Jump to content

First thoughts on uses and abuses of the Moleskine A4


orangos

Recommended Posts

Last night I filled the last page of the journal I started in December -- a plain, serviceable black A4 'Age Bag' notebook from Clairefontaine. It didn't lie totally flat and the endpapers had to be split from the first pages before use, but otherwise it was a perfect notebook -- no bleed, feathering and precious little showthrough. And it only cost £5!

 

Now let's move on to the A4 Moleskine Folio. It's also plain and black, and boasts a lovely hardback cover and all the other Moleskine trimmings. The paper is supposed to be an improvement on their past fare. Amazon only charged £10 when they came out, so there was nothing to lose.

 

First impressions: The paper is a smooth off-white stock. It's lovely to the touch. I like the bookmark, elastic loop and the wallet at the back. This much Moleskine always seems to get right.

 

Encouraged, I went at it with my beloved L2K (fine) filled with MB Black. It wrote like a dream. Then... I turned over the page. More bleeding than an abbatoir!

 

I was tempted to put the journal to one side, after removing that page and fixing it into another Age Bag notebook. That would have been a terrible waste of paper. So next up was a page written by a Hero P51-clone with carbon black ink. Nearly there: no bleed, precious little show-through... but the 'excess' ink doesn't bind to anything and smudges on contact. Not severely, but I don't want to stop every thirty seconds to blot away the excess.

 

Attempt 3. Esterbrook J and Diamine Registrar's Ink. I'd read somewhere that the Diamine iron-gall ink isn't prone to bleeding or feathering. I took a chance on it devouring the Estie in a fizzing acidic fury, loaded the pen and wrote a third page. Success! The ink behaves perfectly. By the time I'd written a third of the way down the page the first lines had already turned a rich blue-black, one of the lovely characteristics of this ink.

 

So maybe I pressed too hard with the L2K, making deep grooves full of ink (it is a wet writer), or the MB ink was thin enough to soak through before it dried. Or both.

 

The moral of this story is that I wouldn't hesitate to recommend the Moleskine Folios to anyone willing to seek the perfect combination of FP and ink for the paper. But that's something I didn't have to worry about with the much less expensive 'Age Bag' notebook. Not a total thumbs-up, then.

 

PS. Apologies for not showing scans. On anything but a diary or personal letter I'd love to share.

http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/606/letterji9.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 28
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • orangos

    3

  • tawanda

    2

  • Philosophy Student

    2

  • mjchuang9

    2

This is nothing uncommon for Moleskines. They flat out aren't designed for fountain pen ink, rather for pencils or ballpoints. It baffles me that people are willing to limit themselves to one or two inks that can be tolerated on this paper, when you can use whatever type of ink you want on nicer paper. To each his own!

Brian Goulet</br><a href='http://www.gouletpens.com' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>www.GouletPens.com</a></br><a href='http://twitter.com/GouletPens' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>GouletPens on Twitter</a></br><a href='http://blog.gouletpens.com' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>Goulet Pens blog</a>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is nothing uncommon for Moleskines. They flat out aren't designed for fountain pen ink, rather for pencils or ballpoints. It baffles me that people are willing to limit themselves to one or two inks that can be tolerated on this paper, when you can use whatever type of ink you want on nicer paper. To each his own!

 

Brian,

 

The problem isn't that people are willing to tolerate the paper, the problem is that Moleskine did 2 things right, the packaging is nearly perfect for 99% of people out there (even for most fountain pen and ball/roller users.) And Moleskine has done an amazing job at marketing their books/papers to nearly every store out there. Because enough people asked the stores for the products, so they stock it.

 

My opinions,

 

Positives :

 

1. The Moleskine paper is a really nice off white. It looks good with black, blue, brown, green, and multitudes of other color inks.

2. The Moleskine cover is thin and rigid, its got the bookmark, and a pocket.

3. The Moleskine papers come in plain, grid and ruled.

 

Negatives :

 

Moleskine papers stinks (yes, this is the MAIN reason to use a notebook, but for some pen/ink combinations it works)

Moleskine paper is sourced by seemingly random paper manufacturers, making finding a pad that doesn't exhibit the negatives fairly hard to find..

