Jeana

40 minutes ago, bfroberts said:

 

Do you use dye? That's where I noticed a problem. Mine just would not fully incorporate.  I worked it hard trying to get it blended, but it never fully did, which is a problem I've never had before. 

I do use color. I didn't have any issues with that. Are you using it straight or mixing it? I use EVO colors from candlewic, what colors are you using?

On 5/9/2018 at 4:30 PM, bfroberts said:

It is significantly harder than usual.  Looks a little more opaque, too.  I am on the verge of freaking out a little.  Has anyone else noticed a difference in this wax lately?

Yes, I noticed this with the box I just got last week. It seems to be the same other than being harder. I had some from my old box left and there was a significant difference in texture.  I blend it with soy, and my finished candle isn't harder than normal. This happened a couple years ago too. 

Good to know, thank you, this is what I was afraid of. I just tried my first batch from another recipe but they are way too soft. So I was tempted to buy this recipe. But when I saw her ingredients they are exactly what I just used. 

Do you make bubble bars?

Have any of you tried this recipe?

https://twowildhares.com/listing/227766741/diy-bubbly-bath-bar-solid-bubble-bath

I'm just wondering if it is as "fool proof" as claimed. The ingredients she lists doesn't seem any different than other recipes I've seen so I'm guessing the amounts are the key? It's only $20 but I still don't want to spend it if it's not going to work. 

On 4/3/2018 at 10:32 PM, pughaus said:

@jeana have you ever tried Flaming Candle's Caribbean Teakwood?  I've seen it on their site but haven't bought it yet.

I saw a few suppliers who have a Caribbean Teakwood but I don't know if they are the same, and if its the exact same, I wonder if I would have the same throw issues. I was hoping someone has used one of the other ones and could help me compare. I don't order from any of the suppliers I found, or I would have ordered some testers. I think I'm going to try going up to 7% to see if it helps. 

It looks really pretty. I like all the blended color variations. And I am a big fan of the rustic look. 

7 hours ago, Trappeur said:

Could you post a picture of the packaged soaps with the background of what you have chosen so we could see what the final picture result looks like?

 

Trappeur

I will but its going to be like next month when I can sit down and work on my website. When I stated my sales were better it has been in my consignment stores, not on my website.

36 minutes ago, strugglebrother said:

 

Yeah, I guess it's not the strongest of scents... their rating of it being 3 out of 3 is a bit misleading. I've used it in a blend, haven't tried it on its own, unfortunately.

What do you mix it with? I was even trying to think of that. Something to pep it up without taking over.

The original CT was not body safe, but now it is, so there has obviously been some type of alterations to it. Funny thing is, it is super strong in CP soap.

On 3/31/2018 at 7:51 AM, Crafty1_AJ said:

Product photography is a serious source of irritation to me.  LOL  As stated above, for example, Etsy recommends plain, white backgrounds and diffused lighting.  But my favorite photos from my Etsy shop are the ones I take in bright sunlight and with small props.  For example, I have a few small seashells in my Ocean Mist candle picture, and I think it looks good.  What appeals to me is very different from what the Etsy "experts" suggest.  My backgrounds are mostly blurred out, so I don't worry too much about that detracting from the picture.  But I mess around with light tents, shade, full sun, and props, and honestly?  I like the stylized photos much better.  I like the stones and such in your product photos.

 

 

This is cute. I like the blurred background. And the color of your candle is so pretty.

On 3/31/2018 at 2:26 AM, Trappeur said:

Ok, here is my unbiased opinion.

 

I love love 

Here is my unbiased opinion....

