EFNIR: Koh-I-Noor Document Black

[LizEF]

Extra Fine Nib Ink Review: Koh-I-Noor Document Black

This is review #225 in my series. Here's the YouTube video:

Post-recording notes: This was a cartridge, gifted to me from a generous FPNer.  I used the Penmanship body in case the ink stains.  It did stain the plastic pipette I used to get the ink from the original, really long standard international cartridge into a Pilot cartridge, but then, you can't get anything inside one of my mini pipettes to rub it clean...  Cleaning was a bear.  Exposed areas come clean with rubbing, but in the section, where the cartridge fits, it would not come off.  I tried pen flush, a pipe cleaner, and the ultrasonic cleaner on the section and could not remove the stain from that area.

The ink has a distinct blue-leaning green color in it - enough that I also did chromatography.  It also likes to bubble / froth, so I'm guessing there's a flow or lubrication aid in it.

Errata: In the writing sample, "It's message paper," should not be in cursive. I just forgot to go back to printing.

Zoomed in photo (Text is just a bit too dark.)

Screenshot (Text a little too dark, not quite enough green.)

Scan of Completed Review (Very close. Possibly not enough green. Possibly a little to light.)

Absorbent Paper Close-up (top is puzzle paper like thick newsprint, bottom is old 20lb copy paper) (AP: Pretty close; CP: lacking green)

Line width (One of the lines used for dry time. Magnification is 100x. The grid is 100x100µm. The scale is 330µm, with eleven divisions of 30µm each. The line width for this ink is roughly 305µm. With 225 inks measured, the average line width is 295µm.)

Microscope image (100x. The dark color at the top left isn't quite right, but the main point was the cool wavy swirls in the light part.)

Microscope image (100x, cell phone through eyepiece. The color is too yellow - especially in the green portion - but that was the only way to show you that edge of bright blue, which is very close to the color my eyes saw.)

Microscope image (100x, cell phone through eyepiece. One corner of the slide. Brains and a maze. The dark lines in the maze had a hint of the coppery sheen (to my eyes). The tealish color at the top is close to the undertone of this ink.)

Water Test Results (The teal shade on the "written ju" text smear is more obvious to my eyes.)

Other (Left is a close-up photo, right is a scan. My eyes see a hint of bright blue along with the grey-green.)

Previous Review: Colorverse Sea of Tranquillity.

Images also available on Instagram: @zilxodarap.

Want to influence the inky sequence? Take the "next ink" poll.

View a list of my inks, complete with review results in a google sheet.

Need to catch up on The Adventures of Quin and Makhabesh? Find the whole story here.

Hope you enjoy. Comments appreciated!

[InesF]

Thank you @LizEF for the story and for the many photos. Especially the first microscopy image is stunning - looks fractal. Maybe this ink should be called fractal black? 

 

The story snip is a bit of a riddle, today. Was the first page coated with carbon, like a carbon paper? But functioning at distance? Hmm. 🤫 Don't worry, this riddle let me wait nail-biting for next weeks sequel! 👍

[LizEF]

6 minutes ago, InesF said:

Thank you @LizEF for the story and for the many photos. Especially the first microscopy image is stunning - looks fractal. Maybe this ink should be called fractal black? 

You're very welcome!  Fractal Black would certainly be a more interesting name.

 

7 minutes ago, InesF said:

The story snip is a bit of a riddle, today. Was the first page coated with carbon, like a carbon paper? But functioning at distance? Hmm. 🤫 

This is the joy of magic - we don't have to explain further!  

 

7 minutes ago, InesF said:

Don't worry, this riddle let me wait nail-biting for next weeks sequel! 👍

[yazeh]

Beautiful review as usual

Those microscopic images are spectacular

Despite this ink being and ISO certified ink, I find their claims dubious the ink compared to some of Noodler's that don't budge is not really document. 

BTW the blue also has a nice sheen apparently. 

One thing is to be said about these inks, they are dirt cheap!

I'm looking forward to meet the parents moment between Quin's "friends" and Mom & Pop 🤣

[LizEF]

5 minutes ago, yazeh said:

Beautiful review as usual

Thank you!

 

5 minutes ago, yazeh said:

Those microscopic images are spectacular

  Yeah, enjoyed this one under the scope.

