Some Interesting Discoveries Playing Around With Iso 14145-2 Testing

[arcfide]

I have been playing around with doing something close to ISO 14145-2 testing for ink intended to be certified for documentary use. Some inks like MB Permanent Blue and Black are officially certified under this standard, and I wanted to compare the officially certified inks against some others.

 

I have not finished all the testing, but my initial results are very interesting to me. I hope to be able to make a thorough post at some point in the future on this stuff once all of the testing is done, but I can't wait to share a little discovery.

 

I'm testing a selection of regular dye-based inks, Noodler's Bulletproof line, iron gall, and pigmented inks. In the case of some makers, they don't make a "documentary" ink, but have a few well regarded ink lines of dye-based stuff that are pretty durable for normal use. Noodler's inks are often respected as being highly appropriate for documentary use, and the pigmented inks are likewise apparently good performers. Some companies continue to refer to their iron gall inks as being suitable for documentary use, but some of them are careful to indicate that they are not as durable as some of the more pigmented inks.

 

Having done only a little bit of testing, it is obvious to me, at this point, why I think most of the modern ink makers are reaching for pigmented inks instead of cellulose-reactive inks for their documentary needs these days. Modern iron gall inks are reasonably archival, but they have very clear and specific weaknesses that make them a fairly distinct third place compared to the cellulose-reactive and pigmented inks for archival and documentary use; these weaknesses are pretty well documented and well known by this point. It has been nonetheless fascinating to see the effects in person.

 

However, I have the impression that many people feel that the ISO testing standard is likely not "telling us anything we didn't already know" with regards to the various inks, with the under current that gives me the impression that I think many people believe that some of the well-regarded permanent inks like Noodler's are a shoe-in for ISO testing, thus making the testing somewhat moot. I think I personally had a bit of this feeling as well going into this.

 

In reality, I'm finding this to be quite different. After only a few tests, it has become clear to me that the pigmented inks designed for durability, such as the Black and Blue from Platinum and Montblanc, are, at the moment, performing significantly better than the majority of the bulletproof inks in these tests. The sole exception to this from my collection appears to be Kung Te Cheng, which so far is behaving more like one of the pigmented inks than the dye-based inks.

 

In the case of many of the Noodler's Bulletproof line, what I am discovering is an interesting series of reactions that don't erase the ink from the page, but cause degradation of the page such that flakes of the ink *and* the paper erode from the page, damaging the lines. Depending on the choice of marking apparatus and how thickly the ink is applied to the page, I can see this as potentially resulting in chunks of the writing completely disappearing from the page, much in the same way that Iron Gall inks have historically eaten holes in the pages, at least in terms of final effect.

 

Even in the cases where the inks didn't fully erode off the page, all of the Noodler's inks I tested so far, when exposed to certain chemicals, have resulted in a bubbling effect left on the page, where the ink looks almost like it is "boiling off". In cases where this becomes too great, the ink and at least some of the paper simply falls off. Sometimes this extends all the way through the page, and other times this only removes a layer of the paper.

 

In contrast, the Kung Te Cheng, and other pigmented inks that I have, show no such proclivity at the moment. The testing is not fully complete, so I don't know whether further tests will vindicate the interesting behavior of the Noodler's inks in these first tests, but it's very interesting to me.

 

I think that in some of these cases, this odd behavior would not disqualify the Noodler's inks from being certified as ISO compliant. However, despite maybe achieving a passing grade in some cases, where something like iron gall inks (and thus, for instance, Lamy's documentary ink) or normal dye-based inks would not receive a passing grade, there is a clear difference in quality of performance on these tests between the pigmented inks and the cellulose-reactive inks.

 

Obviously, that's not a call to abandon the Noodler's inks, and many users probably would not find a need for the ISO certified level of documentary performance. Noodler's is also the only company I know of who is making even remotely ISO-competitive inks in the variety of colors that Noodler's is making, which is worth something. I don't have a large enough supply of pigmented inks of a variety of colors to test for ISO compliance, so I don't know if these other ink colors are even close to ISO compliant.

 

Overall, I just wanted to put this out there as a data point illustrating that while Noodler's is making some very interesting products, when it comes to true documentary use and "resistance" to eroding effects of chemicals, time, and so forth, while Noodler's is very good, and better than Iron Gall and regular dye-based inks, at the moment, it appears to me that the pigmented inks are showing significantly better performance relative to the cellulose-reactive style, color for color. I think many people can easily get the impression from reading online that the pigmented inks and the reactive inks are in some ways "equally bulletproof" or that the reactive dyes are uniquely bulletproof in ways that other inks are not.

