Free Fragrance Composition Software

[Wood and Tobacco]

Version 3.8 doesn't open at all. The prior works fine and it is already a great program.
It's pretty good, but so far I would suggest: change the interface a little, especially to permit to change the size of the window, boxes inside, and even the font so as permitting more workspace. At the present are many people that use big screens at 4k resolutions. Why to squint at a little window with the little letters?
Another thing: for tags would work many other notes such as: amber, creamy, ambergris, oud, citrusy, aldehyde, soft, powdery, etc.

hi sorance! sorry it took a superlong time to reply. my girlfriend got knocked up, long story..

anyway yes you've made some valid feature requests. i've always used 2x 1080p monitors but i can imagine how small the app would be on a 4k. i would have thought that it'd scale up. i will investigate settings to make it proportionally larger, but it's hard to test perhaps without a bigger monitor.

also the ideas around new tags seem solid. i'll start a poll to see what people think and we can vote, anything that gets an appreciable number of votes will be added in.. thanks !

 

[Wood and Tobacco]

You may want to have a look on this, i have developed a formulation software which can run across multiple platforms

https://www.basenotes.net/threads/486357-Formulation-Software

good luck bro. parfumpro has 4k downloads currently. if you wana learn c# from the best, you're welcome to help with pfp though

 

[Wood and Tobacco]

High Resolution Test Version

---

hi sorrance, here's a test version. it targets windows 10+, so it wont work if you use 7/8/vista. if we decide on this option, the app looks better on large screens but the older OS are not supported. personally i think 10 is good anyway so....

please backup your app folder and extract this over the top. let me know if the window scales better now..

it looks normal on my PC as expected, but we need to verify on your monitor before baking it. thanks

 

[sorance]

High Resolution Test Version

---

hi sorrance, here's a test version. it targets windows 10+, so it wont work if you use 7/8/vista. if we decide on this option, the app looks better on large screens but the older OS are not supported. personally i think 10 is good anyway so....

please backup your app folder and extract this over the top. let me know if the window scales better now..

it looks normal on my PC as expected, but we need to verify on your monitor before baking it. thanks

I will try it. Thank you!

 

[sorance]

With this version looks ok, but already looked ok with the windows 11 so far. For me is more important to change the size of the window (or of the boxes, raws etc.) by dragging the margins of it so that if i have a fragrance with many components to be able to see the entire formula, or more of it. Your program is great anyway.

 

[Wood and Tobacco]

With this version looks ok, but already looked ok with the windows 11 so far. For me is more important to change the size of the window (or of the boxes, raws etc.) by dragging the margins of it so that if i have a fragrance with many components to be able to see the entire formula, or more of it. Your program is great anyway.

OK I see. That's an option... I'll make it expand for you.

Just as a side note, I've noticed that whenever a composition exceeds 10 or 15 components, it's getting out of hand.

The creative process (for me at least) seems enhanced with fewer synthetics and a smaller palette. Larger sets will exceed the combinatoric capabilities of even a seasoned perfumer!

 

[Wood and Tobacco]

Version 4.0

---

https://sourceforge.net/projects/parfumpro/files/latest/download

* Support for higher resolution screens (forces Windows 10+)

* Split code out from regions in FormMain into separate files

* Modified default data files to embedded JSON so that the application can be used as standalone

* Removed the unused installer project

* Added export feature for compositions

* Simplified and abstracted code for exporting

 

[Wood and Tobacco]

If anyone will assist in calculating evaporation curves and coding it up, please put your hand up. I'm pressed for time.

Or ... stand back while the engineers do what they do best. If you attempt trolling, you'll be ridiculed acordingly. If you enjoy ridicule, there's a nice quiet cushioned cell and artificial chems down the corridor.

 

[Wood and Tobacco]

Version 4.1

---

https://sourceforge.net/projects/parfumpro/files/latest/download

* Allow sizing of the window, with control anchoring to suit.

* Tinkering with notes textbox placeholders

* Added a command line flag '/sampledata' to allow loading of a sample data set to demonstrate features of the programme.

* Fixed small issues with default currency

* Download FX daily rates from open.er-api.com

 

[sorance]

Version 4.1

---

https://sourceforge.net/projects/parfumpro/files/latest/download

* Allow sizing of the window, with control anchoring to suit.

* Tinkering with notes textbox placeholders

* Added a command line flag '/sampledata' to allow loading of a sample data set to demonstrate features of the programme.

* Fixed small issues with default currency

* Download FX daily rates from open.er-api.com

I downloaded the new Newtonsoft.Json.dll and put it in the program folder by replacing the old one, but nothing changed in the program.

