navigator9
Well-Known Member
I'm amazed at how evenly spaced the swirls are. It's mind boggling. Thanks for letting me know the name of the swirl, I'm off to look for more examples.
Last edited:
Browsing soap pics
- Thread starter newbie
- Start date
Help Support Soapmaking Forum:
I'm amazed at how evenly spaced the swirls are. It's mind boggling. Thanks for letting me know the name of the swirl, I'm off to look for more examples.
kchaystack
Supporting Member
I'm amazed at how evenly spaced the swirls are. It's mind boggling. Thanks for letting me know the name of the swirl, I'm off to look for more examples.
The last 2 soaping 101 vids talk about this technique
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2010
- Messages
- 6,117
- Reaction score
- 5,402
I posted a pic of this technique in April on this forum!
Stearic streaks and glycerine rivers are the same thing but different names. It seems like people use the terms interchangeably.
For today:
Stearic streaks and glycerine rivers are the same thing but different names. It seems like people use the terms interchangeably.
For today:
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2010
- Messages
- 6,117
- Reaction score
- 5,402
Lovely use of texture
Ok, how did s/he get the shimmer in the swirls in post #919? I have been trying to figure that out for months, have tried w/varying amts of mica, to no avail. I wonder if it is glitter?
kchaystack
Supporting Member
I think it is a metallic mica. I know Nurture has a copper mica and a gold mica that has extra sparkles.
I've tried them, K, it hasn't worked. The ones w/actual metal powder (there are a few) are not compatible w/CP except on the top as a swirl. But I will check out the Nurture ones, everyone does rave about them, thank you.
kchaystack
Supporting Member
Um, but I think that is what they did. Put the mica in oil on the top of the soap and swirled it. I do not think they mixed it into the batter.
ETA, that also looks like it is from one of those slab molds with the 18 or 36 bar dividers, not a loaf.
Oh, you're right, I was not looking carefully enough. V. pretty effect, but I want it *in* the soap as well as on top, maybe I am asking for too much.
kchaystack
Supporting Member
You might try mixing it with some glycerin and drop swirling after the pour... Or using a pipette to 'inject' it into the batter, or maybe an ITP swirl?
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2010
- Messages
- 6,117
- Reaction score
- 5,402
If you do an oil in mica within the soap, the most you can get is a thin line of it because it gets compressed by the soap and the oil will be absorbed. There just isn't any bulk/volume to it. I have been able to get some shimmer by using a lot of a high sheen mica inthe batter but it won't be like straight up mica. It just can't because the batter is opaque and light can't hit the mica from all sorts of angles.
I saw Nurture just put out a line of large particle high sheen micas that are supposed to give some sparkle effect in CP. I haven't tried them though.
You can try it using one of your highest sheen, most glittery micas in a small batch. I eyeball it but my guess is that I use 1/3 tsp or a bit more for maybe 4 ounces of batter (not oils, but batter). Don't use Colorona Bordeaux though. I've had very bad luck with that- the texture of the soap gets really strange.
I saw Nurture just put out a line of large particle high sheen micas that are supposed to give some sparkle effect in CP. I haven't tried them though.
You can try it using one of your highest sheen, most glittery micas in a small batch. I eyeball it but my guess is that I use 1/3 tsp or a bit more for maybe 4 ounces of batter (not oils, but batter). Don't use Colorona Bordeaux though. I've had very bad luck with that- the texture of the soap gets really strange.
ngian
Well-Known Member
I think that these are two different issues as their name implies:
- Stearic streaks are made from Stearic Fatty Acid, and are white opaque spots that has solidified/saponified quicker than other FAs
- Glycerine rivers are made with titanium dioxide and glycerine molecules from triglyceride and are transparent little rivers.
Nikos
I would give up on the mica *in* the bar search, sometimes I think it is one of those quests that people get stuck on that is just not workable and a bad/irritating idea. But I know it can be done b/c I've seen it on a long mica thread over on DISH, there are a couple of people there that have had good success with it.
I have a couple of v. fluffy large particle low color glitters from TKB and Mad Oils that actually do work to add shimmer in the body of the soap (I know, it sounds awful but it is actually quite pretty), they have v. little color themselves but are really good for shimmer, both inside and on the bar: http://www.madoils.com/products/sparkle-plenty-fluffy-glitter and http://www.tkbtrading.com/item.php?item_id=1710 For anyone who thinks glitter is awful and tacky, I would check these out, they add understated sparkle without being at all vulgar.
