crazy people & ink (esp Pelikans)
Jolyon Wright
which prompts my question: do only crazy people use Pelikan "fount"
non-waterproof indian ink in their Pelikans?
I stumbled on this in an art book that presents Pelikans as
illustration, rather than writing, tools. This book suggests that
non-waterproof indian inks can be used as long as the pen is washed out
with ammonia.
Now, as a non-artiste, this all sounds a little alarming. It sounds
like the
sort of offbeat stunt for the Advanced Penman only.
ie. dont try this at home.
Is this a brilliant or stupid idea??
jolyon
fdu...@aol.com
the latter.
mz
> Jolyon Wright wrote:
>
<snip>
>>
>>Is this a brilliant or stupid idea??
>
>
> the latter.
To expound just a little, india ink has pigment instead of dye, and FPs
are not designed to be used with pigmented inks. The pigment clogs FPs
and does not desolve in ammonia.
Mark Z.
Jolyon Wright
how do people get away with publishing this sort of advice? I wonder if he
gets busted pens as fan mail...
jolyon
"mz" <mz@dislikes_spam_very_much.infomagic.net> wrote in message
news:3F588B46.6070909@dislikes_spam_very_much.infomagic.net...
kcat
<jwright_...@saitek.com> wrote:
>I stumbled on this in an art book that presents Pelikans as
>illustration, rather than writing, tools. This book suggests that
>non-waterproof indian inks can be used as long as the pen is washed out
>with ammonia.
>
I've heard of being done - but it's not something I'd try. I take my
inking to what I consider a "safe" level for the pen without getting
bored out of my skull with Quink. Seems to me that having to clean a
pen with ammonia on a regular basis would be rather harsh.
>Is this a brilliant or stupid idea??
I don't think it's either. I think you decide your priorities -
incredibly rich inks that might damage the pen (or at least the
cleaning process might) or extending the life of the pen. I'll go
with the latter in most cases.
OTOH - I've also recently heard of a nice watercolour that a FP friend
has used in her pens for years with no problems. With an inexpensive
pen it might be worth it. of coures, it's not waterproof.
In an art catalog I read that J. Herbin inks should be washed out of
FPs after use. Wha? Perhaps they were a different sort of J. Herbin
inks?
just for grins - here's an article on Robert Leone's experiments with
waterproof ink (in a very cheap pen)
http://pentrace.datapacket.net/penbase/Data_Returns/full_article.asp?id=339
to each his own. My "out on a limb" inking will remain in the realms
of Private Reserve and Levenger for the time being. oh... and Penman
Emerald. :)
jon fabian
> <snip>
> Mark Z.
Indeed putting india ink in a fountain pen is a good way to destroy
it. India ink combines carbon, shellac, and water to make a beautiful
deep black waterproof ink. For dip pens.
However the original post was asking about _fount_ india ink, which I
used in my days as an art student. This is completely water soluble, has
no shellac, and is almost as black as india ink. I wouldn't put it in
any of my vintage pens; however, since my drawing professor kept his
vintage early 1960s MB 149 filled wih it I doubt it would harm a modern pen.
--
jon fabian
fabian at panix dot com
fdu...@aol.com
in terms of "harm" that could happen. Do you think vintage pens are
made of cardborad? The materials and constriction of a pen from today
vs 50-75 years ago is in 99% of the cases exactly the same. Other than
perhaps less quality control on newer pens or the use of easily worn off
plating vs gold fill. FD
kcat
>> any of my vintage pens; however, since my drawing professor kept his
>> vintage early 1960s MB 149 filled wih it I doubt it would harm a modern pen.
>>
>There is no difference on earth between a"modern" pen and a vinatge pen
>in terms of "harm" that could happen. Do you think vintage pens are
>made of cardborad?
I know that when I use a similar phrase as a disclaimer I am simply
saying that I would not use such an ink in a pen that I feel cannot
easily be replaced. And, such as in the case of one of my vintage
pens, the material has gotten "brittle" with age while a pen made in
the last 10 years or so will not have done so - depending on what it's
made of I suppose - a la "precious resin." The material used to make
pens was no different then than it is now - but the pen has aged.
Can't these materials change over time? I have plastic dishes that
eventually become brittle and crack 'cause they're so old. How are
pens exempt from this? It has nothing to do with criticizing vintage
pens for their quality when first manufactured.
of course, you may have explained this thousands of times before so if
so, just say "no KCat, see my previous posts for how vintage pens are
indestructible" -able .. whatever. Internal spellcheck not working
tonight.
fdu...@aol.com
If one thinks of where ink is inside a pen one should know that crazed
parts--which the vast majority of vintage pens are NOT subject to (only
a small minority have the problem) are at any rate usually not parts
ever exposed to ink at all so whatever ink used makes no difference at
all. A crazed barrel end on a 100 yr Waterman Pen for example obviously
should not ever effected in any way by ink. Same for a Doric cap top
which has a hard rubber ink proof liner as an inner cap. The feed, nib
and inner caps don't craze on any vintage pen I ever saw.
As for easily replaced some people might think its easier to replace a
$500 brand new Limited Edition PT Barnum pen than a vintage Esterbrook
or 51 or Snorkel. But I think most people would think the vintage pen
is an easier and far cheaper pen to replace in case of damage vs a more
expensive new pen. Thee facts may change on an inexpensive new pens
like a current 45, Pelikan GO, or Waterman Philias, but that is not what
the original poster implied IMHO. I read it as an implication that
something in vintage pens is more subject to damage by ink vs newer
pens. Which would be an absurd claim IF that is what was meant. FD
kcat
>If one thinks of where ink is inside a pen one should know that crazed
>parts--which the vast majority of vintage pens are NOT subject to (only
>a small minority have the problem) are at any rate usually not parts
>ever exposed to ink at all so whatever ink used makes no difference at
>all.
understood - what about visulated sections? I use mostly modern pens
and they have never stained but the "ink view" seems to be of a
different material than a lot of vintage pens with visulated sections.
>which has a hard rubber ink proof liner as an inner cap. The feed, nib
>and inner caps don't craze on any vintage pen I ever saw.
what few I have look brand new to me.
> As for easily replaced some people might think its easier to replace a
>$500 brand new Limited Edition PT Barnum pen than a vintage Esterbrook
>or 51 or Snorkel.
well - I would never buy a $500 pen so from the standpoint of the sort
I buy - a Lamy Safari or Pelikan M200 does seem much more readily
replaced than a vintage pen. Especially since it's highly unlikely
I'd have to go "looking" for such a pen on e-bay or with sellers of
vintage pens. Pretty much just have to go to the nearest pen store
(or any number of on-line sources.) The likelihood they'll have or be
able to get a replacement M200 *seems* much greater than the sort of
digging I might have to do for vintage parts. But that could just be
my perception.
>the original poster implied IMHO. I read it as an implication that
>something in vintage pens is more subject to damage by ink vs newer
>pens. Which would be an absurd claim IF that is what was meant. FD
I understand and while initially I didn't snap to that, that is how it
reads.
Back to the tangent my post went off to - disregarding ink at all -
the pencil cap of my Bantam set was cracked (er.. is) and has been
"cemented" to keep it from shattering. I have no idea when or how it
cracked as i only acquired it a few months ago and my grandmother is
no longer with us to tell me. But the *impression* I get from looking
at it is that the material aged and became brittle. As I noted,
plastic (and glass) seems to age in this way in general which makes me
leery of handling the Bantams a great deal. Not that I'm not careful
with all my pens, just even more so with this one.
with that - is there a resource on-line or elsewhere that details the
major materials used to make pens? I have Mr. Lambrou's book (PFotW)
which provided some info but I'd like to know more about the chemistry
of these materials and their relative strength/fragility.
thanks,
kcat
fdu...@aol.com
>
> understood - what about visulated sections? I use mostly modern pens
> and they have never stained but the "ink view" seems to be of a
> different material than a lot of vintage pens with visulated sections.
No difference for the most part. If a vintage ink view area looks more
stained its most likely due to the pen being 75 or so years old and used
for maybe decades with ink in there. Imagine how a modern pen will look
in 50 years of PR ink used daily in terms of stains. A very few
exceptions due exist on some visible ink pens that are subject to
crazing and therefore perhaps easier staining. Mostly lower to medium
cost pens by low tier companies like Postal barrels for example from the
late 1920s.
> Back to the tangent my post went off to - disregarding ink at all -
> the pencil cap of my Bantam set was cracked (er.. is) and has been
> "cemented" to keep it from shattering. I have no idea when or how it
> cracked as i only acquired it a few months ago and my grandmother is
> no longer with us to tell me. But the *impression* I get from looking
> at it is that the material aged and became brittle. As I noted,
> plastic (and glass) seems to age in this way in general which makes me
> leery of handling the Bantams a great deal. Not that I'm not careful
> with all my pens, just even more so with this one.
> with that - is there a resource on-line or elsewhere that details the
> major materials used to make pens? I have Mr. Lambrou's book (PFotW)
> which provided some info but I'd like to know more about the chemistry
> of these materials and their relative strength/fragility.
No really useful source I know of. Its far less the materials than the
CARE taken to make the pen with said materials. Many chemists think ALL
plastic is eventually doomed. I've hit on this subject before--all
plastic continues to age and cure and like concrete will continue the
process for decades and maybe even 100s of years to come. So all
modern pens are subject to the same problems of crazing as all vintage
pens eventually. Also its well known many modern pens can craze and
warp within a year or two. I've had Pelikan Levels develope multi
crazed micro cracks in the section. The new 51 LE barrels self cracked,
some of the earlier new Sheaffer ballence IIs had the problem and so
on. Plastic is unstable to some extent and for the most part one batch
may last 100 years and the next batch fo the same plactic may go bad in
a year or two with crazing, cracks, warps and so on. Its FAR more a
matter of what is done to the plastic after it leave the plastic factory
in terms of how it will last. Thats is, how it is cured, how carefully
it is molded and/or machined, how other processes could have effected it
such as heat, oils and so on when the pen is made. In short the care
and knowledge the pen company puts into making the pen is far more
important that what kind of plastic is used in terms of it lasting.
Frank
Jolyon Wright
"jon fabian" <fab...@spammeanddie.panix.com> wrote in message
news:bjdiqs$lah$1...@reader2.panix.com...
thanks jon - very interesting.
jolyon
kcat
>kcat wrote:
>
>>
>> understood - what about visulated sections? I use mostly modern pens
>> and they have never stained but the "ink view" seems to be of a
>> different material than a lot of vintage pens with visulated sections.
>
>No difference for the most part. If a vintage ink view area looks more
>stained its most likely due to the pen being 75 or so years old and used
>for maybe decades with ink in there. Imagine how a modern pen will look
>in 50 years of PR ink used daily in terms of stains.
The only staining I've had thus far (fingers crossed) is in my oldest
M200. For the first 3 years of use I only used one ink - Waterman
Violette. So there is a lingering "pink" tint to it that has never
gone away. No big deal - I don't plan on selling these pens and even
if I did a well-used 200, while it has a market, is not going to fetch
the big bucks. :)
>No really useful source I know of. Its far less the materials than the
>CARE taken to make the pen with said materials. Many chemists think ALL
>plastic is eventually doomed.
that would be my take - not a chemist but enough understanding of the
field to draw conclusions given accurate info.
