- Thread starter
- #81
Time/Agitation Is Also an Ingredient When Building Lather
- Thread starter ShavingByTheNumbers
- Start date
One of the things that just occurred to me is that when I shave, I make an effort to minimize the time between getting out of the shower and shaving so that my skin is still fully hydrated when I start to lather. I set up my razor and soap on the sink so I can be shaving 30 seconds after I get out of the shower.
It someone spends 3-4 minutes making lather after getting out of the shower, it seems like their face and whisker would be completely dry by the time the lather went on. Maybe that has something to do with it? Starting with completely saturated/hydrated skin and whiskers because neither one drys out in 60 seconds of lathering?
Just a thought.
It someone spends 3-4 minutes making lather after getting out of the shower, it seems like their face and whisker would be completely dry by the time the lather went on. Maybe that has something to do with it? Starting with completely saturated/hydrated skin and whiskers because neither one drys out in 60 seconds of lathering?
Just a thought.
- Thread starter
- #83
Awesome report, Nick! Thanks! I wish that I'd tried Cella by now so that I'd have an optimum water-to-soap ratio and lather-building time for you. Next time, when you measure mass, try a water-to-soap ratio of 10. That's a good starting point. Congratulations on the success with a brush lather. A minute of building lather seemed to be an improvement, which is great to hear. It's possible that 45 seconds or 30 seconds might work better. Remember, there is no fixed best time. We all build lather at different paces, for one thing. Also, one minute might be best for one soap, and then not an optimum for another. For AOS shaving cream, 45 seconds seemed to work best for me. Currently, I'm finishing up evaluating Declaration Grooming (formerly L&L Grooming). 60 seconds worked fine, and 45 seconds seemed to yield similar results, but with slightly more dense lather. Tomorrow morning, I'll try 30 seconds with slightly more soap and water, expecting more dense lather again. I'm not sure what the optimum time is yet for this soap, and there might not be much of a difference in the time zone that I'm looking at, but it takes about 20 seconds at the optimum water-to-soap ratio for all of this soap to get incorporated, so 30 seconds is the lowest time that I'll test with it.
- Thread starter
- #84
You could have a point there. Skin and stubble hydration matters.
I was just kidding about the Minute Method™ of course.
I know you never said that all folks should use exactly one minute for all soaps. I just thought it was a catchy name that simply communicates the idea that good lather can be made in about a minute rather than the 5 minutes many people have grown accustomed to. My first experiment with it was really very positive. A 6 pass shave incorporating a R41 is something that I find difficult even under the best of circumstances. Sometimes it goes sideways just because I haven't had my coffee yet. I've never attempted it with brush lather before. I figured if I could even come close to pulling it off with brush lather using your method, you're probably on to something.
Too bad about the Cella; I was hoping you might have some data for it. If you haven't tried it yet you really should. It's amazing stuff. It's the only soap I own that can be applied once and has enough residual slickness to carry through a 6 pass hand lathered shave. Not even Grooming Dept soap can manage that. With every other soap I own, I have to re-lather after pass 3.
Currently in the den I have the soaps below. If you've tried any of these, I'd be keen to hear your recommended weights. Otherwise, I'll carry on with the recommend 10:1 ratio.
- Cella
- Grooming Dept Tacit
- Haslinger Schafmilch
- Wholly Kaw: Man From Mayfair (DM)
- Wholly Kaw: Monaco Royale
- Tallow & Steel: West Indies
- Tallow & Steel: Maya
- Proraso White (soap)
- Arko
- Proraso Red (cream)
- Cremo Creme
- RR XXX
- RR Amici
- Thread starter
- #86
I was just kidding about the Minute Method™ of course.
My first experiment with it was really very positive. A 6 pass shave incorporating a R41 is something that I find difficult even under the best of circumstances. Sometimes it goes sideways just because I haven't had my coffee yet. I've never attempted it with brush lather before. I figured if I could even come close to pulling it off with brush lather using your method, you're probably on to something.
Too bad about the Cella; I was hoping you might have some data for it. If you haven't tried it yet you really should. It's amazing stuff. It's the only soap I own that can be applied once and has enough residual slickness to carry through a 6 pass hand lathered shave. Not even Grooming Dept soap can manage that. With every other soap I own, I have to re-lather after pass 3.
Currently in the den I have the soaps below. If you've tried any of these, I'd be keen to hear your recommended weights. Otherwise, I'll carry on with the recommend 10:1 ratio.