These photo shots you took with the stone backgrounds are absolutely beautiful!  Well done!    When you have a beautiful product such as these soaps and have a background such as these to me these backgrounds of stone actually "enhance" your soaps.  They are beautiful the soaps and you have just enough natural stone backgrounds in the pictures that have not distracted your soaps and these backgrounds "show off" your product to a product of " perfection and quality and quite classy.   Your eyes immediately gravitate to your soap product.   When I had my home furnishings store I would shop from the person who put the time and effort into a finished end product.  When I would go to buy for my store and traveled to wholesale shows I was always attracted to the person who made the presentation.  The booths that went all out and had a fabulous display are truly attention grabbers.    It's all about presentation, presentation, presentation.......And that is what you want...If someone had a gorgeous booth with stunning set up and had products such as yours displayed in, you had me at the word "go".  The other pictures you show with a white background, don't get offended...but they look just like everyone elses product....nothing special what so ever.....  Don't you want to stand out from the other person?  What would make the person stay on your site?    Now don't get me wrong...there are sites where the way they have their product displayed with white backgrounds that are absolutely gorgeous...I guess it's the shading of stark white backgrounds or the way the photographer actually styled the whole set up and can be done.   But after looking at your photo's and the white backgrounds....without a doubt, the stone background and not only just for a header on your website but for each product showcased.  If I was browsing through websites and wound up on yours, my first reaaction would be "wow!"  And I'd be stuck there trying to make decisions of what products I wanted to order because each one was as nice as the other and would have a hard time making up my mind...... I would stick with your original style you have going and don't change a thing!

 

One more thing.  You said it bothers you because the pictures are so in your face?     Geesh, you WANT them in your face!!  I can't stand looking at photos that are featured small...It bugs the heck out of me.  You can't see the quality and it's very irritating to me when people take far away photos like that.  Don't change a thing.  You want them up close.  Well done.

 

Trappeur

"Love your soaps"!!

That's so nice of you to say, thank you! 

The reason I've been considering the white backgrounds more now is because since I changed my soap packaging from colorful to plain, my soap sales have tripled. I feel like you can see the personality of the soaps now instead of the personality of the labels. I was wondering if the same concept holds true for websites.  

3 hours ago, strugglebrother said:

 

What wax have you been testing in? I get great results in soy/para blends, but not so great in only soy.

I've use it in a soy, para/soy, paraffin straight, para/coco, and a para/veggie. None of them fill a room like it used to. I test in different places too. The best I can get is waves here and there of scent, not a full room of scent. 

On 4/2/2018 at 11:46 AM, Sarah S said:

This is one of the oils I picked up on their $.99 sale.

It does have a very soft HT to my nose. I use 7% in a 80/20 paraffin/soy blend. I just assumed it was the nature of the fragrance, like Barnwood and most sandalwoods. It smells wonderful, I just burn it in my bedroom, where the fragrance has less space to fill.

I am only scenting it at 6%. I could try going higher, but I never had to before  Plus, it gets really expensive to add more FO. If I go for 7 instead of 6% it can add almost $20 to each order I fill with it. Oh well, I guess no one else carries this scent or one similar to it. 

I’ve used this scent from CS for years but for a while now I’ve noticed the throw barely exists. I looked at the reviews and I see others feel the same. I thought it was a wax issue, but I’ve tested it recently in many different waxes. I get the same results, very little throw. Does any one else carry this scent that gives a stronger throw? 

2 hours ago, LitUp said:

 

 

Really you want both styles of picture, your product photos solos with a white background and also lifestyle shots. Looking at your website if you I would say unless you're going to actually remove the background in the solo shots with white backdrops so they're a pure white then go with the trees in the background ones for your photography. If you don't have software to remove the backgrounds yourself but want them done I suggest googling image touch up companies, specifically clipping services, they are extremely reasonable priced for the images you'd need done.

I just check out your website. It looks great. It’s pretty much what I have in mind for my redo. It really does look so much more serious. 

Did you take your own photos?

i think I can take some nice shots, then use a clipping service like you suggested. But I don’t see how you can make every selection look exactly the same. Even if I crop my photos to the same size there will be obvious differences, mostly the distance from the camera, or the angle. How is this done?

8 hours ago, TallTayl said:

A third option is needed imo: textured background. A well-weathered barn board or piece of stone can make a nice background. 

 

If you want to be possibly featured on etsy, etc. a stark white, well balanced photo will get you three quicker. 

 

Personally, unless *very* well stylized, those with random stuff in the photo detract from the product. 

 

In the end, just be completely consistent within your brand. 

I've always done the slate, stones, iron, or barn looking wood for my product pics, (See below) but I'm trying decide whether to stay with this, or just use those types of shots for feature photos/banner photos on the site. Then go with the no background for the products. Here is a good example of the no background look https://soaptopia.com/collections/all-soaps

The thing that kind of bugs me about this website is that the pics seem so "in your face".  And if you have light colored soaps, it can look a little washed out. But I think it is a more modern look for commerce sites these days. 

