If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Waternan Hemisphere Problems
Hi --
What do you know? You *did* spot the new message down there... BL wrote: Something varies for sure, but that doesn't mean it's the ink. Could be poor reliability of the measures employed. There's a lot we don't know about what James and Michael did in their respective analyses. No, it definitely isn't laboratory-grade chromatography, but... Certainly, if I examine a bottle of Quink Black in moderate room lighting (diffuse fluorescent lighting), I see no evidence of pink at all. The film of ink on the bottle looks grayish blue. If, however, I hold the same bottle up to very bright direct light (Stylus Reach Streamlight, other very bright incandescent light, direct sunlight), then I do see pink. ....I'm not sure how much it has to do with the spectral balance of the light they photographed in. In James' separation, there are clearly two different dyes, while in Michael's, there's apparently one. It could be that there were two that didn't separate in the "black dye" test, but using the same technique Michael did have other inks separate. I think it would take some crazy lighting for black dye to look blue in one area and yellow in an immediately adjacent area, or for adjacent blue and yellow to both look black. But you don't own a bottle of Quink Black, so you can't see for yourself. No, but I may yet. Brian -- |
Ads |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Waternan Hemisphere Problems
Brian Ketterling wrote:
...I'm not sure how much it has to do with the spectral balance of the light they photographed in. In James' separation, there are clearly two different dyes, while in Michael's, there's apparently one. It could be that there were two that didn't separate in the "black dye" test, but using the same technique Michael did have other inks separate. I think it would take some crazy lighting for black dye to look blue in one area and yellow in an immediately adjacent area, or for adjacent blue and yellow to both look black. I'm a hopeless researcher and would have to see results when both bottles are tested under identical conditions to rule-out measurement error or some other threat to internal validity. You know, ink manufacturers do change their dyes from time-to-time. I believe there's some kind of law that requires ink manufacturers to change dyes periodically as a way to aid law enforcement. But changing dyes (or any other constituent for that matter) won't necessarily change the performance characteristics of a product unless that's what the manufacturer wants to do. No manufacturer who wants to stay in business is going to make a change to a product without first determining whether that change will affect the performance characteristics of the product and if so how. But you don't own a bottle of Quink Black, so you can't see for yourself. No, but I may yet. Want me to send you a bottle? I have cases of the stuff. -- B |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Waternan Hemisphere Problems
BL wrote:
Brian Ketterling wrote: In James' separation, there are clearly two different dyes, while in Michael's, there's apparently one. I'm a hopeless researcher and would have to see results when both bottles are tested under identical conditions to rule-out measurement error or some other threat to internal validity. It occurred to me after I posted my last message that you've got tons of Quink and could test it yourself. I contacted both guys, so if you've got some idea of the ages of your newer bottles, Michael's was from about 2000 and James' was brand-new. By the way, James bought his at Staples. You could put the inks side-by-side on the same piece of paper, in the same beaker of water. You know, ink manufacturers do change their dyes from time-to-time. I do. I believe there's some kind of law that requires ink manufacturers to change dyes periodically as a way to aid law enforcement. Never heard of that one... I thought it had more to do with the changing dye market (kind of like coffee blenders, always aiming to get the same result with what's available). But changing dyes (or any other constituent for that matter)... (like the biocide) ...won't necessarily change the performance characteristics of a product unless that's what the manufacturer wants to do. No manufacturer who wants to stay in business is going to make a change to a product without first determining whether that change will affect the performance characteristics of the product and if so how. Generally true, I guess, although Consumers Union might offer a few caveats. Well, as I've said, I'm willing to believe that Quink is generally decent ink (even though, judging by the FPN thread, some pens don't like it) -- I just figured something happened to the shipment that my local Staples was working its way through. I checked their bottles periodically over a period of months, but they may have been going through a single shipment during that time. I was, however, picking up an implicit contention from you that Quink is somehow perfect and immutable, which is why I brought up things like other peoples' complaints and dye variations. I've gotten the sense from reading fountain pen forums like this one that it's acceptable to disagree on Quink's dye saturation, but questioning the quality of any of its iterations, as ink, is taboo. That seems ridiculous to me -- it's just an industrial product offered on the market, and the only component that's remained the same over the years, apparently, is the brand name printed on the label. Want me to send you a bottle? I have cases of the stuff. I'd be happy to try it, and willing to believe that I'd like it -- thanks for the offer! Brian -- |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Waternan Hemisphere Problems
