Inky Question For Ef Nib Users

[LizEF]

Hi Liz. I expect I’ll watch your reviews even though I’m not an EF fan. I’ve seen enough of your posts to appreciate your opinions and ideas.

 

I think most of us seek out more than a single review of a pen or ink. No need to be everything for everyone.

 

Thanks! It's looking like March now - pens had more ink in them than I thought.

[Purplecate]

This would be a great resource for me, thank you. I love EF nibs and use them almost everywhere as I like to write small. I would find it really useful to get an idea of how the colour and any special effect (shading, glitter, sheen) work in an EF and so see lots of EF nib comparisons in the same review would be awesome. My main issues are spread and lubrication - I have a lovely EF cursive italic custom grind that works better with some inks and I find some inks spread reducing the italic line variation. This is a huge amount of work so again, thank you for considering it.

[Karmachanic]

In my limited experience getting shading out of an EF nib would be cause for great celebration.

[sansenri]

+1 for flow investigation.

 

I like to write without the nib almost touching the paper

this is much easier with wider nibs with generous flow

with F and EF this sometimes becomes an issue if flow is insufficient/inconsistent

 

thank you in advance for your efforts

[A Smug Dill]

Looks like a good set. Should give sufficient diversity while still staying in the narrow range.

 

Now that my wrist is getting better, and I can write a whole two pages without paying for it the next day, ...

 

One problem I've only just noticed yesterday, when I did a few small panels of dense Chinese writing with various very fine nibs, side by side on the same piece of (Rhodia 80g/m²) paper, instead of interspersed parallel lines is that the steel EF nibs on the Sailor desk pens are not the only ones that are apt to damage the coating and/or surface of the paper. Even my new Platinum PTL-5000A with a 14K gold EF nib is not immune.

 

I don't make a habit of running my fingertips over writing samples, because I don't want to smear and ruin them with microscopic beads of moisture or sweat on my skin, but when I did that yesterday I could definitely feel different degrees of roughness on the writing sample panels. The damage to the paper may well affect what I subsequently observe with regard to everything about the ink: colour, feathering, bleed-through, water resistance, shading, sheen, and so on.

 

I've already ruined the last remaining Sailor steel EF nib from trying to smooth them; it now writes smoothly and still leaves a narrow line – probably as well as or better than 99% of 'Western' EF nibs – but not quite as fine the (same type of) steel F nib on my Sailor HiAce Neo. The steel nib I pulled from Pilot Penmanship also scratches, even though it doesn't feel scratchy (but only quite 'toothy') when I write with it. The steel EF nib on the Platinum DPQ-700A does almost no perceptible damage to the paper, but then it leaves a broader line than any of the other aforementioned nibs.

 

The best 'Japanese fine' or very fine nibs I have – such as the exquisite 21K gold H-F nib on my Sailor Pro Gear, or 18K gold F nib on my Pilot 'Hannya Shingyo' pen – are much less apt to to cause damage to the paper, but then they aren't in the class of (expendable and easily replaceable) test equipment I want to use for running reviews.

 

What to do? What to do?

[LizEF]

Well, now I have a dilemma (or maybe a trilemma), and I'm just going to yammer through it here to see if I can solve it myself, or maybe someone will have an opinion that helps me out....

 

1) My Pilot Falcon SEF, Pilot Penmanship EF, and Platinum 3776 Century SF all appear about the same line width to my eye - depending on the ink.

 

2) I had previously decided to use the Falcon for my ink reviews because it allowed the most variation in line width and wetness, so I thought I could use this to demonstrate a wider range.

 

3) However, on inking it up with the first ink I intend to review (Herbin Bleu des Profondeurs - because of this post), I find the ink is extremely wet and I suspect that a drier nib would be better for this ink - and both the other nibs are drier.