 

Competitors:

 

Rhodia

 

Positives :

 

1. Their paper (90g) seems FAR superior to Moleskine (thickness/smoothness/no bleed/no feather)

2. They come with what we have come to expect in pocket notebooks; Pockets, elastic strap, bookmark

 

Negatives :

 

1. Their Webbies covers are REALLY thick and the emboss is REALLY deep..

2. Each page has "Rhodia" on it

3. The webbies only have lined papers.. no grid or plain (THIS IS A HUGE FAIL FOR ME)

 

Clairefontaine/Excompta/Standard Rhodia

1. Their normal pads are all so bright, I feel like I need sunglasses to look at them while I write

2. Their ink is a bright blue, which IMHO clashes with anything but blue/black ink.. (Sure, you can use any color you like, but to my eyes, the warmer papers look better)

 

In my opinion, if Rhodia made their Webbie pads with either soft covers, or made the cover a little thinner as well as offered more options than ruled, I think they would OWN the market. (Even with the adverts on every page)

 

On a side note, it was nearly impossible to find any vendors here in San Francisco that had the webbies.. I was able to buy one from Atelier Gargoyle at their calligraphy class on Saturday.. Everyone carries the standard Rhodia pads (meeting, bloc, etc) but few seem to have caught on.. Unless Rhodia can get all of their products into the hands of the vendors, people will still choose Moleskine.. If for no other reason out of convenience.

Science is a way of skeptically interrogating the universe with a fine understanding of human fallibility.

-Carl Sagan

http://mark.intervex.net/fpn/images/LetterExchange_sm.pnghttp://mark.intervex.net/fpn/images/PostcardExchange_sm.pnghttp://1.bp.blogspot.com/_qVJOiluU9_4/THp4f_4pakI/AAAAAAAAA14/_d-MITGtqvY/s320/InkDropLogoFPN2.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree.

 

The new A4 Moles are way better than the old paper used to be. I think the problem is the iron gall inks being used. I find that even Ciak notepaper gets bleed with these inks. My Diamine Reg ink bled through Rhodia quad paper the other day and the feathering was terrible.

 

I have an A4 Mole and have used it for quite a while. It has many non i.g. ink colours contained within its pages, and they have been laid down with a variety of nib sizes, from a L2K fine nib, to a MB12 broad oblique - no problems whatsoever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is nothing uncommon for Moleskines. They flat out aren't designed for fountain pen ink, rather for pencils or ballpoints. It baffles me that people are willing to limit themselves to one or two inks that can be tolerated on this paper, when you can use whatever type of ink you want on nicer paper. To each his own!

 

According to some recent reviews on this forum, that's not supposed to be the case. Several have cited thicker and better paper. That's the only reason I bought one in the first place! I'd never have let an FP near my older, smaller Moleskines. I suspect that good old 'Moleskine variable quality' has struck again.

 

I disagree.

 

The new A4 Moles are way better than the old paper used to be. I think the problem is the iron gall inks being used. I find that even Ciak notepaper gets bleed with these inks. My Diamine Reg ink bled through Rhodia quad paper the other day and the feathering was terrible.

 

I have an A4 Mole and have used it for quite a while. It has many non i.g. ink colours contained within its pages, and they have been laid down with a variety of nib sizes, from a L2K fine nib, to a MB12 broad oblique - no problems whatsoever.

 

My problem wasn't with the iron gall ink, but with normally reliable MB Black -- used because I normally have trouble getting it to feather on anything! The iron gall ink worked a treat, and that's what I'll use for the rest of the book as an alternative to wasting 190 pages of paper. Everyone seems to find a combination all their own. :)

 

Could you recommend any inks that you know work on these books?

http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/606/letterji9.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have just tried to induce feathering on a Moleskine, using a Parker 45 with a broad nib, and some very good MB Bordeaux and then a Lamy/Visconti magenta mix, couldnt do it.

 

Has anyone done a comparison on humidity and feathering?

 

My office and home are both dry and warm, I never get feathering on any paper, with any ink/nib combination, even Cross Broad Nibs.