 

6 minutes ago, yazeh said:

Despite this ink being and ISO certified ink, I find their claims dubious the ink compared to some of Noodler's that don't budge is not really document. 

Yeah, no idea on "the rules", but if you're just writing, and want your writing to stand up to a casual attack by water, it seems good enough.

 

7 minutes ago, yazeh said:

BTW the blue also has a nice sheen apparently. 

One thing is to be said about these inks, they are dirt cheap!

Yes, definitely *very* affordable.  If it had had a finer line, I would have picked it for my aunt.  As it is, she'll have to stick with Lamy Black.

 

8 minutes ago, yazeh said:

I'm looking forward to meet the parents moment between Quin's "friends" and Mom & Pop 🤣

[Sailor Kenshin]

The Koh-I-Noor name is familiar, 'cause they also make other art supplies, and this is an intriguing sorta-black.  I'm hesitating at the hard-to-clean aspect.

 

The micros look brain-y.  Or polar-y.  Polar brains?  

 

But O Noz!  😱 Sworn revenge?  Quin's poor Dad!  Will they get there in time?  

@LizEF, you do ink reviews like no other.  I look forward to Tuesdays!  🥰

 

[Lithium466]

Thank you for the review, very interesting ink!

 

As it stands, I recently received a bottle of KIN document blue, but didn't get to try it yet.

 

There's something I'm wondering about the line width part of your review, it it possible that the pen you're using is wearing out and that more recent reviews are showing a wider line width than when you started because of that? I didn't do a serious comparison, just been reading some of your reviews and thought I had noticed a trend (the trend could also be in the inks!).

[txomsy]

The color in the ink bottles I have/had is -in my humble opinion- better described as a dark grey with murky green undertones. The greenish part is normally not seen unless it spreads or feathers. I have to say I love this kind of grey, but not so much the greenish component.

 

The blue is an interesting color, teal blue as it starts, and if you let the ink oxidize in the cartridge/pen, it can become an intense dark blue. But whichever, it retains the color once laid on paper. Gorgeous (for me) in any case, but the blue tends to stick like crazy. It reminds me of Baystate Blue in its tendency to stain everything, even a porcelain sink. And like BSB, it washes out clear with bleach.

 

But I haven't had that much trouble cleaning the black, which generally washes out with little fuss for me.

 

OTOH this is a wet ink in that it may spread farther than usual, so my experience matches your bubbles: it may have an extra of surfactants.

 

All in all, an amazing review as usual. Thank you so very much, @LizEF

[LizEF]

27 minutes ago, Sailor Kenshin said:

The Koh-I-Noor name is familiar, 'cause they also make other art supplies, and this is an intriguing sorta-black.  I'm hesitating at the hard-to-clean aspect.

@yazeh did a review of this ink, not too long ago.  And yes, they do make lots of stuff.  I do find this a more interesting black than most, and I think if your pen is not a demonstrator, it wouldn't be as hard to clean because you wouldn't notice staining in hard-to-reach places.

 

29 minutes ago, Sailor Kenshin said:

The micros look brain-y.  Or polar-y.  Polar brains?  

  When I went looking, in response to the Noodler's Black threads, I discovered that this "brain-y" appearance is fairly common to permanent inks.  Hmm.

 

30 minutes ago, Sailor Kenshin said:

But O Noz!  😱 Sworn revenge?  Quin's poor Dad!  Will they get there in time?  

 

 

30 minutes ago, Sailor Kenshin said:

@LizEF, you do ink reviews like no other.  I look forward to Tuesdays!  🥰

Thank you!

[LizEF]

25 minutes ago, Lithium466 said:

Thank you for the review, very interesting ink!

You're very welcome!

 

26 minutes ago, Lithium466 said:

As it stands, I recently received a bottle of KIN document blue, but didn't get to try it yet.

Hope you enjoy it!

 

26 minutes ago, Lithium466 said:

There's something I'm wondering about the line width part of your review, it it possible that the pen you're using is wearing out and that more recent reviews are showing a wider line width than when you started because of that? I didn't do a serious comparison, just been reading some of your reviews and thought I had noticed a trend (the trend could also be in the inks!).