- Cella
- Grooming Dept Tacit
- Haslinger Schafmilch
- Wholly Kaw: Man From Mayfair (DM)
- Wholly Kaw: Monaco Royale
- Tallow & Steel: West Indies
- Tallow & Steel: Maya
- Proraso White (soap)
- Arko
- Proraso Red (cream)
- Cremo Creme
- RR XXX
- RR Amici
Nick, when I saw that you came up with "Minute Method", I smiled, liked it, and didn't like it at the same time. It's catchy. TOO catchy.
Maybe that will stick as a subset of the general idea. If it helps others try cutting down their lathering-building times, then I'd be happy with that. Maybe we'll come up with a more precise name for optimizing lather-building time, which generally involves minimizing it. I'm drawing a blank. Your catchy phrase is the best so far. Thanks. 
I'm so glad that your first experiment was a success. I really appreciate your help and feedback. This is a great effort here that I hope continues for some time. Wouldn't it be something if this thread starts a wave of knowledge and experimentation about cutting down lather times and making slicker lathers?
I wish that I could give you my optimized water-to-soap ratio (and lather-building time) for any one of those soaps, but I haven't tried any of them yet. Some of those are on my list. The best that I can say is to start with water:soap at about 10:1 and then maybe try ratios of 7 and 13 and take it from there. If 10 was okay, but 7 worked better, then you're on the right track. The optimum could then be between 7 and 10 or even less than 7. That's just one example.
Let us know how your next experiment goes!
I've been thinking about it a bit. I worked out a thought experiment to help me visualize what happens when lather is made. Let me know what you think.
Lets assume that the same brand of soap is used at the same concentration & quantity.
Test lathers of different duration are made with it & with different brushes, as well as by hand.
The lather leaves a film of soapy water on the surface of the skin. Tiny bubbles of soapy water (the lather) lie on the surface of this film. They act as a cushion.
All other things being equal,
More air will be incorporated in lather if the brush is used for a longer time. Additionally the tiny soap bubbles that make up lather become smaller the longer the brush is plied, & the bubble walls also get thinner. The soapy water layer on the skin gets thinner as more of it is used to make lather.
A brush made of fine hair will make smaller bubbles faster, & so damage the slick lubricating soapy water film quicker. If no brush is used (lather is made by hand), the soapy water film will be almost undamaged & will approach its maximum theoretical thickness & slickness (lubricity).
Sent from my #!@☆¤¿ phone using Tapatalk
Lets assume that the same brand of soap is used at the same concentration & quantity.
Test lathers of different duration are made with it & with different brushes, as well as by hand.
The lather leaves a film of soapy water on the surface of the skin. Tiny bubbles of soapy water (the lather) lie on the surface of this film. They act as a cushion.
All other things being equal,
More air will be incorporated in lather if the brush is used for a longer time. Additionally the tiny soap bubbles that make up lather become smaller the longer the brush is plied, & the bubble walls also get thinner. The soapy water layer on the skin gets thinner as more of it is used to make lather.
A brush made of fine hair will make smaller bubbles faster, & so damage the slick lubricating soapy water film quicker. If no brush is used (lather is made by hand), the soapy water film will be almost undamaged & will approach its maximum theoretical thickness & slickness (lubricity).
Sent from my #!@☆¤¿ phone using Tapatalk
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #88
You might have something there about a soapy water layer on the skin getting thinner as more time is used to build a lather that has smaller and more numerous bubbles. I don't know. My best guess is that with more lather-building time, with more bubbles that are smaller, you end up with more bubble surface contact with the skin, which results in more interfacial/surface tension and less slickness. We might be talking about the same thing but in two different ways. What do you think?
Is all lather bubbles? Lather is certainly created with aeration.
I would think larger bubbles create a less stable lubrication layer while finer, more compacted bubbles create a more stable layer of lubrication because there is more soap product within a surface area. The only reason tension might increase is because of loss of water with longer lather building time?
Just thoughts.
I would think larger bubbles create a less stable lubrication layer while finer, more compacted bubbles create a more stable layer of lubrication because there is more soap product within a surface area. The only reason tension might increase is because of loss of water with longer lather building time?
Just thoughts.
Well, yes, mostly . . .
Results
Inconclusive, though leaning against Grant's hypothesis. But see Discussion, below.
Method
First shave, 1/4 tsp (volume, pressed) of soap, and 1-1/4 tsp water. Agitated to the consistency I currently prefer (just past visible bubbles, thin but not runny). Agitation time: 1 min 50 sec. (Longer than I would have thought.)
Second shave, 1/4 tsp (volume, pressed) of soap, and ultimately 2 tsp water. Agitated to the consistency I used to strive for for over a year (dense, smooth, like yogurt). Agitation time: 2 min 25 sec. (Shorter than I would have thought.)