 

You are welcome to a sample of the magenta as a comparison Orangos but it in the meantime I would be looking at a fine a nib as you can find.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always opt for drier inks and finer nibs in Moles esp those older versions, with 'variable' paper. All my Waterman inks and all Pelikans seem to work with no trouble, also Diamine Damson, Diamine Grey.

 

I use various pens but mainly Reform 1745, Sailor shortlong x/f, Cross Century II (older model with a true fine nib), P45 x/f nib, Pelikan M400 fine nib.

 

With the A4 I've used allsorts, too many inks nad pens to mention, but you should be safe with the above inks if you have them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread sums up exactly what is wrong about Moleskin. I am a Moleskin hater because I have been burned too many times buying a new style and finding the paper unusable for fountain pen - even having variations of paper grade within the same book. I broke my rule "Never ever buy Moleskin again" and bought an A4. It is fabulous. The paper is a real treat and I thought that finally Moleskin had solved this problem. But this thread shows I have been lulled into a false sense of security as others now report problems with the paper in the A4 version. As I said - this thread sums up in a nutshell the problem with Moleskin. A premium product at a premium price with inconsistent quality. They're back on my "never ever again" list.

http://img356.imageshack.us/img356/7260/postminipo0.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for this! As Brian has said it baffles him. It also baffles me why anyone would limit the notebook choice just to use a certain ink! I say use up those moleskines and just the ink that works (which for the A4 is pretty much anything)

 

Thanks again, I quite enjoyed this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for this! As Brian has said it baffles him. It also baffles me why anyone would limit the notebook choice just to use a certain ink! I say use up those moleskines and just the ink that works (which for the A4 is pretty much anything)

 

Eh? As the original poster I didn't say said anything of the sort. I wanted a notebook I could reasonably expect to use with any ink and the Moleskine A4 -- after giving it a try based on very positive reviews elsewhere on FPN -- turned out to be a disappointment in that regard. I certainly didn't buy it expecting only one or two inks to work! That would be too dull for words. Literally so, in the case of a diary. What I did say was that, to avoid bleed troubles while the book is still 'in play', I'll be a little cautious in my choice of ink.

 

After using up this book I'll look for an alternative. A shame that there isn't an equivalently bound notebook that uses Clairefontaine paper, or I'd buy it right away.

http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/606/letterji9.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh no I didnt mean to imply that you said anything of the sort, or even imply it. I was merely commenting on another posters response to you that I found funny. Anyways I really am thankful for your post, i have been eyeing one for a while.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it safe to assume that the people who don't like the A4 are using 100g/m2 paper? The responses are kind of vague because

the Folio line, if you include the A3, also has three different grades of paper 100g /160g / 200g.

 

 

I think the A4 with graph (100g) paper is beautiful stuff but, I also love using the 160g sketch.

 

If you use Aurora or Pilot/Namiki fine or extra fine pens the new Folios will not disappoint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have used both the line and plain version of A4 folio, using Pelikan M800 medium nib and Nakaya medium nib, both with a variety of different blue inks. The paper is very good, no (noticeable) bleed through, no feathering. They are very good Moleskines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the new A4 paper. It isn't perfect, but it is significantly better than any of the other Moleskine's I've used. My preference is towards medium and broad nibs with wet flow. I've tested the A4 Moleskine folio with Carter's Washable Blue, J. Herbin Lie de Thie, Diamine Mediterranean Blue, Private Reserve Tanzanite, and Noodler's Legal Lapis. Bearing in mind that my pens are all wet writers, the only one that bled was the very worst of the bunch, a Parker 51 loaded with the Mediterranean Blue that practically gushes ink - so much so, in fact, that I think most people would find the pen too wet.

 

On top of that, with the exception of the one ink that bled through, show through was very minimal, and more than adequate to allow me to use both sides of this paper, which has previously been impossible.

 

So, am I happy with the new paper? Yes. Is it perfect? Definitely not, but it's a step in the right direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a plain paged pocket moleskine and although occasionally you can see the writing on the reverse side of the page there is very little bleedthrough even when I'm drawing mandalas or writing with broad nibs. The fault with moleskine is their quality control. I originall bought two identical notebooks, the other I gave away because the quality wasn't to the same standard.