Yes, it is possible.  I suspect it's more likely that the pen is flowing wetter rather than that the nib tip is wearing out:

 

a) if anything, I'm using a lighter hand than ever before, and I don't use coarse papers beyond the writing sample you see on the cheaper papers.

b) I do swap the nib and feed between pens, which in theory leaves it looser in the section, which would make it flow wetter

c) I do on occasion floss glitter out of the tines (or floss the tines when an ink dries too quickly on the nib), and though I'm using a super-thin sheet of metal (thinner than the brass sheets sold for nib-tuning), it's probable this has an effect.

 

However, I'm not entirely convinced that it's not just a fluke.  I use An Ink Guy on YouTube to check my wetness rating whenever possible, and I think it's just that I've gotten to some wet and / or well-lubricated inks, which are certain to write wider lines.  For example, spoiler alert!, ink #227 (2 away from today's) is the second-narrowest line ever, at 223µm!  Also, I don't have to go back that far (to the early 200s) to see quite a few with below-average line widths (and all had a "sum" of below-average flow and lubrication, making the line width consistent with those attributes).

 

So, it's uncertain, but I think it's still better to stick with the same nib and feed that I started with.  I do have two other Prera bodies (one entirely unused, bought just for this purpose), and I may at some point decide to swap the nib and feed into one of those in hopes it gives a tighter section, but the "wear" would just resume as I prefer not to put staining inks in the main review pen - if I do, I would lose the ability to evaluate how easily the ink cleans...  (First world problems! )  Anywho, I'm aware of the risk and monitoring things, FWIW.

[LizEF]

33 minutes ago, txomsy said:

The color in the ink bottles I have/had is -in my humble opinion- better described as a dark grey with murky green undertones. The greenish part is normally not seen unless it spreads or feathers. I have to say I love this kind of grey, but not so much the greenish component.

Yes, good description.  The color surprised me enough to "force" me to do the chroma.  And I much prefer grey with undertones to straight black.

 

36 minutes ago, txomsy said:

The blue is an interesting color, teal blue as it starts, and if you let the ink oxidize in the cartridge/pen, it can become an intense dark blue. But whichever, it retains the color once laid on paper. Gorgeous (for me) in any case, but the blue tends to stick like crazy. It reminds me of Baystate Blue in its tendency to stain everything, even a porcelain sink. And like BSB, it washes out clear with bleach.

Thanks for the warning!  I don't have the blue, but if ever I get it, I'll try to remember the bleach trick - I didn't think to try that on the section in question - silly me.

 

38 minutes ago, txomsy said:

But I haven't had that much trouble cleaning the black, which generally washes out with little fuss for me.

I think the issue here is that Pilot sections have that tab to hold the cartridge / converter, and there's a lot of tight space between it and the wall of the section where ink will be prone to dry between the tab and the cartridge / converter and then you really can't get anything in behind the tab to rub the dried ink off.  That plastic is also probably not quite as well polished as it could be, and the combination of all that makes it more prone to staining / more difficult to clean.  (Even a pipe cleaner is hard to get safely in there because of the wire at the center of said pipe cleaner and the softness of the rest of it...)

 

40 minutes ago, txomsy said:

OTOH this is a wet ink in that it may spread farther than usual, so my experience matches your bubbles: it may have an extra of surfactants.

 

41 minutes ago, txomsy said:

All in all, an amazing review as usual. Thank you so very much, @LizEF

Thank you!  And you're most welcome!

[Lithium466]

On 3/21/2023 at 4:56 PM, LizEF said:

So, it's uncertain, but I think it's still better to stick with the same nib and feed that I started with. Anywho, I'm aware of the risk and monitoring things, FWIW.

I somehow had missed your answer, sorry about that.

 

Thank you for the detailed answer, I see you put a lot of thought into your testings!

I still didn't try the KIN document blue...in my defense, I received two iron gall inks to try 😇

[LizEF]

16 minutes ago, Lithium466 said:

I somehow had missed your answer, sorry about that.

No worries.

 

16 minutes ago, Lithium466 said:

Thank you for the detailed answer, I see you put a lot of thought into your testings!

You're very welcome!  I try to keep things consistent, at least - only way a lot of the data has meaning.

 

17 minutes ago, Lithium466 said:

 

I still didn't try the KIN document blue...in my defense, I received two iron gall inks to try 😇

I totally understand.  I still haven't tried out my Jinhao cartridges on my Karas Pen Co Fountain K Mini - and I think it's been months since I started down that road...  So many inks, so many pens, so little time...

