Kajun Kake - plume or mold?
- Thread starter hakchuma
- Start date
SmokingPipes.com Updates
Watch for Updates Twice a Week
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
Site Sponsors
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
- Status
I don't give a rusty fu** what (some) cigar smokers say.
There is a reason to use the best descriptor. Bloom is the phenomenon; plume is a shape.
OK, thanks, chap, I'll see it in a new light.
So in the post all are referring to, Fugu raises a good point that dismissing bloom based on the presence of mold is not very scientific. That study only proved that mold does exist in nearly every sample of tobacco. As posted by yaddy306, further testing of the white substance itself seems to show that plume or bloom is in fact salt, not sugar. And while mold likely coexists, nothing has shown that there is not also the presence of the fabled pbluoom (I'll just combine the terms). My personal opinion is that the pbluoom and mold have little to do with the change in flavor, but can act as visual indicators of the fermentation and aging process having taken place, whilst possibly being totally unrelated.
Thank you, jon. I'm not big, nor small. Average, perhaps. It bothers me a moment or two when I see terms misapplied. But sometimes too much. Cheers.
Plume is crystallization of the oils in the tobacco, indicating relative aging of same, mold has nothing to do with it. Mold is mold, and is usually caused by improper ph or overly humid or storage in too warm temps.
Mold has structure that can be observed above the tobacco, while plume remains relatively flat on the surface of the tobacco.
All plume serves to indicate is that the tobacco has been ages under proper humidity and temp conditions, and it usually but not always occurs in tobaccos with higher oil content.
It's not rocket surgery...
Mold has structure that can be observed above the tobacco, while plume remains relatively flat on the surface of the tobacco.
All plume serves to indicate is that the tobacco has been ages under proper humidity and temp conditions, and it usually but not always occurs in tobaccos with higher oil content.
It's not rocket surgery...
Any scientist would tell you that someone making a discovery means absolutely nothing to the world at large. Some chump makes a post on a cigar site doesn't immediately change the way we should think about plume. Any real scientist could tell you that. There are discoveries, then there is a period of people verifying the discovery, and then a period of the new idea working its way into popular consciousness. People jumping to conclusions from just one guy is not very scientific. This is how we get stupid ideas like wine helps your heart, then they tell us that it doesn't, then it does... it's people not waiting for verification. BTW, scientists still have no idea of the impact that wine has on your heart health. It may take decades, as it should.
Someone we don't know makes a post on a site that I don't belong to. Big whoop!!! Let's see the verification of the findings by similar scientists over a period of time. Then the publications, and the idea working its way into the forums. From the discovery in the 60's that dinosaurs had feathers till the idea worked its way into popular thought that dinosaurs evolved into birds took till Jurassic Park came out, 40-50 years. The concept that smoking causes cancer took 6 decades... and still some people don't believe it.
So excuse me while I don't just start believing someone I don't know on some other site that I have no interest in belonging to. I get so tired of the things that amateur self-declared scientists with an grade school level understanding of the scientific process want us to start believing.
Someone we don't know makes a post on a site that I don't belong to. Big whoop!!! Let's see the verification of the findings by similar scientists over a period of time. Then the publications, and the idea working its way into the forums. From the discovery in the 60's that dinosaurs had feathers till the idea worked its way into popular thought that dinosaurs evolved into birds took till Jurassic Park came out, 40-50 years. The concept that smoking causes cancer took 6 decades... and still some people don't believe it.
So excuse me while I don't just start believing someone I don't know on some other site that I have no interest in belonging to. I get so tired of the things that amateur self-declared scientists with an grade school level understanding of the scientific process want us to start believing.
OK, John, this is why it is easier for me to call it plume than bloom. Bloom to me is as in a flower openning. Plume is the growth or crystalization growths withing an existing stone. It is a lapidary term. Here are some examples of plumes...
So, the blooming of a freaking girly flower is not nearly as accurate as the pluming of crystals or minerals.
Now, everytime you correct me, I will load my comments with more and more photographic examples of plume agates. I can evem mail some to you if you'd like. "Bloom" just sounds so damned stupid, and inaccurate. But, I don't correct you, do I?
Now, back to our regularly scheduled program. :
:
So, the blooming of a freaking girly flower is not nearly as accurate as the pluming of crystals or minerals.
Now, everytime you correct me, I will load my comments with more and more photographic examples of plume agates. I can evem mail some to you if you'd like. "Bloom" just sounds so damned stupid, and inaccurate. But, I don't correct you, do I?