>crazed micro cracks in the section. The new 51 LE barrels self cracked,
<nod> I'd heard about this. Sad that they went through that but at
least they corrected the problem (as far as I've heard)
>and knowledge the pen company puts into making the pen is far more
>important that what kind of plastic is used in terms of it lasting.
>Frank
thanks - that clarifies a lot of things. i'll still avoid bobbling my
Bantams (uh.. sheldon fodder <g>)
PENMART01
>i'll still avoid bobbling my Bantams (uh.. sheldon fodder <g>)
Um, this ain't yer fodder I'm bobbling, it's yer mudder!
Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. . . .
---= BOYCOTT FRENCH--GERMAN (belgium) =---
---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =---
Sheldon
````````````
"Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation."
jon fabian
is a hurricane out there with my name on it.
i merely meant that i would never fool around with fount india ink in
any of my own irreplaceable, expensive, etc. pens, almost all of which
are vintage. that's all. no judgements, no pronouncements, no
implications, no comparisons. i certainly didn't mean to impugn the
quality of the construction, materials, workmanship, etc. of vintage
pens.
peace to all
jon
In article <5e2nlv8i7mehrk8m2...@4ax.com>,
kcat <kca...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> >the original poster implied IMHO. I read it as an implication that
> >something in vintage pens is more subject to damage by ink vs newer
> >pens. Which would be an absurd claim IF that is what was meant. FD
>
> I understand and while initially I didn't snap to that, that is how it
> reads.
--
this posting may be monitored for training and quality control purposes
kcat
<fab...@spammersdie.panix.com> wrote:
>wow, i didn't mean to start up a s___storm here -- but then again there
>is a hurricane out there with my name on it.
storms start easily here...and as storms go, this one was very mild.
>i merely meant that i would never fool around with fount india ink in
>any of my own irreplaceable, expensive, etc. pens, almost all of which
>are vintage. that's all. no judgements, no pronouncements, no
>implications, no comparisons. i certainly didn't mean to impugn the
>quality of the construction, materials, workmanship, etc. of vintage
>pens.
glad to hear i actually had an idea of what you were saying - still,
don't worry about it - it gave me an opportunity to learn something.
No one's upset here - at least, no more than we usually are :)
BLandolf
<fab...@spammersdie.panix.com> wrote:
>wow, i didn't mean to start up a s___storm here -- but then again there
>is a hurricane out there with my name on it.
>
>i merely meant that i would never fool around with fount india ink in
>any of my own irreplaceable, expensive, etc. pens, almost all of which
>are vintage. that's all. no judgements, no pronouncements, no
>implications, no comparisons. i certainly didn't mean to impugn the
>quality of the construction, materials, workmanship, etc. of vintage
>pens.
>
>peace to all
>
>jon
Here's my old sig line... Feel free to use it esp. when you post to
acpp:
"I've been trying to keep from making ad hominem, ad excreta, or ad
anything-else arguments. I feel like Tweedle dee and dum have
accosted my left frontal orbit with a leucotome after I plummeted down
the rabbit hole and landed on my sacral chakra. <shudder>.....
<shrug?>" -- John Kline
Having seen a portion of your collection (which definitely does
contain some beautiful old irreplaceable pens), I knew exactly what
you meant. Hey, I wouldn't hesitate to use Pelikan Fount India in one
of my modern Pelikan 200s, 400s, or 600s (don't have any of the bigger
ones anymore), but I probably wouldn't fill my vintage rose ripple
with it. See ya, Bern
fdu...@aol.com
means the ink contains solids that can NEVER disolve. Unlike fountain
pen ink which contains dyes that have (or should have) no solids at all
and is bascially colored water and any solids remaing from dried dyes
can (usually) easily be redisolved into liquid by more water and flushed
out.
Fount India is listed by Pelikan as drawing ink. Check their web site.
Pelikan does add to the confusion by saying its OK for "plunger"
fountain pens which makes little sense as there is nothing in the design
of a plunger pen that makes it less or more "safe" for a pigmented ink.
At any rate anyone who knows pens, inks and dyes knows no ink with
pigments belongs in a fountain pen. In fact such an "ink" is really far
closer to paint than writing ink. The pigments, being solids can build
up in a pen and nothing can ever disolve them. If one is lucky, they
can be flushed out, but no ammount of flushing on earth can remove
particles that become seriously loged or stuck inside a pen. As more
and more particles build up problems can occure.
So while it can be used, as could any weak paint such as water colors
and such in a founatin pen, the risk of damage remains. I'm not trying
to stand on a soap box here, but just pointing out what Pelikan
themselves says about what they clearly themselves call an "oqaque
pigmented based drawing ink."
Bascially it is, in fact, a water color paint. Water based, yes. Can
one use water color paint in a fountain pen? Its not against the law in
any country on earth. :) In a fountain pen I own? No way. But if I
did use it, I'd make sure it was in a cheapie, Esterbrook or other pen
in the low price range. If allowed to dry out for months in a pen
(which can happen to any pen if misplaced for example) odds are too high
nothing less that a total dismantling could restore operation, perhaps
combined with the need for new gaskets, seals or other repairs to the
filler. The dry solid microscopic particles could also lodge in any
joints making dismantling far more difficult than normal as well. Think
of lubribcating a tight screw thread with fine sand inside it for
example.
In fact if anything such pigmented paints or inks might be "safer" (a
relative term in this case obviously) in a sac pen where the ink is not
expposed to a moving part like a plunger gasket which can become easily
stiff or stuck. Pelikans are alredy well noted for becoming stiff after
a while and many must be lubed with silicone grease to restore easy
filler operation. Add some gritty solids around the gasket and the
problem can become worse. Frank
BLandolf
>Pelikans own web site states Fount India ink is a PIGMENTED ink.
Yes, and they also say it's safe for fountain pens:
http://www.pelikan.de/cgi-bin/search
See also Stephen Hurst's post to this group a few months ago:
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=Xns9304F0950CCE7shNOSPAMa1net%40130.133.1.4&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
A. J. Herman, a Zosser, contacted Pelikan directly regarding the
safety of the ink in Pelikan Souveran series pens, and Nicole Jathe of
Pelikan in Germany replied that Fount India is safe to use in those
pens:
http://escribe.com/collecting/pens/m110067.html
>This
>means the ink contains solids that can NEVER disolve.
I've read a couple accounts of pens being clogged with Fount India
(after having been misused by allowing the filled pens to sit around
unused and without flushing for long periods of time, i.e., days,
months, and in one case--10 years... yikes!) and in all cases the pens
cleaned up fine... which would have been impossible to do had they
been filled with shellac-based India ink. Unlike shellac-based India
ink, Pelikan Fount India is water soluable. See the following posts:
http://escribe.com/collecting/pens/m100337.html
http://escribe.com/collecting/pens/m100340.html
and
http://escribe.com/collecting/pens/m100347.html
Here's another:
http://escribe.com/collecting/pens/m110039.html
>Unlike fountain
>pen ink which contains dyes that have (or should have) no solids at all
>and is bascially colored water and any solids remaing from dried dyes
>can (usually) easily be redisolved into liquid by more water and flushed
>out.
Some fountain pen inks (MB blue-black and a few others) are not
entirely dye based, yet they're perfectly safe for fountain pens.
>Fount India is listed by Pelikan as drawing ink. Check their web site.
>Pelikan does add to the confusion by saying its OK for "plunger"
>fountain pens which makes little sense as there is nothing in the design
>of a plunger pen that makes it less or more "safe" for a pigmented ink.
That they call it drawing ink simply means that it's formulated for
art applications such as drawing. Jon Fabian and Reid McIntyre (an
artist and college art instructor) among others have used Fount India
in their fountain pens with no ill effects. Others attest to its
"safety" (using this term loosely to mean that it won't ruin your
pens)...
http://escribe.com/collecting/pens/m95225.html
http://escribe.com/collecting/pens/m87189.html
http://escribe.com/collecting/pens/m109113.html
Why is Pelikan's use of "plunger" so confusing? They make a lot of
piston (plunger) fillers. They're simply pointing out that the ink is
safe for use in their fountain pens.
<snip>
For most applications, I see no need to use a concentrated ink such as
Fount India as long as there are other inks that provide great density
of color with less potential for staining and clogging (e.g., Aurora
Black, Waterman Black, Quink Black); however, if a person needs a
water resistant (not waterproof... no fountain pen ink is waterproof),
archival quality fountain pen ink, then Fount India is a reasonable
choice.
Bernadette
john cline ii
"BLandolf" wrote in part:
| Here's my old sig line... Feel free to use it esp. when you post to
| acpp:
|
| "I've been trying to keep from making ad hominem, ad excreta, or ad
| anything-else arguments. I feel like Tweedle dee and dum have
| accosted my left frontal orbit with a leucotome after I plummeted
down
| the rabbit hole and landed on my sacral chakra. <shudder>.....
| <shrug?>" -- John Kline
I should probably state for the record that I am not that john kline,
though I wouldn't mind having said that!
john cline ii, who just can't help himself...
fdu...@aol.com
>
> Yes, and they also say it's safe for fountain pens:
>
Why not read your own links since they do NOT say the ink is safe for
fountain pens and limit it to use only in plunger pens, which I
explained makes little sense.
> A. J. Herman, a Zosser, contacted Pelikan directly regarding the
> safety of the ink in Pelikan Souveran series pens, and Nicole Jathe of
> Pelikan in Germany replied that Fount India is safe to use in those
> pens:
Once again saying it is a DRAWING ink and only "safe" in plunger pens.
> I've read a couple accounts of pens being clogged with Fount India
> (after having been misused by allowing the filled pens to sit around
> unused and without flushing for long periods of time, i.e., days,
> months, and in one case--10 years... yikes!) and in all cases the pens
> cleaned up fine... which would have been impossible to do had they
> been filled with shellac-based India ink. Unlike shellac-based India
> ink, Pelikan Fount India is water soluable. See the following posts:
>
Baloney! Because pigments themselves are NEVER water soluable. Your
reading of such accopunts means its safe?? Wow, some evidence. Highly
scientific. I've read of people living to over 100 who smoke daily,
so that proves smoking is safe too. Equally scientific evidence.
> Some fountain pen inks (MB blue-black and a few others) are not
> entirely dye based, yet they're perfectly safe for fountain pens.
Their BB is entirely dye based in terms of coloring agent. The iron
content is so tiny the ink can sit on a shelf for over 50 years and no
rust or iron shpuld build up on the bottom of the bottle. Unlike
pigment ink which must be occasionally stired to keep the solids in
suspension. The amount of "solids" in such sMB BB ink are microsopic in
total unlike the massive amounts of solid pigments necessary to make
Fount Ink Black. Having spent 20 years in the ink industry your lack
of even the most basic knowledge of inks, dyes and pigments is
obvious. FD
BLandolf
>BLandolf wrote:
>
>>
>> Yes, and they also say it's safe for fountain pens:
>>
>
>Why not read your own links since they do NOT say the ink is safe for
>fountain pens and limit it to use only in plunger pens, which I
>explained makes little sense.
"Only?" Where do you see the word "only?" Your interpretation of the
material I posted is what makes no sense.
>> I've read a couple accounts of pens being clogged with Fount India
>> (after having been misused by allowing the filled pens to sit around
>> unused and without flushing for long periods of time, i.e., days,
>> months, and in one case--10 years... yikes!) and in all cases the pens
>> cleaned up fine... which would have been impossible to do had they
>> been filled with shellac-based India ink. Unlike shellac-based India
>> ink, Pelikan Fount India is water soluable. See the following posts:
>>
>
>Baloney! Because pigments themselves are NEVER water soluable. Your
>reading of such accopunts means its safe?? Wow, some evidence. Highly
>scientific. I've read of people living to over 100 who smoke daily,
>so that proves smoking is safe too. Equally scientific evidence.