 

I think that this distinction in performance can easily explain why Noodler's is more or less alone in their choice of using cellulose-reactive inks in the way that they are. For users who want a lot of colors, most of the time, the level of permanence probably doesn't truly matter that much, so the major ink makers can get better ranges of colors and richer properties without introducing the issues of the reactive dyes. On the other hand, if you need permanence enough, you are likely willing to give up on a lot of color variation (or maybe are even in circumstances where color variation isn't looked upon favorably at all), and in such cases, the pigmented inks perform much better now that we have the technology to produce them in ways that are appropriate to fountain pens. The in between crowds that want more permanence and more color variation, and are willing to put up with all of the other trade-offs that come with the use of the reactive dyes, are probably a much, much smaller market share than people think.

 

This is only after a little bit of testing, however. I will need to continue doing more tests to finish the rest of the ISO protocols and see where the chips fall down at that point, but based on the overall performance I am seeing right now, I am not expecting any surprises.

[A Smug Dill]

Fascinating. Thank you very much for sharing your insights! I look forward to seeing your "more thorough post" on the topic, should you decide to write one.

[RJS]

Very interesting. Thanks for sharing.

[Eclipse157]

All thumbs up, thanks for sharing this preliminary result. Looking forward to the whole thing.

[Tasmith]

Thanks!

 

I found Platinum Pigmented Blue to be my choice for its combination of "bullet-proof" and well behaved.

 

Looking forward to your additional testing.

Edited October 24, 2020 by Tasmith

[inkstainedruth]

Interesting research.

Somehow I'm not remotely surprised that Kung Te Cheng has held up better than most of the other Noodler's inks. But good to know about the pigmented inks (I like Sailor Souboku a lot, but was less impressed with their black pigmented ink, for other reasons; and haven't had a lot of experience with other brands).

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

[Runnin_Ute]

Interesting research. I look forward to see what your results show once completed.

 

I don't use a lot of permanent inks, although I do have Noodler's Black and 54th Massachusetts and a few Iron Gall inks. The one that gets the most use is Pelikan 4001 Blue Black.

[wallylynn]

Cool. Do you own the iso standard? When I did iso testing, it was mostly procedure/consistency , less about the result. Does this iso have multiple grade? Eg grade 10 no changes VS grade 3: fades but still legible. Both pass iso at different requirements.

[arcfide]

Cool. Do you own the iso standard? When I did iso testing, it was mostly procedure/consistency , less about the result. Does this iso have multiple grade? Eg grade 10 no changes VS grade 3: fades but still legible. Both pass iso at different requirements.

 

Yes, I have enough of the ISO standard (you actually need to buy two or more standards to get the full assessment, or close enough to it) to do a reasonable job of "close enough." It's most certainly *not* ISO qualified in that there are a few liberties I'm taking for specific purposes, and I'm allowing for greater variability, but that's just the nature of the beast. The ISO standard has some good clear guidelines for consistency of testing that I'm getting pretty close to, so that's good enough for me. The standard itself is mostly about ensuring that the right set of accurately repeatable tests are conducted on accurately repeatable samples. Unfortunately, the 14145-2 standard does *not* have multiple grades, which is unfortunate. However, implicitly, since there are two standards for different levels of "usage", the standard rollerball ISO standard and the documentary use standard, there is a sort of grading system, where you can pass the standard rollerball tests, but fail the documentary tests. The ISO standard itself is primarily concerned with "visibility" after the test exposure, and so even inks that fade a bit would be considered passing, and you would not get a grade reflection in that between the various certifications. However, based on my testing it seems clear that there are very, very few inks that would pass the documentary standard, and even a lot of the Noodler's inks might struggle a little bit with it. Thus, for me, I'm introducing my own little ad hoc grading system on top of the ISO standard, and creating a documentation of the photos, so that I can have an idea of the relative strengths and weaknesses between the inks rather than just classifying them based on pass or fail, as the ISO standard would do.

 

At this point, I suspect, but do not know, that the only inks that would really pass the ISO certification tests with significant margin for error would be the archivally oriented pigmented inks in blue and black. Everything else is likely to fail one or another of the tests. Pencil also does not pass, because even though it could pass all the other tests, they intentionally included a mechanical erasure test. :-) Some of the Noodler's inks will likely "pass" with my wider margins, but I'm intentionally using a lot more ink than the ISO standard prescribes, in order to tease out more of the behavior. This gives a wider margin for error in the inks than the ISO standard permits (which requires that the lines tested be more "realistic" than what I'm doing). I think that if I didn't use as much ink as I am for the Noodler's inks, there's a strong change that they might not do as well. Many of them already show significant fading under these more liberal conditions. Most inks just disappear or vanish.