[Lithium466]

I have been liking the Jinhao "standard" cartridges, except they don't fit my Kaco Edge, and not so well my Rotring Artpen. I encourage you to try them! I didn't measure but they sure seem to have a bigger capacity than a standard international cartridge.
 

And now, first world Saturday problem, which pen to try the KIN Document ink in?

[LizEF]

1 hour ago, Lithium466 said:

I have been liking the Jinhao "standard" cartridges, except they don't fit my Kaco Edge, and not so well my Rotring Artpen. I encourage you to try them! I didn't measure but they sure seem to have a bigger capacity than a standard international cartridge.

Thanks.  Yes, their larger apparent capacity is why I got them.  I'll measure when I get around to trying one - right now I still have too many pens inked.

 

1 hour ago, Lithium466 said:

And now, first world Saturday problem, which pen to try the KIN Document ink in?

  Only in the review pen - Pilot Penmanship, EF.

[txomsy]

Excuse me for resurrecting and old, long-dead thread, and worse, for being off-topic.

 

I was given a Cross FP a couple of years ago, with a medium nib, which I have decided to keep at work for note taking. Of note, I do also keep at work a bottle of KIN Document black and one of KIN Document Blue for refillings.

 

Lately I have been refilling the pen with KIN Document Black, without paying much attention. It is an ISO-certified document ink (likely one of the firsts) that does quite well for a work environment and that I always had used with an F/EF nibbed pen.

 

Now, the interesting -and off-topic- part is that on this medium nib it writes with a noticeable, apparently red, sheen on coated paper. The sheen seems to mute down somewhat after a few days. I hadn't noticed it earlier with an EF/F nib on cheap/absorbent (or even good) paper.

 

I have revised old notebooks (cheap Tiger ones, with different behavior on different pages and sides of the page) and, certainly, all the notes were with EF nib, and most in KIN Doc Blue, but if one looks hard on the scarce EF notes in KIN Doc blue, one may sort of guess an infimum tendency to sheen (or maybe it is that I am expecting it).

 

It might also be that the bottle is old (~8 years) and as it empties, maybe with time the ink reacts with air and changes (as seems to do KIN Doc blue).

 

So, there. Although not EF, has anybody else noticed this tendency of KIN Doc Black to red sheen on medium to broad nibs?

 

[LizEF]

5 hours ago, txomsy said:

I hadn't noticed it earlier with an EF/F nib on cheap/absorbent (or even good) paper.

Not surprising.  My Cross Wanderlust and the Metropolis I got from my aunt, are both wet writers.  Perhaps your Cross M is also a fairly wet writer, which would also contribute to sheen.

 

5 hours ago, txomsy said:

So, there. Although not EF, has anybody else noticed this tendency of KIN Doc Black to red sheen on medium to broad nibs?

Will be interested to learn if others have seen it.  I can't remember if I still have some of this, but I could always drip a drop on some paper and see if it sheens.

[Signum1]

Thanks for the review of this Indian ink.  I never heard of this brand.  The zoomed in photo.  The ink appears to be written on glass because the dots on the paper are out-of-focus.  Hmmm.... the drying time method is certainly different than my approach.  You're fast forwarding the video, so hard to say whether you actually waited 20 seconds before running your finger across the ink.  You must be a laboratory technician to have access to the machineries that provide really close up images of the ink at the micrometer level.

 

If you don't mind me asking, how much time does it takes to make the video?  From set-up to posting the video.

 

All in all, thanks for taking the time to make this excellent ink review.

[LizEF]

27 minutes ago, Signum1 said:

Thanks for the review of this Indian ink.

You're very welcome!  But isn't the company Czech?  Maybe they got bought by an Indian company?  I don't pay much attention to these things... (Or, if you mean "India ink" - this isn't.)

 

33 minutes ago, Signum1 said:

The zoomed in photo.  The ink appears to be written on glass because the dots on the paper are out-of-focus.

Strange, isn't it?  I don't know if it's because I'm using a microscope and microscopes have a ridiculously shallow depth of field, or if it's illusion somehow.  Also, on one side of Rhodia pads, the dots are "fuzzier" than on the other.

 

34 minutes ago, Signum1 said:

You're fast forwarding the video, so hard to say whether you actually waited 20 seconds before running your finger across the ink.