That's strange about the Colorona Bordeau, Newb, but good to know, I do like that color.
but I would like to do this w/mica ...
ETA: if anyone is thinking of buying the madoils one and is dissuaded by the pics on the site, don't be, they are surprisingly bad for madoils and it is much nicer "in person"
I have a couple of v. fluffy large particle low color glitters from TKB and Mad Oils that actually do work to add shimmer in the body of the soap (I know, it sounds awful but it is actually quite pretty), they have v. little color themselves but are really good for shimmer, both inside and on the bar: http://www.madoils.com/products/sparkle-plenty-fluffy-glitter and http://www.tkbtrading.com/item.php?item_id=1710 For anyone who thinks glitter is awful and tacky, I would check these out, they add understated sparkle without being at all vulgar.
That's strange about the Colorona Bordeau, Newb, but good to know, I do like that color.
but I would like to do this w/mica ...
ETA: if anyone is thinking of buying the madoils one and is dissuaded by the pics on the site, don't be, they are surprisingly bad for madoils and it is much nicer "in person"
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2010
- Messages
- 6,117
- Reaction score
- 5,402
N_A, do you have a pic of it done in a loaf? I would love to see what it looks like. The quest is ON!
ngian, I tossed the question out for our chemists on the forum because now I am curious if they are the same or different phenomenon. I have always heard the same so would love to know for certain.
An M&P and a CP for today.
ngian, I tossed the question out for our chemists on the forum because now I am curious if they are the same or different phenomenon. I have always heard the same so would love to know for certain.
An M&P and a CP for today.
Newb, I'll put some of the TKB one into my final challenge soap and kill two birds w/one stone, look for it tomorrow
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2010
- Messages
- 6,117
- Reaction score
- 5,402
Found this one- it's for the July GCS Challenge. I LOVE IT.
Sonya-m
Well-Known Member
Ooh yes I like that!!
Wow, that's beautiful. Love the swirls and the color combination.
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2010
- Messages
- 6,117
- Reaction score
- 5,402
Such an excellent eye for colors. I would not have thought of her darker side combo, with the gray, that color green, black and white. And her proportions are spot on, for my tastes anyway.
To the stearic/glycerin issue, both terms are officially incorrect, I see, but they are the same thing. I will have to eliminate the phrase "stearic streaks" from my vocabulary.
From DeeAnna:
"I dug up some stuff I've written before. Here ya go:
"Glycerin rivers" and "stearic spots or streaks" are misleading terms. The more generic terms "streaking" and "mottling" are really more accurate. Any soap can show rivers, streaks, spots, or mottling; these patterns are just more obvious in soaps with pigment colorants.
Probably the worst name of the two is "glycerin rivers" because it is so incorrect. A high concentration of glycerin would make soap soft and goopy, and the soap should wear away more quickly in those areas due to the softness and water solubility of the glycerin. Ask yourself -- have you ever seen a "glycerin river" that behaved like that??? "Stearic streaks" or spots can be formed by non-stearic soaps as well as stearic soap, but that term is closer to reality.
I have no illusion that people are going to use more accurate names, however. "Glycerin rivers" and "stearic spots" will continue to confuse and mislead soapers for decades to come.
***
Soap is made of many different kinds of soap molecules. As the soap cools in the mold, some parts of the soap may crystallize (harden) before other areas do. That affects where a colorant such as titanium dioxide ends up in the soap. Colorants are more likely to concentrate in the soaps that crystallize last. Also some of the soaps themselves are more opaque (stearic, palmitic) and some are more translucent (oleic, linoleic), which in itself can cause mottling and streaking even without added pigments.
Water content is not really what causes mottling and streaking, although I can see why one would think it is. What water content DOES do is affect whether the soap is likely to gel or not at relatively low temperatures. High water soaps go to full gel at much lower temps than low-water soaps, so they are thus more likely to show mottling and streaking than soaps that don't gel.
Mottling and streaking is more likely if the soap reaches a full gel state and is allowed to very slowly cool, so the different soaps (stearic soap, oleic soap, palmitic soap, etc.) can crystallize at different times.