You have not produced *any* evidence, not even anecdotal evidence to
support your claim that Pelikan's Fount India ink is prone to
irrevocably clog fountain pens. Post one link to a post here or
elsewhere that supports your claim that Pelikan's Fount India ink has
clogged a pen so badly it couldn't be cleaned.
>> Some fountain pen inks (MB blue-black and a few others) are not
>> entirely dye based, yet they're perfectly safe for fountain pens.
>
>Their BB is entirely dye based in terms of coloring agent. The iron
>content is so tiny the ink can sit on a shelf for over 50 years and no
>rust or iron shpuld build up on the bottom of the bottle. Unlike
>pigment ink which must be occasionally stired to keep the solids in
>suspension. The amount of "solids" in such sMB BB ink are microsopic in
>total unlike the massive amounts of solid pigments necessary to make
>Fount Ink Black. Having spent 20 years in the ink industry your lack
>of even the most basic knowledge of inks, dyes and pigments is
>obvious. FD
Well, I guess if you don't have any evidence to present, an ad hominem
argument will have to suffice. Your hypotheses are interesting, but
unless you've actually measured the concentration of solids in MB
Blue-Black and compared it to that of Pelikan's Fount India you've
established nothing. In both cases, the manufacturers suggest
frequent water flushes (MB makes this recommendation only for their
Blue-Black) but clearly intend their inks to be used in fountain pens.
-- Bernadette
fdu...@aol.com
> You have not produced *any* evidence, not even anecdotal evidence to
> support your claim that Pelikan's Fount India ink is prone to
> irrevocably clog fountain pens. Post one link to a post here or
> elsewhere that supports your claim that Pelikan's Fount India ink has
> clogged a pen so badly it couldn't be cleaned.
>
> Well, I guess if you don't have any evidence to present, an ad hominem
> argument will have to suffice. Your hypotheses are interesting, but
> unless you've actually measured the concentration of solids in MB
> Blue-Black and compared it to that of Pelikan's Fount India you've
> established nothing. In both cases, the manufacturers suggest
> frequent water flushes (MB makes this recommendation only for their
> Blue-Black) but clearly intend their inks to be used in fountain pens.
> -- Bernadette
If you knew anything about inks you would know one of the more common
jobs in an ink and dye lab is to measure solids in ink. I probably did
it 10,000 times. The amount of solids in a pigment ink is MANY THOUSAND
times more than in ANY good dye based ink, MB BB or otherwise.
Someone sent me what Greg Clark said about Fount ink backchannel.
Greg--<<What I did was take a Sheaffer Vintage pen that I got at Big
Lots ( I got it for $1.99 as a result of a "heads up" from the Zoss
list) and do an evaporation test with it. As a "controll" I used one of
the included "old" Sheaffer cartridges of black ink. I made the pen
evaporate one entire cartridge of both inks in the feed to see how badly
clogged it would get. Of course I cleaned the pen in between.
The Sheaffer ink totally evaporated, the entire cartridge. Even at the
end I was able to make the pen write well by just dipping the tip of the
nib in ink. It cleaned up completely by soaking 24 hours and using a
rubber squeeze bulb. I was impressed by how well it did. Sort of
explains why the old Sheaffer inks have such a good reputation for pen
safety.
I did the same with the Pelikan Font India. Just to set the tone, the
new reps for Pelikan say that this ink is not recommended for real
fountain pens. They say it is more for technical pens.
I was unable to get more than 1/4 of the ink cartridge to evaporate.
The pen was so badly clogged that I cracked the cartridge trying to
express more ink into the feed. BUT - what surprised me was that 24
hours of soaking and a quick blow out with a rubber squeeze bulb seems
to have completely cleared the feed.
Do I recommend the use of this ink - no.
Is it dangerous? I don,t know. I would have to do this test a 100
times and see if the carbon built up in the feed. My gut level feeling
is feel free to use it if you will flush your pen with water often and
don't use it in a real valuable pen - unless you feel comfortable with
detail stripping and cleaning the nib/feed.
I really don't see how it could do any damage that a strip cleaning
couldn't fix.
Next I will try some BOSS ink I recently got from China. Man what a
black ink!- Greg Clark>>
Strip cleaning ins't something to be undertaken lightly. Since then
Greg has several times also mention he has doubts due to it being a
carbin based ink. Gregs post is at
http://www.escribe.com/collecting/pens/m100337.html.
So I agree with Greg. Sure its "safe" ink in a cheap easy to clean pen
that can easily be dismantled if necessary. Is it a good idea in an
expensive pen? Nooooooooooo Waaaaaaaaaaaay. Its a simply a thin water
based paint. Plain and simple. No different from filling a pen with
water color paint. It can be done. It won't kill anyone and won't make
a pen explode. Beyond that yur takes yur chances. A chance not worth
it IMHO. Frank
BLandolf
> If you knew anything about inks you would know one of the more common
> jobs in an ink and dye lab is to measure solids in ink. I probably
> did it 10,000 times. The amount of solids in a pigment ink is MANY
> THOUSAND times more than in ANY good dye based ink, MB BB or
> otherwise.
How many times did you measure the concentration of solids in Pelikan
Fount India? MB Blue-Black?
> Someone sent me what Greg Clark said about Fount ink backchannel.
Why did "someone" send Greg's post to you backchannel when I actually
included a link to it in my post? What a hoot! FYI, in a follow-up post
to the one I cited (and to which I posted a link) and "someone" (who
apparently can't read either) backchanneled to you, Greg wrote:
<<... In reality, one short test doesn't really proove a whole lot. The
apparent bottom line is that, at least in the short term, the ink
cleasns out easily and does no harm.
With that in mind, I see no reason for not using it.
Greg>>
Here's the link:
http://escribe.com/collecting/pens/m100347.html
<snip>
No one here claimed that Pelikan Fount India should be used routinely in
all fountain pens for all applications. The OP's post was prompted by
something written in a book intended for artists. Fount India was
formulated by Pelikan as a fountain-pen friendly alternative to
shellac-based India inks and is clearly intended for art applications.
As Reid McIntyre explained in an earlier thread regarding Fount India
ink, artists have a good reason to be interested in archival quality
inks, and Fount India is a reasonable choice for artists who want to use
a fountain pen instead of a dip pen for their artwork. I've not seen
any evidence whatsoever that Pelikan has been dishonest in their
labeling/advertising or that using Pelikan Fount India would irrevocably
clog a fountain pen. --- Bernadette
Garglemonster
BLandolf> No one here claimed that Pelikan Fount India should be
BLandolf> used routinely in all fountain pens for all
BLandolf> applications. The OP's post was prompted by something
BLandolf> written in a book intended for artists. Fount India was
BLandolf> formulated by Pelikan as a fountain-pen friendly
BLandolf> alternative to shellac-based India inks and is clearly
BLandolf> intended for art applications. As Reid McIntyre
BLandolf> explained in an earlier thread regarding Fount India
BLandolf> ink, artists have a good reason to be interested in
BLandolf> archival quality inks, and Fount India is a reasonable
BLandolf> choice for artists who want to use a fountain pen
BLandolf> instead of a dip pen for their artwork. I've not seen
BLandolf> any evidence whatsoever that Pelikan has been dishonest
BLandolf> in their labeling/advertising or that using Pelikan
BLandolf> Fount India would irrevocably clog a fountain pen. ---
I think this is an important point. Some artists would be willing to
run the risk that such an ink poses because they are more interested
in what they are making than in the pen. Artists generally don't like
to waste materials and tools, but in their capacity as artists,
they're not collectors. The issues are much different for them than
for the most of the people here.
NANCY!! Why is everything RED?!
fdu...@aol.com
>
> How many times did you measure the concentration of solids in Pelikan
> Fount India? MB Blue-Black?
The concentration is actually around 100,000 times higher in a pigment
ink vs MB BB ink,
I'm sure most people know if I insisted Fount Ink was safe for fountain
pens B would argue it was not. No point arguing with someone who argues
for the sake of arguments without any regards for facts nor knowing in
the least anything she is talking about. Not that she cares. FD
fdu...@aol.com
>
> I think this is an important point. Some artists would be willing to
> run the risk that such an ink poses because they are more interested
> in what they are making than in the pen. Artists generally don't like
> to waste materials and tools, but in their capacity as artists,
> they're not collectors. The issues are much different for them than
> for the most of the people here.
>
Well put. Its bascially powdered carbon and other colored solids
floating in water. The bottle says to shake well before using and to
rinse the pen with water before EACH filling.
I'd defy anyone to find a bottle of standard fountain pen ink that says
that. Any good fontain pen ink, including MB BB can sit on a shelf for
over 50 years and never needs any shaking at all. Frank
Juan
Right Bernadette. Assuming pelikan "pseudo india ink" can be used in a
fp, there's a question to be answered: WHY using it? a water resistant
ink? why? It seems that we are trying to take our pens as far as we
can, and if the idea of using pelikan water-soluble-safe-india ink- is
generally accepted, there are a lot of chances that people will start
to use ANY india ink they find. IMHO the cons win.
Take care, Juan
BLandolf
> I think this is an important point. Some artists would be willing to
> run the risk that such an ink poses because they are more interested
> in what they are making than in the pen. Artists generally don't
> like to waste materials and tools, but in their capacity as artists,
> they're not collectors. The issues are much different for them than
> for the most of the people here.
With all due respect, Gargle, I actually know Reid McIntyre... He's one
of my Pen Haven buds. He's an artist *and* a fountain pen collector.
I've also seen the fountain pens in which he uses Pelikan Fount India
(including vintage Pelikans and vintage American pens) and they're in
perfectly good working order... no clogged feeds, no gummed-up
mechanisms. Yes, Reid uses pens for his work, but are the issues really
that much different for him than for most of the people here? I don't
think so. I use fountain pens in my work, and both (my work and the
pens) are important to me. Actually, in fact, my work is more important
to me, but that doesn't mean I'm willing to get reckless with my pens
(although I'm willing to assume the risks associated with actually using
them rather than avoid those risks by keeping them locked away). I do
agree with you that using Fount India is riskier than using 4001 black
for example; however, that doesn't mean that using Fount India will
wreck a fountain pen. Pelikan makes a lot of different inks... They make
a line of fountain pen inks (4001), at least one line of waterproof
drawing inks which are not intended for use in fountain pens, and one
drawing ink formulated for use in fountain pens. If all were intended
for the same purpose, they'd make just one line of ink. I use MB
blue-black instead of Sheaffer blue-black (which I find wimpy in the
extreme) even though using MB blue-black is "riskier." I have no
difficulty with the claim that using Fount India is "riskier" than using
a non-archival quality fountain pen ink. What I take issue with are the
claims that Fount India is "dangerous" for fountain pens, that using it
is a "stupid idea," that using it will irrevocably clog a feed, that
Pelikan's labeling is misleading, that Pelikan themselves caution
against using Fount India in fountain pens, etc. --- Bernadette
BLandolf
>BLandolf wrote:
>
>>
>> How many times did you measure the concentration of solids in Pelikan
>> Fount India? MB Blue-Black?
