Open Source Ink Project

[koa]

Personally, I'm not fond of the GPL licence and GNU generally; they have a viral quality IMO. I'll be interested to hear what others have to say about whether, and how, such a project should be protected. I'm in favour of no compulsion, and just freely shared info. If some company tries to profit by this, and analysis can determine that they've merely branded public recipes, they'd look pretty silly.

 

On the other hand, with the right license, the ink would have to be sold with the complete recipe (unheard of, yet so sensible...). I confess I like that idea very much.

 

Ah, but recipes cannot be copyrighted, or patented, so there is really no problem there. They might be trade secrets, but then the onus is on the secret holder to keep it secret! Not likely to be an issue in a project like this.

 

(And I have noticed that some who were sharing all their experiments in formulating inks suddenly stopped doing so as soon as they started selling the new, improved versions. Such is life. )

[itayxd]

Briefly, my reasons for preferring a wiki project are: freedom of site architecture, unlimited editing freedom, freedom from censorship, and certainty that the information will continue to be available (via the Internet Archive). FPN is not archived, and I have lost content due to DB failures as recently as last summer, and lost all my pre-2009 PM's, for instance.

 

In fact, the previous open ink effort was hosted on software similar to FPN, and has, it seems, been completely lost because such sites are not scraped by Internet Archive.

 

In my opinion, what would be ideal is an off-site wiki, and -- if the content develops to a point of being "interesting" -- a pinned link to the site in Ink Recipes. A wiki is basically self-administering, you just host it and let it rip (with the wayback machine archiving it periodically, preserving it for posterity).

 

No hard feelings to FPN admins of course; the efforts represented by my posting history attest to my care for the community. But after all, it's the content that accounts for the appeal of FPN, more so (or, for some, in spite of) how it's administered.

 

And in the end, it's up to you Lucas...

 

Kind Reg'ds,

Andrew

 

Well I think you are holding on to the way back machine to strong. I don't know any website that base it's backups / archives on waybackmachine, and I don't think any website should. You can just schedule back ups and upload them to dropbox/box/google drive/all of them together. Also you can export the recipes and keep the most updated version here or in gist or even pastebin. Anyway I don't like the idea to relay on waybackmachinbe.

 

Personally, I'm not fond of the GPL licence and GNU generally; they have a viral quality IMO. I'll be interested to hear what others have to say about whether, and how, such a project should be protected. I'm in favour of no compulsion, and just freely shared info. If some company tries to profit by this, and analysis can determine that they've merely branded public recipes, they'd look pretty silly.

 

On the other hand, with the right license, the ink would have to be sold with the complete recipe (unheard of, yet so sensible...). I confess I like that idea very much.

 

Ah, but recipes cannot be copyrighted, or patented, so there is really no problem there. They might be trade secrets, but then the onus is on the secret holder to keep it secret! Not likely to be an issue in a project like this.

 

(And I have noticed that some who were sharing all their experiments in formulating inks suddenly stopped doing so as soon as they started selling the new, improved versions. Such is life. )

 

Why can't recipes be copyrighted? can't you publish recipes under Creative Commons with Attribution + ShareAlike (CC by-sa)? I also found the Design Science License (DSL) and the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL). Anyway I think it is an important point to make sure the license include copyleft to avoid a scenario like you mentioned.

[koa]

 

Why can't recipes be copyrighted? can't you publish recipes under Creative Commons with Attribution + ShareAlike (CC by-sa)? I also found the Design Science License (DSL) and the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL). Anyway I think it is an important point to make sure the license include copyleft to avoid a scenario like you mentioned.

 

It is like a list, as with telephone directories and so forth. The US Gov says:

Copyright law does not protect recipes that are mere listings of ingredients. Nor does it protect other mere listings of ingredients such as those found in formulas, compounds, or prescriptions. Copyright protection may, however, extend to substantial literary expression—a description, explanation, or illustration, for example—that accompanies a recipe or formula or to a combination of recipes, as in a cookbook.

 

Only original works of authorship are protected by copyright. “Original” means that an author produced a work by his or her own intellectual effort instead of copying it from an existing work.

From Here

 

Patenting would involve an innovation, something new, which is rather hard to imagine in ink. Even Nathan's Bulletproof inks are not patented, so far as I know.

