Inky T O D - Ink Review Series - Next - What Information Do You Want To See?

[Tas]

What I feel makes this forum so informative is the vast variety of reviews and reviewers.

One starts to see where each reviewer is coming from and depending on your mood (I've often liked an ink and then later when looking it up on Google thought, "whaaa?") you begin to form an picture of it in your collection - or not.

 

Often the simplest reviews work just as well as the complex ones, when it comes to actually making a choice - I've bought an ink from just seeing a scribble of it on a piece of paper in a pen show snap (Organics Blue Merle).

 

My only ask is that we encourage more members to share their findings in whatever way they see fit. I never tire of looking at ink reviews and am thankful and grateful to each and every reviewer.

[HalloweenHJB]

At the risk of repeating what has already been said, I'll add my personal preferences to the conversation.

 

• COLOR: wordy description of the color (especially if the photo/scan does not reproduce the color well), as well as closest inks available to the reviewer (how close is the new ink to other similar inks in that person's collection) —I want to know if that pretty yellow-orange ink is distinct or indistinguishable from Apache Sunset, for example; does a swab or swash with a paint brush show a radically different color; does the ink have complex, multiple dyes that separate on paper towel, but combine on regular paper or in your eye like a Seurat painting (e.g., Kobe #57 Himeajisai); etc.

 

• PERFORMANCE: how well does the ink work on different papers that the person is likely to use; does the new ink feather and/or bleed through when most other inks do not on that same paper or in that same pen; is the ink smooth and silky or dry and crusty as you write; does the new ink flow wonderfully, but then won't dry for days or weeks; etc.

 

• BONUS FEATURES: heavy shading (e.g., Callifolio Inti) or shading that reveals two very different colors (e.g., Krishna Jungle Volcano); sheen that's just a "halo" around the edge (e.g., MV Rose Noir) or sheen that's a totally different color or perfect complement (e.g., RO Fire and Ice); sparklies; etc.

 

For me waterproof/lightproof/permanent is not of much interest —although I recognize that it is for others who use their inks for professional purposes. And as someone said very eloquently, given the enormous number of different variables (not just pen, paper, and ink, but also humidity in the air (me here in Indiana), desert (Amberlea in Nevada), altitude (Webgeckos in Colorado), etc.) an attempt at a "scientific" approach to reviews is always only local, and can't be generalized to all of us around the world, non è vero, n'est-ce pas, niet waar, verdad?

[ENewton]

I love reviews that include splashes, artwork, chromatography, and other lovely expositions of the ink, but to me it is crucial for a review also to include a writing sample done with a fountain pen, with some attempt at color correction. Although I do sometimes use a dip pen or a brush, most of my writing is done with a fountain pen, and a review that makes an ink look much more saturated than it will look coming from a fountain pen is not very helpful to me.

 

And I am always grateful when a reviewer has spent enough time with the ink to know how it behaves in different pens and on different papers, whether it is easy to flush, whether it will stop flowing if one pauses for thirty seconds to think while composing a letter, and whether it looks nice at first but will have changed into some disgusting color if I look back at my notes after two months.

[inkstainedruth]

I'm kinda the opposite of ENewton. The splashes and chromatography are interesting, but often doesn't give an accurate approximation of the color coming out of a nib. Ditto for swabs -- I think swabs are mostly useless (when I am, for instance, doing color comparisons of an ink on the Goulet Pens site, I'm bringing up enlargements of the various inks and stack them so I ONLY see the writing example). I don't mind actual artwork because the reviewer is still really putting the ink through its paces (but then, I was an art major in college -- if you work in an office and are having to fill out forms all day long, I can see where that's extraneous).