  I did.  When I have longer intervals I cut out the time in between marks and add a "ripple" transition between clips - didn't figure anyone would want to sit and stare at the dry test in real time - it's tedious enough to do it in real time - watching it would put you to sleep!

 

36 minutes ago, Signum1 said:

You must be a laboratory technician to have access to the machineries that provide really close up images of the ink at the micrometer level.

Nope, just one of those strange people who decided one day I needed a microscope.   It sat mostly unused until I decided to use it for ink-on-slides and when I discovered the software had calibration that would let me measure line width, I was hooked!  (The zoom photo is a WiFi microscope - costs ~$40 - and not as good as the basic lab microscope used for the smear and line width.)

 

38 minutes ago, Signum1 said:

If you don't mind me asking, how much time does it takes to make the video?  From set-up to posting the video.

Not at all.  Technically, I don't know...  TL,DR: all day Tuesday, probably around 5 hours on average (for the video + still images), but probably more like 8-10 hours including all other review-specific activities done also on other days.

 

More than you wanted to know (feel free not to read it):

There isn't much setup.  I have a desk and a room set aside with the lights in a fixed position (taped in place), and a jig affixed to a hutch over the desk.  All I have to do is turn the phone on, attach the external mic, drop the phone in the jig, tape the paper in place, get the comparison cards arranged, and start recording.  Recording and the WiFi microscope photos all happen there at the desk.  Scanning and real microscope are at my main desk, where I also process the video on my computer.  Nothing has to be dragged out, set up, taken down, and put away - it stays set up all the time.  If that weren't possible, I likely wouldn't be doing this!

 

The actual recording usually takes around 15-25 minutes, depending on how many comparisons I do, whether I water test, etc.  The editing of the video itself takes around 1-2 hours.  The hard part is color-correcting the photos and scan.  Sometimes that's just fixing the white balance so the paper looks white (the one and only time I love black inks ), other times, I play around with other settings trying to get the color on screen to look like what my eyes see.  Sometimes that works, sometimes not.  So, this process can take anywhere from maybe 20 minutes to another couple of hours.  It used to be faster when I could do it all in sequence without interruptions, but then I got a kitten. He interrupts me constantly when he's awake, and there's no telling when he'll go to sleep so I can record...  So, I dedicate my entire Tuesday to posting, recording, and processing my reviews; also cleaning the pen, letting it dry, and re-inking, making the slide and swatch card.

 

I have a database into which I enter notes about each photo, post-recording notes, story text, and the data that appears in my shared spreadsheet.  Code in said database imports and exports information to automate repetitious tasks.   (Honestly, I have no idea how the rest of the world can tolerate mortality without being able to create their own database and write their own code. )

 

I upload the video to YouTube as soon as it's processed and schedule when it goes public (so that posting reviews is faster and I'm sure it's going to work on the day it goes public).  Right now, I'm five weeks ahead of what you see (that is, there are 5 videos queued to publish between now and 02 April).  Soon I'll only be 4 weeks ahead as there was a problem with this week's ink and I'll start over on Tuesday with a new sample (assuming it arrives on schedule), so no video will be recorded this coming Tuesday.  (That's why I keep a back-log - to cover problems.)

 

During the week, I use my pen for things I would do anyway, so the only review-related tasks are writing on the absorbent and copy paper, figuring out the dry time, selecting comparison cards, writing the story, finding quotes...  The slide is cleaned on Monday, usually.

 

Posting reviews (in 5 places: YouTube, Instagram, FPN, FPGeeks, reddit r/fountainpens; plus the story on my website) only takes about 15-20 minutes because I just have to copy and paste from a text file my code writes.   And I get it all ready Monday night so I only have to finish the job on Tuesday morning after the video goes live.

 

53 minutes ago, Signum1 said:

All in all, thanks for taking the time to make this excellent ink review.

You're very welcome!  And thanks!

[Signum1]

2 hours ago, LizEF said:

You're very welcome!  But isn't the company Czech?  Maybe they got bought by an Indian company?  I don't pay much attention to these things... (Or, if you mean "India ink" - this isn't.)

My apologies.  I didn't read carefully.  Koh-I-Noor is indeed a company from Czech Republic.