Discussion
If I were a better man, I would repeat this experiment 5 or 6 more times - and find a way to control for the amount of water used - in order to get some more significant results. But I'm not (a better man).
I usually leave the brush fairly wet, and then as I work up the lather I dip my fingers in the basin and dribble water into the bowl as necessary. For this experiment, I wrang out the brush and gave it a few good shakes, then added water to the bowl with a measuring spoon 1/4 tsp at a time.
Normally (and in both of these tests), I have more soap in the bowl than I actually need. So when I got to the second test, and continued agitating past the point of the first test, it was simply impossible for me to get the lather I was looking for without adding more (significantly more) water.
The primary condition I was testing for was the amount of residual slickness on my face after rinsing after the first and second passes. I think this was slightly better with the second (denser, more agitated) lather.
The secondary condition I was testing for was the overall comfort and result of the shave. This was effectively a tie.
I am a firm supporter of the method of science. (Yes, for any who may have been incompletely educated, science is a method, not a result.) And I am an equally big supporter of Grant's efforts to quantify how and why shaving works the way it does. But I still think how wet a lather is is of greater import than how long it's been agitated - though I can't prove it.
More importantly, this attempt to be scientific, and my whole experience of traditional shaving, leads me to the conclusion that traditional shaving is at least as much an art as a science.
Wish I had helped more . . .
- Thread starter
- #91
Water evaporation while building lather is only significant, in my experience, with long lather building times. Lather is a foam, having bubbles next to bubbles with the soapy water mixture in between. The greater number of smaller bubbles, the more interfacial tension there is in the lather and the more structure/cushion there is with the lather. That's my understanding, anyway. With any soap, one can build a lather with a higher water-to-soap ratio that has more structure but less slickness compared to a lather with a lower water-to-soap ratio that was built in less time.
TIME as a factor in building lather, which relates to the methods that we use to build lather, should be given much more consideration and discussion. I think that differences in time/agitation used to build lather explains a good amount of differences that we have about soaps and creams, and people aren't even aware of it. We're all aware of hydration level beause we can see and feel the soap/cream and water. It's common to see discussion and advice about using more/less water and more/less soap, but where is the discussion and advice about using more/less time to build one's lather? As far as I know, this is the first place to have that discussion, and I really appreciate it.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #92
Thanks, Spike, for your detailed results. You've been helpful, buddy.
Your results are your results and I'm not here to discount them in any way. Actually, I think that your results make sense.Even though the time difference was not very large, your second lather was built longer than your first and you ended up finding that the second lather's slickness was "slightly better". That means that there is a correlation between more lather-building time and more slickness with your two lathers, but we have to be careful not to confuse correlation with causation. Your second lather was seemingly made with more water. That could easily explain the results. Only controlled experiments with everything being the same except lather-building time can hone in on the effects of lather-building time. That's what the OP is based on. As you said, it's the scientific method. I get repeatable results with my measured lathers and consistent lathering process.
Your thinking is totally reasonable that lather hydration is more important than lather-building time. In general, I agree. In the OP, I wrote that lather-building time is "just as important" as hydration level. I probably should have written that it is "also important" without judging the degree of importance, which could be considered subjective. It's just that after controlled experimentation with shifts in slickness due to changes in lather-building time that sometimes mimicked shifts in slickness due to changes in water-to-soap ratio, I was excited to share my findings. Lather-building time is important and we should be aware it and find what works best for our individual lathering methods and equipment. That sounds good, right?
I suspect that smaller cells/bubbles is what creates cushion. The more one works the brush, the more lather generated, the finer the lather, the greater the cushion, but the lesser the film of soapy water next to the skin & therefore, lesser the slickness...
I think you're probably right.
I'm looking at a thick layer of soapy water film next to the skin as promoting or increasing the slickness. You're looking at an increasing number of micro bubbles next to the skin as reducing slickness. I see those micro bubbles eating into the layer of soapy water film as cannibalizing slickness. It's virtually the same thing, approached from different angles.
Last edited:
Yes, I agree, it’s definitely a component. I am trying to imagine a better way of isolating it as a factor.
- Thread starter
- #95
Smaller cells/bubbles due to more lather building creates more cushion. That's true. Also, maybe it causes less soapy water next to the skin. Maybe we'll have an answer to this question of mechanics someday. At least I'm convinced that more lather building decreases slickness, even if we don't know how exactly it works. Controlled experiments have proven the phenomenon to me over and over again. I can only hope that more of us experience it, too, and spread the word.
