A Newbie's Guide To Inks - Part I

[dcwaites]

A Newbie's Guide to Inks
2nd Ed

Nearly two years ago I put up 'A Newbie's Guide to Inks'. I decided that it was time to revisit it, there being new and interesting inks available, and having learnt the odd thing or two in the meantime.

 

What is Ink?

We all think we know what ink is, but in most cases our concept of ink is limited to those inks we have had direct contact with. So, let's start from the beginning.

 

An ink is a solution or suspension of colouring or staining agents that is designed to work optimally with a particular type of pen or stylus. Paints, on the other hand, are designed to be used with brushes, and are usually either too thick (oil or acrylic) or too thin (watercolour) to use in pens.

 

A Brief History of Ink

The most ancient inks (and some are still in use today) consist of very fine soot mixed with water and a thickening and binding agent like gum arabic. When used on very robust media like papyrus, this type of ink has been known to last over 3,000 years. This is because the carbon in the soot is very stable and does not fade or degrade over time.

 

A refined version of this ink is called India Ink and is often used in Calligraphy and Drawing, where it is applied with dip pens.

 

Another version of this Carbon Black ink is used in East Asia. A prepared stick of graphite is finely ground with water and applied with a brush.

 

Around about the first Century AD, there were experiments with a new type of ink, based on the chemistry of iron and mild acids. By the 6th Century AD, these had settled down to what is now the classic version of Iron Gall ink. These used a form of Iron called Copperas and Gallic Acid from Oak Galls. When written, the iron would settle out into stable, black Iron III Oxide particles. These formed black marks onto animal skin (parchment and vellum) and later, paper.

 

By the 19th Century, industrial chemistry had enabled the development of artificial Iron-Gall inks. Pure Iron III ions were mixed with Gallic acid to produce a nearly colourless liquid that, when put down on paper, allowed the Iron III to oxidise to black Iron III oxide. To help see the clear ink as it was written, a blue dye, from the newly developed aniline dyes, was added. These inks would 'Go down Blue and dry to Black,' hence the name for the original Blue-Black inks. These inks could be made in large quantities quite cheaply, with very consistent behaviour from batch to batch. Hence they were ideal for the large clerical offices that were springing up to support growing commercial and governmental bureaucracies.

 

Later in that century, inks made from only aniline dyes were developed, with no iron-gall content. These were cheaper still and made colours like Blue, Green, Red, Purple and Turquoise possible.

 

Since that time, the only real new development has been the creation of Cellulose-Reactive dyes. These originated in the textile industry, where dyes that would bond to the cellulose in cotton T-shirts were needed to reduce fading. Adapted to inks, these dyes permitted inks that would chemically bond to the cellulose fibres in plant-based papers. These inks, once dried, could not be removed using normal chemical solvents or bleaches.

 

 

[dragos.mocanu]

Great start! I'm definitely waiting for more

[amberleadavis]

Thank you, David.

 

This guide will help many of us who may not be newbies, but will benefit from the vocabulary lessons. With your background in chemistry, biology and INK, this guide is informative and useful. Thank you.

 

Personally, I'm excited to see these installments.

[Hallel]

Me too. No wonde parchment and vellum were so expensive if they each came from an animal.

[dcwaites]

  On 9/23/2015 at 4:39 PM, Hallel said:

Me too. No wonde parchment and vellum were so expensive if they each came from an animal.

 

Have a look at this item on eBay. One 16"x20" piece is US$90.

Fortunately, you could re-use a sheet. You could scrape the existing ink off (very carefully) and write on it anew. That sheet was then called a palimpsest.

 

I read somewhere that the creation of the St John's Bible, a new re-imaging off the Bible on Vellum, used up most of America's stock of vellum which alone cost a couple of hundred thousand dollars.

 

Given that most monasteries would have had their own flocks of sheep/goats and would have made their own parchment, the monetary cost to the monastery would have been small, compared to the effort. But think of all the mutton you got as well... (So long as you had enough mint sauce.)

[Ergative]

  On 9/23/2015 at 10:32 PM, dcwaites said:

 

Given that most monasteries would have had their own flocks of sheep/goats and would have made their own parchment, the monetary cost to the monastery would have been small, compared to the effort. But think of all the mutton you got as well... (So long as you had enough mint sauce.)

 

Labor and resources were money back then. If there was nothing to buy, as there often wasn't in lean years or rural monasteries, it didn't matter if you had coins. You needed goods to survive, and it took labor to produce goods. The labor going into vellum- and parchment-making would have been breathtaking. How long does it take to raise one goat or sheep to maturity? A couple of years? That means several years of feeding, watering, and animal care for enough vellum to make perhaps a single signature of a book -- not to mention the labor required to skin, scrape, soak, cure, stretch, and smooth the hide into vellum. You'd need several dozen sheep to make a single book, and there goes an entire flock. But of course the females in the flock are needed for milk and to reproduce, so you'd only kill the males for vellum, so it actually takes two flocks to make a book.

