Jump to content

The Fountain Pen Network uses (functional) cookies. Read the FPN Privacy Policy for more info.  To remove this message, please click here to accept the use of cookies


Registration on the Fountain Pen Network

Dearest Visitor of the little Fountain Pen Nut house on the digital prairie,

Due to the enormous influx of spammers, it is no longer possible to handle valditions in the traditional way. For registrations we therefore kindly and respectfully request you to send an email with your request to our especially created email address. This email address is register at fountainpennetwork dot com. Please include your desired user name, and after validation we will send you a return email containing the validation key, normally wiithin a week.

Thank you very much in advance!
The FPN Admin Team






Photo

The ‘Right’ Way To Do Ink Reviews To Serve One's Curiosity And Interests?

ink characteristics review methodology

  • Please log in to reply
200 replies to this topic

#101 cellmatrix

cellmatrix

    Collectors Item

  • FPN Supporter - Platinum

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,449 posts
  • Flag:

Posted 08 November 2018 - 15:28

He does a British voice for this randy professor lobster, which I find very funny.

 

Yes he is really funny, I like his pen reviews too. Sandy1 adds a bit of wit as well which adds nicely to her thorough ink analysis. Humor can be a great addition to an ink review, no doubt.  :thumbup:



Sponsored Content

#102 Honeybadgers

Honeybadgers

    Museum Piece

  • Member - Gold

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,155 posts
  • Flag:

Posted 09 November 2018 - 07:33

To be honest, I don't recall seeing too many examples of such a tool being used to produce graduated and/or multi-pass colour swatches; most of what I've seen of such looks like they were produced with q-tips or the like, and the stripes on ink with neat edges are usually single-pass.

 

 

SBRE Brown, Matt from the pen habit, and David from figboot, as well as mike mattison ( think his name is) all do it. I just didn't think to mention it because it's not something I find relevant in an ink review. I never see an ink used in a multi-pass regard outside of art, where there is usually washing (rendering the Q tip more valuable) so, personally, I don't find it useful.


Edited by Honeybadgers, 09 November 2018 - 07:35.

Selling a boatload of restored, fairly rare, vintage Japanese gold nib pens, click here to see (more added as I finish restoring them)


#103 A Smug Dill

A Smug Dill

    飽食終日無所用心

  • FPN Supporter - Rhodium

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,466 posts
  • Location:Sydney, Australia
  • Flag:

Posted 09 November 2018 - 07:51

I never see an ink used in a multi-pass regard outside of art,


Firstly, multi-pass of ink at a given spot does occur in writing, even in English – when writing lowercase 'f' and 't', and I don't know about you, but it happens when I write uppercase 'A' and 'H', etc. – but especially in Asian langauges (Chinese hanzi, Japanese kana and kanji, and so on).

Secondly, my goal is to show some semblance of a scale of how the particular ink will look at different levels of 'wetness'. I don't care about anyone's particular EDC pen (or any other pen) or how the ink will appear in writing coming out of it, but I do care about showing the range of colours (hue, saturation and intensity) an ink can display on the page, and leave it to the interested prospective user to find the right pen/nib and paper combination to elicit the desired colour(s) within that range from the ink.

As always:  1. Implicit in everything and every instance I write on FPN is the invitation for you to judge me as a peer in the community. I think it's only due respect to take each other's written word in online discussion seriously and apply critical judgment.  2. I do not presume to judge for you what is right, correct or valid. If I make a claim, or refute a statement in a thread, and link to references and other information in support, I beseech you to review and consider those, and judge for yourself. I may be wrong. My position or say-so carries no more weight than anyone else's here, and external parties can speak for themselves with what they have published.  3. I endeavour to be frank and truthful in what I write, show or otherwise present when I relate my first-hand experiences that are not independently verifiable. If it is something you can test for yourself and see the results, I entreat you to do so.


#104 Honeybadgers

Honeybadgers

    Museum Piece

  • Member - Gold

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,155 posts
  • Flag:

Posted 09 November 2018 - 08:47

Your first point is kind of moot. a crossed t, f, are not really good examples, a nib backfilling is not the same as multiple passes (I've done plenty of art with inks myself, layering dry inks is not going to give the same result as wet on wet. wet on wet painting vs wet on dry yield very different results)

 

That said, your second point is actually pretty insightful. I don't agree that it'll be as accurate as a writing sample or heavy wet application vs dry, but I do think it's not a bad way to show saturation at multiple levels of nib wetness. that's a good point I hadn't considered.

