Diamine Autumn Oak - Compact Review

[Jan2016]

[Bergerac]

It looks very attractive. I may have to have a look on their website and weigh up my options.

[Jan2016]

:-) it is a beautiful autumn color. I will try to put up Diamine Pumpkin tomorrow, to make the autumn picture complete... ;-)

[ManofKent]

Nice review. For me it has the edge over Pumpkin.

[Jan2016]

Pumpkin is more bright and red. Autumn Oak is the more interesting color.

[bbs]

I think Autumn Oak behaves better on nibs than Pumpkin too .....

[minddance]

I believe alot of ink must have been put on the paper to produce this effect. I have this ink and in a fine to medium pen, write much lighter and almost illegible. Where it really shines is in my waterman 12 flex nib.

[Jan2016]

A Pelikan Souveran 1000 BB is not very economic with ink... ;-)

And in the middle is an example with a dip pen. (Brause Pumpkin)

Also Tomoe River Paper makes the ink "pop" out because the ink stays "on" the paper and is not absorbed very much.

[Jazini]

I remember this ink being very dry. What is everyone's experience?

[minddance]

I remember this ink being very dry. What is everyone's experience?

very very dry. and very watered-down. many ink reviews are trying to sell and not offer an honest view of inks, especially the diluted and heavily watered-down ones. approach with caution and a discerning mind. it also shows which reviewers are decent enough to show the ink as it is, instead of making everything beautiful and sellable.

 

some places/people simply lack honesty.

 

A Pelikan m1000BB is a wet pen, no dispute. yet the writing sample is still light, with darker parts where alot of ink must have pooled.

 

with 'normal' pens, you will get a very light look. sure it flows, but what flows out is a pale, watered down 'colour'.

 

I was tricked into buying this ink by dishonest reviews.

Edited February 28, 2019 by minddance

[Karmachanic]

very very dry. and very watered-down. many ink reviews are trying to sell and not offer an honest view of inks, especially the diluted and heavily watered-down ones. approach with caution and a discerning mind. it also shows which reviewers are decent enough to show the ink as it is, instead of making everything beautiful and sellable.

 

some places/people simply lack honesty.

 

A Pelikan m1000BB is a wet pen, no dispute. yet the writing sample is still light, with darker parts where alot of ink must have pooled.

 

with 'normal' pens, you will get a very light look. sure it flows, but what flows out is a pale, watered down 'colour'.

 

I was tricked into buying this ink by dishonest reviews.

 

For myself I can say that I do not expect a fine, nail, steel nib to put ink on paper in the same fashion as a soft BB Pelikan 1000 nib. Due to it's softness ink will 'pool' on downstrokes and will be more saturated. Significant shading is what soft nibs do.

 

If you check you will see that Jan2016's review are consistent over time. Calling someone dishonest because their nibs perform differently that yours is .......... Your lack of understanding of the performance characteristics of particular nibs does not constitute trickery on the part of the other person.

 

I find it helpful to look for as many review as possible of an ink I may be interested in, before deciding to purchase a sample. If you check you will see that no two reviews of a particular ink look exactly the same. Each of those reviewers using different nibs on different paper. Some photographs, some scans. Colour rendition affected differently according to the conditions in which they were captured, and the calibration, or lack thereof, of the monitor on which the review is viewed. Theirs and mine. I very much appreciate the effort put forth.

 

Having purchased a sample, I'll try it on the three papers I use, with various nibs. Sometime I like it, sometime I don't.

No one is promising anyone anything.

 

I'm waiting for some Sailor Kin-Mokusei to turn up. If I like it I'll buy a bottle.

[minddance]

 

For myself I can say that I do not expect a fine, nail, steel nib to put ink on paper in the same fashion as a soft BB Pelikan 1000 nib. Due to it's softness ink will 'pool' on downstrokes and will be more saturated. Significant shading is what soft nibs do.

 

If you check you will see that Jan2016's review are consistent over time. Calling someone dishonest because their nibs perform differently that yours is .......... Your lack of understanding of the performance characteristics of particular nibs does not constitute trickery on the part of the other person.

