Noodler's Switch To Plastic Bottles

[amberleadavis]

I'm probably not buying enough ink because my last orders still came in glass bottles.

[white_lotus]

Odd, I thought I had commented in this thread.

 

Does it still seem to be the case that Mr. Tardiff intends on moving back to glass if/when he finds a good price point supplier? Or is plastic the future container for Noodler's products?

The distributor for Noodler's states on the website that it is temporary until an alternate supply of glass bottles is found.

 

There are many suppliers of glass bottles, but the 3 oz size is unusual these days, and so most bottle producers are no longer willing to carry the odd size because they don't sell as well as the 1 oz, 2 oz, 4 oz and up bottles. I understand their thinking, but it does impact their customers who've been using the 3 oz bottles in their products. Finding another glass bottle supplier producing a 3 oz size will be much harder than switching to a 2 oz glass bottle. But that presents it's own problems with having new labels, new boxes. It's a real annoyance I'm sure for Noodler's as having a 3 oz size met most customers' needs, and 4 oz is probably too much for many, and 2 oz certainly will use more resources over time, will be more expensive per mL.

 

I too will rejoice with Hallelujah! when glass bottles return, even if they're a smaller 2 oz size.

[TSherbs]

The distributor for Noodler's states on the website that it is temporary until an alternate supply of glass bottles is found.

 

There are many suppliers of glass bottles, but the 3 oz size is unusual these days, and so most bottle producers are no longer willing to carry the odd size because they don't sell as well as the 1 oz, 2 oz, 4 oz and up bottles. I understand their thinking, but it does impact their customers who've been using the 3 oz bottles in their products. Finding another glass bottle supplier producing a 3 oz size will be much harder than switching to a 2 oz glass bottle. But that presents it's own problems with having new labels, new boxes. It's a real annoyance I'm sure for Noodler's as having a 3 oz size met most customers' needs, and 4 oz is probably too much for many, and 2 oz certainly will use more resources over time, will be more expensive per mL.

 

I too will rejoice with Hallelujah! when glass bottles return, even if they're a smaller 2 oz size.

I'd be willing to purchase 4 oz bottles, easily. I don't think that 3 oz is enough, as it is.

[tfwall]

I'd be willing to purchase 4 oz bottles, easily.

 

4.5 oz Boston Round bottles are available.

[Barkingpig]

I'm probably not buying enough ink because my last orders still came in glass bottles.

When I ordered three bottles of FPH exclusive bottles this fall I received two in glass & one in plastic. Not really a problem because I have a lot of empty Noodler's bottles & just soaked the labels & reattached the one from the plastic bottle to the glass one.

[Ink Stained Wretch]

 

4.5 oz Boston Round bottles are available.

 

This brings up an old issue of whether we're talking about four fluid ounces or four and a half ounces by weight in the Boston Round bottles.

[tfwall]

 

This brings up an old issue of whether we're talking about four fluid ounces or four and a half ounces by weight in the Boston Round bottles.

 

127.5 grams

[GeneralSynopsis]

 

127.5 grams

Irrelevant since he says he says that he fills them to a fixed-ish level, which by my reckoning makes it a volume only loosely related to the number on the bottle be that nominal weight or volume. A 3oz plastic container as filled, holds somewhat more than the 3oz glass bottle as filled.

Edited December 25, 2015 by GeneralSynopsis

[tfwall]

Irrelevant since he says he fills them to a fixed-ish level

 

Yes, meniscus filling is a value added feature for you, the consumer.

 

For the sticklers (and regulators), be assured that when you buy a standard powder bottle or one of the temporary plastic bottles, you are getting at least 3 ounces of ink. When you buy a Boston Round, you are getting at least 4.5 ounces of ink.

 

For the European buyers, that is at least 85 and 127.5 grams.

 

If you want to dilute Noodler's Ink to more "conventional" colorant concentrations, the standard bottle is nearly 300 mLs and the Boston Round is about a half liter of ink!

Edited December 25, 2015 by Chemyst

[mhosea]

Irrelevant since he says he says that he fills them to a fixed-ish level, which by my reckoning makes it a volume only loosely related to the number on the bottle be that nominal weight or volume. A 3oz plastic container as filled, holds somewhat more than the 3oz glass bottle as filled.

The 3 ounce French square bottles do, of course, hold 3 fluid ounces, perhaps a little more, so filling them to the brim probably gives you more than 3 ounces (weight) of ink.

 

I think the point that Chemyst was responding to was made vis-a-vis the 4.5 ounce Boston rounds being "available". In fact 4 ounce Boston rounds are available, that being 4 fluid ounces (volume). These bottles hold more than 4 fluid ounces, upwards of 128ml, which is probably adequate for holding 4.5 ounces by weight of ink. But it's only about 4.3 fluid ounces (volume). Can't get 4.5 fluid ounces into one.

Edited December 25, 2015 by mhosea

[inkstainedruth]

I'm probably not buying enough ink because my last orders still came in glass bottles.

The 3 LE inks that I bought at the Commonwealth Pen Show in September all came in glass bottles. At least the one I bought (I picked up a 4th bottle for someone else who was on the West Coast, and IIRC that was also glass).