 

I have a question, how many damn languages do you speak?  :lol:


Edited by Honeybadgers, 09 November 2018 - 08:48.

Selling a boatload of restored, fairly rare, vintage Japanese gold nib pens, click here to see (more added as I finish restoring them)


#105 A Smug Dill

A Smug Dill

    飽食終日無所用心

  • FPN Supporter - Rhodium

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,466 posts
  • Location:Sydney, Australia
  • Flag:

Posted 09 November 2018 - 09:01

I have a question, how many damn languages do you speak?

Just two: English and (the Cantonese dialect of) Chinese.

I can 'write' Japanese kana (which is analogous to the alphabet in English), as in I know what each character looks likes and the stroke order for putting it on paper, and how to pronounce it, but I cannot read a piece of text in Japanese per se; I may rely on understanding Japanese kanji (literally, 'Chinese characters') using my knowledge of written Chinese to get the general gist of signs and short notices, but sometimes I get things wrong.

So, essentially I can copy a piece of Japanese writing if it is shown to me, but chances are I won't fully understand what it means.

As always:  1. Implicit in everything and every instance I write on FPN is the invitation for you to judge me as a peer in the community. I think it's only due respect to take each other's written word in online discussion seriously and apply critical judgment.  2. I do not presume to judge for you what is right, correct or valid. If I make a claim, or refute a statement in a thread, and link to references and other information in support, I beseech you to review and consider those, and judge for yourself. I may be wrong. My position or say-so carries no more weight than anyone else's here, and external parties can speak for themselves with what they have published.  3. I endeavour to be frank and truthful in what I write, show or otherwise present when I relate my first-hand experiences that are not independently verifiable. If it is something you can test for yourself and see the results, I entreat you to do so.


#106 A Smug Dill

A Smug Dill

    飽食終日無所用心

  • FPN Supporter - Rhodium

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,466 posts
  • Location:Sydney, Australia
  • Flag:

Posted 14 November 2018 - 03:02

@pjford, what has that got to do with (amateur/'casual') users doing ink reviews? Or is that your suggestion for achieving, maintaining and/or improving efficiency in producing user reviews of individual inks?


As always:  1. Implicit in everything and every instance I write on FPN is the invitation for you to judge me as a peer in the community. I think it's only due respect to take each other's written word in online discussion seriously and apply critical judgment.  2. I do not presume to judge for you what is right, correct or valid. If I make a claim, or refute a statement in a thread, and link to references and other information in support, I beseech you to review and consider those, and judge for yourself. I may be wrong. My position or say-so carries no more weight than anyone else's here, and external parties can speak for themselves with what they have published.  3. I endeavour to be frank and truthful in what I write, show or otherwise present when I relate my first-hand experiences that are not independently verifiable. If it is something you can test for yourself and see the results, I entreat you to do so.


#107 Bobje

Bobje

    We're all bozos on this bus.

  • FPN Super Moderators

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,944 posts
  • Location:North Carolina
  • Flag:

Posted 17 November 2018 - 19:08

What I find relevant about Mr. Ford’s inclusion of the nib demos is the way it shows different shades of the same ink depending on nib type.

Reviews and articles on Fountain Pen Network

 

CHINA, JAPAN, AND INDIA

Hua Hong Blue Belter Penbbs 456 | Stationery | ASA Nauka in Dartmoor and Ebonite | ASA Azaadi | ASA Bheeshma | ASA Halwa | Ranga Model 8 and 8b | Ranga Emperor

ITALY AND THE UK

FILCAO Roxi | FILCAO Atlantica | Italix Churchman's Prescriptor

USA, INK, AND EXPERIMENTS

Bexley Prometheus | Route 54 Motor Oil | Black Swan in Icelandic Minty Bathwater | Robert Oster Aqua | Diamine Emerald Green | Mr. Pen Radiant Blue | Three Oysters Giwa | Flex Nib Modifications | Rollstoppers


#108 A Smug Dill

A Smug Dill

    飽食終日無所用心

  • FPN Supporter - Rhodium

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,466 posts
  • Location:Sydney, Australia
  • Flag:

Posted 17 November 2018 - 21:12

@Bobje,

Shading is less of a function of the (physically measurable) nib width, or the angle at which the tip is cut, or whether the corners of the nib are sharp or rounded, than it is that of the 'wetness' of a nib.

