Very Light Weight Paper - Brittains Mill 630

[Sandy1]

Hello Everyone,

 

In my search for a light weight 'airmail' paper, I bought some 'Brittains Mill 630'.

 

So what did I buy?

 

Gross Characteristics:

• The sheets are 8x10".
• The paper is extraordinarily light weight - very much like a heavy tissue paper.
• The paper is plain white: no tint / optical brighteners.
• The watermark is Landscape oriented. (So that if the paper is in Portrait orientation, the top of the watermark's letters is to your left hand side. As this is not the norm, it may be a bit distracting.)
• The paper is claimed to be 35 years old. If true and there is no yellowing along the edges, which makes me wonder if this paper might be acid-free. Maybe. Maybe not. (I Googled Brittains, and came-up with no recent results, Co. address, etc. so they may well be out of the paper business.)
• The paper is crisp, hence noisy, but in a nice way - like new $100 bills.

Use & Performance:

• As the paper is so light, it must be clipped or otherwise held in position. Failing to do that will have the paper bunch-up.
• Initially, I thought that a round broad nib would be needed to avoid ripping the paper. Luckily that was not the case.
• As the paper is so thin, it has no cushion for the nib, so my usual pad of 3 blotters was placed under the paper.
• The notorious Lamy Pink Safari steel B nib; CdA 'Caribbean Sea' ink. Pen inked-up, not a nib dip. I'm still getting used to this pen & nib, so I tended to write a bit slowly with it. Nib+feed are generous without being wet. The ink was well mannered, but the line width was rather larger than on a more conventional paper. Definite show thru. Feathering was not visible to the naked eye, but was readily apparent under a 7X lupe.
• The underrated Waterman Phileas steel F nib; R&K 'Soliferno' ink. Pen was inked-up, not a nib dip. This pen doesn't see a lot of use, as the F nib doesn't really suit my hand, but it is a nice pen+nib combo. The nib did not catch, snag or stutter - I was not bearing down on the nib, just moving along at my usual pace. Once again, the line was a bit wider than usual, but still appeared 'Fine'. No feathering at all. Minor show through. (Hmm I should use this pen more often.)
• The usual Lamy Safari steel M nib; WFB ink. (I think that combo should be a standard for comparison.) Nib was dipped, not inked-up. This Safari writes a bit dry, and is almost stingy with the ink. Results very much the same as the Waterman above. Ink was welcomed onto the page.
• The overstated MB 149 B nib circa 1990; MB BlBk ink. Nib was dipped, not inked-up. This pen & ink are one of my favorite combos. (Pretty boring no?) As I'm very used to this combo, I was easily able to write a bit faster than my normal pace & cadence. The paper didn't interfere at all. This nib has a bit of flex and the ink has restrained shadowing characteristics, both of which were apparent on the page. The line width is true to the nib. Very crisp, zero feathering. Minor show through.
• The wee bit psychotic Pelikan 405 OM gold nib; iroshizuku fuyu-syogun ink. Pen was inked-up, not dipped. Results very much the same as the MB above. Paper captured the nuances of the nib & ink. Very little show through.
• Standard wax Crayolas: Ripped the paper. Unable to dampen sufficiently. Ignited too easily. Unusable.
• Field grade Space pen ballpoint: Paper tended to bunch up. Line width thin. Colour not dense at all. Rather unsuitable.
• UniBall vision rollerball, Fine: Paper tended to bunch up. Line width thin. Colour OK. Marginally usable.
• Sumi ink: You're joking! Snake eyes.

Other:

• In all instances of FP use, the ink colour & density remained very close to what one would expect. The paper welcomes ink, so allowances should be made for either wet pens or wet inks; and if both pen & ink are wet, then I hope you write quite quickly.
• It seems obvious that the paper would not take to water very well, and that proved true when I used an airbrush to mist the paper, and immersed a folded sheet. If this paper were to be immersed, then a full water bath would be needed to separate the pages, and unfold pages. Conservator and Disaster Recovery techniques may well be required.
• Due to show through, this paper cannot be considered for 2-sided (duplex) use.
• Due to its light weight, thinness, dimensions and lack of strength, I doubt that this paper could be subject to autofeeders of photocopiers, microfilm cameras and computer printers & scanners, etc.

Suggested uses:

• As the paper can handle FP use, then it can be used in any normal situation where the page can be secured and kept flat.
• In terms of matching, I think that most pen+nib combos could be used. However, as the paper is very thin, and seemingly delicate, then a lighter, softer ink may be most suitable. The paper's accurate depiction of colours certainly retains ink's subtle characteristics. The Pelican with the gray ink look very fine and handling a page of that writing is rewarding. When the Phileas is empty, I'll definitely try zee Herbin Eclat de Saphir in it. Such a pretty encre yes?
• If one is cost-sensitive to postal rates and writes long letters, then this may well be the paper for you.
• Inclusions in a greeting card. An ideal paper for personal sentiments to be inserted and more importantly, removed from a greeting card. (Now I don't have to worry about Mrs Claus reading my card addressed to her husband.) Not suitable for gluing inside a handmade card as the glue (uhu glue stick) shows through.
• Interleaving & protection of other stuff. e.g. Your glossy 8x10 head shots.
• Too flimsy for paper airplanes / origami. So sorry.

Acquisition:

• The usual eB*y thingy.
• I bought 300 sheets for GBP 4.75, plus GBP 6.00 for P&H. (Not really a Sumgai, but a good deal on a seemingly rare product.)
• The Seller is 'cambusomay', appears to be an individual not a Co., and has 100% positive feedback.
• The *Bay search might well be "white air mail paper".
• OBTW, the shipping packaging is fit for purpose, but for storage the paper should be placed in a suitable acid-free box.

Best Regards,

Sandy1

[Sandy1]

P.S. I was quite amazed to see that this paper has less feathering than the Clairefontaine Triomphe, which is a 'Top Tier' paper for FP use. -- S1

[tfwall]

Thanks for the review. I bought some of this a few weeks ago on a whim but haven't tried it out yet.

[fuchsiaprincess]

Hi guys,

 

I'm on the lookout for some lightweight airmail paper, so where can I get some Brittains?

 

Thanks!

 

Regards,

Soki

[fuchsiaprincess]

Oops! I'm blond too! Just read the rest of your review and found the place to get some. Sorry!

 

Wish the 'Edit' function was back!

 

Soki x

[Sandy1]

Thanks for the review. I bought some of this a few weeks ago on a whim but haven't tried it out yet.

 

Hi -- Please give it a try soonest, then let us know your opinion & findings. -- BR S1

[tfwall]

I concur with your review. The paper is very much like tissue paper and needs to be restrained in some way, in order to write on it. While I didn't notice any bleed through, the transparency of this paper rules out writing on both sides. It is much lighter weight than most airmail papers, but is watermarked, so I am not really sure of its intended purpose.

 

The seller also reports that this paper is going quickly and he has ~5 reams left.