I'm redoing my website soon and I'm torn with whether to just have the product with a white background or have something interesting and pretty in the pics with the products. The bigger sellers like Soaptopia, Sephora, Lush, Origins ...... all have just the product with the white background. And most handcrafted soap makers have a more artistic approach and include their soaps or candles in a setting for their pics. I'm torn, so I thought I would get some opinions. 

3 minutes ago, pughaus said:

 I'm so glad to see at least 1 other person is testing this wax. 
 
Right now I'm testing a small batch that has been cured 4 days.  
(My 1st test batch became a casualty of a playful cat.  All 5 of them were shattered 1/2 way through. Bad kitty.) 

I just finished a 3.15 hr 1st test burn today of LX24 and a CD12 in a 3" glass tumbler.  They burned pretty much identically in this test- very steady flame, a bit more than 1/8" wax hang up all around at the end.  Wick stayed neat and trimmed on both.

An eco 6 test was nixed after 1.5 hrs- it was too deep and tunneling. It smelled weird too; had an odd chemical note.  

Just lit a 51-32 paper core an hour ago.  Might be undersized, but my new pack of 60-44 wicks has vanished so this is biggest I've got right now.
 

It sure is easy to pour this wax -it's very pretty and not 1 of my 11 candles poured has produced a single wet spot.  I don't much care about wet spots but it's worth noting when they are completely absent.

 

Not sure about throw- this batch is my 1st using any fragrance in this wax.  I'm burning  7.5% /aveda shampure dupe which to me is a "soft" fragrance to begin with, which is why I like it.  Throw seems fine so far me.  Honestly, I'm just so relieved to no longer be testing coco83. I'm still new to this candlemaking stuff and just spent 4 months trying in vain to wick that accursed wax.  I never really even got to the point of addressing details like..throw   

 

There is also the IGI paracoco wax to try. And that blend may be more reliably supplied in the future. Have you considered that one?

That was a very naughty kitty! 

I didnt know about the IGI paracoco wax. Who carries it? Like I need more choices, lol.

You are using much stronger wicks than I am. Although, I used to have an Aveda dupe that needed to be wicked up, so maybe it’s the FO?

I’ve been testing Candlesciences Sweet Pea in my 100% SC21 and used a zinc 44/24/18 and I had a full melt pool about 1” deep in a 4 hour burn. The jar is a bit over 3”. I think that was on the second burn. The flame was only around 3/4” tall. I could try smaller but since I didn’t get any throw I decided to mix waxes.

I’m not too concerned about wet spots either, but the adhesion of this wax is truely impressive, even mixed with 4630, it is still 100% wet spot free. And after burning a few times, not one wet spot. 

I need to try some LXs. I’m not a fan of the zinc shrooms, but I can’t stand the HTP, CD, or Eco curls either.  I used to get shrooms with LXs in soy, but always got a nice throw.

4 hours ago, pughaus said:

well folks, I almost hate to admit this but I've been test burning 4 of my 12 cured SC-21 (paracoco and...?)  testers and darn it, I'm starting to like this wax.  It sure is easier to wick than coco83.

 

I was wondering if you tried this wax. If you hadn't I was going to recommend that you do.

I got my sample and I think it is so beautiful. It is very creamy looking, with zero frost and total adhesion. It seems pretty easy to wick. I'm having a couple issues with it at 100% though. I find it has some throw issues, and I find it a little too soft so the melt pool gets too deep too fast, even with a normal size flame. I found mixing it with 4630 substantially helps the throw and slows the burn. I don't like to depend on curing for throw. I'm still testing 4630/cb9 too. I've been getting consistent results with both blends so far. I'm glad I will have a backup blend to go with if something happens with one of these waxes. (CB9 & SC21) They use the same wick sizes so far. Both mixes are far superior to the 464/4630 blend I was doing as far as appearance, performance and throw.  I do a lot of layered candles and  these are true single pour waxes. That will be a big time saver.

The CB9/4630 has the best throw and appearance, so I should just go with that one, but it is harder to keep the pouring temps consistent, and that worries me. It sets up so fast. 

I've been testing with zincs and HTPs so far. I've heard LX wicks could be good too, but I haven't tried them yet. What wicks are you testing it with? How long did you let your testers cure?

