Monteverde - Turquoise

[Sandy1]

Please take a moment to adjust your gear to accurately depict the Gray Scale below.

As the patches are neutral gray, their colour on your monitor should also be neutral gray.

Mac

http://www.wikihow.c...te-Your-Monitor

Wintel PC

http://www.calibrize.com/

http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy116/Sandy1-1/InkyThoughts2010/INK576.jpg

- = + =

Figure 1.

Swabs & Swatch

Paper: HPJ1124 24 lb. Laser Copy.

http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy116/Sandy1-1/FPN%20Stuff%20-%202011/Ink%20Review%20-%20Monteverde%20Turquoise/c0188357.jpg

Figure 2.

NIB-ism ✑

Paper: HPJ1124.

Depicts nibs' line-width and pens' relative wetness.

http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy116/Sandy1-1/FPN%20Stuff%20-%202011/Ink%20Review%20-%20Monteverde%20Turquoise/b9f5c8f3.jpg

Pens:

L → R: Estie, M200, Statesman, 530, NPS & Sonnet.

 

 

WRITTEN SAMPLES - Moby Dick

 

Row width is 8mm.

 

Figure 3.

Paper: HPJ1124.

http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy116/Sandy1-1/FPN%20Stuff%20-%202011/Ink%20Review%20-%20Monteverde%20Turquoise/30fca49d.jpg

Figure 4.

Paper: Rhodia.

http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy116/Sandy1-1/FPN%20Stuff%20-%202011/Ink%20Review%20-%20Monteverde%20Turquoise/c1944c84.jpg

Figure 5.

Paper: G Lalo, Verge de France, white.

http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy116/Sandy1-1/FPN%20Stuff%20-%202011/Ink%20Review%20-%20Monteverde%20Turquoise/d2250a4a.jpg

Figure 6.

Paper: Royal - 25% rag.

http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy116/Sandy1-1/FPN%20Stuff%20-%202011/Ink%20Review%20-%20Monteverde%20Turquoise/dba4c906.jpg

Figure 7.

Paper: Staples 20 lb. multi use.

http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy116/Sandy1-1/FPN%20Stuff%20-%202011/Ink%20Review%20-%20Monteverde%20Turquoise/bc5a5a86.jpg

Figure 8.

Grocery List

Paper: Pulp. One-a-Day calendar page.

http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy116/Sandy1-1/FPN%20Stuff%20-%202011/Ink%20Review%20-%20Monteverde%20Turquoise/c159ee41.jpg

 

Extended Sampling:

 

• It was apparent to me that MvT was giving odd results on the harder less-absorbent papers. Even the dry iron-gall Scabiosa, used for lines & labels, demonstrated better flow/absorption characteristics. (!)
• It is not uncommon for an ink to be challenged on the G Lalo Verge de France, which is both textured and not so absorbent. And as all three pens' behaviour changed on that paper, I believe it is a valid result.
• The results on the usually FP friendly Rhodia were/are bothersome. Pens which have no history of misbehaviour were giving poor results - reminiscent in look and feel to a surface contaminated with hand oil, skin moisturisers, sizing, etc.
• So I gave the new bottle of ink a good bit of agitation, then let it rest for about a day. The 530 and Sonnet were cleansed and dried.
• Then, wearing (black above-the-wrist) silk gloves and using a cover sheet, I ran more samples from the 530 & the Sonnet, (quite different nibs), onto Clairefontaine Triomphe, maruman P143, and Rhodia plucked from an A5 pad.
• Results from both pens on the Rhodia and Triomphe were similar; so pen and paper quirks/defects were ruled-out as causes.
• Results on the maruman were OK except for bleed- show-through from the Sonnet. Once again, pen quirks/defects were ruled-out.
• So all I can say is peruse the Fine Print; and when choosing paper for MvT, kindly exercise more care than usual, and run some samples.