***
The old soap makers (1800s to early 1900s) intentionally made mottled soaps that were popular with the customers of the day. A mottled soap could only be made using a pure soap that had not been "filled" or adulterated with too much water, clay, or other cost-cutting additives, so the mottling was proof the soap was pure and high quality. The soap maker would add a coloring agent to a finished soap, pour the soap into "frames" (large molds), and carefully control the rate of cooling.
The stearic and palmitic soaps would solidify into pale colored clumps first, essentially concentrating the color into the remaining liquid oleic and linoleic soaps. When the oleic soaps solidified, the color would be trapped within these areas and make rivers or veins of darker color around the stearic clumps. The size and appearance of the mottles were controlled by the oils in the recipe, the way the finished soap was handled, and the rate of cooling in the frames.
"...When [soap] is permitted to cool rapidly the colouring matter remains uniformly disseminated throughout the mass; but when means are taken to cause the soap to cool and solidify slowly a segregation takes place: the stearate and palmitate form a semicrystalline solid, while the oleate, solidifying more slowly, comes by itself into translucent veins, in which the greater part of the coloured matter is drawn. In this way curd, mottled or marbled soap is formed..."
Source: http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Soap"
And on to today's post, a beautiful light and summery feeling soap.
To the stearic/glycerin issue, both terms are officially incorrect, I see, but they are the same thing. I will have to eliminate the phrase "stearic streaks" from my vocabulary.
From DeeAnna:
"I dug up some stuff I've written before. Here ya go:
"Glycerin rivers" and "stearic spots or streaks" are misleading terms. The more generic terms "streaking" and "mottling" are really more accurate. Any soap can show rivers, streaks, spots, or mottling; these patterns are just more obvious in soaps with pigment colorants.
Probably the worst name of the two is "glycerin rivers" because it is so incorrect. A high concentration of glycerin would make soap soft and goopy, and the soap should wear away more quickly in those areas due to the softness and water solubility of the glycerin. Ask yourself -- have you ever seen a "glycerin river" that behaved like that??? "Stearic streaks" or spots can be formed by non-stearic soaps as well as stearic soap, but that term is closer to reality.
I have no illusion that people are going to use more accurate names, however. "Glycerin rivers" and "stearic spots" will continue to confuse and mislead soapers for decades to come.
***
Soap is made of many different kinds of soap molecules. As the soap cools in the mold, some parts of the soap may crystallize (harden) before other areas do. That affects where a colorant such as titanium dioxide ends up in the soap. Colorants are more likely to concentrate in the soaps that crystallize last. Also some of the soaps themselves are more opaque (stearic, palmitic) and some are more translucent (oleic, linoleic), which in itself can cause mottling and streaking even without added pigments.
Water content is not really what causes mottling and streaking, although I can see why one would think it is. What water content DOES do is affect whether the soap is likely to gel or not at relatively low temperatures. High water soaps go to full gel at much lower temps than low-water soaps, so they are thus more likely to show mottling and streaking than soaps that don't gel.
Mottling and streaking is more likely if the soap reaches a full gel state and is allowed to very slowly cool, so the different soaps (stearic soap, oleic soap, palmitic soap, etc.) can crystallize at different times.
***
The old soap makers (1800s to early 1900s) intentionally made mottled soaps that were popular with the customers of the day. A mottled soap could only be made using a pure soap that had not been "filled" or adulterated with too much water, clay, or other cost-cutting additives, so the mottling was proof the soap was pure and high quality. The soap maker would add a coloring agent to a finished soap, pour the soap into "frames" (large molds), and carefully control the rate of cooling.
The stearic and palmitic soaps would solidify into pale colored clumps first, essentially concentrating the color into the remaining liquid oleic and linoleic soaps. When the oleic soaps solidified, the color would be trapped within these areas and make rivers or veins of darker color around the stearic clumps. The size and appearance of the mottles were controlled by the oils in the recipe, the way the finished soap was handled, and the rate of cooling in the frames.
"...When [soap] is permitted to cool rapidly the colouring matter remains uniformly disseminated throughout the mass; but when means are taken to cause the soap to cool and solidify slowly a segregation takes place: the stearate and palmitate form a semicrystalline solid, while the oleate, solidifying more slowly, comes by itself into translucent veins, in which the greater part of the coloured matter is drawn. In this way curd, mottled or marbled soap is formed..."
Source: http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Soap"
And on to today's post, a beautiful light and summery feeling soap.
Last edited:
That is beautiful. Spin swirl?
Similar threads