 

[Wood and Tobacco]

I downloaded the new Newtonsoft.Json.dll and put it in the program folder by replacing the old one, but nothing changed in the program.

youve got the inverse. please repeat the procedure and do the exact opposite this time. or just copy all the files. then smiles

 

[Wood and Tobacco]

im issuing a retraction. sourceforge should apologise to both of us... when a UI is difficult to use, even for other software devs, the problem is not sitting on this particular chair

please try this link:

https://sourceforge.net/projects/parfumpro/files/Resources/Releases/PFP-x64-4.1.zip/download

 

[Wood and Tobacco]

New version ! It's the bomb !

https://sourceforge.net/projects/parfumpro/files/PFP-x64-4.2.zip/download

• Allow upload and download of index changes to central server (yes, it sends data, but NOT your compositions)
• Label for index change notifications without popup
• Store material index enumerations as strings, as it is more robust
• Added 'flavour' as a material use

 

[Emanuel76]

I don't see any search field.
I would love to have the option to search after "nutty", for example, after which it would display all the articles that have "nutty" in the description (Notes).

Parfum Pro

Download Parfum Pro for free. Easy-to-use and powerful fragrance composition software! ParfumPro is intended to be easy-to-use and powerful. It is designed for anyone who is involved in composing fragrances..

sourceforge.net

 

[Wood and Tobacco]

OK I added a checkbox which allows you to search in notes and extended info. It can be unchecked if the search term should only apply to names etc.

https://sourceforge.net/projects/parfumpro/files/PFP-x64-4.3.zip/download

 

[Emanuel76]

@Wood and Tobacco, , I'd like to be able to search through the stuff I added there, not in the TGSC.

 

[sorance]

Hi. Can you, when reopen, make the program to keep the actual size of the window as it was when closed?
Thanks.

 

[Wood and Tobacco]

@Wood and Tobacco, , I'd like to be able to search through the stuff I added there, not in the TGSC.

do you mean your own notes in the 'notes' field of inventory items ? or compositions ?

 

[Wood and Tobacco]

Hi. Can you, when reopen, make the program to keep the actual size of the window as it was when closed?
Thanks.

sure. I'll put it in the next release

 

[Emanuel76]

I have no knowledge of programming, so I don't know how complicated it is. I'm just saying what I'd like.

1. I would like to be able to convert from PPT (or PP9000, PP7200, PP3300, PP570, or PP69 etc) to PPH.

2. I'd love to be able to scale down the formula when it's in PPH. I mean, maybe I want to make only 7g, not 100g.

It would help me a lot, otherwise I'd be playing my calculator like an accountant.

do you mean your own notes in the 'notes' field of inventory items ?

Yes.
I want to check, for example, which of the substances I have has a nutty note.

 

[Wood and Tobacco]

its probably easier to think in volume terms for batches, rather than weight

so, you can scale down from 100mL to 7mL, for example. just make another batch based on the same composition, but set the bottle volume to 7mL. then all the batch calculations will update accordingly

but you need to take density into account.. since most oils have lower density than water, so 1mL < 1g

 

[pkiler]

its probably easier to think in volume terms for batches, rather than weight

so, you can scale down from 100mL to 7mL, for example. just make another batch based on the same composition, but set the bottle volume to 7mL. then all the batch calculations will update accordingly

but you need to take density into account.. since most oils have lower density than water, so 1mL < 1g

Have you really founded your entire program on volume instead of weight?

 

[David Ruskin]

I have no knowledge of programming, so I don't know how complicated it is. I'm just saying what I'd like.

1. I would like to be able to convert from PPT (or PP9000, PP7200, PP3300, PP570, or PP69 etc) to PPH.

2. I'd love to be able to scale down the formula when it's in PPH. I mean, maybe I want to make only 7g, not 100g.

It would help me a lot, otherwise I'd be playing my calculator like an accountant.


Yes.
I want to check, for example, which of the substances I have has a nutty note.

I think it sad that you have no conception of percentages. I remember being taught about percentages in maths class when I was about 12. Having a formula written in percentages means that it is very easy to convert to any total you want. You may use a calculator, but it isn't rocket science. Mind you, it is easy to convert a formula with any total into percentages.

As I understand it, PPH means parts per hundred, which is percentage. PPT means, parts per thousand. To convert PPT to PPH, move the decimal point one place to the left.

 

[David Ruskin]

its probably easier to think in volume terms for batches, rather than weight

so, you can scale down from 100mL to 7mL, for example. just make another batch based on the same composition, but set the bottle volume to 7mL. then all the batch calculations will update accordingly

but you need to take density into account.. since most oils have lower density than water, so 1mL < 1g

No commercial perfume house ever compounds using volume. Every worthwhile compounding computer system (e.g Formpack or Winchem) only uses weight.