>
> The concentration is actually around 100,000 times higher in a pigment
>ink vs MB BB ink,
But you've never actually measured the concentration of solids in
either ink have you? C'mon, you're speaking in generalities. You've
never used Fount India nor do you know anyone who has. You see the
word "India" in its name, and you exclaim, "It says 'India!' It can't
be safe for fountain pens!" You see the word "drawing" on the label
and you exclaim... "It says 'drawing!' It can't be safe for fountain
pens!" You see the word "pigment" on the label, and you go berserk.
You see (assuming you've actually seen a bottle, and that I doubt) the
words "Drawing Ink for Fountain Pens," and you totally disregard that.
You've made some pretty hair brained claims in these threads... For
example, you've said that Pelikan doesn't recommend the ink for
fountain pens even though their site and correspondence from Nicole
Jathe at Pelikan in Germany clearly state the ink is formulated for
use in fountain pens.
As for MB ink, the printed material enclosed in my bottle of MB
Blue-Black states the following: "If permanent Montblanc ink
(blue-black) is used, regular cleaning of the fountain pen is
essential because the high solids content of the ink can lead to
deposits in the feed system." But I guess you'll continue to claim
that MB blue-black is safer than Fount India because... well, because
MB blue-black doesn't contain 'India' in its name or because MB
blue-black doesn't claim to be a drawing ink or because the inks and
dyes you worked with many years ago (none of which were the inks in
question, of course, but that's neither here nor there) possessed
certain qualities.
>I'm sure most people know if I insisted Fount Ink was safe for fountain
>pens B would argue it was not. No point arguing with someone who argues
>for the sake of arguments without any regards for facts nor knowing in
>the least anything she is talking about. Not that she cares. FD
Once again, when you have no evidence (not even anecdotal evidence) to
back your claims, you resort to ad hominem. I think the discussion
that occurred after you reamed Jon Fabian for making a perfectly
legitimate point was far more enlightening than your initial using-
Fount-India-is-stupid post. --- Bernadette
fdu...@aol.com
>
> But you've never actually measured the concentration of solids in
> either ink have you? C'mon, you're speaking in generalities. You've
> never used Fount India nor do you know anyone who has. You see the
> word "India" in its name, and you exclaim, "It says 'India!' It can't
> be safe for fountain pens!" You see the word "drawing" on the label
> and you exclaim... "It says 'drawing!' It can't be safe for fountain
> pens!" You see the word "pigment" on the label, and you go berserk.
The berserk one is someone who obviously knows zero about inks, dyes and
pigments. Beserk people tend to keep talking without regards to any
facts or knowledge. Byeeeeeee. FD
BLandolf
> The berserk one is someone who obviously knows zero about inks, dyes
> and pigments. Beserk people tend to keep talking without regards to
> any facts or knowledge. Byeeeeeee. FD
Whatever you say, Rainman. -- B
kcat
> <snippety do da>
>
>Right Bernadette. Assuming pelikan "pseudo india ink" can be used in a
>fp, there's a question to be answered: WHY using it? a water resistant
>ink? why?
From what little I'm learning about Calligraphy and Lettering as an
art - because the artist would rather not have their work wash away. A
fountain pen provides wonderful, consistent flow compared to dip pens,
poster pens, etc. So if that consistency is wanted without having to
constantly load a pen - than I can see the desire to use an ink that
might better stand up to potential damage in a piece of artwork or
writing. I wouldn't do it myself, but that's not the point.
You'll find some interesting discussions about ink permanence in
various URLs - experiments done with Higgins "Engrossing" ink on
Pentrace for example. Observations made re: light-fastness of certain
FP dye-based inks like Doctor Black ink (I think this is on Norman
Hasse's site?) and so on.
you'll also find on nearly ever site out there that sells both
dye-based and pigment-based writing fluid - the caution that the
latter shouldn't be used in FPs.
>It seems that we are trying to take our pens as far as we
>can,
i think that's true. And since I am an ink "mixer" - that is, I
derive enjoyment from mixing various colours to come up with what I
consider "the perfect purple" or whatever my whim is of the day - then
I think I can understand this approach and even find it acceptable.
Again, I wouldn't, but I can see why someone else would. For many of
us, FPs are not just about the beauty of the instrument. Nor just
about the functionality of the tool. But about what we can accomplish
with it. What aesthetics we can derive or how much can we stretch
this tool to perform in a way that just plain black ink won't do for
us. And even how far can we take "just plain black ink" in itself
with various pens, brushes, etc.
In short (something I really never do) not all collecting is just
about the object - some of us collect and use and stretch the
definition of our addiction to papers, inks, journaling, calligraphy
and so on.
>generally accepted, there are a lot of chances that people will start
>to use ANY india ink they find. IMHO the cons win.
I'd disagree with "lots of chances." For the most part, people who go
in blind with a nice FP and a bottle of inappropriate ink are going to
be people who haven't had any exposure to boards like this at all. I
think the most readers here and on other pen boards do have the sense
not to make the assumption that because one fount india ink might be
safe, that all are. I would hope so anyway.
can ya tell that I can't get to pentrace? :-)
kcat - just yappin.
Garglemonster
BLandolf> "Garglemonster" wrote:
>> I think this is an important point. Some artists would be
>> willing to run the risk that such an ink poses because they are
>> more interested in what they are making than in the pen.
>> Artists generally don't like to waste materials and tools, but
>> in their capacity as artists, they're not collectors. The
>> issues are much different for them than for the most of the
>> people here.
BLandolf> With all due respect, Gargle, I actually know Reid
BLandolf> McIntyre... He's one of my Pen Haven buds. He's an
BLandolf> artist *and* a fountain pen collector.
guess what? he's not the only one.
all i said was that the issues are different for artists _in their
capacity as artists_.
Actually, what I'd like is a little toy spaceship!!
Jolyon Wright
"Juan" <jjtele...@yahoo.es> wrote in message
news:500c2486.03090...@posting.google.com...
>
> Right Bernadette. Assuming pelikan "pseudo india ink" can be used in a
> fp, there's a question to be answered: WHY using it? a water resistant
> ink? why? It seems that we are trying to take our pens as far as we
> can, and if the idea of using pelikan water-soluble-safe-india ink- is
> generally accepted, there are a lot of chances that people will start
> to use ANY india ink they find. IMHO the cons win.
>
> Take care, Juan
well no; my understanding (limited I am sure!) is that it is non-waterproof
indian; not "pseudo" indian. Its not true to say that people will believe
they can use any indian ink because they can use a non-waterproof indian.
ie:- waterproof indian black ink cannot be used in an fp therefor we should
not suggest that anybody uses black ink. this is the same logic.
why use it? it's black. very black. very very black! is it worth the "risk";
well I don't know - but I really appreciate everyone's thoughts,
thanks
jolyon
LEFTPAWRM
From: "Jolyon Wright" <A
HREF="mailto:jwright_...@saitek.com">jwright_...@saitek.com</A>
<< I stumbled on this in an art book that presents Pelikans as
illustration, rather than writing, tools.>>
<< This book suggests that non-waterproof indian inks can be used as long as
the pen is washed out
with ammonia. >>
<< Now, as a non-artiste, this all sounds a little alarming. >>
Since my name has been invoked in this thread:
If you are not an artist why worry about what is presented in a book (The Pen &
Ink Book) concerned with the making of art. I've read this book and the mocking
of it makes no sense (nor does it have any validity) in this venue.
The author does not write that the pen is to be "washed out with ammonia". He
writes (regarding the MC 120) that it can use Fount India if "washed (in water
with a tiny bit of ammonia added)...". For the Souveran 250, his advice is
identical: "if washed with water and a small amount of ammonia each time the
pen is refilled". The same proceedure is cited for the other Pelikans
mentioned.
The author also mentions other FP's as well as Pelikans (e.g.: Senator,
Faber-Castell) which are his favorites when drawing (or making preliminary
sketches). He also lists FP's that he does not recommmend for use with Fount
India :Montblanc, Rotring 600, Waterman (18K nibs with c/c ) and 3 Sheaffers.
However he does use examples of drawings and sketches done with Waterman and
Pelikan Fount India and notes that the Sheaffer Triumph (and Targa) can take
finely ground fount india inks (Pelikan Fount India is not cited specifically
in this instance).
The Pen and Ink Book is a fine, if not excellent, presentation of the use of
pen and ink (its pros and potential problems) alone and with mixed media.
I've posted here before that I use the ink in question without any problems and
have for quite some time. I believe the author of the aforementioned book errs
on the side of caution. I just fill my pens and use them (without even a water
rinse). I guess I'm just lucky that I have pens that were made on Tuesday,
Wednesday or Thursday.
I will add that I put a Rexall Monogram,fitted with an Esterbrook 9128, in a
down vest almost two years ago. It was filled with Pelikan Fount India in the
fall of 2001. I had forgotten about it but after reading the postings of B and
FD, I went looking for it. I found the pen. I unsrewed the cap and the pen
wrote (drew) on the first stroke and did not hestitate one bit in the making
of over hundreds of marks. Just luck again? I doubt it.
I have been down this road before on this site and Mr. Dubiel has his opinion
of the ink. And that would seem to be that.
The appropriate findings of Mr. Clarke have been cited by B. Again, as earlier
this year, I have 2 bottles of Pelikan Fount India sitting right in front of
me and nowhere on either bottle is there an admomition to "shake it" before use
and nothing about cleaning the pen before refilling. One bottle is a recent
purchase ( 8/03, blue label, D-3001) and the second is from the last century
(late 1970's - yellow label, black text, Pelikan AG (dot)D 3000). Mr. Dubiel is
not correct in his comments about the instructions on the PFI bottle.
Considering all the SITB posts I read on this and other sites, I would be more
concerned about those inks than PFI. It seems that most are willing to give,
for example, PR a second and third chance in spite of the fact that the ink HAS
fouled many a pen. Not urban legend, not the application of one set of
statistics to something not part of the (or a) study - but fact. Since the
company is attempting to rectify the problem, the evidence of a problem with
the formulation of its ink must be indisputable. Yet, PR seems to move briskly
and certainly has more shelf space than any ink at any pen store I've visited.
As Bernadette indicated (and I wrote earlier this year), the pens I use are
part of the tools of my trade. Day in and day out, they are filled with PFI. I
do not think they are at risk, at least not from the ink.
Reid McIntyre
Subject: crazy people & ink (esp Pelikans)
From: "Jolyon Wright" <A
HREF="mailto:jwright_...@saitek.com">jwright_...@saitek.com</A>
<< I stumbled on this in an art book that presents Pelikans as
illustration, rather than writing, tools.>>
<< This book suggests that non-waterproof indian inks can be used as long as
the pen is washed out
with ammonia. >>
<< Now, as a non-artiste, this all sounds a little alarming. >>
Since my name has been invoked in this thread:
If you are not an artist why worry about what is presented in a book (The Pen &
Ink Book) concerned with the making of art. I've read this book and the mocking
of it makes no sense (nor does it have any validity) in this venue.
The author does not write that the pen is to be "washed out with ammonia". He
writes (regarding the MC 120) that it can use Fount India if "washed (in
water with a tiny bit of ammonia added)...". For the Souveran 250, his advice
is identical: "if washed with water and a small amount of ammonia each time the
pen is refilled". The same proceedure is cited for the other Pelikans
mentioned.
