Ten Notebook Bleed-Through Battle

[jaysongo]

[jaysongo]

SCORECARD

 

Round III Standings

 

1. Cambridge - 1.0

2. Clairefontaine - 1.5

3. Maruman Mnemosyne - 3.0

T4. Black n' Red (Germany) - 3.5

T4. Rhodia 80gsm - 3.5

T4. Staples Sustainable Earth - 3.5

7. Hilroy - 7.0

T8. Five Star Heavyweight - 8.5

T8. Black n' Red (Poland) - 8.5

10. Staples Notes - 24.0

 

Overall Standings

 

1. Clairefontaine - 2.5

2. Maruman Mnemosyne - 7.0

3. Rhodia 80gsm - 7.5

4. Staples Sustainable Earth - 8.5

5. Cambridge - 11.5

6. Black n' Red (Germany) - 13.0

7. Five Star Heavyweight - 28.5

8. Black n' Red (Poland) - 29.5

9. Hilroy - 31.5

10. Staples Notes - 69.0

 

Cumulative Bleed-Through Score By Sample:

 

Sample 21 - 5.5

Sample 22 - 7.5

Sample 23 - 5.5

Sample 24 - 12.0

Sample 25 - 4.5

Sample 26 - 4.5

Sample 27 - 2.5

Sample 28 - 7.5

Sample 29 - 8.5

Sample 30 - 6.0

 

Notes:

 

I've made the decision from now on to post each hi-res image in its own separate post. I'm afraid that putting all ten images in a single post, as I've been doing, will slow page load times and make this topic difficult to access for many people. Giving each image its own post will force new pages quicker, as a new one's created every twenty posts. I've seen many examples of this sort of thing being done so I don't believe I'm breaching some sort of forum etiquette. At this point I think I must because prior to this round's postings there were already twenty hi-res pictures up, not including the ones in the introduction. And I believe it's important to have hi-res images for this sort of thing because people want to see the details of an ink on paper (whether it feathers or spreads, etc.). Judging by the amount of page views this topic has had in such a short period of time I can say that there's interest in it and I'd like to make it as accessible as possible (vis-à-vis not having to wait for forty or more images to load).

Edited June 13, 2016 by jaysongo

[DrDebG]

Wonderful work here! And yes, I agree that seperate posts of each page are warranted. I particularly like your final scoring as well.

[jaysongo]

Wonderful work here! And yes, I agree that seperate posts of each page are warranted. I particularly like your final scoring as well.

 

Thanks. With the scoring I figured that I had so many numbers at my disposal that I may as well find different ways to put them together. I personally love looking at stats for things.

[Tas]

http://emoticoner.com/files/emoticons/smileys/multi-stars-smiley.gif?1292867640

[jaysongo]

ROUND IV

 

[jaysongo]

[jaysongo]

[jaysongo]

[jaysongo]

[jaysongo]

[jaysongo]

[jaysongo]

[jaysongo]

[jaysongo]

[jaysongo]

SCORECARD

 

Round IV Standings

 

1. Clairefontaine - 1.0

T2. Cambridge - 1.5

T2. Maruman Mnemosyne - 1.5

4. Rhodia 80gsm - 2.5

5. Staples Sustainable Earth - 3.5

6. Black n' Red (Germany) - 4.5

7. Black n' Red (Poland) - 6.0

8. Hilroy - 7.5

9. Five Star Heavyweight - 10.5

10. Staples Notes - 16.5

Overall Standings

1. Clairefontaine - 3.5

2. Maruman Mnemosyne - 8.5

3. Rhodia 80gsm - 10.0

4. Staples Sustainable Earth - 12.0

5. Cambridge - 13.0

6. Black n' Red (Germany) - 17.5

7. Black n' Red (Poland) - 35.5

T8. Five Star Heavyweight - 39.0

T8. Hilroy - 39.0

10. Staples Notes - 85.5

Cumulative Bleed-Through Score By Sample:

Sample 31 - 7.5

Sample 32 - 1.5

Sample 33 - 3.5

Sample 34 - 0.5

Sample 35 - 7.5

Sample 36 - 7.5

Sample 37 - 2.5

Sample 38 - 4.0

Sample 39 - 3.0

Sample 40 - 17.5

 

[DrDebG]

Well, I guess I will give my unused 5-Star notebooks to someone who doesn't use fountain pens. Wow! I knew Staples Notes were horrible for fountain pens. I am surprised by the Cambridge notebook paper, though. I use them because I can get them from Costco fairly inexpensively. Since I use mostly stub nibs, almost all of my inks produce a fair degree of bleedthrough (at least 1/2, and most a 1 or 2). And you are right about the J. Herbin Bleu Pervenche. I have been using it all day, and it bleedthrough far more that I previously realized.

 

Thanks for doing this! Very enlightening.

[jaysongo]

Well, I guess I will give my unused 5-Star notebooks to someone who doesn't use fountain pens. Wow! I knew Staples Notes were horrible for fountain pens. I am surprised by the Cambridge notebook paper, though. I use them because I can get them from Costco fairly inexpensively. Since I use mostly stub nibs, almost all of my inks produce a fair degree of bleedthrough (at least 1/2, and most a 1 or 2). And you are right about the J. Herbin Bleu Pervenche. I have been using it all day, and it bleedthrough far more that I previously realized.

 

Thanks for doing this! Very enlightening.

 

Cambridge surprised me too. My only thought would be that since it's Mead's business brand that it would be better able to handle fountain pens because fountain pens are more prevalent in a business environment. That's contrasted with Five Star, Mead's student brand, where I could see them anticipating a near exclusivity of ballpoint users. But that's only speculation.

 

The particular Five Star notebook I test uses their Heavyweight paper. I assume that the regular Five Star notebooks would use the same paper as Hilroy notebooks, since Mead owns both as well as Cambridge, and my understanding is that Hilroy is just re-branded Mead paper for the Canadian market. Though since Five Star and Hilroy are tied in the overall standings the Heavyweight aspect of the the paper doesn't add anything beyond counterbalancing the more porous paper with a buffer of thickness.

 

And, yes, Staples Notes somehow manages to be exceptionally terrible. Though Staples Sustainable Earth is very nice; its high level of show-through actually works in its favor, camouflaging what minor bleed it does have.

Edited June 18, 2016 by jaysongo

[jaysongo]

ROUND V

 

[jaysongo]