Linked Images:

 

A. Rhodia Redux

http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy116/Sandy1-1/FPN%20Stuff%20-%202011/Ink%20Review%20-%20Monteverde%20Turquoise/th_559d7538.jpg

B. Clairefontaine Triomphe

http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy116/Sandy1-1/FPN%20Stuff%20-%202011/Ink%20Review%20-%20Monteverde%20Turquoise/th_00a6a63b.jpg

C. maruman P143

http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy116/Sandy1-1/FPN%20Stuff%20-%202011/Ink%20Review%20-%20Monteverde%20Turquoise/th_8f29cf09.jpg

 

OTHER STUFF ‡

 

Figure 10.

• Smear/Dry Time
  • HPJ1124
  • Rhodia
  • Staples 20 lb. multi use

  [*]Wet Tests

  • HPJ1124

http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy116/Sandy1-1/FPN%20Stuff%20-%202011/Ink%20Review%20-%20Monteverde%20Turquoise/50bed72b.jpg

‡ 'Other Stuff' changed recently.

• It was thought that as coatings and glossy paper may be inconsistent, the results shown may be misleading. Consequently, the HAPPY! coated card stock and S/D Time on glossy paper were eliminated.
• In light of recent S/D Time sampling, http://www.fountainp...everflo-orchid/ , it was apparent that the variance and range of such times was greater than previously sampled. Consequently, to represent papers whose use is widespread, the set of papers for S/D Time samples was changed.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

 

Type:

• Dye-based fountain pen ink.

Daily writer?

• Only if your days are too perfect.

A go-to ink?

• Not so much.

USE

 

Business:

(From the desk of Ms Blue-Black.)

• In the medium to darker densities, I could see MvT being used for lateral and downward communication.
• For upward communication, it may be considered as lightweight / lacking gravitas by some.
• Good for goings-on in a Meeting Room, but not a Conference Room.
• Good pick for Drafts that will be marked-up & edited.
• Sufficiently eye-catching for mark-up & editing of Black text printouts.
• Not enough zap for error correction or grading of assignments.

Illustrations / Graphics:

• Likely to be wonderful from a brush- porous-tip implement.
  
• Manageable S/D Times support rapid reworking.
• Lines are crisp, but can be of uneven density, so MvT is not well suited to generating uniform tight lines. e.g. labels, crosshatching.

Students:

• As MvT seems to be finicky about paper, and has zero water resistance, I'd give it a miss. So sorry.
• But, as for Business Use, it may suit ephemera that will be marked-up, edited, corrected, etc.

Personal:

• Yes indeed.
• When one has the papers to match MvT's odd performance profile, the Look of MvT is appealing.
• Definitely a bright-eyed alternative to the convivial Blue inks. (Oh hush my little iroshizuku posey.)
• For pro forma business writing, I'd prefer whatever Blue or BlBk was to hand.
• The few letters I've written with MvT looked just fine, without show-stopper faults. You can tell I am disappointed that the scope of pens and papers is less than I prefer, but good results are readily attainable.
• The uneven density of the lines is not appealing to me, so I suppressed that by using a wet-ish writer + narrow nib: the Pilot C74 + SFM, (OoooBaby!) Also, the uneven density might not suit Italic nibs or calligraphic pens which may accentuate that characteristic.
• MvT is an excellent pick for writing thank-you notes, but watch-out for slick coated card stock. (Gum sandarac anyone?)
• Billet doux should be toned-down to cute frisky notes from an XF nib.

PHYSICAL PERFORMANCE & CHARACTERISTICS

 

Flow Rate:

• Uncertain.

Nib Dry-out:

• Not seen.

Start-up:

• Without confidence on hard smooth papers.

Lubrication:

• More than adequate.

Nib Creep:

• Not seen.

Staining:

• Not seen.

Clogging:

• Not seen.

Bleed- Show-Through:

• Yes.
  • On the Royal, maruman and Staples 20 lb.
  • Both sides of the sheets could be used in a pinch.

Feathering / Woolly Line:

• Inconsequential amount from the Sonnet on the Royal.