The author also mentions other FP's as well as Pelikans (e.g.: Senator,
Faber-Castell) which are his favorites when drawing (or making preliminary
sketches). He also lists FP's that he does not recommmend for use with Fount
India :Mont blanc, Rotring 600, Waterman (18K nibs with c/c ) and 3 Sheaffers.
However he does use examples of drawings and sketches done with Waterman and
Pelikan Fount India and notes that the Sheaffer Triumph (and Targa) can take
finely ground fount india inks (Pelikan Fount India is not cited specifically
in this instance).
The Pen and Ink Book is a fine, if not excellent, presentation of the use of
pen and ink (its pros and potential problems) alone and with mixed media.
I've posted here before that I use the ink in question without any problems and
have for quite some time. I believe the author of the aforementioned book errs
on the side of caution. I just fill my pens and use them (without even a water
rinse). I guess I'm just lucky that I have pens that were made on Tuesday or
Wednesday or Thursday.
I will add that I put a Rexall Monogram,fitted with an Esterbrook 9128, in a
down vest almost two years ago. It was filled with Pelikan Fount India in the
fall of 2001. I had forgotten about it but after reading the postings of B and
FD, I went looking for it. I found the pen. I unsrewed the cap and the pen
wrote (drew) on the first stroke and did not hestitate one bit in the making
of over hundreds of marks. Just luck again? I doubt it.
I have been down this road before on this site and Mr. Dubiel has his opinion
of the ink. And that would seem to be that.
The appropriate findings of Mr. Clarke have been cited by B. Again, as earlier
this year, I have 2 bottles of Pelikan Fount India sitting right in front of
me and nowhere on either bottle is there an admomition to "shake it" before use
and nothing about cleaning the pen before refilling. One bottle is a recent
purchase ( 8/03, blue label, D-3001) and the second is from the last century
(late 1970's - yellow label, black text, Pelikan AG (dot)D 3000). Mr. Dubiel is
not correct in his comments about the instructions on the PFI bottle.
Considering all the SITB posts I read on this and other sites, I would be more
concerned about those inks than PFI. It seems that most are willing to give,
for example, PR a second and third chance in spite of the fact that the ink HAS
fouled many a pen. Not urban legend, not the application of one set of
statistics to something not part of the (or a) study - but fact. Since the
company is attempting to rectify the problem, the evidence of a problem with
the formulation of its ink must be indisputable. Yet, PR seems to move briskly
and certainly has more shelf space than any ink at any pen store I've visited.
As Bernadette indicated (and I wrote earlier this year), the pens I use are
part of the tools of my trade. Day in and day out, they are filled with PFI. I
do not think they are at risk, at least not from the ink.
Reid McIntyre
Subject: crazy people & ink (esp Pelikans)
From: "Jolyon Wright" <A
HREF="mailto:jwright_...@saitek.com">jwright_...@saitek.com</A>
<< I stumbled on this in an art book that presents Pelikans as
illustration, rather than writing, tools.>>
<< This book suggests that non-waterproof indian inks can be used as long as
the pen is washed out
with ammonia. >>
<< Now, as a non-artiste, this all sounds a little alarming. >>
Since my name has been invoked in this thread:
If you are not an artist why worry about what is presented in a book (The Pen &
Ink Book) concerned with the making of art. I've read this book and the mocking
of it makes no sense (nor does it have any validity) in this venue.
The author does not write that the pen is to be "washed out with ammonia". He
writes (regarding the MC 120) that it can use Fount India if "washed (in
water with a tiny bit of ammonia added)...". For the Souveran 250, his advice
is identical: "if washed with water and a small amount of ammonia each time the
pen is refilled". The same proceedure is cited for the other Pelikans
mentioned.
The author also mentions other FP's as well as Pelikans (e.g.: Senator,
Faber-Castell) which are his favorites when drawing (or making preliminary
sketches). He also lists FP's that he does not recommmend for use with Fount
India :Mont blanc, Rotring 600, Waterman (18K nibs with c/c ) and 3 Sheaffers.
However he does use examples of drawings and sketches done with Waterman and
Pelikan Fount India and notes that the Sheaffer Triumph (and Targa) can take
finely ground fount india inks (Pelikan Fount India is not cited specifically
in this instance).
The Pen and Ink Book is a fine, if not excellent, presentation of the use of
pen and ink (its pros and potential problems) alone and with mixed media.
I've posted here before that I use the ink in question without any problems and
have for quite some time. I believe the author of the aforementioned book errs
on the side of caution. I just fill my pens and use them (without even a water
rinse). I guess I'm just lucky that I have pens that were made on Tuesday or
Wednesday or Thursday.
I will add that I put a Rexall Monogram,fitted with an Esterbrook 9128, in a
down vest almost two years ago. It was filled with Pelikan Fount India in the
fall of 2001. I had forgotten about it but after reading the postings of B and
FD, I went looking for it. I found the pen. I unsrewed the cap and the pen
wrote (drew) on the first stroke and did not hestitate one bit in the making
of over hundreds of marks. Just luck again? I doubt it.
I have been down this road before on this site and Mr. Dubiel has his opinion
of the ink. And that would seem to be that.
The appropriate findings of Mr. Clarke have been cited by B. Again, as earlier
this year, I have 2 bottles of Pelikan Fount India sitting right in front of
me and nowhere on either bottle is there an admomition to "shake it" before use
and nothing about cleaning the pen before refilling. One bottle is a recent
purchase ( 8/03, blue label, D-3001) and the second is from the last century
(late 1970's - yellow label, black text, Pelikan AG (dot)D 3000). Mr. Dubiel is
not correct in his comments about the instructions on the PFI bottle.
Considering all the SITB posts I read on this and other sites, I would be more
concerned about those inks than PFI. It seems that most are willing to give,
for example, PR a second and third chance in spite of the fact that the ink HAS
fouled many a pen. Not urban legend, not the application of one set of
statistics to something not part of the (or a) study - but fact. Since the
company is attempting to rectify the problem, the evidence of a problem with
the formulation of its ink must be indisputable. Yet, PR seems to move briskly
and certainly has more shelf space than any ink at any pen store I've visited.
As Bernadette indicated (and I wrote earlier this year), the pens I use are
part of the tools of my trade. Day in and day out, they are filled with PFI. I
do not think they are at risk, at least not from the ink.
Reid McIntyre
Jolyon Wright
"LEFTPAWRM" <left...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030910035124...@mb-m19.aol.com...
> Subject: crazy people & ink (esp Pelikans)
> From: "Jolyon Wright" <A
>
HREF="mailto:jwright_...@saitek.com">jwright_...@saitek.com</A>
>
> << I stumbled on this in an art book that presents Pelikans as
> illustration, rather than writing, tools.>>
> << This book suggests that non-waterproof indian inks can be used as long
as
> the pen is washed out
> with ammonia. >>
> << Now, as a non-artiste, this all sounds a little alarming. >>
>
> Since my name has been invoked in this thread:
>
> If you are not an artist why worry about what is presented in a book (The
Pen &
> Ink Book) concerned with the making of art. I've read this book and the
mocking
> of it makes no sense (nor does it have any validity) in this venue.
>
intended to be mocking. i am not an artist. that does not mean that i have
nothing to learn from artist's perspective. this is the reason i read the
book and posed the question.
your'e right, i misrepresented the ammonia bit; I should have written
"washed out with a mild solution of ammonia". nonetheless to a non-artiste
pen user this sounds alarming which is why I was afer some reassurance that
people actually do this. you have done this in your post; so what can say
but
thanks
jolyon
Juan
Please, bear in mind that I'm talking as a fpens USER (and lover); not
as an artist (the closest I've been to being an artist were 2 months
as a martial artist (when I was 7), and I got sick of having my head
banged onto the tatami :-D).
I'm not judging pelikan ink either. I'm just saying that fpens world
is full of urban legends - the dif posts are full of them -, and I
really think that the use of this "india ink" can be one of them in
the future.
Why? because mouth to mouth information deteriorates...always, and
there are lots of fpens users who do not read these posts, visit
pentrace, attend meetings etc.
What we will get is a few happy artists with fps and a lot of fp users
with ruined pens.
As I said before, I'm not saying that pelikan ink can't be used in a
fp; i'll not use it (BTW, have you noticed that despite we agree on
the safety of that ink NONE of us is going to use it?), and I don't
want you to think that I disagree with Bernadette, Jolyon, Kcat...When
i read those posts I think that both Frank and Bernadette agree!! (in
the content)
IMO, pelikan should get that ink, put it into a FP ink bottle, and
sell it as "pure black" FP ink or something. Sell it as "safe india
ink" may create a monster.
Juan
Jolyon Wright
> IMO, pelikan should get that ink, put it into a FP ink bottle, and
> sell it as "pure black" FP ink or something. Sell it as "safe india
> ink" may create a monster.
>
jolyon
fdu...@aol.com
I have 2 bottles of Pelikan Fount India sitting right in front of
> me and nowhere on either bottle is there an admomition to "shake it" before use
> and nothing about cleaning the pen before refilling. One bottle is a recent
> purchase ( 8/03, blue label, D-3001) and the second is from the last century
> (late 1970's - yellow label, black text, Pelikan AG (dot)D 3000). Mr. Dubiel is
> not correct in his comments about the instructions on the PFI bottle.
>
CHECK PELIKAN'S WEB SITE--They clearly proclaim the bottle must be
shaken before EACH use and the pen cleaned before EACH refill.
fdu...@aol.com
Actually Juan you are correct. B and I bascially agree on Fount Ink.
Of course she does disagree that we agree. Frank
BLandolf
> ... (BTW, have you noticed that despite we agree on the safety of
> that ink NONE of us is going to use it?) ...
> ... IMO, pelikan should get that ink, put it into a FP ink bottle,
> and sell it as "pure black" FP ink or something. Sell it as "safe
> india ink" may create a monster.
Hi Juan... Actually, I would use Fount India for certain applications
and in certain pens. I also think Pelikan is doing the right thing by
including the words "India" and "drawing" on the label and marketing the
ink primarily to artists. If they didn't do these things and just
bottled the ink as "pure black fountain pen ink," they'd have to enclose
an insert with a warning similar to the warning MB includes in bottles
of their blue-black... and (like signage) very few people read those
inserts.
Jon Fabian's post was a good one because it mentioned a very important
difference between traditional waterproof India inks and Pelikan Fount
India --- namely, traditional waterproof India inks contain a lot of
*shellac* and shellac-based inks will ruin (in no uncertain terms)
fountain pens. Pigment and other solids (e.g., the solids in iron-gall
inks such as MB blue-black) are nowhere near as dangerous as shellac.
Solids can be flushed or cleaned out. Shellac doesn't flush... Imagine
filling a pen with varnish or epoxy. So, inks containing a lot of
shellac will ruin a pen, but inks containing pigment or other solids
won't necessarily do so. They can certainly muck up a feed, but so can
concentrated dye-based inks. If you check out John Mottishaw's site (or
talk to him in person), you'll see/hear what dried up dye-based ink can
do to a feed (probably won't ruin a pen, but cleaning it may require
disassembly and more than just a little time in an ultrasonic cleaner).
Fountain pen inks containing solids (Fount India, MB blue-black) should
be used with a little more care (more frequent flushings), but the same
goes for heavily-concentrated dye-based inks. At least Fount India
fills a niche (it's better than the alternatives for certain
applications). What's the point of having heavily concentrated
dye-based inks? For what application are they better suited than say
Waterman inks? There are many dye-based inks I don't intend to use for
the same reasons some folks want to steer clear of Fount India. ---
Bernadette
BLandolf
> <snip>
> Actually Juan you are correct. B and I bascially agree on Fount Ink.