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

[mhosea]

The 3 LE inks that I bought at the Commonwealth Pen Show in September all came in glass bottles. At least the one I bought (I picked up a 4th bottle for someone else who was on the West Coast, and IIRC that was also glass).

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

When the LE bottles were presented in the video, Nathan said something along the lines of "...that's pretty much the last of the glass." But we'll see what happens next.

[El Gordo]

The 3 ounce French square bottles do, of course, hold 3 fluid ounces, perhaps a little more, so filling them to the brim probably gives you more than 3 ounces (weight) of ink.

 

I think the point that Chemyst was responding to was made vis-a-vis the 4.5 ounce Boston rounds being "available". In fact 4 ounce Boston rounds are available, that being 4 fluid ounces (volume). These bottles hold more than 4 fluid ounces, upwards of 128ml, which is probably adequate for holding 4.5 ounces by weight of ink. But it's only about 4.3 fluid ounces (volume). Can't get 4.5 fluid ounces into one.

 

The point is, as mentioned above, Noodler's ink is actually sold by weight (but containers are referred to by their volume, hence the confusion).

 

As discussed here and I other threads, US people are quite fond of believing they have some special units of their own. I don't care as long as I know. But if 1 fl oz = 29.5735 ml, then a 4 fl oz bottle can contain (filled to the designed and appropriate level to match exactly 4 fl oz) 118.3 ml

 

If Noodler's for one or another reason, legitimate or weird, wants to sell ink on a weight basis and claims that the 4 fl oz bottles contain (at least) 4.5 oz (127.57 g) then (assuming filled to the same level as mentioned above), then the ink at hand has a density of (at least) 1.078 g/ml). (If it is filled to the rim as usual, you have more volume, so density will be lower; if the ink would be pure water (it isn't ...) at 4 degC, the 4 fl oz to its level would contain 4.17 oz of such water (weight)).

 

So baseline: if you are happy with the ink, buy it. You get what you pay for.

 

If you have different inks, all filled to the same rim, you will have the same volume of different inks, and you likely will have different weights of ink (variation of less than 7.5 % at worst I think), with a minimum of 4.5 oz as Noodler's claims (125.76 g).

 

@ Chemyst:

- thanks for considering European users as well

- one question: if the weight oz is selected for Noodler's trade because of the presence of immiscible phases, how is milk (fat vs skimmed) sold in the US, just wondering We buy by volume but pay different prices because of the different fat loading.

 

Edit: oops, apparently replying to an edited post ...

Edited December 25, 2015 by El Gordo

[mhosea]

Edit: oops, apparently replying to an edited post ...

Sorry about that. I read it back and decided it was just too laborious to read in its original form, so I shortened and simplified it.

[dcwaites]

I believe the reason for filling to weight, rather than to volume, is that it is easier for a one-person operation.

Put empty bottle on scale. Tare to zero. Fill to weight (1 or 3 or 4.5) in ounces because that's what the scale is set to.

 

This is exactly how I make cold-brew coffee.

Put 1 litre plunger on scale. Tare to zero. Put in 100 g of coarse ground coffee. Put in 500 g of water. Wait for at least 12 hours. Enjoy.

 

Personally, I can't understand all the fuss. I don't know why so many people are going after Nathan for changing (perhaps temporarily, perhaps permanently - I don't care, I just want the ink) to plastic bottles. I didn't see the same crowd going after Visconti when they changed from glass to plastic.

 

I am glad that Nathan uses avoirdupois ounces, rather than tower ounces.

Nathan is probably glad that he uses avoirdupois ounces rather than troy ounces.

However, if you apply Chemyst's comment "If you want to dilute Noodler's Ink to more "conventional" colorant concentrations, the standard bottle is nearly 300 mLs", that comes out to 3 Dutch ounces or ons.

[TSherbs]

 

4.5 oz Boston Round bottles are available.

cool. I'll look into it.

[Margana]

Odd, I thought I had commented in this thread.

 

Does it still seem to be the case that Mr. Tardiff intends on moving back to glass if/when he finds a good price point supplier? Or is plastic the future container for Noodler's products?

According to the distributor, Noodler's will be returning to glass bottles very soon.

[El Gordo]

Sorry about that. I read it back and decided it was just too laborious to read in its original form, so I shortened and simplified it.

No problem at all, I like the math anyhow and I enjoy the heart-breaking world-problem solving discussions in this thread a lot

[TSherbs]

......and I enjoy the heart-breaking world-problem solving discussions in this thread a lot

[El Gordo]

I believe the reason for filling to weight, rather than to volume, is that it is easier for a one-person operation.

Put empty bottle on scale. Tare to zero. Fill to weight (1 or 3 or 4.5) in ounces because that's what the scale is set to.

I wouldn't expect so. If it is truly a one man's business with all being done manually, by far the fastest way to fill the bottles would be a dispensette (assuming no automation intended on the weighing nor dispensing). Move stem up, move stem down, bottle filled to the exact volume (and weight as well ... ), within 0.5 %. I'll have 5 or 6 bottles filled manually by the time you have tarred your scale, probably 3 or 4 more while you are watching the scale and filling the bottle simultaneously ... (job done much faster, plenty of time to develop more brilliant inks or whatever).