Platinum 3776 - F, Pilot Decimo - F, TWSBI Vac Mini - 1.1i

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is nothing uncommon for Moleskines. They flat out aren't designed for fountain pen ink, rather for pencils or ballpoints. It baffles me that people are willing to limit themselves to one or two inks that can be tolerated on this paper, when you can use whatever type of ink you want on nicer paper. To each his own!

 

I completely agree. I've bought two A4 Moleskine Folio notebooks. I've yet to open the lined but the squared one is bleeding through (the odd spot here and there and not as bad as the normal Moleskine notebooks) with Diamine Monaco Red. Herbin Poussière de Lune, Waterman Blue-Black, Diamine Grey, Sailor Blue, Blue-Black and Red-Brown. This is with using a Lamy Safari with F or EF nibs. They are lovely books but the paper can't hold a candle to Apica, Rhodia or Clairefontaine. I really can't be bothered cycling through all of my inks just to find one that behaves (as if it's the ink's fault anyway). I'm thinking of just sending the unopened lined one back or just buying some really nice ballpoints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just received a Mole A4 (plain paper) this morning and tried out a few pens on the back page earlier - was quite pleasantly surprised. Far better than my 'large' (= ~A5) mole, where wider nibs bleed like crazy. There are tiny spots of bleed with wet writers, but they really are tiny (There are slight points of bleed with a wet EF, but none whatsoever with an ~M-like stub, for some reason).

 

Admittedly there is quite a bit of faint showthrough, but it's little worse than some of Clairefontaine's offerings. Far from perfect, but they are immensely practical notebooks, and as I got my A4 Mole at a substantial discount, I don't find it too bad - not sure I'd feel the same if I'd paid RRP for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is nothing uncommon for Moleskines. They flat out aren't designed for fountain pen ink, rather for pencils or ballpoints. It baffles me that people are willing to limit themselves to one or two inks that can be tolerated on this paper, when you can use whatever type of ink you want on nicer paper. To each his own!

 

Brian,

 

The problem isn't that people are willing to tolerate the paper, the problem is that Moleskine did 2 things right, the packaging is nearly perfect for 99% of people out there (even for most fountain pen and ball/roller users.) And Moleskine has done an amazing job at marketing their books/papers to nearly every store out there. Because enough people asked the stores for the products, so they stock it.

 

My opinions,

 

Positives :

 

1. The Moleskine paper is a really nice off white. It looks good with black, blue, brown, green, and multitudes of other color inks.

2. The Moleskine cover is thin and rigid, its got the bookmark, and a pocket.

3. The Moleskine papers come in plain, grid and ruled.

 

Negatives :

 

Moleskine papers stinks (yes, this is the MAIN reason to use a notebook, but for some pen/ink combinations it works)

Moleskine paper is sourced by seemingly random paper manufacturers, making finding a pad that doesn't exhibit the negatives fairly hard to find..

 

Competitors:

 

Rhodia

 

Positives :

 

1. Their paper (90g) seems FAR superior to Moleskine (thickness/smoothness/no bleed/no feather)

2. They come with what we have come to expect in pocket notebooks; Pockets, elastic strap, bookmark

 

Negatives :

 

1. Their Webbies covers are REALLY thick and the emboss is REALLY deep..

2. Each page has "Rhodia" on it

3. The webbies only have lined papers.. no grid or plain (THIS IS A HUGE FAIL FOR ME)

 

Clairefontaine/Excompta/Standard Rhodia

1. Their normal pads are all so bright, I feel like I need sunglasses to look at them while I write

2. Their ink is a bright blue, which IMHO clashes with anything but blue/black ink.. (Sure, you can use any color you like, but to my eyes, the warmer papers look better)

 

In my opinion, if Rhodia made their Webbie pads with either soft covers, or made the cover a little thinner as well as offered more options than ruled, I think they would OWN the market. (Even with the adverts on every page)

 

On a side note, it was nearly impossible to find any vendors here in San Francisco that had the webbies.. I was able to buy one from Atelier Gargoyle at their calligraphy class on Saturday.. Everyone carries the standard Rhodia pads (meeting, bloc, etc) but few seem to have caught on.. Unless Rhodia can get all of their products into the hands of the vendors, people will still choose Moleskine.. If for no other reason out of convenience.