I care about what the color looks like (but realize that how it looks on a computer screen may be VASTLY different from how it looks in person -- which is why I gave away a 30 ml bottle of Diamine Passion Red recently, not long after I'd bought it). I care how it behaves in a pen (flow, clogging, the wetness/dryness, etc.), and how it behaves on a page (dry times, feathering, and show/bleedthrough). I like where the reviewer tries different pens or paper (or both). I agree that if you're doing a comparison it helps to have inks very close in color: for instance, Diamine Havasu Turquoise, Akkerman Tréves-Turquoise, and Edelstein Topaz are REALLY similar on the page -- but I'm seriously leaning towards the Topaz because of some je ne sais quoi feel to the ink -- even though it is VASTLY more expensive; OTOH, PR Rose Rage is really similar looking to Iroshizuku Kosumosu -- for roughly a third of the price, so I bought a full bottle of Rose Rage.

But sometimes, yeah, just color. Which is why I have a bottle of Diamine Sargasso Sea. But almost never use it because it's cloggy after a day or two, and vastly prefer Akkerman Shocking Blue (and, to some extent, KWZI Chicago Blue LE). And yes, I bought full bottles of all three....

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

[ENewton]

Strange. I guess I didn't express myself clearly.

[DrDebG]

I enjoy all the reviews that people put here on FPN. Many people put hours into crafty their ink reviews. I, for one, really appreciate it!!!!

 

For me, whatever they care to share will likely be the most important characteristics of the ink. Each person sees something different in an ink. As certain people post their reviews, patterns in the way they see ink in general develop. For example, I know if Visvamitra is reviewing a bluish green ink, for the most part he will hate the color but will likely focus more on behavior. Yet, when crahptacular reviews an ink, we will see the ink in all of its various shades in outstanding artwork with great writing. And I really appreciate Sandy1's reviews for the specifics.

 

So, when I am trying to choose an ink, I look at as many reviews that are posted for that ink. I want to see how many people view the ink.

 

BTW, I love the ink review index!

 

So, thank you Ink Reviewers - each and every one of you! You have saved me lots of money, and sometimes cost me a little as well!

[HalloweenHJB]

  On 6/17/2018 at 9:18 PM, ENewton said:

Strange. I guess I didn't express myself clearly.

 

I believe that you did. Very well.

[amberleadavis]

  On 5/17/2015 at 5:56 PM, ENewton said:

I wish more people included these two items, from the pinned topic on what to include in an ink review:

 

• Does it tend to dry up in pens quickly if the cap is off for awhile?
• Any start-up problems with the pen, either in a short time or if not used for a few days?

 

I understand that such information is difficult to include if one has used an ink just long enough to write a review, as opposed to getting to know the ink over some period of time, but if the reviewer happens to know how the ink behaves in regular use, it would be helpful for the review to reflect that additional perspective.

 

 

E - I agree with you. Lapis calls those "ignition" problems. I hate using inks (and pens) that don't fire right up.

[crahptacular]

I habitually re-cap my pen if I'm not actively writing for longer than 5 seconds or so, so it never really occurred to me to test for start-up issues, but I should be able to work that into my review process. What amount(s) of sitting-around-uncapped time would be a useful benchmark? e.g. if I test for hard starts after 30s or 1m (or longer?), would those be useful metrics?

[amberleadavis]

  On 6/18/2018 at 5:57 PM, crahptacular said:

I habitually re-cap my pen if I'm not actively writing for longer than 5 seconds or so, so it never really occurred to me to test for start-up issues, but I should be able to work that into my review process. What amount(s) of sitting-around-uncapped time would be a useful benchmark? e.g. if I test for hard starts after 30s or 1m (or longer?), would those be useful metrics?

 

 

Oh yeah...

 

Think about it, you are writing a letter and a kid comes in to ask a question, you haven't put your pen down, kid leaves, how long did that take?

 

30 sec.; 1 m; 5 m -- do you think it would make a difference? I'd love to know. I wonder if we could try this on some well known ink and get a bench mark. What do you think?

[crahptacular]

I had six inked pens at my desk, so I did some preliminary testing. All six had no issues starting after 2 minutes uncapped. Only one had a very slight skip after 5 minutes. Four of six had minor hard starts (resolved within the first half of a stroke) after 8 minutes. So based on this small sample, somewhere between 5-10 minutes appears to be when one would expect a hard start.

