Jump to content

Has Lamy Blue-Black Been Re-Re-Formulated?


jabberwock11

Recommended Posts

I recently purchased a bottle of Lamy Blue-Black and was quite surprised by the performance. It seemed to do much better than any review would have had me believe. I initially purchased the ink more or less just to get the bottle (with the hope that I might actually like the ink), but after using this ink for a couple of weeks I have to say that I am really impressed with it. This leads me to believe that either Lamy has reformulated their reformulated version of Blue-Black, or that folks have been overly critical of what I have found to be a pretty good ink.

 

Right now I am using this ink in a Jinhao X750 with a Knox 1.1 nib; and in a Jinhao X450 with an Anderson Pens 1.1 nib (identical to the Goulet Pens 1.1, but with different brand etchings, obviously). I have used the ink on a number of different papers all with fairly similar results. What I have found is that this ink does not write overly wet, but still tends to bleed through a little bit even on good paper. It is an unusual color, it has a nice chalky blue color that dries a little bit on the dark grey side. The most unusual finding is that the ink is actually fairly water resistant. I would not call it waterproof, but I wrote a sample on an index card with a sample written using Chesterfield Archival Vault ink (an iron gall ink) for comparison, ran the card under water, and the Lamy held up fairly well. I would never use it to address an envelope, but I have no issues using it as an every day ink.

 

I performed three water tests with Lamy Blue-Black and all of them had the same results. The test consisted of me washing the index card under a fast moving tap for 60 seconds. While this could have been made more rigorous by actively rubbing the ink while under water or adding a soap, I feel that my test is adequate for general use conditions. Below is the index card before the test, an example of bleed through (on a Rhodia #12 pad...the bleed through is not as bad here as it is on many other papers, but it is still visible), and the index card after the test.

 

 

tumblr_nzts3oaL3B1uf00n4o1_1280.jpg

 

tumblr_nzts3oaL3B1uf00n4o2_1280.jpg

 

tumblr_nzts3oaL3B1uf00n4o3_1280.jpg

 

 

So, either I am more accepting of Lamy Blue-Black, or it has been reformulated to be a better overall ink. I could believe either scenario, but I tend to think that I am just not as hard on this ink as other folks have been. If it is the case that I am not as harsh as other users, then I tend to think that this is due to the fact that I never tried the old iron gall formulation. In any event, taken on its own merits I think that Lamy Blue-Black is a good ink. It has either gotten a bad rap, or is now better than it used to be. I would be very interested in hearing what other folks think about this subject.

Edited by jabberwock11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • jabberwock11

    2

  • lapis

    1

Top Posters In This Topic

AFAIK it has not been changed again (recently. It was changed in any case back in 2012 when they started to make the ink (in the bottle) as a non-IG, just like they had already done much earlier for the blue-black in their cartridges.

One problem (over and above that move from IG to non-IG) is that the old blue-blacks (prior to 2012) and the new blue-blacks (both in bottles and in cartridges all had/have the same bar code numbers. Other Lamy distinctions and/or Ident. numbers -- like for all MB inks -- were never issued.

Long story short: maybe you just purchased an older bottle instead of a newer one.

 

http://i654.photobucket.com/albums/uu264/peli46/hidden-171.gif

Life is too short to drink bad wine (Goethe)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I purchased the bottle from Amazon, so I assumed it was the newer formulation, but I suppose it is possible that my bottle just happens to be the old iron gall version. If this is the non-iron gall formula, then I would consider Lamy Blue-Black impressively water resistant. If this is actually the older iron gall formula of Lamy Blue-Black, then it is not as water resistant as I would like. The Chesterfield barely even noticed that it was wet, which is how I expect my iron gall inks to act; the Lamy Blue-Black may not have bled completely away when wet, but it certainly ran a bit and lost some of its body.

 

I will have to do some further investigation, but without a sample of the old version (that I am 100% certain IS the old version) to compare it to, I'm not sure how I will determine if my current bottle is the modern or older iron gall version of Lamy Blue-Black. As of right now, I am on the fence. I did another water test where I rubbed at the ink while it was under running water, and it did not run anymore than it did with just the water. I will have to compare this to inks that I know are not iron gall and are also not specifically formulated to be water proof.

 

In the end, I may be praising the iron gall Lamy Blue-Black rather than the current non-iron gall formula...either way, I like the ink and will continue to use it, but I may end up disappointed when it comes time to buy another bottle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Most Contributions

    1. amberleadavis
      amberleadavis
      43844
    2. PAKMAN
      PAKMAN
      33501
    3. Ghost Plane
      Ghost Plane
      28220
    4. inkstainedruth
      inkstainedruth
      26627
    5. jar
      jar
      26101
  • Upcoming Events

  • Blog Comments

    • Shanghai Knife Dude
      I have the Sailor Naginata and some fancy blade nibs coming after 2022 by a number of new workshop from China.  With all my respect, IMHO, they are all (bleep) in doing chinese characters.  Go use a bush, or at least a bush pen. 
    • A Smug Dill
      It is the reason why I'm so keen on the idea of a personal library — of pens, nibs, inks, paper products, etc. — and spent so much money, as well as time and effort, to “build” it for myself (because I can't simply remember everything, especially as I'm getting older fast) and my wife, so that we can “know”; and, instead of just disposing of what displeased us, or even just not good enough to be “given the time of day” against competition from >500 other pens and >500 other inks for our at
    • adamselene
      Agreed.  And I think it’s good to be aware of this early on and think about at the point of buying rather than rationalizing a purchase..
    • A Smug Dill
      Alas, one cannot know “good” without some idea of “bad” against which to contrast; and, as one of my former bosses (back when I was in my twenties) used to say, “on the scale of good to bad…”, it's a spectrum, not a dichotomy. Whereas subjectively acceptable (or tolerable) and unacceptable may well be a dichotomy to someone, and finding whether the threshold or cusp between them lies takes experiencing many degrees of less-than-ideal, especially if the decision is somehow influenced by factors o
    • adamselene
      I got my first real fountain pen on my 60th birthday and many hundreds of pens later I’ve often thought of what I should’ve known in the beginning. I have many pens, the majority of which have some objectionable feature. If they are too delicate, or can’t be posted, or they are too precious to face losing , still they are users, but only in very limited environments..  I have a big disliking for pens that have the cap jump into the air and fly off. I object to Pens that dry out, or leave blobs o
  • Chatbox

    You don't have permission to chat.
    Load More
  • Files






×
×
  • Create New...