 

I agree with a lot of this.

 

I wish I could get a Moleskine form factor with Rhodia graph paper inside it. Moleskine has the absolute perfect size and shape for portable notebook that will endure a month and half in my bag. I can also get them discounted at the Strand Bookstore in NYC. I am using a variety of other notebooks now, but I miss the form factor of Moleskines. Nothing comes close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is nothing uncommon for Moleskines. They flat out aren't designed for fountain pen ink, rather for pencils or ballpoints. It baffles me that people are willing to limit themselves to one or two inks that can be tolerated on this paper, when you can use whatever type of ink you want on nicer paper. To each his own!

 

Brian,

 

The problem isn't that people are willing to tolerate the paper, the problem is that Moleskine did 2 things right, the packaging is nearly perfect for 99% of people out there (even for most fountain pen and ball/roller users.) And Moleskine has done an amazing job at marketing their books/papers to nearly every store out there. Because enough people asked the stores for the products, so they stock it.

 

My opinions,

 

Positives :

 

1. The Moleskine paper is a really nice off white. It looks good with black, blue, brown, green, and multitudes of other color inks.

2. The Moleskine cover is thin and rigid, its got the bookmark, and a pocket.

3. The Moleskine papers come in plain, grid and ruled.

 

Negatives :

 

Moleskine papers stinks (yes, this is the MAIN reason to use a notebook, but for some pen/ink combinations it works)

Moleskine paper is sourced by seemingly random paper manufacturers, making finding a pad that doesn't exhibit the negatives fairly hard to find..

 

Competitors:

 

Rhodia

 

Positives :

 

1. Their paper (90g) seems FAR superior to Moleskine (thickness/smoothness/no bleed/no feather)

2. They come with what we have come to expect in pocket notebooks; Pockets, elastic strap, bookmark

 

Negatives :

 

1. Their Webbies covers are REALLY thick and the emboss is REALLY deep..

2. Each page has "Rhodia" on it

3. The webbies only have lined papers.. no grid or plain (THIS IS A HUGE FAIL FOR ME)

 

Clairefontaine/Excompta/Standard Rhodia

1. Their normal pads are all so bright, I feel like I need sunglasses to look at them while I write

2. Their ink is a bright blue, which IMHO clashes with anything but blue/black ink.. (Sure, you can use any color you like, but to my eyes, the warmer papers look better)

 

In my opinion, if Rhodia made their Webbie pads with either soft covers, or made the cover a little thinner as well as offered more options than ruled, I think they would OWN the market. (Even with the adverts on every page)

 

On a side note, it was nearly impossible to find any vendors here in San Francisco that had the webbies.. I was able to buy one from Atelier Gargoyle at their calligraphy class on Saturday.. Everyone carries the standard Rhodia pads (meeting, bloc, etc) but few seem to have caught on.. Unless Rhodia can get all of their products into the hands of the vendors, people will still choose Moleskine.. If for no other reason out of convenience.

 

The above is pretty accurate to me. I don't agree that the Moleskine paper stinks, but I find I need to stick to finer nibs.

 

The Rhodia's are disappointing in two ways:

1) the covers are horrible. The material scratches and smudges and soaks up skin oils like crazy. It looks almost like plastic to me. And they are a bit thick.

2) the books are hard to write in because they pages just won't lie flat. The binding is so tight that no amount of stretching ever seems to make the books lie flat.

 

After using a small webbie for a couple of months, I find myself missing the Moleskine's because of the covers and the fact they lie flat. I don't find it an imposition to use my pens with finer nibs in these books (I use my broader nibs in the webbies), so I can go either way. In fact, in a way, the choice of books (between webbies and moles) gives me the option of using my finer nibs or broader nibs, depending on how I'm feeling that day.

 

Henry

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...