Smear/Dry Time:

• HPJ1124: 5 - 10 seconds.
• Rhodia: 20 - 25 seconds.
• 20lb.: < 5 seconds.

Water Resistance: ☂

• -0- on the 4S Scale:
  • Nothing left but wrinkled paper.
  • Recycle.

Smell:

• Ink; very faint.

Hand oil sensitivity:

• Not noticed.

Clean Up:

• Thorough and timely with plain water.

Mixing:

• Certainly not to change the colour or shorten S/DT.
• Perhaps a surfactant to improve the flow. (?)

Archival:

• Not claimed.

THE LOOK

 

Presence:

• Cool lustre.
• Welcoming.
• Potentially playful.
• Reminiscent of the sunny morning breeze playing with pinwheels & streamers.

Saturation:

• Low.

Shading:

• Ink density varies within a line, but I really do not consider it to be attractive shading. (I am sooo picky.)

Variability:

• Pen+nib combos used:
  • About as expected.

  [*]Papers used:

  • Considerably more than expected - an outlier.

  [*]Malleability:

  • Driven far more by choice of paper than choice of writer.
  • That characteristic, in combination with the flow characteristics, makes it very important to have a range of papers to hand. Fortunately, the preferred papers may not be the more expensive ones.

Hi-Res Scans:

As I do not wish to earn the sobriquet 'Queen of the Bandwidth Bandits', these are thumb-links.

D. Estie on HPJ1124

http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy116/Sandy1-1/FPN%20Stuff%20-%202011/Ink%20Review%20-%20Monteverde%20Turquoise/th_7129fc2e.jpg

E. Statesman on Rhodia

http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy116/Sandy1-1/FPN%20Stuff%20-%202011/Ink%20Review%20-%20Monteverde%20Turquoise/th_5bb71432.jpg

F. M200 on G Lalo

http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy116/Sandy1-1/FPN%20Stuff%20-%202011/Ink%20Review%20-%20Monteverde%20Turquoise/th_2e5a3149.jpg

G. 530 on Staples 20 lb.

http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy116/Sandy1-1/FPN%20Stuff%20-%202011/Ink%20Review%20-%20Monteverde%20Turquoise/th_2e55ef52.jpg

H. Sonnet on Royal

http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy116/Sandy1-1/FPN%20Stuff%20-%202011/Ink%20Review%20-%20Monteverde%20Turquoise/th_80ea7011.jpg

I. 530 on Clairefontaine Triomphe

http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy116/Sandy1-1/FPN%20Stuff%20-%202011/Ink%20Review%20-%20Monteverde%20Turquoise/th_bcc94d00.jpg

J. Sonnet on maruman P143

http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy116/Sandy1-1/FPN%20Stuff%20-%202011/Ink%20Review%20-%20Monteverde%20Turquoise/th_3a0a9a32.jpg

 

FIDELITY

 

Is the name appropriate?

• Fine with me.

Are swatches accurate?

• Impressively so.

SIMILAR COLOURS

Figure 11.

Shown below are swabs of MvT interlaced with Pelikan 4001 [L] and Sheaffer Skrip [R] turquoise inks.

http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy116/Sandy1-1/FPN%20Stuff%20-%202011/Ink%20Review%20-%20Monteverde%20Turquoise/b24dd34a.jpg

PAPERS

 

This ink is unusually finicky about paper. (oh oh)

MvT did not run nearly as well as expected on the range of papers used.

Lovely papers:

• Crisp pure white.
• From samples shown, MvT seems to prefer rather absorbent papers: HPJ1124, Staples 20lb, Royal & maruman P143; but there is risk exposure to bleed- show-through if using a wet writer.

Trip-wire Papers:

• Papers with hard surfaces, especially those with very smooth texture. (Phooey!)

Tinted Papers:

• Hmm.
• I do think those would detract from the subtle colour & poise, so I'd not use such tints. (Even the natural tint of maruman and GL detract.)