 

All of the labor that goes into the sheepherding is labor that cannot go into the daily chores of the monastery --- repairs, sewing, cleaning, laundry, cooking, and in particular, cultivating the garden. Vegetables are an enormously more efficient way to feed yourself than meat: the caloric return for the labor and time is massively higher. Yes, mutton is nice, but it's an inefficient way to get your calories, which is why only the rich ate meat back then. Only the rich could afford the labor and time that went into raising meat, rather than the much more efficient beans and barley and so on. The monks may have been able to eat a lot of mutton, but all that means is that they imposed on themselves the labor requirements of the very wealthy, without the resources of the very wealthy.

[dcwaites]

Your point about the wealth is very important. It's why the Dominicans mounted such a campaign against the Franciscans, because the poverty the Franciscans displayed put them (the Dominicans) in a bad light.

[Anne-Sophie]

In France second sons and daughters of nobility were drafted into a religious carrier, in the same manner the first born sons were drafter into military service and heirs production to perpetuate the family name, daughter were married to expand estates and/or acquire the estate and the title of a higher ranking aristocrat whose debts, were somewhat mitigated, by the influx of cash from the dot.

 

People had little choice in the matter but the Abbot and Abbess of the local monastery, was most probably the relative of the person who owned the local castle, nearby lands and farms.

 

Grazers need more land than a monastery will provide but, in many UK and French provinces wool has been big business since the middle ages.

It means enormous flocks where, a limited amount of fertile males are needed. Some male lambs became Easter feast and their skins probably made the nicest vellum.

 

Any low or poor quality wool producing sheep, a lame animal as well as overly problem causing male and non milk producing ewe could also be consumed after the Spring sharing. Spring is also the time of fairs, where young animals are traded.

 

It is most probable that animals were given as payment for the salt tax, the meat and some of the wool to the castle and the skin as well as the leftover wool to the nearby monastery.

 

For many centuries, wool was the only fiber available to share croppers who were the majority of the population in Europe. Small farmers made sure to use animal stock as efficiently as possible.

 

For protein, poultry and pigs were a lot more economical and efficient to raise. Hence, Henry IV said "a chicken in every pot."

[Flaxmoore]

  On 9/23/2015 at 10:32 PM, dcwaites said:

 

Have a look at this item on eBay. One 16"x20" piece is US$90.

Fortunately, you could re-use a sheet. You could scrape the existing ink off (very carefully) and write on it anew. That sheet was then called a palimpsest.

 

I read somewhere that the creation of the St John's Bible, a new re-imaging off the Bible on Vellum, used up most of America's stock of vellum which alone cost a couple of hundred thousand dollars.

 

Given that most monasteries would have had their own flocks of sheep/goats and would have made their own parchment, the monetary cost to the monastery would have been small, compared to the effort. But think of all the mutton you got as well... (So long as you had enough mint sauce.)

 

And now that Bible is truly priceless- the Washington inaugural Bible, and the Bible upon which every Master Mason for over 2 centuries at St. John's #1 in Philadelphia has taken their final Oaths. I've seen it in person, at a display at Grand Lodge one year soon after I joined. That Bible doesn't just record history, it is history.

[majolo]

  On 5/20/2016 at 11:54 PM, Flaxmoore said:

 

And now that Bible is truly priceless- the Washington inaugural Bible, and the Bible upon which every Master Mason for over 2 centuries at St. John's #1 in Philadelphia has taken their final Oaths. I've seen it in person, at a display at Grand Lodge one year soon after I joined. That Bible doesn't just record history, it is history.

 

I think dcwaites may have been referring to this St. John's Bible, created between 1998 and 2011. I saw several of the pages in person near the end of that period.

[Inky_paws]

Just to reassure David that this wonderful thread is still being read. Now to episode 2

[arellano81366]

I have just read first part, thanks for this! I wonder what about chinese inks?? These are too old but I do not know how they were made. I read once that they produced the famous ROYAL BLUE.

[Turtlegeuse]

Cool story but you forgot the part about that time Chinese corporate spies stole the formula for India ink from some other country. They did'nt even bother to change the name ! We are all ears for chapter 2, tell us it please.

[Bibliophage]

I'd like to point out that vellum bearing animals were raised as additional protein, not in place of vegetables. Sheep, goats, and cattle ate vegetation (especially goats) that humans couldn't eat. Goats, especially, were kept to keep bushes and trees trimmed. Sheep require the maximum amount of labour of any those three. 1), they'll stay in one place until all the food is gone unless forced to move by a shepherd. Due to the shape of their teeth, they'll actually destroy the roots of the plants. (Thus leading to the cattle/sheep wars in West Texas and New Mexico. It could take years for an area to recover from sheep enough to support cattle, or even more sheep). 2) They're stupid. If there's a place to get trapped, they'll find it. They can even die from thunderstorms.