 

[mnitabach]

I feel like today is crazytown in perfumery land... Not here, but someone today just suggested to use fucjen BENZENE to clean perfumery glassware...

 

[Emanuel76]

I think it sad that you have no conception of percentages.

Of course I know percentage.

As I understand it, PPH means parts per hundred, which is percentage. PPT means, parts per thousand. To convert PPT to PPH, move the decimal point one place to the left.

Yeah, it's obvious. But the others are no longer as easy to calculate.


PP3300 -> 3300:100=33
So, you have to divide each line by 33

PP69 -> 100:69=1.4492
So, you have to multiply each line by 1.4492

Yeah, it's not a big deal. But it's much more convenient to be able to automatically calculate it at the push of a button.

 

[RomanB]

No commercial perfume house ever compounds using volume. Every worthwhile compounding computer system (e.g Formpack or Winchem) only uses weight.

And this is not relevant for volumes of amateur perfumers. If one wants to make 1 kg of composition and then to add 4 kg of ethanol, with a formula of 1000 parts, customarily accuracy of 1 gram is needed (one part per thousand), and 0.1 gram scales to achieve it. Most people do not have such steady hands to pour in 30-40 liquids with such accuracy. Even if they’ll pour onto a glass stick, the level of stress and possibility of a dramatic mistake make such approach very uncomfortable.

Using an electric pipette pump and glass pipettes of 1-100 ml solves this issue: one comfortably fills in pipettes by volume with much greater accuracy, without any stress or possibility of a dramatic mistake.

It makes sense to weight only solid and very viscous ingredients, in separate weighting glassware.

Same with trials. Realistically 10 gram trials are still affordable for amateurs, but not much more. With micro-pipettes one easily measures volumes of 10-100 ul with accuracy of 1 ul, and of 100-1000 ul with accuracy of 5 ul. There is no way to comfortly achieve this using Pasteur pipettes and relying on weight.

So yes, it makes sense to measure densities if all ingredients and mix mostly by volume.

 

[Emanuel76]

And this is not relevant for volumes of amateur perfumers. If one wants to make 1 kg of composition and then to add 4 kg of ethanol, with a formula of 1000 parts, customarily accuracy of 1 gram is needed (one part per thousand), and 0.1 gram scales to achieve it. Most people do not have such steady hands to pour in 30-40 liquids with such accuracy. Even if they’ll pour onto a glass stick, the level of stress and possibility of a dramatic mistake make such approach very uncomfortable.

Using an electric pipette pump and glass pipettes of 1-100 ml solves this issue: one comfortably fills in pipettes by volume with much greater accuracy, without any stress or possibility of a dramatic mistake.

It makes sense to weight only solid and very viscous ingredients, in separate weighting glassware.

Same with trials. Realistically 10 gram trials are still affordable for amateurs, but not much more. With micro-pipettes one easily measures volumes of 10-100 ul with accuracy of 1 ul, and of 100-1000 ul with accuracy of 5 ul. There is no way to comfortly achieve this using Pasteur pipettes and relying on weight.

So yes, it makes sense to measure densities if all ingredients and mix mostly by volume.

So, I have to fill the automatic pipette with 100ul, for example, and weight it, for each substance.
How I weight it? I fill the pipette from the bottle with 100u, put the bottle on the scale, set the tare, pour the substance back into the bottle and, practically, the scale will display the weight of 100ul, hence the density.
Ok, but my 0.001 scale is only for 50g.
So, the first question that comes to my mind is how much does an automatic pipette weigh?
Can I put the pipette horizontally to weigh it? Or it have to stay only vertically?

 

[David Ruskin]

If you don't care about reproducibility, or about quality, or accuracy; chuck in anything you want, in any way you want. I will make this clear, I give my opinion based on over 30 years experience. If you choose to ignore it, then go ahead. I do not give a flying damn.

There are too many badly made fragrances already, we don't need any more. If you want to play, enjoy.

However, if you wish to adopt good practise, it will, I think, benefit you in the long run. Do not think I am that much of a fanatic. I give good advice which you are free to ignore. Relevant or not, I will express my opinion.

You really think that buying an electric pump and micro-pipettes is better than a simple weighing machine and a beaker? Enjoy.

 

[RomanB]

So, I have to fill the automatic pipette with 100ul, for example, and weight it, for each substance.
How I weight it? I fill the pipette from the bottle with 100u, put the bottle on the scale, set the tare, pour the substance back into the bottle and, practically, the scale will display the weight of 100ul, hence the density.
Ok, but my 0.001 scale is only for 50g.
So, the first question that comes to my mind is how much does an automatic pipette weigh?
Can I put the pipette horizontally to weigh it? Or it have to stay only vertically?