Pre-Printed Papers:

• Forms, etc.
  • Possible, but in general Tuquoise seems a bit animated; I would reach for a Blue / BlBk. (Give the Lamy Green a rest.)

  [*]For charts & graphs:

  • Will provide a good expansion to the cool colours; and an excellent foil to lighter 'Blurples', (e.g. JH Bleu Myosotis), and actual Royal Blues, (e.g. MBRB).

Is high-end paper 'worth it'?

• Only if it has the preferred level of absorbency.

OTHER THAN INK

 

Presentation :

• 90 ml. bottle in a box.
• No HazMat warnings.

Country of origin:

• Austria.

Container:

• A squat narrow-shouldered cylindrical bottle with a base diameter of 60mm rising to a capped height of 70mm. The centred round opening is a comfy 26mm ∅.
• Ink level can be easily determined.
• Single tank, no sediment collector, no filling aid. 3x Bah!
• The flexible plastic screw cap has adequate grip, supplemented by knurling of the vertical side of the bottle to ensure a firm grasp.
• The cap seal seems to be some sort of plastic.
• Given the volume of ink, I would be tempted to decant this into a smaller bottle for routine use; topping-up along the way. (Ink pots soonest please Speedy!)
• The cap is not child-proof.

Box:

• 60x75x60mm
• Well coated light card stock.
• Exceptionally accurate swatch is achieved by box cut-outs revealing colour-coded micro-brochure. THUMB
• Ink name is not written on box! Tsk

Eco-Green:

• OK.
• All should be recyclable / benign.

Availability:

• A growing number of online and B&M retailers.

ETC.

 

Majik:

• No. MvT is just not sufficiently malleable or robust.

Personal Pen & Paper Pick:

• I am tempted by the M200 on the Royal, yet I prefer the coverage, lustre and poise generated by the Notorious Pink Safari on HPJ1124.
  

Yickity Yackity:

• Considering how enthusiastic I am about Turquoise inks, MvT is a bit of a let down. The colour itself is a bit new-ish; but the performance profile is unfortunate.
• It might be worth looking for a paper greater than 24 lb with good absorbency and low potential for bleed- show-through. Perhaps a 28 - 32 lb with some tooth, but not the extra-smooth HPU1132. (?)
• While there are not so many Turquoise inks, MvT is stuck in the peloton.
• Ah kushbaby, please stop me if I play with the abbreviation 'ITF' to derive a secondary unsanctioned meaning.

<-+-||-+:+-||-+:+-||-+:+=|÷|=+:+-||-+:+-||-+:+-||-+->

 

MATERIEL USED:

 

To be relevant to most members, I make an effort to use papers, pens & nibs that are readily available. Pens are those for which I paid $100 or less, and are factory stock - not customised.

 

Pens:

• Esterbrook J + 2551 posting XF steel nib. (The 9551 was otherwise engaged.)
• Pelikan M200 + g-p EF steel nib.
• Sheaffer Statesman + PdAg nib.
• TWSBI Diamond 530 + M steel nib.
• The Notorious Pink Safari + B steel nib.
• Parker Sonnet + stock Italic B 18K nib.(Paid >$100 new)

• For lines & labels: Pilot Plumix + R&K Scabiosa.

http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy116/Sandy1-1/FPN%20Stuff%20-%202011/Ink%20Review%20-%20Monteverde%20Turquoise/th_6477660c.jpg

 

On these papers:

• HPJ1124 24 lb. Laser Copy.
• Rhodia, Bloc 16 & 18.
• G Lalo, Verge de France, white.
• Royal, 25% cotton rag.
• Pulp. One-a-Day Calendar page.
• Staples 20lb. multi use.
• Clairefontaine Triomphe.
• maruman P143.

_________________________

 

IMAGES:

• Scans were made on an Epson V600 scanner; factory defaults were accepted.
• Figures shown were scanned at 72 - 150 dpi & 24 bit colour.
• HiRes Images linked were scanned at 300 dpi & 24 bit colour.
• Scans were not adjusted, so went straight to Photobouquet.

