elderboy = moldy cigars?

[Treinenwj]

My non-expert opinion: It looks to me like Diamondog uses/ used something other than distilled water to humidify his cigars. It doesn't look like mold, definitely doesn't look like plume/bloom. To me, it looks like mineral deposits from regular tap water or bottled water. Looks the same as many cigars I've seen at the locals.

[massphatness]

[quote author=Diamondog link=topic=12232.msg64741#msg64741 date=1325163809]
Lol, its ok I don't need your approval....there will always be disagreements in this hobby, you are incorrect and I'm good with that. I simply posted this picture as an aid to illustrate that the original picture was not mold. Most comments have been discussion based you smply want to tell me I'm wrong and my cigars are moldy lol. If you are ever in Ottawa Canada let me know I'd be glad to show you my collection and enjoy a fine cigar with you.
[/quote]

[b]“None so blind as those that will not see.”[/b]

[moki]

[quote author=Diamondog link=topic=12232.msg64741#msg64741 date=1325163809]
Lol, its ok I don't need your approval....there will always be disagreements in this hobby, you are incorrect and I'm good with that. I simply posted this picture as an aid to illustrate that the original picture was not mold. Most comments have been discussion based you smply want to tell me I'm wrong and my cigars are moldy lol. If you are ever in Ottawa Canada let me know I'd be glad to show you my collection and enjoy a fine cigar with you.
[/quote]

Like I said, I posted what I did as a cautionary tale [b]for others[/b].  It was pretty clear to me based on your tone that you would not listen to anything I had to say regarding your cigar.

[url=http://www.vitolas.net/displayimage.php?pos=-1128]Anyway, WTF do I know? (look familiar?)[/url]

As I said, there's a good chance it's not mold.  But it's also not plume/bloom.  It's probably a blistered wrapper just like the URL I linked to above.

I'd still look at it with a magnifying glass to ensure it isn't mold, due to the location of the substance on the cigar relative to the humidity source in your humidor.

[Diamondog]

[quote author=moki link=topic=12232.msg64792#msg64792 date=1325201228]
Like I said, I posted what I did as a cautionary tale [b]for others[/b].  It was pretty clear to me based on your tone that you would not listen to anything I had to say regarding your cigar.

[url=http://www.vitolas.net/displayimage.php?pos=-1128]Anyway, WTF do I know? (look familiar?)[/url]

As I said, there's a good chance it's not mold.  But it's also not plume/bloom.  It's probably a blistered wrapper just like the URL I linked to above.

I'd still look at it with a magnifying glass to ensure it isn't mold, due to the location of the substance on the cigar relative to the humidity source in your humidor.
[/quote]

Its all good, that cigar was smoked long ago and it was great lol....at the end of the day I pay very close attention to my collection as we all do and should....I am grateful I have never had an issue with mold or beetles....cigar storeage is pretty simple if you follow some basic rules, didn't feel simple in the beginning but we all grow up, well except for maybe family guy but thats to be expected...

[terrantheman]

I've had some opus like the one you showed moki, nice.  I must say when you see as such in that pic it reminds me of the sugar coating on like sour skittles or something.  I literally begin to salivate whenever I come across a cigar specifically an opus that has plumed like that, thanks for the pic ;D

[4cbln3]

[quote author=Knuck42 link=topic=12232.msg64744#msg64744 date=1325168350]
Not necessarily so.  Propylene glycol is NOT what causes bloom/plume.  I believe the research referenced above mentioned that large amounts of it were found in the samples studied because such a product was used in maintaining the humidity of the cigars that the samples were taken from.  Bloom/plume is created when cigars are left to age undisturbed for extended periods of time, (many years), and the essential oils and other organic matter within them dries and crystallizes upon the outside of the cigar.  This is not to say that bloom/plume will form on all cigars left to age this way, but this is what causes it to form.  If you age your cigars in such a manner you may indeed see the formation of bloom/plume in your collection.   
[/quote]

Thanks for the clarification on why there may have been PG crystals from that research, Knuck.

I hope one day those sticks I buried may produce some plume, but until then I will just be gellin' like a felon, smoking my stogies!  :bigup:

[MoeCizlak]

[quote author=Knuck42 link=topic=12232.msg64744#msg64744 date=1325168350]
Not necessarily so.  Propylene glycol is NOT what causes bloom/plume.  I believe the research referenced above mentioned that large amounts of it were found in the samples studied because such a product was used in maintaining the humidity of the cigars that the samples were taken from.  Bloom/plume is created when cigars are left to age undisturbed for extended periods of time, (many years), and the essential oils and other organic matter within them dries and crystallizes upon the outside of the cigar.  This is not to say that bloom/plume will form on all cigars left to age this way, but this is what causes it to form.  If you age your cigars in such a manner you may indeed see the formation of bloom/plume in your collection.   
[/quote]

The guy referencing the study on plume didn't actually say whether the PG was used in that particular case or not, he just said, "Simply put, what makes up 50-70% of the plume he sampled was Propylene Glycol.  Which we are all familiar with as a moisture stabilizer (humectant)".  In talking with my chemists, they seem to think that it is possible for Propylene Glycol to form naturally from the oils (lipids/fats) from the aging leaf.  Not sure how that would crystallize, but they seem to think that it's at least possible for the PG to be produced naturally.  That being said, it is entirely possible that the PG was used in humidification and that's where it came from.  Very interesting topic, IMO.

[grateful1]

[quote author=MoeCizlak link=topic=12232.msg64857#msg64857 date=1325256327]
The guy referencing the study on plume didn't actually say whether the PG was used in that particular case or not, he just said, "Simply put, what makes up 50-70% of the plume he sampled was Propylene Glycol.  Which we are all familiar with as a moisture stabilizer (humectant)".  In talking with my chemists, they seem to think that it is possible for Propylene Glycol to form naturally from the oils (lipids/fats) from the aging leaf.  Not sure how that would crystallize, but they seem to think that it's at least possible for the PG to be produced naturally.  That being said,[b] it is entirely possible that the PG was used in humidification and that's where it came from[/b].  Very interesting topic, IMO.
[/quote]

What Knuck and Moe referenced are what I was referring to regarding the 'sampling'.

To get the high of a percent is odd to say the least.

Does that mean mold ina basement has a high % PG?

Anyhow, I also don't think the 50-70% is accurate, at least is probably not what people are thinking.

It's more 50-70% of the items detected. (ex. of the 30% of items detected PD was 17% of it).

[Knuck42]

[quote]The guy referencing the study on plume didn't actually say whether the PG was used in that particular case or not, he just said, "Simply put, what makes up 50-70% of the plume he sampled was Propylene Glycol.  Which we are all familiar with as a moisture stabilizer (humectant)".  [b]In talking with my chemists, they seem to think that it is possible for Propylene Glycol to form naturally from the oils (lipids/fats) from the aging leaf. [/b]  Not sure how that would crystallize, but they seem to think that it's at least possible for the PG to be produced naturally.  That being said, it is entirely possible that the PG was used in humidification and that's where it came from.  Very interesting topic, IMO.[/quote]Very interesting indeed.  I'm the furthest thing from a chemist and just assumed that the high percentage of PG found in the study had to be attributable to the use of such a product in the maintenence of the cigars that samples were drawn from. 

[MoeCizlak]

I'm with you on not being a chemist, I'm just glad I work with people who are much smarter than I.  I'd still be interested in seeing the write up of that plume analysis.