How were the bars before salting out? You said they were harsh even though you added back glycerine while rebatching. This should have canceled any effect of the glycerine wash.
Salted out "Aleppo" Soap
- Thread starter engblom
- Start date
Help Support Soapmaking Forum:
- Status
How were the bars before salting out? You said they were harsh even though you added back glycerine while rebatching. This should have canceled any effect of the glycerine wash.
judymoody
Well-Known Member
I found this thread very interesting but a little confusing. I am glad that this method produces a soap that works well for you.
However, I'm having a hard time grasping the idea that a soap which is effectively not superfatted (I'm assuming that the free oils would be washed away in the process you describe) and has the glycerin removed, would be a mild, gentle soap.
Maybe I will have to try it and see for myself.
However, I'm having a hard time grasping the idea that a soap which is effectively not superfatted (I'm assuming that the free oils would be washed away in the process you describe) and has the glycerin removed, would be a mild, gentle soap.
Maybe I will have to try it and see for myself.
Obsidian
Well-Known Member
They were ok bars, lower on lather but not drying. The salt out completely ruined them, I was surprised that adding back glycerin didn't really change anything. Maybe the salt out process removes or adds something beside glycerin. I know its not the salt making it drying, I use salt bars daily.
It would be interesting to see if there has been any scientific testing done on the before vs after.
It would be interesting to see if there has been any scientific testing done on the before vs after.
AtraGarden
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2013
- Messages
- 70
- Reaction score
- 29
Hello,
Thats going to be a creamy and skin friendly soap. I was wondering if it was made with Cold Pressed oil or not? Here is a picture of Laurel Soap that I recently made.
I have no idea if it is cold pressed or not. At the point when I bought the oil you did not yet ship small quantities and with no prior experience of "Aleppo soap" I did not want to put really much money into it.
Which is better, cold pressed or "normal"?
Which is better, cold pressed or "normal"?
AtraGarden
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2013
- Messages
- 70
- Reaction score
- 29
It really depends on which one you like better. I personally like the smell of traditional but maybe the idea of being made ancient ways make me feel that way. I really get happy when someone post a product made with what I like and sell
It really does not matter where you buy it, I am here to help with it and let people know about it. The product you purchased probably came out of our facility. I certainly wait for your feedback after you use it. You should try making a bar or two of high percentage like 70-80% Laurel or 100% Laurel to see how great it is
Cheers
Miha Engblom
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2013
- Messages
- 104
- Reaction score
- 72
AtraGarden are you selling oil to manske-shop in germany? It was from there that he bought it.
One more question... how old is the soap in the picture? Our soaps are still pretty green, and I think it has been passing a few weeks since we made our first.
One more question... how old is the soap in the picture? Our soaps are still pretty green, and I think it has been passing a few weeks since we made our first.
Last edited:
AtraGarden
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2013
- Messages
- 70
- Reaction score
- 29
I know manske but I do not directly sell to manske. There are only couple first hand suppliers of this oil beside me so maybe manske's supplier might be one of my customer. This is the reason I started doing retail because I can't control where my product goes. I want suppliers go through me not the middle people.
The soap in the picture is just came out of curing area which is 3 months old and contains 50% of Laurel Oil. The color fades away, it wont stay green or brownish, the color of 100% laurel soap even fades away. Yours probably going to turn cream color.
ilovesoap2
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2013
- Messages
- 254
- Reaction score
- 121
I wish the only thing the salting removed was any excess lye. The idea of losing the glycerin, not so good.
Before pressing the bars, you could add anything you want to a salted out soap. This includes super-fatting oils, fragrances, colors and even glycerin, if you so want. Just put everything into blender and blend in whatever you want.
I have not felt any need to add back the glycerin, as my skin is having significantly more moisture from the salt content in the salted out soap. This could be something that some are reacting in another way to than how I am reacting.
TheVelvetLeopard
Member
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2014
- Messages
- 6
- Reaction score
- 0
I have never heard of Aleppo or salting a soap (although I have heard of salt soaps). I'm going to have to look this up now
The salting out is not specific for "Aleppo soap". It can be used for any soap. Also "Aleppo soaps" could be made without the salting out part.I have never heard of Aleppo or salting a soap (although I have heard of salt soaps). I'm going to have to look this up now
Laurel Berry Oil has quite a bit of Lauric acid which, while nice for generating bubbles, is a bit drying on the skin (far from what coconut is allthough). This was my main reason for salting out the soap.
Can you make Aleppo soap with just normal Cold Process, Olive oil and Lye water and add Bay Laurel oil after trace?
Do you think the Syrians went through that convoluted process just because they could measure the Lye percentages very accurately? Or none perfect measures.
Do you think the Syrians went through that convoluted process just because they could measure the Lye percentages very accurately? Or none perfect measures.