 

Apart from the statistical insignificance of such a small sample and assuming my experience is typical, would that make a 5min hard start test a useful benchmark to have?

 

Alternatively, maybe it's better to ask at which point is it considered too fast for an ink to be drying out on the nib. After all, if one is annoyed by a hard start after 2 minutes uncapped, it wouldn't make much of a practical difference if the ink stayed wet for 5 or 10 or 30 minutes, as long as it lasted at least 2 minutes.

[minddance]

May we please have Sandy1 do reviews on more inks? I have learnt alot not only about inks but papers and pens and colours from his/her reviews. I think he/she disappeared for too long.

 

While swabs, dramatic splashes and extremely wet flex nibs can easily impress, they are not accurate unless one buys the inks to do exactly the same things with them. In my earlier days of exploration, I looked at many swabs and filled my pens with excitement, only to be profoundly disappointed.

 

Then I stumbled upon Sandy1s review, I can still remember very clearly, Herbin Cacoa du Bresil. I found it a difficult ink because it was way too light in my unadjusted Preppy05. This problem created the connection between me and his/her reviews. And then it was Ajisai and Scabiosa, all very problematic inks to me until I discovered Sandy1.

 

Sandy1 please: Real pens, honesty, educational and may I say entertaining.

Edited June 18, 2018 by minddance

[DrDebG]

  On 6/18/2018 at 8:58 PM, minddance said:

May we please have Sandy1 do reviews on more inks? I have learnt alot not only about inks but papers and pens and colours from his/her reviews. I think he/she disappeared for too long.

 

While swabs, dramatic splashes and extremely wet flex nibs can easily impress, they are not accurate unless one buys the inks to do exactly the same things with them. In my earlier days of exploration, I looked at many swabs and filled my pens with excitement, only to be profoundly disappointed.

 

Then I stumbled upon Sandy1s review, I can still remember very clearly, Herbin Cacoa du Bresil. I found it a difficult ink because it was way too light in my unadjusted Preppy05. This problem created the connection between me and his/her reviews. And then it was Ajisai and Scabiosa, all very problematic inks to me until I discovered Sandy1.

 

Sandy1 please: Real pens, honesty, educational and may I say entertaining.

 

+1

[dcwaites]

  On 6/18/2018 at 4:02 PM, amberleadavis said:

 

 

E - I agree with you. Lapis calls those "ignition" problems. I hate using inks (and pens) that don't fire right up.

 

Yes, but...

 

Sometimes it's the pen, in combination with the ink.

Specifically, the exact geometry of the nib slit, and whether the tine tips are touching (which seems to exacerbate the problem).

But, I have also used one ink to combat the problem with one particular pen, a chinese fine-nibbed P51 clone. The ink was Wancher Imari Blue (which more of you should be using, BTW)

 

I think I have come down firmly on both sides of the fence...

[DrDebG]

  On 6/19/2018 at 11:28 PM, dcwaites said:

 

Yes, but...

 

Sometimes it's the pen, in combination with the ink.

Specifically, the exact geometry of the nib slit, and whether the tine tips are touching (which seems to exacerbate the problem).

But, I have also used one ink to combat the problem with one particular pen, a chinese fine-nibbed P51 clone. The ink was Wancher Imari Blue (which more of you should be using, BTW)

 

I think I have come down firmly on both sides of the fence...

 

 

I think I have to agree. Just for grins and giggles, I experimented with two different pens which I already had inked with the same ink, and tested them after they have been uncapped at 1, 3, 5, 10, 15 and 30 minute intervals. My thought was that since both inks were relatively lubricating, the ink would not dry in the nib. I was wrong.

 

Ink 1: Stipula Calamo Dark Blue - a fairly wet ink with some lubrication

Pen 1: Pelikan 400, medium nib - normally a wet pen.

Pen 2: Franklin Christoph Panther 40, Medium nib - a moderate pen

 

Results: At 1, 3, 5, and 10 minutes, both started up with no problems. At 15 minutes, the Panther began to have difficulty starting up, but the Pelikan had no difficulty. At 30 minutes, the Panther had a bit more difficulty starting up, and now the Pelikan has a slight difficulty starting up.