 

So open source for ink formulas should not be an issue, except when we get to issues like some pen makers have in buying Bock nibs: minimum order of 1000. What would you do with 500 gallons of aniline blue dye?

[itayxd]

Well it actually is a problem because if you can't license the recipes then the "(And I have noticed that some who were sharing all their experiments in formulating inks suddenly stopped doing so as soon as they started selling the new, improved versions. Such is life. )" could happen, let me get some professional help about it, I'll post here my findings.

 

Edit: Databases can be copyrighted, so we might be able to copyright it, still waiting for an answer.

 

Edit2: If it can be copyrighted GPL might be a match:

"GNU General Public License (#GPLOther)

 

The GNU GPL can be used for general data which is not software, as long as one can determine what the definition of “source code” refers to in the particular case. As it turns out, the DSL (see below) also requires that you determine what the “source code” is, using approximately the same definition that the GPL uses." -http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html

 

So the "source code" is the recipe and the "compiled program" is the ink.

Edited August 17, 2012 by itayxd

[LucasT]

Copyrights, licenses, etc. all seem to complicate the project. If someone wants to pursue that angle, go for it, but every contributor will need to be acknowledged (I've had my name removed from a couple patent applications that should have had my name on them....Every contributor, no matter how small, deserves recognition) Anyway, my original thought was the it's-a-trade-secret-but-we-aren't-good-at-keeping-secrets approach. I think we need to just make a decision, my thoughts right now are as follows: Setup a forum section in FPN for the project and collaborate ideas here. Use a Wiki to document the process, etc. But the "erm, so I tried some acrylic paint in my pen and it...well...um...my Mont Blanc doesn't work" type of things we do could be started and discussed here, and then documented on the wiki.

 

So basically, FPN for brainstorming and collaboration, which this format does well I think, and Wiki for documenting and tracking versions and changes. (bear in mind I might not really know how editing works in a wiki, so my assumptions as to what it is good at may be totally off base...)

 

Everybody interested in the project chime in on what you think about the ideas. Eventually a decision will need to be made which won't make everyone happy, but I will take full responsibility for that decision, I'm used to people not liking me anyway.

[ElaineB]

Wow, this brings back a lot of memories. (Hello Gerry, hope you are well!) If you read the FPN thread from 2005, I was one of the active members in that particular project, with a small lab and access to a lot of potential ingredients. Unfortunately, my life shifted suddenly in 2005 and I no longer have a lab nor materials to offer. However, I am still quite interested in the idea of an open source ink project and will be happy to contribute what I can. I'm very experienced with dyes and color theory, so perhaps I could help out with color development.

Edited August 17, 2012 by ElaineB

[professionaldilettante]

This would be hard. Mist ink today are made with dyes that are hard to come by in pure form and in small enough quantities for a hobbyist. I as well as many others have proposed a mixing system with a clear base and concentrated dyes, but this has fallen on deaf ears and even been silenced as useless.Even the platinum free mix inks have a very limited market since each base color needs to be purchased separately. Best of luck to you all, but I think I will stick to my commercial inks with a known safety track both publicly and pro ally than with a homebrew. Also... on that note you I'll need to find a preservative that can be easily found, non-rective with other ink components, won't corrode your pen, safe and purchasable in relatively small and pure quantities that is effective against a wide range of microbes.

[LucasT]

Professionaldilettante, The assumption is that a majority of fountain pen users will be using commercially made fountain pen inks. If that wasn't the case I wouldn't be interested in starting this project as I would put myself out of a job.

One of the safest inks for fountain pens and health you can make would be a synthetic blue food coloring, water, glycerine, and some Germall plus (oh, wait that might just be our starting point formulation. ) You can start adding lubricants, anti corrosion additives, etc, etc.

Now is our formulation going to maximize profits for a multinational ink manufacturer due to minimal raw material cost? No. Are we all going to have fun and create an ink formulation that we created that costs less per ounce to make than it costs to buy a bottle of ink at retail? Yep. Will it be safe for fountain pens? Yep. Will we test it in a documented round-robin test in multiple pen types by multiple observers and test it in various conditions? You betcha. Can any other commercial ink manufacturer say they've done that? Doubtful. Will we ruin some pens, kitchen counters, clothes, etc. Yeah, probably, but that all depends on how risky we want to be.

