Is Noodlers Black pigmented or dye-based?

[TSherbs]

On 7/11/2023 at 2:36 PM, XYZZY said:

I was just reading about nib creep on Richard Binder's site (http://www.richardspens.com/ref/ttp/creeps.htm) and ran across a statement that reminded me of this thread.  Apparently he has known the answer to this question for ages.  Emphasis added by me:

 

 

 

I'm only seeing this now (don't know why, really)....Thanks for this info. Interesting....

[LizEF]

On 3/13/2023 at 12:40 PM, LizEF said:

This appearance is similar to pigmented inks, but I cannot say that dye cannot do this.

  

 I found (more like re-found) some info that may solve the issue of why Noodler's Black seems like a pigment ink (e.g. under the microscope) but is not a pigment ink.  This is from Richard Binder's site:

Quote

Noodler’s “bulletproof” inks contain a component that causes the dye in the ink to bond chemically with the paper. Unfortunately, this bonding agent is particulate, not in solution. It settles, and you have to shake the bottle to disperse it when filling a pen. It also settles in the pen, and it can cause clogs.

So, it seems that the particulate appearance in microscope images is the bonding agent, not a pigment.  Now we know.

[yazeh]

1 hour ago, LizEF said:

  

 I found (more like re-found) some info that may solve the issue of why Noodler's Black seems like a pigment ink (e.g. under the microscope) but is not a pigment ink.  This is from Richard Binder's site:

So, it seems that the particulate appearance in microscope images is the bonding agent, not a pigment.  Now we know.

Thanks for posting this. I just spend  a few minutes asking ChatGPT it came up with the same conclusion.

Mystery solved. 🙏

[LizEF]

2 hours ago, yazeh said:

Thanks for posting this. I just spend  a few minutes asking ChatGPT it came up with the same conclusion.

Mystery solved. 🙏

You're welcome!    Clearly ChatGPT is reading my mind...

[Tommaso Santojanni]

On 3/15/2023 at 6:09 PM, TSherbs said:

many even non-permanent inks do NOT "rinse clean" from hands, clothing, other fabrics and surfaces, etc. 

OT - regarding vintage pens and other (non-Noodler’s) inks.
 

For those of us still finding our feet in this inky world, might someone kindly clarify whether these other inks (i.e., not Noodler’s) are likewise considered as allegedly dangerous as Noodler’s Black? And if so, how is the ordinary, ink-incompetent enthusiast to make a safe and informed choice when it comes to using inks in vintage pens?

 

On 3/17/2023 at 1:34 AM, amberleadavis said:

You are all so amazing. Thank you for the hard work and images!

+1   Thank you to all who contributed to this wonderfully geeky and very interesting thread. It truly is what you Brits so aptly call a "rabbit hole"!

[LizEF]

FWIW, here are the details of what ChatGPT had to say.  Note that it is not a scientist and it has been known to make up nonsense.  But this appears to be a good summation of the information people have posted out there on the interwebs:

Quote

 

🧪 Is Noodler’s Black pigment-based or dye-based?

→ Dye-based.

Multiple independent chromatography tests confirm it behaves like a dye — it fully dissolves in water and spreads on filter paper. It does not behave like a pigment ink, which would leave particulate matter or show insolubility.

 

---

 

🧫 What about the sediment in the bottle?

Some users mistake the black residue or settling for pigment, but it’s far more likely to be dye precipitate or fixative byproduct.

True pigment inks (like Platinum Carbon Black) leave obvious crusts or flocculates — that’s not observed here.

 

---

 

🧬 Has it been scientifically tested?

 

This is where things get definitive:

 

No FTIR (Fourier-Transform Infrared Spectroscopy) has been performed or published to confirm if any actual chemical bonding with cellulose occurs.

 

No SEM (Scanning Electron Microscopy) has been done to check for pigment particles or crystal structure.

 

No ISO or ASTM archival certifications exist for Noodler’s Black (e.g., ISO 11798 or ASTM D4303).

 

 

The ink is marketed as “Bulletproof,” meaning waterproof and tamper-resistant on cellulose paper, but there’s no independent laboratory validation of the claimed bonding mechanism.

 

[Tommaso Santojanni]

9 hours ago, LizEF said:

FWIW, here are the details of what ChatGPT had to say.  Note that it is not a scientist and it has been known to make up nonsense.  But this appears to be a good summation of the information people have posted out there on the interwebs:

 

 

…if I may add my modest twopence of ignorance, ask ChatGPT to list its sources. You'll discover that it cites this very thread as the basis for its replies 🤷‍♂️

 

 

I wouldn’t trust ChatGPT with any degree of certainty on this matter, or much else.