Now, back to our regularly scheduled program. :
:
Plume is also the colloidal dispersion of one liquid into another, forming crystal-like patterns as it disperses.
M- The top two sure look like plume. It's a shape! (Can't tell on the third photo)
From the OED: (first definition relates to birds and feathers)
From the OED: (first definition relates to birds and feathers)
Bloom, not as in flowers, but as in the appearance of growth (crystals, we hope!) on dead plant material. Again, plume implies spreading that will produce a noticeable shape.
I can pretty well guarantee that there are no sensible cigar smokers out there looking for molded cigars.
As far as pipe tobacco goes, if I see fuzz on tobacco it’s trashed. Pipe tobacco dusted with a faint sparkle, THAT I’ll smoke.
As far as pipe tobacco goes, if I see fuzz on tobacco it’s trashed. Pipe tobacco dusted with a faint sparkle, THAT I’ll smoke.
John, I am not sure what dictionary you could find the jargo, but in watercolor, when you touch a wet brush full of a darker watercolor paint into a wet piece of paper the effect is called plume. The term is also used by ink artists.
In metallurgy, the firescale caused by oxidation of precious metals are called plumes. Also the mineralization of the acidic pickle used to quench hot metal is referred to as a mineral plume.
And, in lapidary it is a well-know term for... well I posted that above. Google "plume agates."
It is also a term used by painters of automobiles to describe certain types of orange-peel defects in the paint. But, I am not in that field, but I have heard it.
Now, I am not saying that I am more correct. I am just saying that some people have a different vocabulary. Plume is a word that doesn't seem to confuse people when I have used it to talk about the mineralization of tobacco in the past, so it doesn't seem to confuse anyone. Plus, I have seen others use it. Heck, I really haven't talked about plume/bloom on tobacco till more recently, as I haven't been privy to seeing it much on my young cellar, until recently. So, it couldn't have me that started the use for the term on tobacco.
Just saying... but "bloom" does seem to suggest mold to me. But, I don't correct anyone. As long as it doesn't cause wide-spread confusion or misunderstanding, I say "by whatever name, it still smokes as sweet." ::
In metallurgy, the firescale caused by oxidation of precious metals are called plumes. Also the mineralization of the acidic pickle used to quench hot metal is referred to as a mineral plume.
And, in lapidary it is a well-know term for... well I posted that above. Google "plume agates."
It is also a term used by painters of automobiles to describe certain types of orange-peel defects in the paint. But, I am not in that field, but I have heard it.
Now, I am not saying that I am more correct. I am just saying that some people have a different vocabulary. Plume is a word that doesn't seem to confuse people when I have used it to talk about the mineralization of tobacco in the past, so it doesn't seem to confuse anyone. Plus, I have seen others use it. Heck, I really haven't talked about plume/bloom on tobacco till more recently, as I haven't been privy to seeing it much on my young cellar, until recently. So, it couldn't have me that started the use for the term on tobacco.
Just saying... but "bloom" does seem to suggest mold to me. But, I don't correct anyone. As long as it doesn't cause wide-spread confusion or misunderstanding, I say "by whatever name, it still smokes as sweet." :
:
As others have pointed out, it may be useful to think of plume, bloom references in this context...
Referring to a carbonated soft drink as a Coke (even if it’s not a Coca-Cola) is common in the southern states, soda is the term for it on the northeastern coast and pop is the word in the midwest.
It's reasonable to assume that people are assigning a different term to the phenomena without prescribing that it match some pre-determined definition(s).
If anyone feels that a particular word or term is incorrect then they have thousands of other similar (mis) word usages to contend with that have occurred in various languages, i.e. slang, etc.
Referring to a carbonated soft drink as a Coke (even if it’s not a Coca-Cola) is common in the southern states, soda is the term for it on the northeastern coast and pop is the word in the midwest.
It's reasonable to assume that people are assigning a different term to the phenomena without prescribing that it match some pre-determined definition(s).
If anyone feels that a particular word or term is incorrect then they have thousands of other similar (mis) word usages to contend with that have occurred in various languages, i.e. slang, etc.
Thank you. Quite correct, and I've gone over board in defending what I see as important terminology. But it is not that important. As long as it's not mold. Or bad mold.
And here in CA it'd be "carbonated sugar drink that's sure to kill".... And, no straws, thank you!
Can't say that I disagree, but others can drink what they like.
And soon, no plastic grocery bags either!
What once was a convenience is now a detriment. We (society) make decisions without foresight or thought of consequences.
- Status