"...Can you make Aleppo soap with just normal Cold Process, Olive oil and Lye water and add Bay Laurel oil after trace? ..."
Yes, but why add the bay laurel oil after trace? That will not work to ensure the BL oil is the superfat -- the lye is still very active at trace and will saponify what it wants. If you specifically want the BL oil to be the superfat, you will need to hot process the soap and add the BL oil after the cook.
"...Do you think the Syrians went through that convoluted process just because they could measure the Lye percentages very accurately? ..."
Do you mean "...because they could ~not~ measure the Lye percentages..."?
If so, the answer is "yes" and "no". It's more complicated than that -- and here is a very simple but still complicated answer:
There are two types of "salting" as used in soap making.
Originally, only soft soaps could be made because the lye used for soap making was collected from ashes harvested from the burning of certain types of plants. The ashes contained mostly potassium salts, and these ashes were leached with water to dissolve the potassium salts and form a potassium lye.
The soaping fats were warmed in a large kettle, the lye solution was added, the mixture was stirred and boiled over a fire, more water and lye were added as needed, and the mixture was allowed to saponify. When the saponification was complete, common salt was sometimes added to the soap paste to force some of the potassium soap to convert into sodium soap. This paste was poured into containers for use. The salting step made the soft soap somewhat firmer and easier to handle and use, although the soap was still soft and paste-like. The sodium soaps in the paste were less soluble in water, so the soap would last somewhat longer. This type of soap was probably something like modern-day soft shaving soaps or "cream soap".
Later on in the early 1800s, soap was made with a sodium lye rather than a potassium lye. This changed the "normal" type of soap from a soft paste soap to a hard bar soap, similar to what we are familiar with today. This occurred when people figured out how to make sodium hydroxide (caustic soda) from soda ash and lime, so soap makers weren't limited to using the potassium lye from ashes.
This sodium soap was made pretty much as described above -- the difference comes after the soap is mostly or fully saponified. At that point, the soap is a hot, liquid mass partly mixed into and partly floating on a watery solution of glycerin, salt, impurities from the soap ingredients, and spent (used up) lye. Believe it or not, adding salt to this mixture will cause the soap to become almost completely insoluble in water, and the soap would form curds and float to the top of the soap kettle. This was called "graining" the soap. After a settling period, the water layer underneath the soap curds was drained off. This washing and draining procedure could be repeated several times, depending on what kind of soap the soapmaker wanted to make. The "grained" soap was poured into molds to cool and harden, and then cut into bars for sale.
Actually, commercially produced soap is still made today with a "boiled" method where lye is gradually added until the fats are just saponified. Only handcrafters make cold-process or hot-process soap using a superfat as "insurance" against the error in our calculations. In some respects, the boiled method has advantages, because no one can truly predict exactly how much lye is required to saponify fats and the boiled method allows for this fact.
Handcrafted soaping is actually more prone to error because the saponification values we use to create our recipes are basically estimates. These values may be very good estimates, but are still not precise measures of the fats actually in our soap pots. We just design recipes in a way that usually forces any error to be extra superfat, rather than extra lye.
Henry Gathmann, author of a commercial soapmaking text written in the late 1800s, talked a lot about the alternatives to the boiled soapmaking method. He described the cold process method and the half-boiled method (basically a hot process method). He felt these methods made soap that was less desirable in some ways than a fully boiled soap, because the impurities from the soaping fats were not removed. He wrote:
"...cold-made soap, therefore, contains—like half-boiled soap—all the impurities that may have been introduced with the stock, all the water used for making the lye, the foreign salts that may have been contained in the caustic, the glycerine formed during the formation of the soap, and also more or less of the raw materials in an uncombined state...."
He went on to explain the cold and half boiled methods were easier to do when making small batches, so small commercial (and home) soap makers were pretty much limited to using these methods versus the "full boiled" method. Gathmann went on to say:
"...The boiling of soap requires apparatus, labor, and time, which are too expensive to apply except for a fairly large batch, to say nothing of the practical impossibility of properly finishing a small batch of soap by boiling. In connection with this there is the further advantage that by the cold process a batch of soap can be turned out on very short notice, and certainly much more rapidly than by boiling...."
Probably too much info to answer such a short question ... but there ya go!
Yes, but why add the bay laurel oil after trace? That will not work to ensure the BL oil is the superfat -- the lye is still very active at trace and will saponify what it wants. If you specifically want the BL oil to be the superfat, you will need to hot process the soap and add the BL oil after the cook.
"...Do you think the Syrians went through that convoluted process just because they could measure the Lye percentages very accurately? ..."
Do you mean "...because they could ~not~ measure the Lye percentages..."?
If so, the answer is "yes" and "no". It's more complicated than that -- and here is a very simple but still complicated answer:
There are two types of "salting" as used in soap making.