As far as I'm concerned, as a reviewer and a fountain pen user, it is far more meaningful to show a range of different nibs that lay down similar line widths, and whether the colour and shading appear differently for them. It shows the potential of the ink – nay, more than that; it demonstrates what has been actually achieved by at least one user (i.e. the reviewer), not just the theoretical potential, and not just under the manufacturer's particular set of controlled conditions in its laboratory.

There is no point for me to close/narrow the gap between which equipment and materials I use for an ink review, and with/on what a (or every) faceless prospective reader of the review may have in mind to use the ink. It's up to the reader to extrapolate based on the data and information presented, without any assurance that the guesswork will be correct or accurate. It has been suggested to me that the review methodology ought to be clearly spelt out for the reader, and I think that is useful, so that a reader could attempt to replicate the results using the same methodology – including type of equipment, material, and technique used – if he/she desires to obtain the same results out of the ink as has been demonstrated in the review. Whether the individual reader wants to use the same type of nib, or paper, or handwriting style as the reviewer for his/her own use cases is irrelevant to the purpose and production of an ink review.

As always:  1. Implicit in everything and every instance I write on FPN is the invitation for you to judge me as a peer in the community. I think it's only due respect to take each other's written word in online discussion seriously and apply critical judgment.  2. I do not presume to judge for you what is right, correct or valid. If I make a claim, or refute a statement in a thread, and link to references and other information in support, I beseech you to review and consider those, and judge for yourself. I may be wrong. My position or say-so carries no more weight than anyone else's here, and external parties can speak for themselves with what they have published.  3. I endeavour to be frank and truthful in what I write, show or otherwise present when I relate my first-hand experiences that are not independently verifiable. If it is something you can test for yourself and see the results, I entreat you to do so.


#109 XYZZY

XYZZY

    Extremely Rare

  • FPN Supporter - Rhodium

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 377 posts
  • Location:WA
  • Flag:

Posted 18 November 2018 - 18:25

 It has been suggested to me that the review methodology ought to be clearly spelt out for the reader, and I think that is useful, so that a reader could attempt to replicate the results using the same methodology – including type of equipment, material, and technique used – if he/she desires to obtain the same results out of the ink as has been demonstrated in the review. Whether the individual reader wants to use the same type of nib, or paper, or handwriting style as the reviewer for his/her own use cases is irrelevant to the purpose and production of an ink review.

 

I'm not interested in reading your methodology for the purpose of reproducing your review.  However, a writeup of the methodology is very interesting to me for a different reason:  I can consider which aspects of your review are directly relevant to me, which might need some "translation" before being relevant to me, and which aspects might be even remotely predictive for me.  I originally wrote "not useful", but that's not correct:  I can find an ink review "useful" for entertainment or aesthetic value, even if it's not remotely predictive of what I might see.

 

Also, you're putting a fair amount of thought into this (both your own ideas, and feedback from others), and a summary of methodology is basically a distillation of all the conversations that led up to that point.



#110 Bobje

Bobje

    We're all bozos on this bus.

  • FPN Super Moderators

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,944 posts
  • Location:North Carolina
  • Flag:

Posted 18 November 2018 - 22:23

Sounds good, Dill. Looking forward to reading your reviews.

Reviews and articles on Fountain Pen Network

 

CHINA, JAPAN, AND INDIA

Hua Hong Blue Belter Penbbs 456 | Stationery | ASA Nauka in Dartmoor and Ebonite | ASA Azaadi | ASA Bheeshma | ASA Halwa | Ranga Model 8 and 8b | Ranga Emperor

ITALY AND THE UK

FILCAO Roxi | FILCAO Atlantica | Italix Churchman's Prescriptor

USA, INK, AND EXPERIMENTS

Bexley Prometheus | Route 54 Motor Oil | Black Swan in Icelandic Minty Bathwater | Robert Oster Aqua | Diamine Emerald Green | Mr. Pen Radiant Blue | Three Oysters Giwa | Flex Nib Modifications | Rollstoppers


#111 A Smug Dill

A Smug Dill

    飽食終日無所用心

  • FPN Supporter - Rhodium

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,466 posts
  • Location:Sydney, Australia
  • Flag:

Posted 18 November 2018 - 23:34

Sounds good, Dill. Looking forward to reading your reviews.