Take a clan 1 ml test tube, place it on your scales, press tare. Take 1000 ul of an ingredient using the pipette with a clean tip, discharge them into a test tube, weight it, get the density, pour everything back.

 

[Emanuel76]

Take a clan 1 ml test tube, place it on your scales, press tare. Take 1000 ul of an ingredient using the pipette with a clean tip, discharge them into a test tube, weight it, get the density, pour everything back.

Of course, this option also exists, but I was hoping for something even easier.

 

[RomanB]

If you don't care about reproducibility, or about quality, or accuracy; chuck in anything you want, in any way you want. I will make this clear, I give my opinion based on over 30 years experience. If you choose to ignore it, then go ahead. I do not give a flying damn.

There are too many badly made fragrances already, we don't need any more. If you want to play, enjoy.

However, if you wish to adopt good practise, it will, I think, benefit you in the long run. Do not think I am that much of a fanatic. I give good advice which you are free to ignore. Relevant or not, I will express my opinion.

You really think that buying an electric pump and micro-pipettes is better than a simple weighing machine and a beaker? Enjoy.

Yes, I really think that scales are not enough and a pipette pump gives much better accuracy with far less stress. For example, a 10 ml pipette allows to measure down to 0.1 ml. If you need 8 g of diethyl phtalate, take 7,1 ml with a pipette, your error will be order of magnitude less than pouring it manually from a large bottle.

 

[RomanB]

Of course, this option also exists, but I was hoping for something even easier.

Density is usually written in Data Sheet of every ingredient. However, it is variable and it is always better if you will perform actual measurements for each batch.

 

[mnitabach]

OMG

 

[ourmess]

Just...work by mass. Stop jumping through hoops to try and avoid working by mass.

Go get a scale.

 

[Alex F.]

Yes, I really think that scales are not enough and a pipette pump gives much better accuracy with far less stress. For example, a 10 ml pipette allows to measure down to 0.1 ml. If you need 8 g of diethyl phtalate, take 7,1 ml with a pipette, your error will be order of magnitude less than pouring it manually from a large bottle.

Who expects to pour out milligrammes or even grammes accurately from a bottle? Nobody doubts the usefulness of pipettes. You draw up what you think you need and release it into your mixing container sitting on a scale, and weigh it - if you have a target weight, you try to get as close to it as possible. It's really not rocket science. You can use micropipettes for smaller amounts if you want to and don't mind the price. But pumps and whatnot are a waste of money, if you ask me. (I have one glass pipette for each of my materials, and I'm quite happy with that solution.) The issue is with using volume to measure your composition. If you want to use millilitres or microlitres to help you draw up approximately the right amount of material into the pipette, fine. Just weigh what you've added to your mix and take down what you've weighed, not the volume.

 

[RomanB]

Who expects to pour out milligrammes or even grammes accurately from a bottle? Nobody doubts the usefulness of pipettes. You draw up what you think you need and release it into your mixing container sitting on a scale, and weigh it - if you have a target weight, you try to get as close to it as possible. It's really not rocket science. You can use micropipettes for smaller amounts if you want to. But pumps and whatnot are a waste of money, if you ask me. The issue is with using volume to measure your composition. If you want to use millilitres to draw up approximately the right amount of material, fine. Just weigh what you've added to your mix and take down what you've weighed, not the volume.

A pump costs about 70$ and provides far better results than taking approximately and discharging a pipette dropwise. If you have the right volume inside a pipette, you just discharge it on full speed and that's all, no more meticulous measuring.

 

[mnitabach]

Take a clan 1 ml test tube, place it on your scales, press tare. Take 1000 ul of an ingredient using the pipette with a clean tip, discharge them into a test tube, weight it, get the density, pour everything back.

How much material is still adhering to the side of the pipette tip after you "discharge" it???

 

[mnitabach]

A pump costs about 70$ and provides far better results than taking approximately and discharging a pipette dropwise. If you have the right volume inside a pipette, you just discharge it on full speed and that's all, no more meticulous measuring.

How much material is still adhering to the inside of the pipette tip after you "discharge" it???

 

[Wood and Tobacco]

he's right. measuring by weight for small/medium amounts, even batching, is just stupid ..

the only time I measure weights at all is for concretes, resins, solids. and if you think weighing is superior, go back to school and learn about density calculation.

but if anyone starts making batches of 1000Lt+ at a time, I'll add the weight option