_________________________

 

Densitometer Readings (FWIW):

HPJ1124:

• Red 97
• Grn 189
• Blu 246
• Lum 181

_________________________

 

Fine Print:

• The accuracy and relevance of this Review depends in great part upon consistency and reliability of materiél used. Ink does not require labelling/notice to indicate (changes in) formulation, non-hazardous ingredients, batch ID, date of manufacture, etc. As always, YMMV, not only from materials, methods, environment, etc., but also due to differences between the stuff in the bottle I used, and that in bottle you may have.
• Also, I entrust readers to separate opinion from fact; to evaluate inferences and conclusions as to their merit; and to be amused by whatever tickles your fancy.

-30-

Edited February 24, 2011 by Sandy1

[corniche]

Hello Sandy,

 

Thanks for another detailed review.

 

The color of MVt is really pleasant to my eyes, it is a shame it seems to have so many performance issues; this gives me pause on whether or not I might crack and get a bottle. That said, as you probably know, my ultimate buzzword is L-U-B-R-I-C-A-T-I-O-N... I like inks that glide but still flush easy. You said MVt is "More than adequate" for lubrication. How does that compare with say, MV blue, which I have also used, or inks well established for lubrication such as Aurora black?

 

All the best,

 

Sean http://www.millan.net/minimations/smileys/ribbons/black2.gif

[Lovesink]

Amazing review, so much work and effort....

 

I look up lots of reviews like these (if available), I find them very helpful. These reviews are part of the reasons why I am so glad I found this site.

 

So thank you Sandy (and all the others).

[Sandy1]

Hello Sandy,

 

Thanks for another detailed review.

 

The color of MVt is really pleasant to my eyes, it is a shame it seems to have so many performance issues; this gives me pause on whether or not I might crack and get a bottle. That said, as you probably know, my ultimate buzzword is L-U-B-R-I-C-A-T-I-O-N... I like inks that glide but still flush easy. You said MVt is "More than adequate" for lubrication. How does that compare with say, MV blue, which I have also used, or inks well established for lubrication such as Aurora black?

 

All the best,

 

Sean http://www.millan.net/minimations/smileys/ribbons/black2.gif

Hi Sean,

 

You're welcome!

 

The MvT has two performance issues: the lack of water resistance, and its recalcitrance to perform well on smooth / hard-surfaced papers. I certainly did [over]emphasise the paper selection - simply because it is contrary to previous experience and expectations. As mentioned and shown, MvT will give very nice results on papers such as the penny-a-page HPJ1124 and even the Staples 20 lb.

 

When I started doing IRs, my primary goal was to show how an ink looks from several pens on several papers. A practitioner could then match their pen/s & paper/s to the ink and get a certain result. Along the way, it became apparent that some inks just couldn't give a fair result from certain pen+paper combos. Those results then represented (for me) the edge of the performance profile. e.g. Wet writer on an absorbent paper: Does that combo generate bleed- showthrough? feathering? Very often I will show results I consider 'outside the envelope', so the reader can make their own evaluation. (I am constrained by practical limits - less so by common sense.)

 

The lubrication on not-too-slick papers that give a fair result is in the Monteverde 'house style', so their Brown and Blue are good indicators. As I do not use Bk FP ink, I cannot compare to Aurora Black. I would say the lubrication is similar to Sheaffer Skrip Blue, Caran d'Ache Blue Sky, and less than Visconti Blue. So even if one does not use smooooth papers, the MvT will provide glide for your ride.

 

Bye,

Sandy1

[mholve]

Looks a lot like Waterman South Seas Blue - but a tad lighter.

[corniche]

Hello Sandy,

 

OK, thanks. I think I'm going to get a bottle of this ink, now that I know the lubrication is okay; it reminds me very much of an ink I used to use when I was a boy back in the mid to late '70s. They were ball point pens, (OH NO!), but the color is a spot-on match; I wish I could remember the brand... maybe Scripto or Lindy?...oh well. Thanks again, this review triggered some fond old memories for me of a far simpler time.

