Lather consistency question

[DrStrange]

Hard to describe, but a little thinner than the gorgeous lather photos you often see. When I first started here about ten years ago, I wanted lather that looked like the stiff peak stage, when making whipped egg whites or whipped cream. The little peak on top of the brush? It would stand up proud! Like this:

Now, for most soaps, I would face lather to that point and then give it one or two more dips of just the brush tips in water and keep going. I credit the SR crowd for nudging me this way. Now a great lather for me looks more like this. It's still not what I'd call anywhere near 'runny', but it is softer, the peaks won't stand quite as stiffly, they droop a little bit. None of this is very scientifically described, I know, but it's the best I can do. It's softer, has a little more sheen to it, and the extra water does add slickness, IMO.

View attachment 1343312

Here's another one with Cella. I used to make it like the photo at the top, but now I make it softer, more of a sheen. I don't want runny at all, but softer is better, I've found, as I've gotten more experienced at this. This particular topic is so very YMMV though.

View attachment 1343314

I like the first one.

 

[JCinPA]

I like the first one.

Well, there is that YMMV thing! Some people do! I used to!

 

[tyoung]

I shave face and head every single day too. Dense and creamy lather all the way for me, so the water stays in the soap, and the lather stays in place on my skin (most important when I shave my head) Some soaps do this better than others for me. I like to load heavy, add lots of water and get the best of both worlds as far as density and slickness (Protection and glide). Overhydrated lather in a sub par soap will just run off my head, and when I'm shaving by feel, that's definitely no good!

 

[SterFry]

It doesn't make sense to me at all to use the word "cushion".

Protection maybe...but not cushion in the sense that there's a barrier stopping the edge of the blade from contacting skin. If there were then the more "cushioning" the soap the less close the shave would be...and there's nothing else to provide "cushion" against.

... but I digress. I also prefer my lather on the wet side as I have found that wetter does, in fact, mean slicker...but only up to a point. There's a critical point that with each soap where incorporating more water stops contributing to how slick the lather is. Otherwise straight water would be viable to shave with.

 

[Lefonque]

Lather consistency is such a personal thing. I have said in other threads I was taught to create lather by my Grandmother who worked in her stepfather’s barber shop in London in the 1900-1910s as a lather girl. I still love the lather that I produce however I am always trying to try new and different ways of creating lather.

The way that I was taught makes a slick lather but also a lot of bulk. Very impressive for a customer who may come to a barber shop for a shave. Thinking about this it may not be optimal for a single shaver. I have been experimenting on different ways and different methods. Even after 50+ years as wet shaver you never stop learning. The fun continues.

 

[mtcn77]

Less whipping gives a wetter/slicker/protective lather whereas more gives an airy/cushiony/emulsified feel in my opinion. It is also easier with longer loft brushes, I really recommend them. I would try the wet type, but I find it hydrates better when I whip, or expand with water some more. Dryness can be overcome by applying a second coat, however I cannot solve a wet lather that doesn't stick to the face. I consider drying on the face in the same wetness category, essentially I find them not enough emulsified.

 

[Lefonque]

I love lathering and over the years have viewed many people lather. Some lather is slick, some dense and some runny. I have settled on what I like in consistency. Having said that I have been experimenting over the last two months bu different hydration and different whipping, stirring and using different bowls, while it has been fun I am not convinced that I have changed my mind to what I consider a good lather.

I am of the opinion that Chard52142 has the best looking lather on this forum and I am openly envious. Go to show us you lather page and see what I mean. My hat is off to him.

 

[Anu]

Less whipping gives a wetter/slicker/protective lather whereas more gives an airy/cushiony/emulsified feel in my opinion. It is also easier with longer loft brushes, I really recommend them. I would try the wet type, but I find it hydrates better when I whip, or expand with water some more. Dryness can be overcome by applying a second coat, however I cannot solve a wet lather that doesn't stick to the face. I consider drying on the face in the same wetness category, essentially I find them not enough emulsified.