> Of course she does disagree that we agree. Frank
Frank... You're doing that Carnac the Magnificent thing again.
Actually, I agree that we basically agree on Pelikan Fount India. --
Bernadette
BLandolf
kcat
well, at least it's "deteriorated" into humour. :-)
kcat
>What we will get is a few happy artists with fps and a lot of fp users
>with ruined pens.
i guess I'm more optimistic (naive) in believing that a person buying
such a pen will read the directions. Most do have instructions - the
obvious exception being unboxed/unpapered pens found in auction.
>As I said before, I'm not saying that pelikan ink can't be used in a
>fp; i'll not use it (BTW, have you noticed that despite we agree on
>the safety of that ink NONE of us is going to use it?),
:-) I did notice that. I *would* try it in an ultra-cheap pen -
like perhaps a no-nonsense italic. But otherwise I limit use of such
things to dip nibs.
>IMO, pelikan should get that ink, put it into a FP ink bottle, and
>sell it as "pure black" FP ink or something. Sell it as "safe india
>ink" may create a monster.
on this agree - a number drawing inks lack the explicit
warnings/recommendations. Especially when buying online and the fine
print on the bottle/box isn't available. I'm still a bit boggled as
to why Paper and Ink Arts recommends washing J. Herbin ink out of your
parallel pens (an artist pen with a FP-like feed) with dlute ammonia.
They equate FW Acrylics and Herbin "D" inks. Perhaps just poor copy
writing.
LEFTPAWRM
shaken before EACH use and the pen cleaned before EACH refill.
Pelikan's web site also says the ink (PFI) is 'safe' to use in its (Pelikan's)
pens.
You summarily dismiss this 'minor' bit of information as so much dreck, yet
when it may serve your purpose, you're telling me (and everyone else)to check
Pelikan's website to back you.
You do like to play both sides of the fence when it suits your 'need to be
right'.
I wrote that I had two bottles of PFI. One from the late 70's. That bottle has
has no admonitons on it. When I bought it, I guess I should have gone to
Pelikan's website and read what the company "forgot' to put on its product's
label.
I guess the problem with that would have been that (in the late 70's) THERE WAS
NO WEBSITE.
That was (and is the point) of the comparison of the bottles: the consistent
absence of the shake / clean mantra over a period of 25 years.
I guess you overlooked that in your zeal.
Now let me get the rules in order here: the Pel reps are right, the Pel website
is wrong when it suits you, the website is right when it suits you.
Whatever.
Reid McIntyre
fdu...@aol.com
>
> << CHECK PELIKAN'S WEB SITE--They clearly proclaim the bottle must be
> shaken before EACH use and the pen cleaned before EACH refill.
>
> Pelikan's web site also says the ink (PFI) is 'safe' to use in its (Pelikan's)
> pens.
>
> You summarily dismiss this 'minor' bit of information as so much dreck, yet
> when it may serve your purpose, you're telling me (and everyone else)to check
> Pelikan's website to back you.
>
> You do like to play both sides of the fence when it suits your 'need to be
> right'.
> Now let me get the rules in order here: the Pel reps are right, the Pel website
> is wrong when it suits you, the website is right when it suits you.
>
> Whatever.
Guess you are upset because their web site tells you to shake the bottle
before each use. Its BigBirds words on their own web site. Not mine.
Obviously you like to argue. The web site really says (as you probably
intentionally misquote above) it is safe in PLUNGER pens. It does not
say a word about other fountain pens. Nor does it even really say safe
in Pelikan pens. It says PLUNGER pens. Which can easily imply it is
not safe in non plunger pens. No matter what they may or may not mean.
No matter safe or not safe--that is what the web site says. You don't
like it?? Too bad. I didn't put it there. Take it up with
BigBird--not me.
You are good at selective quotes. and misquotes. Whatever indeed. FD
BLandolf
>Guess you are upset because their web site tells you to shake the bottle
>before each use. Its BigBirds words on their own web site. Not mine.
Got the link? I haven't been able to find that quote... but, so what
if it does say, "shake?" We all agree the ink contains solids; so
does MB blue-black among others. The disagreement seems to lie in
whether one agrees or disagrees with the statement, "If an ink
contains solids, it must be dangerous for fountain pens." No one here
or on any of the other pen forums has been able to provide any
evidence that the ink ruins pens... even when allowed to dry up inside
pens, the ink washes out. For those who deny that major mucking can
occur with dye based inks ... and I'm referring to mucking that can't
be remedied by flushing or soaking and requires disassembly of the
pen... check this out:
http://www.nibs.com/index.html?http://www.nibs.com/PenMaintenance.htm
>Obviously you like to argue. The web site really says (as you probably
>intentionally misquote above) it is safe in PLUNGER pens. It does not
>say a word about other fountain pens.
I can't believe you're going down this road again. FYI, Pelikan
states in their FAQ:
<<Which filling systems for fountain pens are offered today?
Mainly, there are two filling techniques: the plunger system and the
cartridge system (as a variation on the converting technique). The
plunger system: the plunger refill is moved using a filler knob at the
end of the shaft. This guarantees that the ink is economically
absorbed out of the ink bottle. After filling, release a few drops of
ink back into the bottle and then turn the filler knob to the closed
position. The cartridge-system: Easy and clean to handle. The most
common kinds of cartridges: The small standard ink cartridge (Pelikan
= TP/6) and the giant ink cartridge (Pelikan = GTP/5). The variant
converter: Makes it possible for you to convert a cartridge fountain
pen into a plunger fountain pen. Instead of the cartridge, the
converter is inserted into the shaft. The fountain pen can then be
filled like a plunger fountain pen out of the ink bottle.>>
And this:
<<What pieces do the fountain pens consist of?
Fountain pens are manufactured in many manual steps using very precise
technology. Generally, they consist of: the nib, ink duct, sleeve with
ink reservoir and plunger mechanism or a space for cartridges or
converter, the cap and the clip.>>
Here's the link:
http://www.pelikan.de/en/docs/faq.php?faqid=8&action=view
From Chartpak's site:
<<Fount India Fountain Pen Drawing Ink>>
And this:
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=Xns9304F0950CCE7shNOSPAMa1net%40130.133.1.4&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
And this (from Nicole Jathe) :
http://escribe.com/collecting/pens/m110067.html
> Nor does it even really say safe in Pelikan pens.
Nor does it say it's safe for dip pens or for teenagers to use or for
people from India to use or for people under the age of 53 to use or
for Catholics to use or for people who like to eat spaghetti on
Sundays to use or ....
> It says PLUNGER pens.
Let it go, Frank. Pelikan has been making plunger fillers for the
better part of 75 years. Other than a few c/c fillers and the Level,
that's all they've ever made. To them, "plunger pen" is synonymous
with fountain pen. As Stephen Hurst noted in an eariler post, "the
German 'Kolbenfüllhalter,' which they [Pelikan] translate as plunger
fountain pen, is simply a conventional fountain pen with a piston
filling system."
> Which can easily imply it is not safe in non plunger pens.
Granted the piston filler is superior to all other fillers, but any
filler that can move ink out of the resevoire with some force (i.e.,
not a cartridge pen) should be able to handle it.
>No matter what they may or may not mean.
>No matter safe or not safe--that is what the web site says. You don't
>like it?? Too bad. I didn't put it there. Take it up with
>BigBird--not me.
Are we still ruminating about shake?
Bernadette
fdu...@aol.com
> Let it go, Frank.
>
> Granted the piston filler is superior to all other fillers,
Total BS of course but let it go B. FD
BLandolf
Learn to take a joke...You set yourself up for that one.
I bet you're an excellent driver, Frank.
B
LEFTPAWRM
Date: Wed, Sep 10, 2003 3:24 PM
Message-id: <3F5F7A...@aol.com> >><BR><BR>
<< Guess you are upset because their web site tells you to shake the bottle
before each use. Its BigBirds words on their own web site. Not mine.
>><BR><BR>
No, I'm not quoting the Peliikan web site. I'm quoting you.
From Sept. 9 :
Well put. Its bascially powdered carbon and other colored solids
floating in water. The bottle says to shake well before using and to
rinse the pen with water before EACH filling.
Note that you write "the bottle says". The BOTTLE has nothing written on it
about shaking/ rinsing.
Argue? My first post, this time around, was mainly direct quotes and an
anecdote plus the mention of your incorrect statement concerning the
information on the label of the PFI bottles. I was accurate and that was my
intent.
Now you are going to flim-flam with the old plunger-piston routine. Excellent
move.
Whatever, indeed, indeed . Well,Harrrumph. What is up your ass? Is it that
analogy I told you to shove last winter? Whatever it is, you should get it
checked because, although I'm not a physician, I can tell from your defensive
posture that it is going to take an excellent proctologist and two mules to
pull it past your seized sphincter. (Da Merck Manual, page 1185).
Bern - please don't dignify this guy with a comparison to Charlie Babbit. He's
no savant. Just a guy with a key to Kinko's.
Reid McIntyre
LEFTPAWRM
Bern - please don't dignify this guy with a comparison to Charlie Babbitt. He's
no savant. Just a guy with a key to Kinko's. >><BR><BR>
Not Charlie Babbitt. Not Charlie Babbitt. Raymond Babbitt.
No comparison to Raymond Babbitt. That would be D-9. No Comparison to Raymond
Babbit.
RM
fdu...@aol.com
>
> Whatever, indeed, indeed . Well,Harrrumph. What is up your ass? Is it that
> analogy I told you to shove last winter? Whatever it is, you should get it
> checked because, although I'm not a physician, I can tell from your defensive
> posture that it is going to take an excellent proctologist and two mules to
> pull it past your seized sphincter.
Your own posts say more about you than I ever could. FD
BLandolf
> ...
>No comparison to Raymond Babbitt. That would be D-9. No Comparison to Raymond
>Babbit.
Qantas.
Michael Oates
I am new to this list (Yesterday) I am also relatively new to using fountain pens,
but I do have a bottle of the Fount India ink with me. Here is what it says on the
bottle.
(Note it is in both English and German, I will just quote the English)
FOUNT INDIA
Original Pelikan Calligraphy Ink
- special calligraphy fountain pen ink
- easy-flowing producing intense colours
- clear-cut letters
- protects fountain pen and nib
It is an 18ml bottle with a code 321091
There is no mention of shaking the bottle before use.
The one I have is black. I have never used it, and do not intend too either. I got it
in a box of other bits from a relative some time ago and just put it in a drawer in
case it came in handy.
Hope that answers some of the groups questions.
Regards,
Mike
>Garglemonster wrote:
>
>>
>> I think this is an important point. Some artists would be willing to
>> run the risk that such an ink poses because they are more interested
>> in what they are making than in the pen. Artists generally don't like
>> to waste materials and tools, but in their capacity as artists,
>> they're not collectors. The issues are much different for them than
>> for the most of the people here.
>>
>Well put. Its bascially powdered carbon and other colored solids
>floating in water. The bottle says to shake well before using and to
>rinse the pen with water before EACH filling.
>
>I'd defy anyone to find a bottle of standard fountain pen ink that says
>that. Any good fontain pen ink, including MB BB can sit on a shelf for
>over 50 years and never needs any shaking at all. Frank
BLandolf
If you're not going to use it, would you consider selling it to me?