 

Ink 2: Monteverde Horizon Blue - a moderately wet ink with some lubrication

Pen 1: Delta Horsepower with EF nib - a moderately wet pen

Pen 2: Namisu Nova with Medium titanium nib - normally a wet pen

 

Results: At 1, 3, and 5 minutes, both behaved pretty much the same. At 10 and 15 minutes, the Delta had a very hard start, while the Nova started right up. At 30 minutes, both pens were hard starting.

 

Obviously this isn't conclusive since every pen behaves differently from every other. Perhaps the only way to know is to always use the same pen with your ink reviews. But that defeats the purpose of trying to determine how long it takes the ink to cause hard starting, since we all use different pens. And it defeats the purpose of seeing how the ink behaves in various pen types. It would be like saying that every ink review should always be written on one kind of paper so it can be compared with others. I think our best bet is to just use as many pens with the ink being tested as reasonably/conveniently possible.

Edited June 20, 2018 by DrPenfection

[senzen]

I am very grateful for all the reviews (my wallet hates all of you though), I would have one suggestion / request if at all possible:

 

Wait for a day or so after inking up the pen, wait for it to dry, and then take the photo or scan.

 

I understand this goes against the excitement of trying out a new ink, but I've come to realize some inks can change a lot depending on the pen, in particular they may become darker. For instance most of the online images I've seen of Kon Peki show a vibrant blue I've never been able to match; it does match what is shown on its box, so getting that light blue might simply not be in its nature (if it is, tell me please!), and it might be more of a job for Ama Iro (which I also have). It might also be a question of more shading showing up the ink best.

 

Another extreme case is Équinoxe 6, which not only changes from less to more green, but seems to clog up feeds in hours (at least that's what happened to an EF Ambition, no problemas with a Lamy Vista).

 

I am still going to take another shot at Kon Peki, as soon as its dedicated m205 gets here, probably with the cellophane trick I learned here also.

[DrDebG]

  On 6/21/2018 at 12:07 AM, pseudo88 said:

I am very grateful for all the reviews (my wallet hates all of you though), I would have one suggestion / request if at all possible:

 

Wait for a day or so after inking up the pen, wait for it to dry, and then take the photo or scan.

 

 

I am still going to take another shot at Kon Peki, as soon as its dedicated m205 gets here, probably with the cellophane trick I learned here also.

 

 

Do you mean wait a day or so after inking the pen before writing the review? Or letting the written words wait for a day or so before taking the photo?

 

Either case would be good for a review. Sometimes after inking, these might be a bit of residual water in the feed which might dilute the color. Waiting a day or so, or better yet, using the pen for a few days before writing the review would show the true color of the ink. Also, allowing the written ink review to "cure" for a day or so would also be a good think because the ink color may darken or change. I've noticed this with Pilot Iroshizuku Momiji. The initial color is a vibrant red with a slight pink cast, but after a few hours it darkens to crimson with a slight yellow-orange cast - much more like the name "Autumn Leaves".

 

Cellophane Trick????? Could you please elaborate?

[senzen]

  On 6/21/2018 at 6:15 PM, DrPenfection said:

 

 

Do you mean wait a day or so after inking the pen before writing the review? Or letting the written words wait for a day or so before taking the photo?

 

 

 

Yes, both!

 

As for the cellophane hack, it's from a post by TheDutchGuy. My first thought was: madness! But it works, even if it might give some people nightmares, seeing their beautiful pens defaced. It's easy to undo though. Souten and Verdigris finally look like I thought they could.

 

[DrDebG]

  On 6/22/2018 at 3:47 PM, pseudo88 said:

 

Yes, both!

 

As for the cellophane hack, it's from a post by TheDutchGuy. My first thought was: madness! But it works, even if it might give some people nightmares, seeing their beautiful pens defaced. It's easy to undo though. Souten and Verdigris finally look like I thought they could.

 

 

 

Thank you for directing my accordingly.

[minddance]

What is the cellophane tape for?