 

Now, I can continue with the pen I've chosen, and simply comment that I think this ink would be better with a drier nib, and call this close enough to my goal. Or I can switch my reviews to a drier nib, which would have the effect of showing a finer line, resulting in my reviews covering the finest of lines at my disposal. I had already planned to switch to the Penmanship for glitter inks (since the Penmanship can be fully disassembled for cleaning and the Falcon is at best difficult to fully disassemble - and I have no intention of ever disassembling it). Even a drier nib can be made to write wet - with pressure and by slowing down (though this has other impacts), whereas it's harder (perhaps impossible) to make a wet nib write drier (without physically altering the nib, something I have no intention of trying on my Falcon).

 

On the other hand, Japanese SEF is pretty darn fine to the average person, and reviews even from this nib would likely have told me what I want to know back in the day. This nib can also tell me fun things like inks that "outline" when flexing (the Platinum SF could perhaps do this, but not the Penmanship). And, really, for all I know, the ink would be just as wet out of those other nibs and there wouldn't be a significant difference anyway. Perhaps I should put the ink in a Penmanship and see (maybe just temporarily move the converter to a Penmanship once it's not quite so full, and do some testing).

 

What to do? What to do?

 

I think I will use the Falcon to journal and to record my introduction video, and then decide (a) whether the videos are going to work at all with my equipment, and ( b ) whether to stick with the Falcon or not.

 

Commentary welcome and appreciated.

Edited February 26, 2019 by LizEF

[A Smug Dill]

Commentary welcome and appreciated.

Having recently ruminated on what 'Extra Fine' really means in practical and/or objective terms, (for my purposes anyway) I don't think it is necessary to achieve the narrowest of lines for the purposes of reviewing an ink. There are at least three different angles I can take:

• As a user of writing instruments in general: I need to be able to lay down lines that are no more than 0.28mm wide, to have confidence that my writing will be legible and each stroke will be distinct from another. Platinum defines the range for Extra Fine (極細) to be 0.24–0.28mm for its nibs, so that's about right for 'Japanese extra fine', whatever the average fountain pen user who reads reviews want to call them in their heads. So, assuming I have a pen that is capable of producing so thin a line with the ink being reviewed, my goal would be to test and to show the characteristics (colour, drying time, water resistance, feathering, ghosting, bleed-through, and possibly shading and sheen) of that ink when used to write or draw such fine lines. Whether the lines are actually 0.245mm wide or 0.275mm wide (>20% difference there!) doesn't really matter.
• As a user of the particular ink: I need to lay down lines that are no more than 0.28mm wide. I may have a number of different pens with which I can produce such fine lines, with some of the pens producing 'wetter' lines than others. I want to see and show the 'potential' or (practicably achievable) range the ink can exhibit when used at different levels of 'wetness', to help me choose which pen(s) to fill with that ink for my own writing/drawing purposes. By extension, someone else reading the ink review may decide they want to use a 'drier' (or alternatively, 'wetter') pen/nib with that ink to achieve a different look they're after.
• As a user of a particular pen, with an EF nib that I know is generally capable of producing the sort of fine lines I want: I want to show whether the ink being reviewed will 'work for' me if I'm committed to using that pen (presumably representative of whatever is my 'go-to' pen?), and if the ink is so 'wet' it will produce significant thicker lines than what I need, then my conclusion in the ink review (having shown what the specific combination of pen-nib-ink produces on the page) will be that the ink is not fit for (my) purpose. Other readers of the review can adjust their expectations of that ink as they wish.

Incidentally, I have just collected from the post office a metal-barrelled Pilot ELABO pen with a soft EF nib, but since that is not – and will never be – my 'go-to' pen for everyday applications of handwriting, there is no point in my specifically testing every ink with that pen, just to show how the ink will look with different line widths all the way up to 'Broad' or even 'Double Broad'; I don't even go for 'flex' and so-called 'line variation' in my everyday writing. Edited February 26, 2019 by A Smug Dill

[LizEF]

Having recently ruminated on what 'Extra Fine' really means in practical and/or objective terms, (for my purposes anyway) I don't think it is necessary to achieve the narrowest of lines for the purposes of reviewing an ink.