I'll pay for shipping etc. Contact me backchannel at
(blan...@toad.netNOSPAM).
Thanks,
Bernadette
so what
>The one I have is black. I have never used it, and do not intend too either
Don't blame ya!
Hey, Mike, welcome to the group! What pens ya got? How about coffee?
Starbucks? What about stationery?
HURRY!! We gotta get shopping!!
satrap
who didn't ask about orange ink yet, because she wants to take it easy on the
newbie
Michael Oates
I said I was relative new to using fountain pens. Yet I have had the pen I am now
using for 32 years since I was at school a Parker Junior Duofold with 14K OM nib.
However, I have not really used it since, until recently. I am now using it as much
as possible having rediscovered the joy of using pen and paper instead of the
computer and last 2 weeks ago got a Pelikan M400.
I asked for a OM nib as that was what I used too, but it was awful! It has been
returned for a nib swap for a fine nib. I used the internet to find out firstly which
pen to get, then more to find out why the nib did not write with varying line
thickness (a bit like an talic) like my Parker does. I then discovered the whole
collecting scene and modifications that can me done. SO, the end result is: I have a
John Mottishaw nib on it's way for the M400; and I have ordered a Pelikan Berlin. Is
this a collection yet?
Mike
LEFTPAWRM
LEFTPAWRM wrote:
Why not quote the rest of the post : "Guy with key to Kinkos"
Etc., etc.
I'm not going to take the crap you dish out to most of the folks on this site
when they have the temerity to disagree with you.
You went ad hominem (without cause) on my first post here and I won't forget
it.
You are a jackass blowhard on here and other sites. You belittle simple, honest
questions and then direct the poor lambs to Da Book. Smite 'em and then sell'em
Da Book.
And you make a living off this method of Conversion? Some racket.
I usually try to inject humor into posts, but not this time.
I spit on you.
I'll see you in DC next August (Lord willing and the cricks don't rise) and we
can have a "chat" outside this world of 1's and 0's.
Reid McIntyre
Rockville, MD
fdu...@aol.com
> You are a jackass blowhard on here and other sites. You belittle simple, honest
> questions and then direct the poor lambs to Da Book. Smite 'em and then sell'em
> Da Book.
>
> And you make a living off this method of Conversion? Some racket.
>
> I usually try to inject humor into posts, but not this time.
>
> I spit on you.
Your own words again tell everyone what kind of person you are. People
can read and judge for themselves so no need for me to say more nor
return insults. FD
BLandolf
"Michael Oates" wrote: ...
> ... I asked for a OM nib as that was what I used too, but it was
> awful! It has been returned for a nib swap for a fine nib. I used the
> internet to find out firstly which pen to get, then more to find out
> why the nib did not write with varying line thickness (a bit like an
> talic) like my Parker does.
Hi Mike,
Pelikan's modern obliques are made for lefties who rotate or slant the
pen while writing, not for creating line-width variation. If you want
line-width variation in a Pelikan, you'll have to go with one of their
vintage (50s or earlier) nibs or regrind the tip of a modern one.
Vintage Pelikan nibs have nicely shaped, flat tips which produce some
nib variation. It's especially noticeable in their broader obliques
(OM, OB, OBB, etc.) and broader standard widths (B, BB, BBB). Modern
Pelikans have ball-shaped tips; even the obliques are ball shaped.
> I then discovered the whole collecting scene and modifications that
> can me done. SO, the end result is: I have a John Mottishaw nib on
> it's way for the M400; and I have ordered a Pelikan Berlin. Is
> this a collection yet?
Oh yes... One pen is a nascent collection, two pens are a full-blown
collection, and more than that is an obsession. :) -- Bernadette
Tom Morley
Michael Oates wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I said I was relative new to using fountain pens. Yet I have had the pen I am now
> using for 32 years since I was at school a Parker Junior Duofold with 14K OM nib.
> However, I have not really used it since, until recently. I am now using it as much
> as possible having rediscovered the joy of using pen and paper instead of the
> computer and last 2 weeks ago got a Pelikan M400.
>
> I asked for a OM nib as that was what I used too, but it was awful! It has been
> returned for a nib swap for a fine nib. I used the internet to find out firstly which
> pen to get, then more to find out why the nib did not write with varying line
> thickness (a bit like an talic) like my Parker does. I then discovered the whole
> collecting scene and modifications that can me done. SO, the end result is: I have a
> John Mottishaw nib on it's way for the M400; and I have ordered a Pelikan Berlin. Is
> this a collection yet?
>
> Mike
>
>
>
Whenever two or more pens are gathered together. .....
--
Tom Morley | Same roads
mor...@math.gatech.edu | Same rights
tmo...@mindspring.com | Same rules
AIM: DocTDM
Nancy Handy
> Whenever two or more pens are gathered together. .....
They mulitply like rabbits and your wallet gets depleted!
Was that the correct phrase?????
LEFTPAWRM
From: fdu...@aol.com
Date: Fri, Sep 12, 2003 7:07 AM
Message-id: <3F61A8...@aol.com>
>><BR><BR>
<< Your own words again tell everyone what kind of person you are. People can
read and judge for themselves so no need for me to say more nor return insults.
FD >><
Well, well. Dubiel now wants to take the high road. At least in this case.
Unctuous -o-rama!!!
[He’ll be back slinging his aspersions on the unsuspecting, if not in this
thread, then in another.]
*************************
Well, Dubiel, you always seem to like to drag things into the mud. Now you’re
in some deep mud and you’re not getting out with that ‘ let the people
judge’ bunk. I don’t care what they think about this.
You and your mysterious backchanneler(s)] better have a confab on the finer
points of escape and evasion.
I may live in MD but your problem is that you’ve pissed off the wrong
Mountaineer.
See you down the road boy.
McIntyre
fdu...@aol.com
>
> Well, Dubiel, you always seem to like to drag things into the mud. Now you’re
> in some deep mud and you’re not getting out with that ‘ let the people
> judge’ bunk. I don’t care what they think about this.
>
> You and your mysterious backchanneler(s)] better have a confab on the finer
> points of escape and evasion.
>
> I may live in MD but your problem is that you’ve pissed off the wrong
> Mountaineer.
>
> See you down the road boy.
The amazing thing is I do not recall ever meeting this person, dealing
in any way with him or even exchanging emails with him or if any of that
ever did I happen i cannot recall it at all. His real complaint alwas
has been I do not agree with his view that an intense pigment based
black ink is totally safe and harmless for use in any fountain pen for
extended usage.
Forgetting who is right or wrong and putting aside my 20 years in the
ink and dye industry its a matter of a difference of opinion on what
"totally safe for extended use in any fountain pen" is. Imagine if we
discussed politics or religion. :) I have expressed my views and
reasons. His view is to (his words) call me all sorts of names, quite
literally spit on me and offer the sole proof that his pens so far write
OK.
Fine. He is certainly entitled to express his views and results on
ink. So am I. Beyond that the far larger problem does seem to be his
own personality and temperament. FD
LEFTPAWRM
Message-id: <3F6300...@aol.com>
<< quite literally spit on me >><BR><BR>
You got any gob on you ,boy? Then I ain't " quite literally' spit on you, now
have I.
I believe you meant to write that I spit on you, figuratively speaking. Unless
of course , you own that special spittin' computer. Nothing like those Bits all
over you and your keyboard.
<< Beyond that the far larger problem does seem to be his
own personality and temperament. FD
Amateur psychologist? What can't you do boy? My temperament is already a
problem for you , boy. You are rockin' on your heels, boy. I know cause you
draggin out your twenty years in the ink and dye business.
You're not covered with mud now, boy. You're covered in tar.
look at you, boy. Rolling around tryin' to get something off and only gettin'
more on yourself.
Again, see you down the road boy.
McIntyre
SMMRFLD
inks...I wouldn't think he's able to use much more than a crayon. I'd sure
worry, Frank...he's ready for a duel in his sandbox!
Scott
<<<You got any gob on you ,boy? Then I ain't " quite literally' spit on you,
now have I.I believe you meant to write that I spit on you, figuratively
speaking. Unlessof course , you own that special spittin' computer. Nothing
like those Bits allover you and your keyboard.<< Beyond that the far larger
problem does seem to be hisown personality and temperament. FD Amateur
psychologist? What can't you do boy? My temperament is already aproblem for you
, boy. You are rockin' on your heels, boy. I know cause youdraggin out your
twenty years in the ink and dye business. You're not covered with mud now, boy.
You're covered in tar.look at you, boy. Rolling around tryin' to get something
off and only gettin'more on yourself.Again, see you down the road
boy.McIntyre>>>
Tim McNamara
left...@aol.com (LEFTPAWRM) wrote:
Good grief, who is this idiot? Another candidate for the killfile,
anyway.
LEFTPAWRM
Date: Sat, Sep 13, 2003 3:31 PM
Message-id: <20030913153115...@mb-m06.aol.com>
This is funny...quite ironic that this moron is a participant in a thread on
inks...I wouldn't think he's able to use much more than a crayon. I'd sure
worry, Frank...he's ready for a duel in his sandbox!
Scott
Subject: Re: crazy people & ink (what Pelikan says)
From: Tim McNamara <A
HREF="mailto:tim...@bitstream.net">tim...@bitstream.net</A>
Date: Sat, Sep 13, 2003 7:40 PM
Message-id: <timmcn-5D8451....@gemini.visi.com>
Good grief, who is this idiot? Another candidate for the killfile,
anyway.
Hey you boys. I'm just an ignert hillbilly so, hey callin me a moron and an
idiot is a compliment. Thanks.
I did spend me one summer learning to write with a crayon. Dam, if everthing I
wrote didn't come out backwards -reversed like, if you catches my drift here.
The name on the crayon was Korn. You, the one called Scott, you being the
expert on crayon writin. could you tell me why everthing was reversed.
Careful now when you get into somebodie's sandbox: it may be a sandbox but it
ain't your sandbox.
You fellas gonna be part of Dubiel's bodyguard. Fine. If not, stay out of this.
It ain't your show.
McIntyre
so what
Sister Mary Saint Satrap,
mahogany rosary, ready for exorcise
Winter Wind
Dubiel's personality, but seriously, are you really threatening to
assault him over a trivial conversation about ink?
If you like Fount India, then use it and do not worry about what
someone says online. I have used Parker Penman and Private Reserve
for years, and Frank Dubiel's hatred of these inks has absolutely no
impact on my choice.
I suggest the Stoicist approach: have the courage of your convictions
and do not worry about the opinions of people like Frank Dubiel.
kcat
wrote:
>I suggest the Stoicist approach: have the courage of your convictions
>and do not worry about the opinions of people like Frank Dubiel.
or anyone else's for that matter. We (humans with the ability to
think and draw conclusions) should be able to glean information from
many sources and then test our own theories and make a decision from
there.
isn't everyone getting tired of this?
fdu...@aol.com
>
> This is a conversation about ink? I certainly do not care for Frank
> Dubiel's personality, but seriously, are you really threatening to
> assault him over a trivial conversation about ink?
>
> If you like Fount India, then use it and do not worry about what
> someone says online. I have used Parker Penman and Private Reserve
> for years, and Frank Dubiel's hatred of these inks has absolutely no
> impact on my choice.
I strongly dispute the word "hatred." In fact I use both Penman and PR
inks myself. I have a pen in front of me filled with Penman Sapphire at
this very moment. I also use india ink when the occasion calls for it
such as illustration work and other tasks. I did have four years of
drafting in school and have quite a bit of drafting equipment although
for the most part it collects dust.