 

[yazeh]

3 hours ago, Tommaso Santojanni said:

 

…if I may add my modest twopence of ignorance, ask ChatGPT to list its sources. You'll discover that it cites this very thread as the basis for its replies 🤷‍♂️

 

 

I wouldn’t trust ChatGPT with any degree of certainty on this matter, or much else.

 

I was the one who sent the information to @LizEF with the caveats that one has to take into consideration. Here is the response from ChatGPT: 

 

Yes — I ran a deep search through my connected document and research tools, looking specifically for:

• Scientific papers

• Published chromatography data

• Lab reports

• Conservation chemistry documents

• Peer-reviewed archival ink studies

Here’s the key outcome:

❌ There are no published scientific or conservation lab studies on Noodler’s Black in the scientific literature (as of July 2025).
That includes: no FTIR, no SEM, no ISO archival certification, and no academic ink chemistry paper covering it.

---

✅ So where does this information come from?

I built the answer from triangulated, verifiable sources, including:

1. Independent Chromatography Tests

• Done by respected users on Fountain Pen Network, Reddit, FPGeeks

• Show Noodler’s Black separating like a single dye component, not a particle-based pigment ink

• Examples:

  • FPN user amberleadavis

  • Ink tests by Karin H. and dcwaites

2. Statements by Nathan Tardif (Creator)

• FPN forum posts, Reddit AMAs (~2014), Goulet Pen interviews

• Tardif consistently calls Noodler’s Black a “dye-based, bulletproof ink”

• He never claims it is pigment-based and distinguishes it from his other ink types

3. Known Chemistry of Pigment vs Dye Inks

• Pigment inks contain micronized insoluble particles

• These particles are visible under SEM and behave differently on chromatography

• Pigment inks (like Platinum Carbon Black or De Atramentis Document) require:

  • Particle stabilization (e.g., surfactants)

  • Certification for lightfastness and permanence

• Noodler’s Black shows none of these properties

4. Absence of Scientific Literature

• I ran 5 full deep searches:

  • "Chemical composition of Noodler's Black ink"

  • "Scientific analysis of fountain pen ink permanence"

  • "Chromatography or microscopy of Noodler's inks"

  • "Is Noodler's Black pigment or dye based"

  • "Scientific analysis of Noodler's Bulletproof Black"

• No academic databases, journals, or ink conservation articles return results for Noodler’s Black

---

🧾 Conclusion on Sources

My answer is based on:

• Absence of scientific lab testing

• Confirmed chromatography behavior

• Publicly stated claims by the manufacturer

• Established chemical knowledge of how dyes vs pigments behave

It’s the best possible synthesis in the absence of lab data. If a lab were to run FTIR or SEM on Noodler’s Black tomorrow, the discussion could shift — but as of now, all evidence points to it being dye-based, with no pigment content, and no third-party archival verification.

 

[Tommaso Santojanni]

8 minutes ago, yazeh said:

I was the one who sent the information to @LizEF with the caveats that one has to take into consideration. Here is the response from ChatGPT: 

 

 

Yes — I ran a deep search through my connected document and research tools, looking specifically for:

• Scientific papers

• Published chromatography data

• Lab reports

• Conservation chemistry documents

• Peer-reviewed archival ink studies

Here’s the key outcome:

❌ There are no published scientific or conservation lab studies on Noodler’s Black in the scientific literature (as of July 2025).
That includes: no FTIR, no SEM, no ISO archival certification, and no academic ink chemistry paper covering it.

---

✅ So where does this information come from?

I built the answer from triangulated, verifiable sources, including:

1. Independent Chromatography Tests

• Done by respected users on Fountain Pen Network, Reddit, FPGeeks

• Show Noodler’s Black separating like a single dye component, not a particle-based pigment ink

• Examples:

  • FPN user amberleadavis

  • Ink tests by Karin H. and dcwaites

2. Statements by Nathan Tardif (Creator)

• FPN forum posts, Reddit AMAs (~2014), Goulet Pen interviews

• Tardif consistently calls Noodler’s Black a “dye-based, bulletproof ink”

• He never claims it is pigment-based and distinguishes it from his other ink types

3. Known Chemistry of Pigment vs Dye Inks

• Pigment inks contain micronized insoluble particles

• These particles are visible under SEM and behave differently on chromatography

• Pigment inks (like Platinum Carbon Black or De Atramentis Document) require:

  • Particle stabilization (e.g., surfactants)

  • Certification for lightfastness and permanence

• Noodler’s Black shows none of these properties

4. Absence of Scientific Literature

• I ran 5 full deep searches:

  • "Chemical composition of Noodler's Black ink"

  • "Scientific analysis of fountain pen ink permanence"

  • "Chromatography or microscopy of Noodler's inks"

  • "Is Noodler's Black pigment or dye based"

  • "Scientific analysis of Noodler's Bulletproof Black"

• No academic databases, journals, or ink conservation articles return results for Noodler’s Black

---

🧾 Conclusion on Sources

My answer is based on:

• Absence of scientific lab testing

• Confirmed chromatography behavior

• Publicly stated claims by the manufacturer

• Established chemical knowledge of how dyes vs pigments behave

It’s the best possible synthesis in the absence of lab data. If a lab were to run FTIR or SEM on Noodler’s Black tomorrow, the discussion could shift — but as of now, all evidence points to it being dye-based, with no pigment content, and no third-party archival verification.

 

Apology, English is not my first language and I never implied any rebuke or retort. I only meant to beware of ChatGPT. Please do accept my apologies 🙏

 

[yazeh]

@Tommaso Santojanni you were right to point it out.  It's also important to know the sources. This way, people can make up their minds. In my experience, for precise information, one needs to run the Deep Search; otherwise, it skims over stuff.. I actually used it to see how it fares out for black ink suggestions, for you, in the other thread, and the suggestions were somewhat confusing.  

[TSherbs]

@yazeh very interesting 

[Claes]

Noodler's Black is a peculiar one. After a long time being left untouched, the ink separates into two layers: a reddish see-through layer on top, and a black layer of flocculants at the bottom. Shaking the bottle will not make the ink usable again; the two layers refuse to reunite.

 

Have fun!
Claes in Lund, Sweden

 

[Tommaso Santojanni]

1 hour ago, yazeh said:

In my experience, for precise information, one needs to run the Deep Search

I tested deep search for OMAS pen history and it delivered vary evident errors in both years and model specifications. It even included a model not crafted by OMAS ...
 

 

4 minutes ago, Claes said:

Noodler's Black is a peculiar one. After a long time being left untouched, the ink separates into two layers: a reddish see-through layer on top, and a black layer of flocculants at the bottom. Shaking the bottle will not make the ink usable again; the two layers refuse to reunite.

 

Have fun!
Claes in Lund, Sweden

 

This is exceedingly interesting ...
 

[LizEF]

7 hours ago, Tommaso Santojanni said:

…if I may add my modest twopence of ignorance, ask ChatGPT to list its sources. You'll discover that it cites this very thread as the basis for its replies 🤷‍♂️

As I said,

17 hours ago, LizEF said:

this appears to be a good summation of the information people have posted out there on the interwebs

[LizEF]

3 hours ago, Tommaso Santojanni said:

I only meant to beware of ChatGPT.

As I also said:

17 hours ago, LizEF said:

what ChatGPT had to say.  Note that it is not a scientist and it has been known to make up nonsense. 

[yazeh]

3 hours ago, TSherbs said:

@yazeh very interesting 

Thanks! It's a very interesting tool. It acts like a lazy, brilliant kid who does the least amount of work, unless you question it, challenge it, and force it to go deeper. Obviously, if you pay, it'll do more work. I'm sure you had a lot of students like that.  

 

Doing a Deep Search as @Tommaso Santojanni mentioned, doesn't mean that it will have the correct information and thus reasoning. 

In English, it can be stuffy and argumentative, and has a penchant for em-dashes, for example. It is ironic how Grammarly and ChatGPT correct each other. It often amuses me when they correct native speakers. As a non-native speaker, I tend to use French-style sentence structures, which often feature long sentences where the verb is placed at the end. I also use a lot of ambivalence in describing an emotion.  Apparently, English is a direct language. Maybe it is true for some types of American English (though that's debatable) but British English is the most indirect way of speaking English. The Scots are very direct, so are Aussies, to name a few. 

 

Personally, I enjoy reading/ or hearing different styles of English, different accents. At one time, I used to read a lot of screenplays, and the least thing on my mind was grammar and spelling. As long as the story worked, I was fine with it. But that's a screenplay. You never hear the scenes, only the dialogue.  

[TSherbs]

5 hours ago, Claes said:

Noodler's Black is a peculiar one. After a long time being left untouched, the ink separates into two layers: a reddish see-through layer on top, and a black layer of flocculants at the bottom. Shaking the bottle will not make the ink usable again; the two layers refuse to reunite.

 

Have fun!
Claes in Lund, Sweden

 

 

"flocculant" is a new word for me....thanks for that!