Thanks. I have posted a few 'incomplete' ones so far, because I haven't quite worked out what a 'full' review in my book ought to and can viably include, and the methodology for producing all of it.

Right now my writing hand is a bit handicapped and I cannot write more than four lines at a time without exacerbating the injury. It's most frustrating!

As always:  1. Implicit in everything and every instance I write on FPN is the invitation for you to judge me as a peer in the community. I think it's only due respect to take each other's written word in online discussion seriously and apply critical judgment.  2. I do not presume to judge for you what is right, correct or valid. If I make a claim, or refute a statement in a thread, and link to references and other information in support, I beseech you to review and consider those, and judge for yourself. I may be wrong. My position or say-so carries no more weight than anyone else's here, and external parties can speak for themselves with what they have published.  3. I endeavour to be frank and truthful in what I write, show or otherwise present when I relate my first-hand experiences that are not independently verifiable. If it is something you can test for yourself and see the results, I entreat you to do so.


#112 TSherbs

TSherbs

    Donor Pen

  • Member - Gold

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,867 posts

Posted 19 November 2018 - 00:18

This is now a 6-page analysis of what a review might be. How long is the actual review going to be?  :)



#113 minddance

minddance

    Antique

  • Member - Gold

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,528 posts

Posted 19 November 2018 - 06:54

please show us the review already.

#114 A Smug Dill

A Smug Dill

    飽食終日無所用心

  • FPN Supporter - Rhodium

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,466 posts
  • Location:Sydney, Australia
  • Flag:

Posted 19 November 2018 - 07:05

please show us the review already.


As I said above, I've already done a few 'incomplete'/'quickie' ink reviews last month and posted them on FPN. I can't do any this month because of tendonitis in my writing hand, and I'll be away from home for a few weeks from the end of this month.

As always:  1. Implicit in everything and every instance I write on FPN is the invitation for you to judge me as a peer in the community. I think it's only due respect to take each other's written word in online discussion seriously and apply critical judgment.  2. I do not presume to judge for you what is right, correct or valid. If I make a claim, or refute a statement in a thread, and link to references and other information in support, I beseech you to review and consider those, and judge for yourself. I may be wrong. My position or say-so carries no more weight than anyone else's here, and external parties can speak for themselves with what they have published.  3. I endeavour to be frank and truthful in what I write, show or otherwise present when I relate my first-hand experiences that are not independently verifiable. If it is something you can test for yourself and see the results, I entreat you to do so.


#115 the-smell-of-dust-after-rain

the-smell-of-dust-after-rain

    Extremely Rare

  • Member - Gold

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 245 posts
  • Flag:

Posted 25 March 2019 - 14:18

This is a really interesting thread.  Great questions.

 

I've been reading a lot of ink reviews these last few months. I really appreciate everyone who takes the time to share their experiences with the inks.

 

Some of the things I like to see

 

  • how the ink performs on different papers (including cheap stuff)
  • what the reviewer's experience is after having written with the ink for a week or so.
  • Follow up data, especially for inks that are supposed to change over time.
  • what things the reviewer felt were relevant to a good ink.
  • what situation they use the ink for
  • how the ink responds to a highlighter

I also really appreciate the waterproof testing.  Something to add to that would be waterproof testing within a few minutes of writing, and another waterproof test when the writing is at least 24 hours old.