Originally, only soft soaps could be made because the lye used for soap making was collected from ashes harvested from the burning of certain types of plants. The ashes contained mostly potassium salts, and these ashes were leached with water to dissolve the potassium salts and form a potassium lye.
The soaping fats were warmed in a large kettle, the lye solution was added, the mixture was stirred and boiled over a fire, more water and lye were added as needed, and the mixture was allowed to saponify. When the saponification was complete, common salt was sometimes added to the soap paste to force some of the potassium soap to convert into sodium soap. This paste was poured into containers for use. The salting step made the soft soap somewhat firmer and easier to handle and use, although the soap was still soft and paste-like. The sodium soaps in the paste were less soluble in water, so the soap would last somewhat longer. This type of soap was probably something like modern-day soft shaving soaps or "cream soap".
Later on in the early 1800s, soap was made with a sodium lye rather than a potassium lye. This changed the "normal" type of soap from a soft paste soap to a hard bar soap, similar to what we are familiar with today. This occurred when people figured out how to make sodium hydroxide (caustic soda) from soda ash and lime, so soap makers weren't limited to using the potassium lye from ashes.
This sodium soap was made pretty much as described above -- the difference comes after the soap is mostly or fully saponified. At that point, the soap is a hot, liquid mass partly mixed into and partly floating on a watery solution of glycerin, salt, impurities from the soap ingredients, and spent (used up) lye. Believe it or not, adding salt to this mixture will cause the soap to become almost completely insoluble in water, and the soap would form curds and float to the top of the soap kettle. This was called "graining" the soap. After a settling period, the water layer underneath the soap curds was drained off. This washing and draining procedure could be repeated several times, depending on what kind of soap the soapmaker wanted to make. The "grained" soap was poured into molds to cool and harden, and then cut into bars for sale.
Actually, commercially produced soap is still made today with a "boiled" method where lye is gradually added until the fats are just saponified. Only handcrafters make cold-process or hot-process soap using a superfat as "insurance" against the error in our calculations. In some respects, the boiled method has advantages, because no one can truly predict exactly how much lye is required to saponify fats and the boiled method allows for this fact.
Handcrafted soaping is actually more prone to error because the saponification values we use to create our recipes are basically estimates. These values may be very good estimates, but are still not precise measures of the fats actually in our soap pots. We just design recipes in a way that usually forces any error to be extra superfat, rather than extra lye.
Henry Gathmann, author of a commercial soapmaking text written in the late 1800s, talked a lot about the alternatives to the boiled soapmaking method. He described the cold process method and the half-boiled method (basically a hot process method). He felt these methods made soap that was less desirable in some ways than a fully boiled soap, because the impurities from the soaping fats were not removed. He wrote:
"...cold-made soap, therefore, contains—like half-boiled soap—all the impurities that may have been introduced with the stock, all the water used for making the lye, the foreign salts that may have been contained in the caustic, the glycerine formed during the formation of the soap, and also more or less of the raw materials in an uncombined state...."
He went on to explain the cold and half boiled methods were easier to do when making small batches, so small commercial (and home) soap makers were pretty much limited to using these methods versus the "full boiled" method. Gathmann went on to say:
"...The boiling of soap requires apparatus, labor, and time, which are too expensive to apply except for a fairly large batch, to say nothing of the practical impossibility of properly finishing a small batch of soap by boiling. In connection with this there is the further advantage that by the cold process a batch of soap can be turned out on very short notice, and certainly much more rapidly than by boiling...."
Probably too much info to answer such a short question ... but there ya go!
Yes they didn't have access to pure lye and couldn't measure it correctly that's why they had to do the boiling method. Now that we have pure NaOH that could make it faster with CP. It's the same with Black African Soap.
I'll repeat myself -- just because we have high purity NaOH and KOH today doesn't mean the boiled method is obsolete. High purity NaOH and KOH have been available and used in soap making for well over 100 years. Commercial soap makers today generally do not use the CP or HP processes that we do -- these methods are actually more error-prone than the boiled method.
did you make your bar with hot or cold process?
Also, the bar looks brownish instead of green. has it oxidized? when you cut it open, is the inside green?
Saponificarian
Well-Known Member
https://classicbells.com/soap/saltOutTut.html
Here ya go.
ETA: This thread is old. It’s better not to resurrect old threads. Read the forum rules.
Here ya go.
ETA: This thread is old. It’s better not to resurrect old threads. Read the forum rules.
A general answer is already in this thread. Re-read my Post #34, especially the paragraph that starts "...The soaping fats were warmed in a large kettle, the lye solution was added, the mixture was stirred and boiled over a fire..."
Saponificarian is right, however. If you want to start a new discussion about this, please do it in a new thread. You can give a link to this old thread in your new thread if you like.
- Status
Similar threads
