents for example), will dilute their oils in a carrier to make the most skin safe right out of the bottle. Totally different scenario, and is usually labeled as a "body oil" or some such. A few suppliers may  choose to carry "grades" of FO, but again, they are labeled as such.

I believe that there are many aroma chemicals that do not survive the combustion process, and therefore there will be FOs that do not throw well. And some aroma chemicals can not tolerate the high heat of melted wax, and dissipate before we can't perceive them. And some just don't attach well to the wax molecules. I doubt it has anything to do with strength, but more to do with the chemical composition of the fragrance itself. Hence, the constant testing on our part. 😂

So beautiful!! Definitely makes me think of Mexico!

Preferences vary so much with tart wax, I think even more so than with candle wax because you don't have to worry about wick performance. Some people love soft waxes for scoops, some love pillar waxes for clams, some love a blend that's in between. And when you add in veggie waxes, sky's the limit!

3 hours ago, Fireside said:

No worries blacktie, many still use and love 4794 without issues as well.  I have not tested that one much due to reading so much about longevity not being there with that one.  However, we all get different results half the time so I should.  I hear 129 is using the 4794 base so I am assuming if I like 129 best, I would be satisfied enough with 4794.  What about KY 133/Problend 450/JS paraffin pillar votive tart wax by CJ Robinson?  I am thinking CJR and IGI are the most used when it comes to paraffin???

I personally did not like the KY 133 at all, the dimples were so ugly, and it did not wow me in the throw department. But that doesn't mean it wouldn't meet someone else's' requirements! Even though I am very happy with the waxes that I use, I still like to try other waxes out as budget permits, just to see how they perform. Knowledge is never wasted!

I'm not a C3 user, but here's my take: I'd go with the 1212. The CD 26 looks a smidge too big, and 62-52-15 isn't big enough, nor do I think blending with coconut is doing anything other than making you do more work.

Yes, there's some hang up with the 1212, but that's with regimented burns. Anecdotally I find most candle lovers burn either all day long, or in shorter bursts like a couple hours at a time. Either way, the power burners will clean the sides and the erratic burners are going to have hang up no matter what you wick it with. The burn with the 1212 looks nice, and if you are getting good HT, I'd say go with it.

I definitely agree with the others that a double wick might be better, and it's worth it to investigate that avenue. But if you really need a single wick, my vote is the 1212.

Always hugs!! 💗💗💗

I can't remember, do you hate HTPs? I'm thinking the answer is yes, but honestly I think they are just the most fantabulous wick for the super viscious parrafins and parasol blends. You're still doing a parasoy, right?

I really did not like the Eco's at all, the burn was too unattractive and they are too fussy for me. I haven't tried CDs or LXs, sorry!

So really I'm not much help at all! 😂😂 But if you want to try the HTPs, I have a crapload and I'd be happy to mail you a sample set!

50 minutes ago, Forrest said:

I have very little experience with Jars, but here is what I would do. I would start with a CD8 and, after a two week cure; I would do a 4 hour test burn. Take pictures at 2, 3, and 4 hours. I would post the pictures here and get opinions from those more knowledgeable than I am. Then if I needed to wick up or down I would do a wickectomy and use the list to pick the next wick. With luck you’ll have a good wick by your third choice, but still on the first candle with no additional cure time.

 

@xxxAlpha71xxx, that's what I would suggest too. Your idea of starting small and working your way up is solid also.

Unfortunately I don't have much experience with the wicks you listed, except the Premiers. But I've only used Premiers with palm wax, and that's a totally different scenario.

Something else I would suggest is to search the candle making forum with the key words "wicks and 6006", and wade your way through posts. You'll glean a lot of great information and tips, even if you don't find the answer to your original question.