 

 


petrichor


#116 A Smug Dill

A Smug Dill

    飽食終日無所用心

  • FPN Supporter - Rhodium

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,466 posts
  • Location:Sydney, Australia
  • Flag:

Posted 25 March 2019 - 19:39

Some of the things I like to see


Thank you for your ideas about what you'd like to see in ink reviews, which I assume match your interests as an ink reviewer, and therefore what you would work into your ink review methodology to cover prospectively. :)

As always:  1. Implicit in everything and every instance I write on FPN is the invitation for you to judge me as a peer in the community. I think it's only due respect to take each other's written word in online discussion seriously and apply critical judgment.  2. I do not presume to judge for you what is right, correct or valid. If I make a claim, or refute a statement in a thread, and link to references and other information in support, I beseech you to review and consider those, and judge for yourself. I may be wrong. My position or say-so carries no more weight than anyone else's here, and external parties can speak for themselves with what they have published.  3. I endeavour to be frank and truthful in what I write, show or otherwise present when I relate my first-hand experiences that are not independently verifiable. If it is something you can test for yourself and see the results, I entreat you to do so.


#117 the-smell-of-dust-after-rain

the-smell-of-dust-after-rain

    Extremely Rare

  • Member - Gold

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 245 posts
  • Flag:

Posted 26 March 2019 - 01:58

I plan to do ink reviews soon - that's why I'm reading so many. 

 

One of the things I wonder about is colour accuracy.  When I take a photo of something for size, I put a rule near it for scale.  Is there some sort of tool like this to help calibrate colour accuracy?  


petrichor


#118 A Smug Dill

A Smug Dill

    飽食終日無所用心

  • FPN Supporter - Rhodium

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,466 posts
  • Location:Sydney, Australia
  • Flag:

Posted 26 March 2019 - 03:22

Yes, there are colour calibration charts that you can place inside the frame of a photo (in the background, or as another artefact) or in the scan area.


Edited by A Smug Dill, 26 March 2019 - 03:22.

As always:  1. Implicit in everything and every instance I write on FPN is the invitation for you to judge me as a peer in the community. I think it's only due respect to take each other's written word in online discussion seriously and apply critical judgment.  2. I do not presume to judge for you what is right, correct or valid. If I make a claim, or refute a statement in a thread, and link to references and other information in support, I beseech you to review and consider those, and judge for yourself. I may be wrong. My position or say-so carries no more weight than anyone else's here, and external parties can speak for themselves with what they have published.  3. I endeavour to be frank and truthful in what I write, show or otherwise present when I relate my first-hand experiences that are not independently verifiable. If it is something you can test for yourself and see the results, I entreat you to do so.


#119 Karmachanic

Karmachanic

    Nibulous

  • Member - Gold

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,331 posts
  • Location:Tralfamador

Posted 26 March 2019 - 07:29

 

One of the things I wonder about is colour accuracy.  When I take a photo of something for size, I put a rule near it for scale.  Is there some sort of tool like this to help calibrate colour accuracy?  

 

Then may I suggest you calibrate your monitor in addition to adding an 11 step gray scale to the review


"Want little. Need less. Love more."


#120 Tom Kellie

Tom Kellie

    From EEF to BBBB Small Signature

  • Member - Gold

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,206 posts
  • Location:Southern China
  • Flag:

Posted 28 September 2019 - 17:18

This is a really interesting thread.  Great questions.

 

I've been reading a lot of ink reviews these last few months. I really appreciate everyone who takes the time to share their experiences with the inks.

 

Some of the things I like to see

 

  • how the ink performs on different papers (including cheap stuff)
  • what the reviewer's experience is after having written with the ink for a week or so.
  • Follow up data, especially for inks that are supposed to change over time.
  • what things the reviewer felt were relevant to a good ink.
  • what situation they use the ink for
  • how the ink responds to a highlighter

I also really appreciate the waterproof testing.  Something to add to that would be waterproof testing within a few minutes of writing, and another waterproof test when the writing is at least 24 hours old.

 

~ the-smell-of-dust-after-rain:

 

Thank you for your comments above. They're helpful to me.

 

I'd never considered the effect of a highlighter, as I've never used one on anything written in ink.

 

Waterproof testing baffles me, which reflect how little I know. I've never been in any situation where water affected ink on paper.

 

Your comments about follow-up data, and the experience with an ink after one week make excellent sense to me.

 

After reading through this thread one takeaway idea is that of using a Medium nib in a review. I'd neglected to consider how that might be helpful to others.

 

I hope that you did finally post an ink review. If so, I've somehow overlooked it.

 

Tom K.







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: ink, characteristics, review, methodology



Sponsored Content




|