 

Mostly, I think we're in it for the fun, if it doesn't sound like fun, or if you are a commercial fountain pen manufacturer who shivers at the idea of people de-mystifying the fountain pen ink world, well...um, nobody said you had to come play with us .

[thorn]

This would be hard. Mist ink today are made with dyes that are hard to come by in pure form and in small enough quantities for a hobbyist.

 

They sell in small quantities:

 

http://www.fsw.cc/index.htm

 

http://www.prochemicalanddye.com

 

http://www.pylamdyes.com/ink.html

[andru]

Well I think you are holding on to the way back machine to strong. I don't know any website that base it's backups / archives on waybackmachine, and I don't think any website should.

Oh, I agree with you there. This angle came into the discussion (partly backchannel) due to the fact that, had the prior effort been in a non-BBS setup like a wiki, the Internet Archive would have the information. It is a worst-case scenario fallback (as is Google cache in the short-term). I'm sure the original project participants had the best intentions to preserve their efforts, yet you see that the data has disappeared.

 

As for GPL, please, no...

 

Lucas I really appreciate your positive attitude. You're a relatively new member, but I have a good feeling about your leadership here.

 

And sirach, thanks for the proactive spirit and the generous offer to foot the first year. We can share the burden though, maybe that would be better; whatever.

 

Andrew

[ElaineB]

The situation today is the same as it was in 2005, when I was very active in this project. There are numerous places to obtain dyes, additives, and effective preservatives in small quantities for our uses. There is a small but very active industry of artisan skin care product manufacturers and textile dyers. I was one of them in 2005, and my suppliers are all still in business. Preservatives that are used in skin care products are both robust and very safe, having undergone rigorous testing by the FDA over decades of use.

 

I don't expect us to have many problems sourcing the basic components for dye-based inks. And I cannot imagine how we could concoct something from modern dyes that could corrode metal or be dangerously toxic.

[josiah]

This is a fantastic idea, and one that I think we should run with. I've thought a few times about how to get this going.

 

Regarding licenses: here's Wikipedia's article on open-source hardware licenses, and here's an essay on Recipes and Copyright Law.

[thorn]

 

I don't expect us to have many problems sourcing the basic components for dye-based inks. And I cannot imagine how we could concoct something from modern dyes that could corrode metal or be dangerously toxic.

 

 

I have not had any trouble, ink is mostly water. Most dyes are inert. Aren't most nibs made of stainless steel anyway?

 

Some dyes are carcinogenic, but there are plenty of them that aren't (at least have not been shown to be carcinogenic).

 

Be prepared to have stained fingers! :roflmho:

[penhand]

I as well as many others have proposed a mixing system with a clear base and concentrated dyes, but this has fallen on deaf ears and even been silenced as useless.

I'm sure many of those here think this approach would be far from useless. My non-chemist background does wonder why inks aren't like cake decorating? You have a base and then very concentrated colors.

 

As a goal, I would think this project would get more interest if we were coming up with building blocks where folks could easily custom color their world vs yet another blue or black.

[dvorak]

Hi, my name is Brent, and I'm a chemist in a textile dyeing lab. I'd loooove to help

[ElaineB]

Thorn, dyes aren't inert. You might be thinking of pigments -- the colored materials ground into fine powder and mixed into paints. Dyes are a different type of coloring agent. They are, by definition, chemically active because they are intended to bond with their substrate at a molecular level. Paints are simply applied to the surface of wood, paper, canvas, etc. and don't react with it. (I don't know how pigmented inks work, but I don't think they rely on chemical activation for their permanence.)

 

About making a clear base and mixing in colors as desired: it sounds like a great idea. However, working with dyes is not like putting food coloring in water. From my own years as a dyer, I know that some of my dye solutions are finicky and granulate crystals, or are sticky, or get really viscous, etc. I'm guessing that ink formulators probably need to tweak the consistency of each dye mixture to make them play nice as inks.

[thorn]

Thorn, dyes aren't inert. You might be thinking of pigments -- the colored materials ground into fine powder and mixed into paints. Dyes are a different type of coloring agent. They are, by definition, chemically active because they are intended to bond with their substrate at a molecular level.

 

 

Doesn't it depend on the type of dye? Acid, basic and direct dyes are used for inks from what I understand. I guess instead of inert I was thinking more of non-reactive with metals, or not corrosive.?