 

All the best,

 

Sean http://www.millan.net/minimations/smileys/ribbons/black2.gif

Edited February 24, 2011 by S. P. Colfer

[Sandy1]

Amazing review, so much work and effort....

 

I look up lots of reviews like these (if available), I find them very helpful. These reviews are part of the reasons why I am so glad I found this site.

 

So thank you Sandy (and all the others).

Hi,

 

You're welcome!

 

If you cannot find a Review for a certain ink, there is a Thread in this Forum where a person can request a Review, Comparison, or just a simple swab and a few lines of writing. (Original poetry will take longer to compose.)

 

There are many people who contribute / participate in this Forum, which makes it great! Many people, many inks, many pens & many papers!

 

Cheers!

S1

[Sandy1]

Looks a lot like Waterman South Seas Blue - but a tad lighter.

Comparison: https://www.fountainpennetwork.com/forum/index.php?/topic/186692-comparison-waterman-south-sea-blue-monteverde-turquoise/#entry1884462

[Parc Monceau]

Sandy,

 

I love everything about your ink reviews. I love the detailed work you put into them, the wealth of information you provide, and the way you express yourself. Simply put, your reviews are amazing.

 

This ink looks very pretty. Too bad there seem to be some problems with it.

[Sandy1]

Sandy,

 

I love everything about your ink reviews. I love the detailed work you put into them, the wealth of information you provide, and the way you express yourself. Simply put, your reviews are amazing.

 

This ink looks very pretty. Too bad there seem to be some problems with it.

Hi,

 

Thank-you for such a gracious complement!

 

This is indeed a very pretty ink; and I have come to favour Turquoise inks.

 

The problems with MvT are certainly not insurmountable, and perfectly acceptable results can be achieved without resorting to pricey or labourious work-arounds. I certainly will be using this ink quite often - but can it challenge the Skrip Turquoise for top billing?

 

Bye,

S1

[dpierrea]

Boy! So many caveats about this ink from the reviewer. I just bought a bottle today. It came down to this one and Pelikan Turquoise since the store had only those two in bottles. I must confess price-versus-quantity is what determined my choice in the end.

 

I love the colour of this ink, but it does seem to be a little finicky. With a Monteverde stub nib, it doesn't lay down as thick a line as I feel it should. On some papers, it's a little as if there was a thin layer of wax preventing the ink from getting into the fibers of the paper. In the end, it's more a matter of "feel" of the paper than one of colour.

 

I don't see feathering...

 

D

 

 

[Sandy1]

Boy! So many caveats about this ink from the reviewer. I just bought a bottle today. It came down to this one and Pelikan Turquoise since the store had only those two in bottles. I must confess price-versus-quantity is what determined my choice in the end.

 

I love the colour of this ink, but it does seem to be a little finicky. With a Monteverde stub nib, it doesn't lay down as thick a line as I feel it should. On some papers, it's a little as if there was a thin layer of wax preventing the ink from getting into the fibers of the paper. In the end, it's more a matter of "feel" of the paper than one of colour.

 

I don't see feathering...

 

D

 

 

 

Hi,

 

Many thanks for sharing your impressions of this ink.

 

I am quite 'loud' about any performance foibles I notice, and make an effort to put those into context of the Written Samples so dear readers can see for themselves. The things not apparent from the WSs, such as flow, lubricity, etc., are best put into context of other inks that I've reviewed, especially as I eschew numeric metrics for things that cannot be quantified.

 

I'm glad you share my enthusiasm for the appearance of the ink when it is matched with a suitable paper. I find that the Turquoise inks in the higher values (pale) are quite sensitive to the paper properties, such as base tint and amount of florescent optical brightening agents. (OMAS also offers a rather pale Turquoise.)

 

Bye,

S1

Edited March 4, 2014 by Sandy1