 

I'm also adding one more additional solvent to the mix over what the ISO standard requires because that is a solvent that is mentioned in traditional advertisements for permanent inks.

Edited October 27, 2020 by arcfide

[arcfide]

Interesting research.

Somehow I'm not remotely surprised that Kung Te Cheng has held up better than most of the other Noodler's inks. But good to know about the pigmented inks (I like Sailor Souboku a lot, but was less impressed with their black pigmented ink, for other reasons; and haven't had a lot of experience with other brands).

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

 

I don't have any of the Sailor pigmented inks on hand, so I'm afraid that the end results are going to be missing for those inks right now. Given that they overlap with a lot of my other inks that I do have a lot of, then it's not likely that I'm going to pick up much of those inks and do tests on them, unless I pick up some samples for the sole purpose of doing the tests.

[Dimy]

Thats a very good initiative by you sir, really thank you for that, I agree of you having enough of ISO standard and honestly as someone who is tech enthusiastic of its know-hows and motorcycle enthusiast, these industry kinda makes me annoyed, take "military grade" for example, they never mention what it actually is and how hoax it is..there are many other for safety (in motorcycle) and durability (in tech and bikes) but I won't name them...some might get angry, some might just be not allowed..who knows...... anyway point is they are so misleading and favor manufacturers then consumers that it kinda hurts now.... thats why when these tests are done by indivisual I really feel glad, so thanks for doing them and will be eagerly waiting for full test even if results are nothing out of expected.

ISO's flaw in my eyes is same that many safety equipment tests have....we never know if it passed by millimeter or a mile, plus ambiguity of tests nature (could be wrong here but safety equipment have these issues) and that well as someone who is doing these tests already knows what emotions arise.

 

PS- I started to use platinum carbon ink and pigment ink for this specific reason...I feel odd to say this but R&K Sallix I feel fades dispite being IG..its definitely much lighter now then when it was written...I wonder why.

[arcfide]

Thats a very good initiative by you sir, really thank you for that, I agree of you having enough of ISO standard and honestly as someone who is tech enthusiastic of its know-hows and motorcycle enthusiast, these industry kinda makes me annoyed, take "military grade" for example, they never mention what it actually is and how hoax it is..there are many other for safety (in motorcycle) and durability (in tech and bikes) but I won't name them...some might get angry, some might just be not allowed..who knows...... anyway point is they are so misleading and favor manufacturers then consumers that it kinda hurts now.... thats why when these tests are done by indivisual I really feel glad, so thanks for doing them and will be eagerly waiting for full test even if results are nothing out of expected.

ISO's flaw in my eyes is same that many safety equipment tests have....we never know if it passed by millimeter or a mile, plus ambiguity of tests nature (could be wrong here but safety equipment have these issues) and that well as someone who is doing these tests already knows what emotions arise.

 

PS- I started to use platinum carbon ink and pigment ink for this specific reason...I feel odd to say this but R&K Sallix I feel fades dispite being IG..its definitely much lighter now then when it was written...I wonder why.

 

Iron gall inks for a long time have been known to not be chemically immune to fading. This is true of all the modern iron galls, and to a relatively strong degree the traditional iron galls that were made as well. They are much more long lived than many of the traditional dye-based inks that are out there, but even now there are dye-based inks that can be made which are reasonably fade resistant to compete with the iron gall inks. Especially given that there is not that much iron gall in modern iron gall fountain pen inks, they are durable inks, but they are not going to last a seriously long time without archive level active preservation (that is, over the course of hundreds of years, I mean, they will obviously be fine for a generation or three based on much of the testing that people have done, particularly with some of the older but still produced iron galls for fountain pens, which so good behavior after many decades). I would feel confident that a modern iron gall fountain pen ink would be able to be preserved over time well enough, unlike some of the weaker dye-based inks that would not last as long no matter what you did to them barring extreme measures even by archival standards.

 

I have not tried this, but in other forms of testing that I have seen, the testing organization will usually furnish pretty complete testing results to the client, often with photographic evidence or other types of things. It is likely that Montblanc and other makers who have taken the time to ISO-certify their inks are in possession of an official testing report. If you could make an authenticated claim that your business required the use of a certain level and grade of ISO-certification with documentation of the testing results, I imagine that you could get that from some of the ink makers if you had a sufficiently good political relationship with them. I am sure that they would be reluctant to provide this information without some push back, but I bet you could still get it somehow. That might be more revealing than just the ISO stamp of approval, even if getting that information would be more difficult.