 

I found one formulation for a blue FP ink in: Industrial dyes : chemistry, properties, applications by Klaus Hunger.

 

 

• 
   
  
• Acid Blue 93 0.5%
  
• Glycerine 1.7 %
  
• Sulfuric Acid (95 wt %) 0.2 %
  
• Biocide 0.07%
  
• Nonionic surfactant 0.03%
  
• Water 97.5%
   
  

 

I wonder about the sulfuric acid.

 

 

About making a clear base and mixing in colors as desired: it sounds like a great idea. However, working with dyes is not like putting food coloring in water. From my own years as a dyer, I know that some of my dye solutions are finicky and granulate crystals, or are sticky, or get really viscous, etc. I'm guessing that ink formulators probably need to tweak the consistency of each dye mixture to make them play nice as inks.

 

 

One dye I got did not dissolve at all. Not very using for FP ink. One problem I would think would be the salt content. It's worse for ink jet printers since they clog easily, not sure about FP.

Edited August 18, 2012 by thorn

[andru]

dvorak welcome!

 

ElaineB, I was wondering about that. It seems like inks vary a lot in viscosity, flow, odor, etc. within a given company's line. One presumes it is due to the cause you say, dealing with the dyes and their peculiarities.

 

Are the nano inks (such as Sailor's) based on "nanoized" pigments? (I use the term after seeing in some of the old posts from the previous open ink project days.) Am I right in supposing that it would be more convenient from a chemist's point of view to make inks from pigments, if they could be brought into suspension and kept there, without coagulation? Aside from the cellulose-bonding parts of Noodler's, for instance, there are some inks in Nathan's line that use pigments aren't there?

 

Why is it exactly that salts are a no-no for FP inks?

 

P.S. I'm going to dump some links to older posts that seemed to contain relevant info. My apologies if some are not actually that interesting, I haven't read them thoroughly yet, but no harm in linking:

 

ink-rheology-can-anyone-help

chartpak-v-noodlers-round-two

is-it-always-possible-to-mix-ink

everyone-here-should-have-ph-strips

is-there-a-way-of-quantitatively-measuring-saturation

saturated-inks-why

ink-mixing

anybody-diluting-noodlers

properties-of-the-ideal-fountain-pen-ink

make-your-own-ink

strange-colors-of-ink

making-fp-ink-from-cold-water-soluble-dye

 

And of course fiberdrunk's very interesting vegetal ink experiments; here's

scans of some of their findings.

 

I read in a recent post that J. Herbin and Omas are the only ink manufacturers who claim to make inks based on vegetal dyes; is that correct?

Edited August 18, 2012 by andru

[penhand]

There is a small but very active industry of artisan skin care product manufacturers and textile dyers.

Is it stupid or naive for me to ask about using RIT dyes? They are readily available in many colors, if we only had a base that one could add RIT dyes to.

 

Another readily available coloring agent is Kool-Aid, but I'm not sure it would do well for pens as I think it is too acidic (I think it has ascorbic acid mixed with it) -- also, we'd have to make sure to use the Kool-Aid without the added sugar.

[thorn]

 

ElaineB, I was wondering about that. It seems like inks vary a lot in viscosity, flow, odor, etc. within a given companies line. One presumes it is due to the cause you say, dealing with the dyes and their peculiarities.

 

Are the nano inks (such as Sailor's) based on "nanoized" pigments? (I use the term after seeing in some of the old posts from the previous open ink project days.) Am I right in supposing that it would be more convenient from a chemist's point of view to make inks from pigments, if they could be brought into suspension and kept there, without coagulation? Aside from the cellulose-bonding parts of Noodler's, for instance, there are some inks in Nathan's line that use pigments aren't there?

 

I wonder if Noodler's bullet proof inks are pigmented. I have the carbon Ink from Platinum and it seems to have the same properties. Noodler's website doesn't say anything about cellulose reactive dyes. From what I have read, once you mix the sodium carbonate (soda ash) with reactive dyes it must be used within a day or so. If it is reactive dyes, I wonder how he does it?

 

 

Procion MX Fiber Reactive Cold Water Dye

 

About Fiber Reactive Dyes

 

Why is it exactly that salts are a no-no for FP inks?

 

 

I would assume when it dries in the FP, it can clog, just like ink jet printers. Salts are left over from manufacturing dyes. It costs more to take out the salts, I guess using osmosis.