 

So, your average goat would end up as the following (at a minimum) at a monastery or other organization.

 

1) Meat.

2) Leather (vellum and other types)

3) Glue (hide and joint glue is still very much in demand by furniture makers)

4) Sinew (useful for many purposes, including medical stitches and bow strings)

5) Bone meal.

 

Thinking of animals as being 'wasteful' to raise for food is a concept only held by people that don't understand that _everything_ is useful on an animal after slaughter - not just for food.

 

Mind you, parchment/vellum lasts much longer than paper, so for long term contracts (such as treaties), it makes sense to keep using it, despite the modern expense. Just don't try to use human skin. It's thin, fragile (relatively speaking), and doesn't like to hold ink.

[Centurion]

Sounds like Noodler’s use Cellulose-Reactive dyes. Cellulose-Reactive dyes a rather new invention, perhaps 20 years ago? I wonder they’re other ink companies making inks with Cellulose-Reactive dyes?

[Arkanabar]

Well, first Nathan Tardif had to demonstrate that there was a market for such inks.  I think there's some other entrants into this market now, with DeAtramentis' Dokumentus line (certified to meet ISO 12757-2), and MontBlanc's Permanent inks (certified to meet ISO 14145-2). I've seen claims that Cross inks are made to ISO standards for archival ink, but not that they are certified as archival.  And I'm not really sure who all is using cellulose reactive dyes, and who's using nano-particle pigments (except for Sailor Kiwa-Guro, Sei Boku, and Sou Boku, and Platinum Carbon Black).

[Centurion]

  On 1/5/2022 at 2:15 PM, Arkanabar said:

Well, first Nathan Tardif had to demonstrate that there was a market for such inks.  I think there's some other entrants into this market now, with DeAtramentis' Dokumentus line (certified to meet ISO 12757-2), and MontBlanc's Permanent inks (certified to meet ISO 14145-2). I've seen claims that Cross inks are made to ISO standards for archival ink, but not that they are certified as archival.  And I'm not really sure who all is using cellulose reactive dyes, and who's using nano-particle pigments (except for Sailor Kiwa-Guro, Sei Boku, and Sou Boku, and Platinum Carbon Black).

Expand  

Which ISO is more difficult to pass (and therefore?) the more fraud proof, waterproof, archival, etc. ink?

[Noihvo]

  On 1/5/2022 at 7:00 PM, Centurion said:

Which ISO is more difficult to pass (and therefore?) the more fraud proof, waterproof, archival, etc. ink?

Expand  

[grayautumnday]

  On 1/3/2022 at 6:49 PM, Centurion said:

Sounds like Noodler’s use Cellulose-Reactive dyes. Cellulose-Reactive dyes a rather new invention, perhaps 20 years ago? I wonder they’re other ink companies making inks with Cellulose-Reactive dyes?

Expand  

Unlikely. Pre-metallized fiber reactive dyes have a very short window to react with the fabric (which has been pretreated well ahead with soda ash solution soaks to change the state of the cellulose fibers so they become physically/chemically capable of bonding with the paper. Plus, even in the absence of a base like sodium carbonate solution, FR dyes swiftly lose effectiveness when exposed to humidity. As long as I keep the ph neutral and store my dyestock/chemical water (sans soda ash) in the fridge, the max I can get on the best dyestocks is 2-3 weeks and even then the dye mixes will separate when they encounter a dyestuff. 

[grayautumnday]

  On 6/17/2024 at 12:17 PM, grayautumnday said:

Unlikely. Pre-metallized fiber reactive dyes have a very short window to react with the fabric (which has been pretreated well ahead with soda ash solution soaks to change the state of the cellulose fibers so they become physically/chemically capable of bonding with the paper. Plus, even in the absence of a base like sodium carbonate solution, FR dyes swiftly lose effectiveness when exposed to humidity. As long as I keep the ph neutral and store my dyestock/chemical water (sans soda ash) in the fridge, the max I can get on the best dyestocks is 2-3 weeks and even then the dye mixes will separate when they encounter a dyestuff. 

Expand  

I'm here to contradict myself. Obviously if I'd read more closely, I'd've seen the notice about the proprietary process. I suspect they've microencapsulated either the pH adjustor or the dye, so when there's friction of the nib on a surface, it tears them open and starts the reaction.

 

 I've been dyeing yarn thread paper and clothing for around 30 years, but I stopped papermaking and bookbinding during that time. It's really neat they've managed that. Jacquard and an unknown company ca