However what pen the ink go into and why usually has a valid reason.
The Penman, for example, is in a refillable rollerball some of which
write too light with less intense inks. Not an expensive pen to damage,
although that is unlikely since I'm careful. I've posted many times I
use such inks, but they are not my usual choice of "anything sort of
blue" for normal everyday use in an average pen.
Not to like an ink for any reason is not "hatred" of an ink. That
should not be too difficult to understand I'd hope. Indeed anyone who
really needs "hatred" for anything pen related has a problem beyond
pens. For that matter its an ugly enough word that it shouldn't be used
at all. Well, maybe its better to hate something in pens than to hate
people for their race, color, religion or whatever. Although that would
only apply to people who feel a need to hate in the first place.
Frank
so what
>only apply to people who feel a need to hate in the first place.
Yeah, dontcha just hate it when people are like that?
<G>
anonymous
who just had to
LEFTPAWRM
(Winter Wind)
Date: Sun, Sep 14, 2003 11:38 AM
Message-id: <202d34b4.03091...@posting.google.com>
>>This is a conversation about ink? I certainly do not care for FrankDubiel's
personality, but seriously, are you really threatening to assault him over a
trivial conversation aboutink?<<
Hell fire, this here things over the label on a bottle of ink and sumthin that
was done awhiles back.
Don't be frettin over Da Dubiels situation. Its his problem not your.
That other fella, Scott boy, used the duel in sandbox . I jes wrote: "I'll see
you in DC next August (Lord willing and the cricks don't rise) and we can have
a "chat" outside this world of 1's and 0's."
Have I been speeking nasty to him? Dam Straight. Will I do it again, if he
comes in this thread? Dam Straight.
Hey WW, check on down the line. You tryin' to hep him out and he's writn
against you. Yessir.
Hope your clothes suit your weather.
McIntyre
AND
From: kcat <A HREF="mailto:kca...@newsguy.com">kca...@newsguy.com</A>
Date: Sun, Sep 14, 2003 12:33 PM
Message-id: <es59mvgve7v
<isn't everyone getting tired of this?>
TARED OF IT? This is what u folks come here for, ain't it (meybe not you in
perticular)? What's the headin on this line?
Shoot.
LEFTPAWRM
From: fdu...@aol.com
Date: Sun, Sep 14, 2003 1:10 PM
Message-id: <3F64A0...@aol.com> >><BR><BR>
<< I have used Parker Penman and Private Reserve
> for years, and Frank Dubiel's hatred of these inks has absolutely no impact
on my choice. >><BR><BR>
<< I strongly dispute the word "hatred." In fact I use both Penman and PR
inks myself >>
Hey boy, why doen you cut that fella some slack. He was takin up 4 you. You
jest cant help yourself can you. Hell, I bet there's a line of folks waitin' to
"chat" with you at them pen shows.
<< I also use india ink when the occasion calls for it
such as illustration work and other tasks >><BR><BR>
That's a good one boy. It reads mighty famil-yure. Go ahead on back and read
what I had writ in my 1st letter under a line called Archival Ink. Then you
opened your pie hole.
You just can't help you self. Rolling in the dust yet, T-boy.
See you down the road boy.
McIntyre
BLandolf
LEFTPAWRM wrote:
fdu...@aol.com wrote:
> <<I also use india ink when the occasion calls for it
> such as illustration work and other tasks >>
> That's a good one boy. It reads mighty famil-yure. Go ahead on back
> and read what I had writ in my 1st letter under a line called
> Archival Ink. ...
FD was talkin' about traditional waterproof shellac-based India ink (the
stuff you use with drafting pens like the Graphos), not Pelikan Fount
India, which is a non-waterproof waterbased ink made for fountain pens.
"...don't just stand there Punkin' Puss!...here...take your rifle...and
let's get ta fudin'!" Naw... There's been enough fudin'. --- B
LEFTPAWRM
Date: Mon, Sep 15, 2003 11:37 AM
Message-id: <3f648...@newsfeed.slurp.net>
LEFTPAWRM wrote:
get ta fudin'!" Naw... There's been enough fudin'. --- B >><BR><BR>
B, I know exactly what FD is talking about and what follows is the direct
question and the answer I wrote in response. I did not
suggest that anyone {except, perhaps, inadvertently, someone else concerned
with the archival quality of ink] or to anyone that he or she use the said ink
[PFI or, here, KFI] other than the original poster (Neo).
The reference to Picasso's WC is there to assure the original poster that,
regardless of what he chooses to do or use, if what he creates is of merit, it
can be conserved. In contemporary art, there are paintings done with blood,
with elephant dung,sculpture of gnawed chocolate, etc. Each is probably a chore
to preserve but preserved it is.
My post was in answer to a specific person regarding his (or her) specific
concern. FD went from the specific to the general.
As to getting my rifle(s) -well -I gave the bolts to the rifles to my lawyer
and he won't give them back. "I a reckon" weese a both practikin what U city
folk wood caw beehavyure mawdifeeKshun." "Diamonds are diamonds and stone is
stone..."
And now, the feature presentation:
>> From:<A
HREF="http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=aut
hor:jumpoleX%40hotmail.com+"> Neo</A> (<A
HREF="mailto:jumpoleX%40hotmail.com">jump...@hotmail.com</A>)
Subject: Any archival quality inks available?
<A
HREF="http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=
slrnb1r7le.142.jumpoleX%40localhost.localdomain">View this article only</A>
Newsgroups:<A
HREF="http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&group
=alt.collecting.pens-pencils"> alt.collecting.pens-pencils</A>
Date: 2003-01-09 08:08:02 PST
Just wondering if there are any archival inks available?
I find my fountain pen to be fluid enough for drawing, but naturally
I am concerned about the archival quality of inks.
I would be drawing on good acid free paper.
How do the more readily availalbe modern inks such as
rom:<A
HREF="http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=aut
hor:leftpawrm%40aol.com+"> LEFTPAWRM</A> (<A
HREF="mailto:leftpawrm%40aol.com">left...@aol.com</A>)
Subject: Re: Any archival quality inks available?
<A
HREF="http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=
20030110154724.13962.00000421%40mb-cr.aol.com">View this article only</A>
Newsgroups:<A
HREF="http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&group
=alt.collecting.pens-pencils"> alt.collecting.pens-pencils</A>
Date: 2003-01-13 11:14:36 PST
<< Just wondering if there are any archival inks available? >>
Try Pelikan Fount India Ink ( or Kohinoor Fount India Ink). I 've used it in my
FPs (Pelikans, Watermans, Swan) without any problems. It holds up to water
pretty well and if your drawings are any good -someone -somewhere -will find a
way to conserve them. I saw a Picasso sketch for The Women of Avignon that was
WC on Vellum -it was in a motorized box frame ( a guard operated the system)
that opened for a few seconds every few minutes so that the work could be
viewed and then shut -eliminating the damaging effects of any light.
If you want certainty ( as much as you can get), get a Pelikan Graphos set and
go at the paper with good old India Ink. I have other approaches but this is
the standard operating proceedure I use: PFI in the FPs and India Ink in the
Graphos. <<
OK. Now let FD and I get on with the business of this thread: Crazy people and
ink. YEEHAW.
RM
Nancy Handy
LEFTPAWRM <left...@aol.com> wrote:
> "I a reckon" weese a both practikin what U city folk wood caw
> beehavyure mawdifeeKshun." "
You say behavior modification, I say it looks more like terrorism.
The newsgroup has grinded to a screeching halt.
Congrats
Tim McNamara
nha...@optonline.net (Nancy Handy) wrote:
Simple solution for that. Killfile the idiots.
Maeven
Wendy
"Tim McNamara" <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote in message
news:timmcn-36C5DE....@gemini.visi.com...
LEFTPAWRM
Message-id: <timmcn-36C5DE....@gemini.visi.com>
In article <1g1cn07.rwo7j91bsk8jzN%nha...@optonline.net>,
nha...@optonline.net (Nancy Handy) wrote:
>>Simple solution for that. Killfile the idiots.<<
Gee, Tim, I thought that you were going to KF this idiot on Sunday. You a
rubbernecker aren't you?
AND
Subject: Re: crazy people & ink (what Pelikan says)
From: <A HREF="mailto:nha...@optonline.net ">nha...@optonline.net </A> (Nancy
Handy)
Date: Mon, Sep 15, 2003 10:48 PM
Message-id: <1g1cn07.rwo7j91bsk8jzN%nha...@optonline.net>
LEFTPAWRM <left...@aol.com> wrote:
Thanks. I think "reads more like" is the accurate way to state your thought.
Check your definiton of terms and get your "isms" in order. You booted your
computer. You went to this group. You knew what was going on in this thread and
you chose to read it. And, presto, you are in a state of fear and submission?
Yeah. right.
The entire passage (of which you partially quote) says that I made useless said
rifle(s) by my own choice. Isn't that the goal of a certain segment of this
society? Disarmament?
I believe there are several more threads above this one that could be a balm to
your bruised sensibilities.
AND
Subject: Re: crazy people & ink (what Pelikan says)
From: "Maeven" <A
HREF="mailto:maev...@bellsouth.net">maev...@bellsouth.net</A>
Date: Tue, Sep 16, 2003 8:19 PM
Message-id: <SLN9b.294$AZ5...@bignews4.bellsouth.net>
>>Done, What a jerk....
>>Wendy
Yes. What a jerk. And what tremendous fortitude it took for you to activate
your KF.
Below, for those interesteded, is an exchange in the thread Da Book that
transpired between WENDY and the original poster, JOLYON (in this thread)
concerning what was occurring in this thread ("Crazy people.. etc.):
Subject: Re: Da Book
From: "Maeven" <A
HREF="mailto:maev...@bellsouth.net">maev...@bellsouth.net</A>
Date: Sat, Sep 13, 2003 10:12 AM
>>Frank himself is a remarkable fount of information. Not always delivered with
sugar, but you
can be assured that it is backed by actual experience.
Good luck,
Wendy
Subject: Re: Da Book
From: "Jolyon Wright" <A
HREF="mailto:jwright_...@saitek.com">jwright_...@saitek.com</A>
Date: Mon, Sep 15, 2003 2:36 AM
Message-id: <bk3ml8$pis$1...@shale.ftech.net>
"Maeven" <maev...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:DzF8b.1673$fm2...@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
> a remarkable fount of information. Not always delivered with sugar, but
you
ugh oh:- the "f" word. stand well back; frank & leftpawrm are going to be
rolling in the dirt before you can say indian in*
jolyon
Subject: Re: Da Book
From: "Maeven" <A
HREF="mailto:maev...@bellsouth.net">maev...@bellsouth.net</A>
Date: Mon, Sep 15, 2003 7:44 PM
Message-id: <U7s9b.155$c84...@bignews1.bellsouth.net>
I kinda did it on purpose as I feel the other thread was beyond the point of
all sensibility to the point of hilarious. I wish some people would just
grow up and agree to disagree.
Can we get back to pens now?
Wendy <<
-Gee, I kinda did it on purpose -tee hee -aren't I cute. Who's got the Smors?
When's the pillow fight? -
So WENDY and JOLYON dragged this over into that. So WENDY, you're as dirty as
anyone aren't you? Hypocrite.
Frank, if we ever get into it again, we should charge admission instead of
letting all these *upright citizens* peek under the tent.
Reid McIntyre