The webnotes is a definite attempt to copy the Moleskin rather than create their own masterpiece and this is where the notebook is a bit of a let down.
The cover is a leatherette sort of feel and I am not sure how it will wear long term. Its ok and I like the feel but I would rather have the Moleskin like finish that doesn't seem to mark or stain easy.
It has one ribbon bookmark the same colour as the cover (orange or black). The ribbon is fine, good length and seems well bound.
The notebook does lay flat but needs help to achieve this. If you relax the pressure it almost snaps closed like a trapdoor. this may relax a little with use.
It has an elastic closure like Moleskin and on my orange sample it has already marked the cover. Probably wouldn't be noticable on the black covers and it isn't a problem but reflects on the softness of the cover material.
It has the Moleskin copy expanding pocket inside the back cover, but not the perforated last few sheets that I think are an excellent feature of the Moleskin.
Now to the paper. The one thing that cuts Rhodia apart from the others generally is their paper quality. So why oh why would you compromise that? I am speechless. The paper is thinner than their usual notepads and an ivory colour again like Moleskin, and it has a small Rhodia tattoo in the bottom corner of each page. It is a fraction toothy when writing and feathers a fraction. Have to look closely but it does feather a little - not enough to deter my use. I didn't experience any bad bleed but you can see the writing on the other side simply because the paper is thin. Some people who use both sides may find this a problem with an inky or wettish pen. Just cannot believe that Rhodia would do this when they had a perfectly good sheet of paper. I used two modern Parker Duofolds (F & FO), two Lamy Safaris (M &
, and a Pencraft with a Taccia steel M nib.The frustration for me is that Rhodia had the paper bit sorted out. So why would they use a sheet that compromises that quality? Obviously they were more intent on copying the Moleskin than just creating their own fantastic notebook.
In summary this is a better book than any Moleskin and I intend using them - just have to be careful which pen I use. The review sounds very critical but I am just pointing out the good and bad in a way that may save people buying it is certain features are important to them. If I was Mr Rhodia I would have stuck with my signature paper and has a few less sheets in the notebook if cost was the problem. I would also have stuck with the basic colour and not bothered trying to match the ivory.
I like the notebook, its better than a Moleskin, but not what many of us had hoped it would be.
In the immortal words of Maxwell Smart, " Missed by that much".
Hope you find this of interest and I would be happy to answer any questions.
By the way I have sent one on to our esteemed moderator Phthalo and I look forward to her review in due course.