 

I think it would be interesting to determine what could be done about updating the ISO standard. I imagine that not enough people have enough of a hand in it to bother with it, but IME, these sorts of these can be changed with the right involvement. An update to ISO 14145-2 that included grading schemes and a certification code for specific chemical resistances and the like might be interesting, and I don't think that it's out of the realm of possibility for someone who was willing to put in the effort to work with ISO to accomplish it. Certainly companies like MB and other companies with very well-performing inks wouldn't have much to worry about in terms of competition, as there just aren't that many inks even capable of passing the ISO standard.

[Mech-for-i]

Not surprising at all, just take a look at the high end inkjet Giclée print and you would know ; and its historically been so , the first and still around pigment ink is simply the good old Carbon ink. The nature of utilizing natural resin , and their peers in the modern day pigment ink means the pigment are simply embedded into the paper and coated , sealed, and binded to the paper by the carrier ( resin , gum, whatever ) and this binder is almost always chemically inert, basically water proof and resistant to elements.

 

One of my other hobby is photography and doing all those Giclée print is mighty fun ( but time consuming and expensive ) ; pretty much any Giclée print maker use pigment ink of quality ones.

 

if for the need for colour , and yet needing the durability , the pigment ink is the coice, but if you are just into the colour and usually store your work in proper storage, todays dye based ink can last a whole lot.

[XYZZY]

@arcfide, thank you very much for your efforts on this.

 

One question about the ISO standard: is compliance required to be tested by a neutral laboratory? Or can companies self test & self certify? I have always assumed the latter.

[arcfide]

@arcfide, thank you very much for your efforts on this.

 

One question about the ISO standard: is compliance required to be tested by a neutral laboratory? Or can companies self test & self certify? I have always assumed the latter.

 

I don't know off the top of my head and I don't recall reading about requirements for the laboratory. It's possible that this is included or referenced in a reference to another standard and that this is not included explicitly in the parts that I have.

[A Smug Dill]

One question about the ISO standard: is compliance required to be tested by a neutral laboratory?

 

As far as I'm aware, ISO itself is not a certifying body; and so it wouldn't assert who needs to test, validate or certify the testing for compliance. The level and credibility of certification a particular entity wants to claim for its products and/or processes, for marketing purposes, is a different matter from being compliant with a technical standard, especially one that is not made mandatory by local laws and regulations.

Edited October 28, 2020 by A Smug Dill

[Intensity]

This is very interesting, and kind of on the extreme side of ISO compliance. On the other extreme, to me, are the Graf von Faber-Castell inks, which I love dearly, but they really don't have particularly good staying power on paper. Some worse than others.

[amberleadavis]

This is very interesting.

[yazeh]

Noodler’s ink, like historic iron gall bonds with the cellulose. If there’s too much ink it is obvious that excess ink could not bond with the paper and would obviously wash out. 

In reading extensively about "historic" iron gall inks. What commonly causes the destruction of documents is:

1)    Humidity >70% It could be water damage, flood or documents taken to tropical climates. There’s an experiment done that shows how humidity affects Iron gall document in less than 15 days. 

2)    Excessive handling of paper. Documents, which are handled often. show sign of stress. Especially where the inks have pooled or there is excess ink. Anyone who has used a dip pen knows that more often than not, a freshly dipped pen can have excess ink. Ink that penetrated deep and bonds with cellulose/ collagen can fracture and break in unfavorable conditions. 

3)    Finally, the quality of paper. The deterioration is more pronounced in 19th century paper. That is due to acid paper…

4)    And finally, inconsistent recipes…

 

Realizing what caused the destruction of the paper, I wonder if cellulose reactive inks would suffer the same fate as did iron gall inks in less the optimal conditions over a long period of time.  

 

https://irongallink.org site is a treasure trove for those interested by the way. 

[Dimy]

On 10/28/2020 at 7:12 AM, A Smug Dill said:

 

As far as I'm aware, ISO itself is not a certifying body; and so it wouldn't assert who needs to test, validate or certify the testing for compliance. The level and credibility of certification a particular entity wants to claim for its products and/or processes, for marketing purposes, is a different matter from being compliant with a technical standard, especially one that is not made mandatory by local laws and regulations.

 

Thats a bit ouch......it sadly has possibility of repeat of few safety standards where half of certified will not meet the actual certification criteria when tested for same....I won't name them but such exists in any place and field if there is no actual body to do testing. Some will stay on the ethical path while others will misuse the system....sigh...