Brian Ketterling wrote:
I was, however, picking up an implicit contention from you that Quink is somehow perfect and immutable, which is why I brought up things like other peoples' complaints and dye variations. Hi Brian... Been busy at work and haven't had enough time to respond to this. Please bear in mind that many people who speak highly of Quink's quality have been using it for a very long time, in some cases for decades. This does not mean they're blind loyalists who've stuck with the ink in spite of its failures. I suspect that these people, like myself, keep using Quink because it consistently performs well and is of consistently high quality. See the following threads on Lion & Pen: http://kamakurapens.invisionzone.com...?showtopic=118 http://kamakurapens.invisionzone.com...?showtopic=207 Although I haven't been using Quink for 50 years as Rob has, I have been using it for 10 years and haven't had a single problem with it. In addition, I have dozens of bottles from the 40s, 70s, 90s, and 2000s, and have never had a single problem with any of them. No SITB, no mold, no crud, no flecks, nothing precipitating out of solution, nuthin'. Furthermore, the ink flows beautifully from my pens, and I've been using primarily dry writers (51s and VPs/Caplesses for the past couple of years, especially at work). I have found the latest iterations of Quink Black to be free flowing, not slow flowing. The 51 Demis that are filled with Quink Black have been continuously filled with Quink Black for several years. These pens write beautifully the moment nib touches paper. No flow problems whatsoever. I do not read FPN, but I did slog through the thread you cited. I'm sorry, but what was your point in asking me to read that?! Oh my Heavens! I laughed out loud when I read the 12th post from the top in which one poster, with 2237 posts, told another poster, with 257 posts, to "listen rather than talk." Ahem! ... What's a little more troubling, though, is that the thread contains factual errors, some of which were corrected (e.g., that original Quink was pulled off the market because it hurt pens), but others that went uncorrected (e.g., that Quink is made in France). BTW, I don't buy the bit about dye variations in recent iterations of Quink Black for the reasons I cited previously. I've gotten the sense from reading fountain pen forums like this one that it's acceptable to disagree on Quink's dye saturation, but questioning the quality of any of its iterations, as ink, is taboo. That seems ridiculous to me -- It only seems ridiculous to you because you have no experience with it. And it's not taboo to question its quality. But if you're going to question its quality, you'd better be prepared to sway the opinions of people who have tons of experience with the stuff. it's just an industrial product offered on the market, and the only component that's remained the same over the years, apparently, is the brand name printed on the label. Changing components does not equate with variability in performance. Even Richard made that distinction. Again, people who use Quink do so because of its performance characteristics (quick dry time, etc.) and consistent quality. -- B |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Waternan Hemisphere Problems
BL wrote:
Brian Ketterling wrote: I've gotten the sense [that] questioning the quality of any of [Quink's] iterations, as ink, is taboo. That seems ridiculous to me -- It only seems ridiculous to you because you have no experience with it. And it's not taboo to question its quality. The taboo that doesn't exist isn't ridiculous ? (BTW, you shouldn't try to tell me why things seem to me as they do -- leave that to Tony Snow and Don Rumsfeld!) But if you're going to question its quality, you'd better be prepared to sway the opinions of people who have tons of experience with the stuff. I guess I should have added that "even seeming to question its quality" will elicit outrage. Back to my spoiled- (not necessarily lousy-) ink assumption. I was wrong: I have bought some black Quink, as it turns out -- I'd forgotten about it. It's in cartridges that I bought at the same store, during the same period that I was turning up my nose at the bottled Quink. That bottled Quink *was* cruddy (I'll believe my eyes, and risk the wrath of the Elders by not trying to make them sway), but the stuff in the cartridges is fine. It's not separated, it doesn't have a weird tint, and it flows out of the "45" I tried it in without a problem. Brian -- |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Waternan Hemisphere Problems
After weeks of struggling with different inks in my Waterman
Hemisphere and having the sames issues, ink feed problems after two pages, I finally gave up the fight and sent the pen back to Parker here in the UK. They are going to adjust the feed. I asked, if like other quality pen manufacturers they offered a free nib exchange facility as I fancied a broad. They didn't reply to that! I know that I should have done this earlier but I don't like to give up. I got a bit of a shock when they sent me an ivoice for the work. I wondered whose lifetime their lifetime warranty referred to considering the pen was an xmas 2006 present and wasn't used until mid January 2007. They quickly apologised for the error! I will let you know how I get on. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Waternan Hemisphere Problems
Brian Ketterling wrote:
The taboo that doesn't exist isn't ridiculous ? Want taboo? Want outrage? Just try criticizing Noodlers. Criticizing Noodlers is taboo because "Nathan is one of us." All you'll get when you criticize Quink are questions and comments from people who've been using the stuff for years (in some cases decades) and who've never had problems with it. It's nothing if isn't boring... No fashionable colors, no catchy names with gourmet or historical referents, no claims of immortality ... Boring, Boring, Boring. Even Quink's claim to fame, namely consistency, is boring. The color of Washable Blue hasn't changed in 65 years. Boring. Stuff dries fast. Boring. It's safe. Boring. Got a clogged 61 filler? Soak it in Quink! Boring. (BTW, you shouldn't try to tell me why things seem to me as they do -- leave that to Tony Snow and Don Rumsfeld!) Well, I wouldn't have been put off at all if you had said something to the effect of, "Quink only seems like good ink to you because you've used it for 10 years with no problems whatsoever and your experience comports with the experiences of your friends, like Rob and others, who've used it for decades with no problems." I woulda been fine with that. (Do you actually listen to Tony Snow?!) I guess I should have added that "even seeming to question its quality" will elicit outrage. If you want outrage, criticize Noodlers... preferably on FPN... but wear your asbestos suit and be ready to run. And while you're over there, never, ever, *ever* deign to question the opinions of AN AUTHORITY (or even those who post a lot). The quality of information doesn't matter as much as the mouth from whom the information emanated. Speaking of quality of information, I've ordered chromatography strips and will do a few tests here of various iterations of Black Quink. You know, we've been referring to these as "various iterations," but I'm not sure they are different iterations. I have a bottle here from Gillette and another from Sanford, and I'm not convinced they're different iterations at all. I think the stuff has been made in New Haven all along and very little has changed. I will do more research on this to find out. I will post my results on Lion & Pen. Back to my spoiled- (not necessarily lousy-) ink assumption. I was wrong: I have bought some black Quink, as it turns out -- I'd forgotten about it. It's in cartridges that I bought at the same store, during the same period that I was turning up my nose] at the bottled Quink. That bottled Quink *was* cruddy (I'll believe my eyes, and risk the wrath of the Elders by not trying to make them sway), but the stuff in the cartridges is fine. It's not separated, it doesn't have a weird tint, and it flows out of the "45" I tried it in without a problem. Wrath? Anyway, next bottle of "cruddy" Quink you find, drop me an e-mail and I'll pay you to send it to me. I didn't see one reference to crud when I slogged through that torturous thread over on FPN. Those who did complain (not all complained) complained that it didn't flow well in their pens. I'll drop you an e-mail and let you know when I've posted my results on Lion & Pen. It'll be a few weeks. -- B |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Waternan Hemisphere Problems
AndyH" wrote:
After weeks of struggling with different inks in my Waterman Hemisphere and having the sames issues, ink feed problems after two pages, I finally gave up the fight and sent the pen back to Parker here in the UK. They are going to adjust the feed. I asked, if like. .... I will let you know how I get on. I hope they do a good job for you Andy. -- B |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Waternan Hemisphere Problems
On Feb 20, 4:10 pm, "BL" wrote:
AndyH" wrote: After weeks of struggling with different inks in my Waterman Hemisphere and having the sames issues, ink feed problems after two pages, I finally gave up the fight and sent the pen back to Parker here in the UK. They are going to adjust the feed. I asked, if like. .... I will let you know how I get on. I hope they do a good job for you Andy. -- B Thank you. The pen arrived back today and I wrote a three page letter to my mum without a skip of the pen, so I am really pleased. However, since using this and the Rotring 600 I have realised how soulless these pens are and am now search for something a little older than my Parker 61, that has an italic of more flexible nib that the new pens. Something that adds character to my written ramblings. I fear the bug has me! |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Waternan Hemisphere Problems
On Feb 20, 4:10 pm, "BL" wrote:
AndyH" wrote: After weeks of struggling with different inks in my Waterman Hemisphere and having the sames issues, ink feed problems after two pages, I finally gave up the fight and sent the pen back to Parker here in the UK. They are going to adjust the feed. I asked, if like. .... I will let you know how I get on. I hope they do a good job for you Andy. -- B Thank you. The pen arrived back today and I wrote a three page letter to my mum without a skip of the pen, so I am really pleased. However, since using this and the Rotring 600 I have realised how soulless these pens are and am now search for something a little older than my Parker 61, that has an italic of more flexible nib that the new pens. Something that adds character to my written ramblings. I fear the bug has me! |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Int'l (short) cartridges won't fit in Waterman Hemisphere | [email protected] | Pens & Pencils | 5 | August 13th 06 10:24 AM |
Waterman Hemisphere opinions? | RPJ | Pens & Pencils | 3 | July 26th 06 01:05 AM |
Ebay problems? | Sue H | Autographs | 9 | December 21st 05 03:20 AM |
Wurlitzer 3400 problems | Bob E. | Juke Boxes | 4 | August 21st 03 05:19 AM |
Rowe CD100 problems... something new | KLR | Juke Boxes | 1 | June 29th 03 09:51 AM |