- Thread starter
- #96
You did a great job with measuring the soap. A 1/4 teaspoon is a lot---about 1.1 g by my estimation---so I hear you about the large amount of soap, but at least it was constant. For using the same amount of water and making things simple, you could start with all of the water in the lathering bowl. How about 2 1/4 teaspoons or 2 1/2 teaspoons? Starting with a dry synthetic brush is important for keeping the water amount the same. Then, for each lather, start the timer and build each lather in the same manner except build one with significantly more time. How about building the first lather in 1 minute and the second lather in 2 minutes? Or, how about building the first lather in 1.5 minutes and the second lather in 3 minutes? What about 1 minute and 3 minutes? 2 minutes and 3 minutes? 2 minutes and 4 minutes? The options are endless!
So I gave this a shot, although not measuring soap or water. 
I normally bowl lather to soft peaks (adding water probably 8-10 times, 3-4 minutes) and then spend a minute or two lathering on a wet face.
Last night I added water in larger increments (4 total) building the lather in the bowl for about 2 minutes. It appeared to be a tiny bit wetter than usual, but I was still happy with it's appearance. Lathered on my wet face for about 2 minutes (didn't want to stop - very enjoyable!).
Slickness seemed to be slightly better than normal for this soap base (new scent). The Ikon Tech with Red Personna (7) glided over my skin with ease. Not a significant difference, but slightly noticeable. Enough so, that I think I will continue to try to decrease my bowl time, primarily by adding water a bit quicker.
I used to do some cooking, and there are some batters that should not be mixed or beaten too long, as it can toughen the end product. Pancakes, pie crusts, etc. I suppose a "tough lather" is cushiony but not as slick... LOL
Ok, Grant, I will admit that bringing a little science into my shaving can be done without breaking out any measuring devices.
I normally bowl lather to soft peaks (adding water probably 8-10 times, 3-4 minutes) and then spend a minute or two lathering on a wet face.
Last night I added water in larger increments (4 total) building the lather in the bowl for about 2 minutes. It appeared to be a tiny bit wetter than usual, but I was still happy with it's appearance. Lathered on my wet face for about 2 minutes (didn't want to stop - very enjoyable!).
Slickness seemed to be slightly better than normal for this soap base (new scent). The Ikon Tech with Red Personna (7) glided over my skin with ease. Not a significant difference, but slightly noticeable. Enough so, that I think I will continue to try to decrease my bowl time, primarily by adding water a bit quicker.
I used to do some cooking, and there are some batters that should not be mixed or beaten too long, as it can toughen the end product. Pancakes, pie crusts, etc. I suppose a "tough lather" is cushiony but not as slick... LOL
Ok, Grant, I will admit that bringing a little science into my shaving can be done without breaking out any measuring devices.
- Thread starter
- #99
So I gave this a shot, although not measuring soap or water.
I normally bowl lather to soft peaks (adding water probably 8-10 times, 3-4 minutes) and then spend a minute or two lathering on a wet face.
Last night I added water in larger increments (4 total) building the lather in the bowl for about 2 minutes. It appeared to be a tiny bit wetter than usual, but I was still happy with it's appearance. Lathered on my wet face for about 2 minutes (didn't want to stop - very enjoyable!).
Slickness seemed to be slightly better than normal for this soap base (new scent). The Ikon Tech with Red Personna (7) glided over my skin with ease. Not a significant difference, but slightly noticeable. Enough so, that I think I will continue to try to decrease my bowl time, primarily by adding water a bit quicker.
I used to do some cooking, and there are some batters that should not be mixed or beaten too long, as it can toughen the end product. Pancakes, pie crusts, etc. I suppose a "tough lather" is cushiony but not as slick... LOL
Ok, Grant, I will admit that bringing a little science into my shaving can be done without breaking out any measuring devices.
View attachment 883315
That's great, @Jaidmaster! Thanks for the update. I'm glad (and not surprised) that less lathering time worked for you and made slicker lather. The more that you try it, and the more significant the differences in time between lathers, the more that you'll notice slickness (and cushion) differences.
Your analogy with batters is very good! Overmixing batter develops more gluten and makes the batter stiffer and tougher. I think that the gluten development with batter parallels the interfacial tension development with lather. More mixing of lather develops more smaller cells/bubbles, increasing the total cell/bubble surface area and interfacial tension in the lather that gets less slick, but stiffer. The cell/bubble surfaces in lather seem like the gluten in dough.
Last edited:
I don’t think the baking analogy works. Because in baking water is a minor ingredient in what’s going on, whereas in leather making, water is a major ingredient if not one of the most important ingredients. Also in baking, there are other chemical reactions going on.