...

 

Thanks! This was sort of what I was wondering - does it really matter, as long as my pen is in that Japanese EF range? Cuz there are guaranteed to be both thinner and fatter lines still within what someone will call EF, and I've already decided that I don't have it in me to present inks in a variety of pens. Since I have to pick one, it probably doesn't matter so much which, as long as I use it for all the inks (which will allow comparison between inks and guestimates about behavior in other nibs).

 

So far, I'm sticking with my plan to just write with the pen and see how it goes - that was my plan anyway - get enough writing experience to do the review at the end, commenting on the ink's behavior after sufficient use. I've got the Penmanship set aside in case I decide for some reason that the Falcon won't work, but "talking through it" (so to speak) is making me realize I'm just overthinking this - hooray for team introvert

[Karmachanic]

Stick with your plan!

That way we can see the effect of different inks in relation to one consistent factor, and extrapolate from that.

[LizEF]

Stick with your plan!

That way we can see the effect of different inks in relation to one consistent factor, and extrapolate from that.

 

Thanks! This morning was the first day of journal writing with this ink, and it was hard - I had to try to write faster because of how wet that ink is, but I can't write neat and fast at the same time! There's a sneak preview into the review conclusions.

[Purplecate]

Hi LizEF

 

Not sure if this is of any use but I find some of the Herbin inks sort of spread more than other inks, giving less definition in my fine italics and a broader line all round. I'm not sure if that's because they're wetter or more watery. I know that sounds odd but I've had less spread with other so-called wet inks and I'm not sure how to describe this effect. This is on Tomoe River paper.

 

In terms of testing, I'm with Karmachanic, then we can see how different inks behave with the same nib.

[DrDebG]

Hi LizEF -

 

Thank you, and all the others including A Smug Dill, for your desire to see ink reviews with EF nibs. I love the idea and appreciate all the time and effort this is taking.

 

I generally prefer wide nibs (stubs, broads, oblique broads and italic broads) because it shows the ink so wonderfully. But I also have a few EFs which I also enjoy. All are moderately wet nibs. For me, I find that inks that perform well in my wider nibs do not perform well in my EFs, particularly with regard to color, lubrication, wetness, spread and feathering. It took me almost a year to find the right ink for one of my EF fps. It is much easier with my wider nibs. And, I believe it all has to do with the chemistry and physics of the ink in relation to the nib on the paper. And yes, paper is also a major factor. But we won't get into that here to your great relief.

 

All this is to say that I appreciate what you are doing and will find it of great interest!

[LizEF]

Thanks, everyone! I regret to say that I'm going to be delayed further - my computer crashed hard at 3am Wednesday, and it wasn't until last night that I found the proper arrangement of chicken bones to convince it to install Windows onto the new hard drive. Right now I have exactly two apps installed - AV and Firefox. I expect to be at this for at least another week. At least I didn't lose any data!

[Misfit]

Hi Liz, I thought of your review plans when I bought a fountain pen impulsively at Barnes and Noble. Turned out it has an EF nib. I bought it anyway, because of the green dots on the turquoise pen body.

 

It’s a Faber-Castell Grip 2010.

 

I hope your computer is better.

[NeverTapOut]

Liz...

I think any reviews using smaller size nibs would be great...F and smaller...

We are overlooked users segment.

I would like to suggest using a premium copy paper (like HP 32) and any run of the mill copy paper.

​I also like it when ink has sat in the pen for a while versus a fresh fill because the evaporation process has started to begin and that is what we will see when we write...a slightly darker ink because of less water in the ink.

Thank you for doing this. I can't wait : )

I am late to the party...when do you plan on posting reviews...

Kindest Regards,

David

Edited May 13, 2019 by Jesus1

[A Smug Dill]

I think any reviews using smaller size nibs would be great...F and smaller...

We are overlooked users segment.