 

 

I am well aware of the characteristics of soft nibs, various papers , etc. I understand how ink-pooling works.

 

My point on pooling is that even at where the ink pools, it is a light ink, in case you didn't get that.

 

I am not calling Jan2016 dishonest.

 

who am I calling dishonest:

 

e.g. 1. adjusting nibs on say, a Pilot Met to be super wet just to make an ink work/be legible and label it just as Pilot Met without stating what has been done to the pen. 2. constantly priming the feed to make a very light ink look legible and shade or sheen and tell me it was written by a certain pen, without disclosing what has been done to the pen. 3. just showing me a swab and tell me the ink looks like this. 4. constantly dipping the pen into a very light ink to make it legible or to show sheen/shading and tell me it was written by that pen. Sure, it was written by that pen and that ink, but the point of reference wrt the pen, is heavily distorted.

 

when these points of references are heavily distorted, it is dishonest, or if it pleases you, highly inaccurate.

 

There is no accurate portrayal of any ink as we all know it. but some reviewers makes things MORE inaccurate and beautify inks in order to sell or to please or just to make things work.

 

if you claim there is no such thing as dishonesty, then anyone can come up with any presentation of an ink and pass it off as an ink review, is that what you mean? and is that what it is with inks and reviews?

[alexander_k]

Lovely shading - thanks for the review.

[Jazini]

 

For myself I can say that I do not expect a fine, nail, steel nib to put ink on paper in the same fashion as a soft BB Pelikan 1000 nib. Due to it's softness ink will 'pool' on downstrokes and will be more saturated. Significant shading is what soft nibs do.

 

If you check you will see that Jan2016's review are consistent over time. Calling someone dishonest because their nibs perform differently that yours is .......... Your lack of understanding of the performance characteristics of particular nibs does not constitute trickery on the part of the other person.

 

I find it helpful to look for as many review as possible of an ink I may be interested in, before deciding to purchase a sample. If you check you will see that no two reviews of a particular ink look exactly the same. Each of those reviewers using different nibs on different paper. Some photographs, some scans. Colour rendition affected differently according to the conditions in which they were captured, and the calibration, or lack thereof, of the monitor on which the review is viewed. Theirs and mine. I very much appreciate the effort put forth.

 

Having purchased a sample, I'll try it on the three papers I use, with various nibs. Sometime I like it, sometime I don't.

No one is promising anyone anything.

 

I'm waiting for some Sailor Kin-Mokusei to turn up. If I like it I'll buy a bottle.

Thanks. I also felt it was dry in several of my wet pens and very pale.

[Jan2016]

According to lgsoltek:

 

Autumn Oak - the driest ink in the world ever

(in review about Diamine Honey Burst)

 

 

This review is written with the pens as described. I don´t mention anything about dryness or whatsoever. Pens are not adjusted, tweaked or anything.

The colors are what they are, with calibration of printer and scanner and monitor. I don´t have anything to win by giving an dishonest review, only that I can get a bad name. So here is no reason for me to tweak the review or be dishonest.

[JulieParadise]

I am a bit disturbed or irritated rather by the implication that ink reviewers here have any interest to beautify their inks. These people are hobbyists who contribute to the community, mostly pay for the inks with their own money or get samples from friends or other people in the community with no other interest than a genuine sense of curiosity.

 

It is well known that any ink can look vastly different in different pens and on different papers, freshly filled or left in the pen for some time. That is the only source of the different looks we get to see by these reviewers. Of course there are some pens that show the best in every ink, for me these are my Pilot CH 912 with FA nibs or most of the Pelikan nibs I have that make every ink look amazing, especially the broad nibs, and I am pretty sure that if an ink reviewer has such a pen, he'd be stupid not to use it and not the fine-nibbed dry writer that is no fun to use anyway.

 

Most reviewers do give accurate info on what was used.

 

To call that dishonest or suspect some trickery was involved is flat-out offensive, at least that was my impression of the tone used above here on in a similar thread (I cannot recall the exact place, please excuse that).

 

I hope the reviewers mentioned do not tire of doing reviews as these are greatly appreciated and very enjoyable, useful, informative and -- I am sure -- honest and done with best intentions.

[Jan2016]

Thank you!