9 minutes ago, pughaus said:

Can't say yet- I only poured some testers and I'm still letting them cure before I stick some wicks in them. It came with NO instructions at all so I went with the same temps I used with Coco 83. I called them today for more info and some wicking suggestions- they seemed pretty clueless and admitted it's a new wax for them and they haven't tested it much. Great.  
I asked if this wax was similar to IGI's paracoco and was told they're not familiar with IGI's and this is their own house blend.  Then I asked, OK did you start with coco83 as a base - they said no. It's a whole new blend.  But it's like coco83, just easier to wick.

So all I can say, based in what they've told me is this is a coconut wax with some paraffin and ...other stuff?  Now that I put this all in writing, I'm starting to wonder why I'm even bothering to test it

Hmmm, anything custom blended for a distributor makes me nervous since Peak closed down. I used to buy their cotton wicks that were made for them. And of course after they closed I had to retest all the scents that used those wicks. That could be a strike against that wax. 

15 minutes ago, Kerven said:

Looks good!

 

CB#9... A Calwax wax, maybe? Might try asking them about the paraffin content, if so.

Thanks!

I asked them already how much was in there and he wouldn't answer. It is a veggie/soy/para blend.  I thought if I get a case the manufacturer info should be on the box. Maybe I can get more info that way. 

7 minutes ago, pughaus said:

looking good!  I'm curious why you blended the 2 waxes.  Did you try the CB9 alone and find it lacking?  I have a small box of CB9 at home to test, haven't gotten to it yet but I did pour some of their SC21 paracoco last night. 

I think SC21 is the other sample I have coming from them this week. What did you think of it?

I found CB#9 to have a very odd background smell on its own. And it seemed a little hard. I'm looking for soft and creamy. I don't mind wet spots but the sample I poured of 100% pulled away from the glass and had some frosting. It reminded me too much of plain soy.  

I have used 4630 to mix with 464 for many years. It has been very consistent all these years. I tried this on its own and I didn't care for it 100% either. I can't remember what I didn't like about it though. It seems, so far, the two are a good fit together. 

My big concern with this blend or other paraffins is how to keep the pouring temps up high enough when pouring a lot of candles. Soy takes a lot longer to cool so you have more control over pour temps without it setting up quickly.

19 minutes ago, Tokoo said:

No I am on other end of the map, and since shipping wouldn't be to cheap, I was think about doing some for personal use, unless I can find it near me (Which I doubt since, closet suppliers are about the highest in the business). I am in the same boat. I am new to candle making, but all my 464 seem to have turned out with no hot throw as well. I was thinking about doing 464/4630 blend or 6006 (Reviews are scary though).

Is this place near you for the coconut? https://uscandlesupply.com/product-category/case/coconut-case/

I just posted a pic of a candle blend of CB#9 and 4630. I'm really liking this mix so far. The throw is outstanding. And no soot while burning.

This is 80% 4630 and 20% CB#9. CA candle supply doesn't say what CB#9 is other than a veggie blend wax. He told me it had paraffin in it to but wouldn't say how much. Annoying! 

I like the looks much better than 464 already. I poured at 195. I didn't heat the jar, just wiped it out with alcohol and a micro cloth before pouring. Even this morning it still has total adhesion, no need for a second pour, and zero frost. 

I have another tester I did of the same wax blend scented with Lavender from CS. I'm getting an impressive med/high throw, even without curing. When I used this scent in 464 I could only get a low throw at best. 

I'm using zinc wicks for now. They seem to be working so far. No soot, or smoke while burning. 

Over all I'm enjoying the positive sides of a paraffin blend. I'm really starting to regret not looking at paraffins sooner. 

13 minutes ago, Tokoo said:

I like to know how this turns out myself.

My Coconut sample should be here today or tomorrow. Are you in CA? Right now I have been testing Their CB#9. I don't like it on its own, but I was testing it with the 464. Now that I want to dump 464 I've been doing about 20% in 4630 and I'm getting some good results so far.  

1 hour ago, TallTayl said:

It’s not just the ambient temp. The rest of the wax in the container is cold by comparison, which speeds the cooling of the new layer. Simple physics. Especially given the nature of the newer soy lots. 

I understand that the upper layer cools faster anyway. But I was also talking about the cracks in the lower part of the candle. Everyone has been saying it's caused by room temps being too cool. I'm just pointing out it's not really cool, its normal. So outside influence isn't the problem. 

Another reason I mentioned ambient temps was because you stated in your comment your layered top cracking was related to your shop being cold.