Overlooked in what way specifically? Almost every pen model — with the exception of Sailor King of Pens models, and the Pilot Plumix — is offered with Fine nibs, as far as I'm aware, so thankfully the business end of 'the hobby' has not overlooked users of narrow nibs as consumers and prospective customers.

 

If ink reviewers in the hobbyist community, who are investing time and effort in reviewing inks just for the fun of it and not for financial reward or compensation, don't cater to the specific information requirements of users of narrow nibs, that must be because we're not thought of (by them) as being like-minded, and what we would do with ink isn't "fun" for them. If that is the case, then I wouldn't say we're overlooked.

[NeverTapOut]

A Smug Dill...

Let me rephrase...Ink reviews in the micro nib sizes would be very much appreciated since I write in those nib sizes as well.

Respectfully,

David

[SchaumburgSwan]

Hi LizEF

 

Not sure if this is of any use but I find some of the Herbin inks sort of spread more than other inks, giving less definition in my fine italics and a broader line all round. I'm not sure if that's because they're wetter or more watery. I know that sounds odd but I've had less spread with other so-called wet inks and I'm not sure how to describe this effect. This is on Tomoe River paper.

 

In terms of testing, I'm with Karmachanic, then we can see how different inks behave with the same nib.

 

Hi,

 

that's something I have observed, too.

I was wondering why my 1990s Pelikan OM turned into broad after switching from Pelikan 4001 to Herbin Perle Noir.

On my vintage Swan F and EF nibs Perle Noir behaved better...

 

Best

Jens

Edited May 14, 2019 by SchaumburgSwan

[pictogramax]

Lovely thread! Thanks!

[LizEF]

Well, I'm more than a year behind schedule, but I've finally gotten started on these. 5 reviews are recorded, the first published today - you can see it in the Ink Reviews forum: https://www.fountainpennetwork.com/forum/topic/352809-efnir-waterman-audacious-red/

 

I plan to publish one review a week, and at present, I've got 123 inks to review, so more than 2 years worth. If I can do them faster, perhaps I'll post more than one per week. Also, I thought I'd let the community set my priorities. To that end, I've created a google form to use as a sort of poll for which inks I should review next. The first 7 inks have been selected, but you can influence what comes after those 7 by taking the poll: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1KpnbyWXFksNUeMp9x1oLOd2ItjeH-H29-zvtuu-J5jA

 

Also, after careful consideration of what I'm capable of, and what I wanted most as an EF nib user, I've set a sort of "philosophy" for my reviews...

 

My goal is to help users of EF nibs decide whether an ink is worth sampling (not buying). To me, the most important thing that was missing from other reviews was what the color looked like in a Japanese EF nib. Upon buying, I found some inks were too pale, some so dark as to look black, while others seemed to match the color from broader nibs. Therefore, that's a primary focus of these reviews. In addition, I will make a subjective analysis regarding whether I think the ink is a good candidate for this fine a nib, and whether there are any conditions to consider when making that decision. I'll be using only one paper - Rhodia 80gsm dot grid, because it's so common, and it's white.

 

Beyond that, I expect viewers will either like what they see and sample the ink in their pen, on their paper, and in their environment; or they'll decide the ink probably isn't worth sampling.

 

I'm not going to test every paper or every possible ink behavior or attribute. It's not possible, and I don't have the time or money to do that. Nor am I that self-sacrificing. If the ink has some unique problem or feature, I will mention that (assuming I notice it). I'm not going to test bleed, show-through, or feathering, because.....it's a Japanese EF! (And I'm using Rhodia for the review.) But if I notice such, I'll call it out. I'm not going to say it doesn't shade or sheen, but if it does, I'll mention it. I'm not going to test every ink for waterproofness (there's enough of that elsewhere), but if it claims to be waterproof (and I know that), I'll test it.

 

In short, I'm going for the minimal information and a recommendation on whether I think users of Japanese EF nibs should give the ink a try.