 

2 hours ago, LizEF said:

 

Strange, isn't it?  I don't know if it's because I'm using a microscope and microscopes have a ridiculously shallow depth of field, or if it's illusion somehow.  Also, on one side of Rhodia pads, the dots are "fuzzier" than on the other.

 

  I did.  When I have longer intervals I cut out the time in between marks and add a "ripple" transition between clips - didn't figure anyone would want to sit and stare at the dry test in real time - it's tedious enough to do it in real time - watching it would put you to sleep!

 

Nope, just one of those strange people who decided one day I needed a microscope.   It sat mostly unused until I decided to use it for ink-on-slides and when I discovered the software had calibration that would let me measure line width, I was hooked!  (The zoom photo is a WiFi microscope - costs ~$40 - and not as good as the basic lab microscope used for the smear and line width.)

I can understand the microscopes as a hobby or toy for yourself. I had neighbours with a collection of power tools for their next "project." LoL...

 

2 hours ago, LizEF said:

 

Not at all.  Technically, I don't know...  TL,DR: all day Tuesday, probably around 5 hours on average (for the video + still images), but probably more like 8-10 hours including all other review-specific activities done also on other days.

 

More than you wanted to know (feel free not to read it):

There isn't much setup.  I have a desk and a room set aside with the lights in a fixed position (taped in place), and a jig affixed to a hutch over the desk.  All I have to do is turn the phone on, attach the external mic, drop the phone in the jig, tape the paper in place, get the comparison cards arranged, and start recording.  Recording and the WiFi microscope photos all happen there at the desk.  Scanning and real microscope are at my main desk, where I also process the video on my computer.  Nothing has to be dragged out, set up, taken down, and put away - it stays set up all the time.  If that weren't possible, I likely wouldn't be doing this!

 

I'm familiar with this overhead camera set-up.  I'd seen the videos on YouTube describing this overhead camera set-up. You can use this set-up for other handheld size product for product reviews.  Just walk around your home to get ideas for product reviews.

 

2 hours ago, LizEF said:

 

 

The actual recording usually takes around 15-25 minutes, depending on how many comparisons I do, whether I water test, etc.  The editing of the video itself takes around 1-2 hours.  The hard part is color-correcting the photos and scan.  Sometimes that's just fixing the white balance so the paper looks white (the one and only time I love black inks ), other times, I play around with other settings trying to get the color on screen to look like what my eyes see.  Sometimes that works, sometimes not.  So, this process can take anywhere from maybe 20 minutes to another couple of hours.  It used to be faster when I could do it all in sequence without interruptions, but then I got a kitten. He interrupts me constantly when he's awake, and there's no telling when he'll go to sleep so I can record...  So, I dedicate my entire Tuesday to posting, recording, and processing my reviews; also cleaning the pen, letting it dry, and re-inking, making the slide and swatch card.

 

I have a database into which I enter notes about each photo, post-recording notes, story text, and the data that appears in my shared spreadsheet.  Code in said database imports and exports information to automate repetitious tasks.   (Honestly, I have no idea how the rest of the world can tolerate mortality without being able to create their own database and write their own code. )

 

You're lucky that you are living in a period of time where you can create your own database and write your own html code. 

 

2 hours ago, LizEF said:

I upload the video to YouTube as soon as it's processed and schedule when it goes public (so that posting reviews is faster and I'm sure it's going to work on the day it goes public).  Right now, I'm five weeks ahead of what you see (that is, there are 5 videos queued to publish between now and 02 April).  Soon I'll only be 4 weeks ahead as there was a problem with this week's ink and I'll start over on Tuesday with a new sample (assuming it arrives on schedule), so no video will be recorded this coming Tuesday.  (That's why I keep a back-log - to cover problems.)

 

During the week, I use my pen for things I would do anyway, so the only review-related tasks are writing on the absorbent and copy paper, figuring out the dry time, selecting comparison cards, writing the story, finding quotes...  The slide is cleaned on Monday, usually.

 

Posting reviews (in 5 places: YouTube, Instagram, FPN, FPGeeks, reddit r/fountainpens; plus the story on my website) only takes about 15-20 minutes because I just have to copy and paste from a text file my code writes.   And I get it all ready Monday night so I only have to finish the job on Tuesday morning after the video goes live.

 

You're very welcome!  And thanks!

Thanks for sharing your experience about making videos.  I was wondering about the effort and time involved in making a video.