[minddance]

 

According to lgsoltek:

Autumn Oak - the driest ink in the world ever

(in review about Diamine Honey Burst)

This review is written with the pens as described. I don´t mention anything about dryness or whatsoever. Pens are not adjusted, tweaked or anything.

The colors are what they are, with calibration of printer and scanner and monitor. I don´t have anything to win by giving an dishonest review, only that I can get a bad name. So here is no reason for me to tweak the review or be dishonest.

 

Hi Jan2016:

 

Relax! I don't see anyone calling you a liar or accuse you of cheating or being dishonest with a review. Personally, I must say I do not see any 'tweaking' in your review(s)/presentations, and with the choice of pens, there is really no need to.

 

Out of curiosity:

 

When asked about the flow of this ink, why would you have to quote a fellow member Lgsoltek and not answer the question on your own? What is your view on the flow of this ink? Or would it be rather difficult for you to answer this because the pens and paper you chose to use (Brause dip pen and a wet Pelikan M1000BB) in this review might not really tell you much about flow and probably other qualities like saturation and lubrication (Tomoe River is a rather slick paper to begin with)?

[Jan2016]

Thank you for the post!

I refrain from commenting on flow because as you say, flow dependents on a lot of variables, pen, paper, speed of writing, and maybe some more. And to me it is also a subjective thing. The same as to saturation and lubrication.

Some members have a fast experience and have used a lot more inks then I do, so I consider their opinion more useful then mine on that subject.

[minddance]

I am a bit disturbed or irritated rather by the implication that ink reviewers here have any interest to beautify their inks. These people are hobbyists who contribute to the community, mostly pay for the inks with their own money or get samples from friends or other people in the community with no other interest than a genuine sense of curiosity.

 

Hi JulieParadise, please calm down and we carry on.

 

Are we to take it that ALL reviews here on FPN have no interest to beautify inks? If so, I will take it as you said. Reviewers might be ARE hobbyists, and paying consumers ARE also hobbyists who also buy the inks with their own money. Do certain reviewers have curiosity only about how an ink behaves on one type of paper, in a wet super broad pen, a dip pen, or do they have a wider sense of curiosity that encompasses more types or papers, more types of pens?

Of course, I don't see anything wrong with a more myopic specific/focused/specialised curiosity.

 

It is well known that any ink can look vastly different in different pens and on different papers, freshly filled or left in the pen for some time. That is the only source of the different looks we get to see by these reviewers. Of course there are some pens that show the best in every ink, for me these are my Pilot CH 912 with FA nibs or most of the Pelikan nibs I have that make every ink look amazing, especially the broad nibs, and I am pretty sure that if an ink reviewer has such a pen, he'd be stupid not to use it and not the fine-nibbed dry writer that is no fun to use anyway.

 

This contradicts "interest to beautify inks". Can we also have 'negative' presentation of inks, presentations that do not look good?

 

A fine-nibbed dry writer is a valid fountain pen too. And sometimes readers might want to know if a certain ink works in that fine-nibbed dry writer too. Presenting an ink in this "fine-nibbed dry writer that is not fun to use anyway" certainly adds another dimension to reviews and provides more information for readers - if the reviewers' intentions are to also help this group of people.

 

Most reviewers do give accurate info on what was used.

 

It is not easy for a novice reader to know/filter out which are the rest of the reviewers who do not give accurate info.

 

To call that dishonest or suspect some trickery was involved is flat-out offensive, at least that was my impression of the tone used above here on in a similar thread (I cannot recall the exact place, please excuse that).

 

In the business of things, there is no ruling out of such possibilities. And personally, I do not see any names of reviewers being singled out (yet). All I see is that there is mention of such a possibility with reviews and reviewers in general.

 

I hope the reviewers mentioned do not tire of doing reviews as these are greatly appreciated and very enjoyable, useful, informative and -- I am sure -- honest and done with best intentions.

 

I share your hopes too. With no mention of qualities like flow, saturation and probably lubrication, and using one paper, 2 pens, how much does a presentation of ink qualifies to be a review? How much information is presented? Please enlighten me.

Edited March 6, 2019 by minddance