Whilst I completely agree on the lubricating properties of highly hydrated lather, as opposed to the low hydrated, there's a definitive misnomer, which others have also propagated in other related forums, in the above statements. Aside from a couple of highly specialized foams - shaving lather not being one of them - there's no emulsification process between foam constituents. Without having to delve into solvation, phase separation and other higher-order inter-molecular interactions, shaving foam is a gaseous suspension/inclusion formed mechanically or hydrodynamically within a solution, ergo miscible fluids/liquids (water as solvent, soap as solute). Emulsification, by its own definition, implies an non-diffusive association between immiscible fluids/liquids in normal conditions. This post is in no way, shape, or form, berating in scope, only a minor and sensible reminder of semantics and phenomena, understood well-enough to be relegated to nomenclature.

 

[Kentos]

Slicker the better, and by extension it will be a very thin lather with very little aeration. Whipping up a thick voluminous lather looks good in pics, but for they offer very little helping the blade glide on the skin. More so as I use straights. YMMV greatly tho. Try a bunch of different consistencies and see what works for you.

 

[mtcn77]

Whilst I completely agree on the lubricating properties of highly hydrated lather, as opposed to the low hydrated, there's a definitive misnomer, which others have also propagated in other related forums, in the above statements. Aside from a couple of highly specialized foams - shaving lather not being one of them - there's no emulsification process between foam constituents. Without having to delve into solvation, phase separation and other higher-order inter-molecular interactions, shaving foam is a gaseous suspension/inclusion formed mechanically or hydrodynamically within a solution, ergo miscible fluids/liquids (water as solvent, soap as solute). Emulsification, by its own definition, implies an non-diffusive association between immiscible fluids/liquids in normal conditions. This post is in no way, shape, or form, berating in scope, only a minor and sensible reminder of semantics and phenomena, understood well-enough to be relegated to nomenclature.

Hi, soap is solids. I would agree to its suspension, yet I don't get perfect solution every time and lots of people would still work for the perfect lather. Besides soap is made of stearic acid and it contains superfats. That definition makes it an emulsion by definition.

I wasn't up for a semantic protest either, but you have to consider there are similar ingredients in both the shaving soaps and preshave oils(they contain free stearic acid fatty acids while soaps contain them by the superfat content considering there is superfat to be in soaps and they would't be lye heavy) I think the only difference is you might have to mix soap more vigorously to emulsify all the superfat. I don't know I never checked an actual single one soap, I'm just generalizing.

 

[Anu]

Hi, soap is solids. I would agree to its suspension, yet I don't get perfect solution every time and lots of people would still work for the perfect lather. Besides soap is made of stearic acid and it contains superfats. That definition makes it an emulsion by definition.

I wasn't up for a semantic protest either, but you have to consider there are similar ingredients in both the shaving soaps and preshave oils(they contain free stearic acid fatty acids while soaps contain them by the superfat content considering there is superfat to be in soaps and they would't be lye heavy) I think the only difference is you might have to mix soap more vigorously to emulsify all the superfat. I don't know I never checked an actual single one soap, I'm just generalizing.

I believe you are referring to 'saponified' fats or superfats. And though I'll glide with this one, since it is well known that artisan soaps may contain the unsaponified variety, the comment still stands as the inherent emulsification is contingent upon foam formation, and it is fractionally lower. Generalizations work quite well when the concerning phenomena is more than marginally dependent on primary effects.

 

[mtcn77]

I believe you are referring to 'saponified' fats or superfats. And though I'll glide with this one, since it is well known that artisan soaps may contain the unsaponified variety, the comment still stands as the inherent emulsification is contingent upon foam formation, and it is fractionally lower. Generalizations work quite well when the concerning phenomena is more than marginally dependent on primary effects.

Thanks.

 

[Crisp Rat]

I am of the opinion that Chard52142 has the best looking lather on this forum and I am openly envious.

I agree with this statement 100%. The man is a master