Was a window into nothing.
Printable View
Was a window into nothing.
I think it's a safe assumption that the majority were and are made without windows, when you think about all the ebonite and non-translucent materials. But, how are you defining "ink window"? If I unscrew a non translucent barrel and examine the converter for remaining ink (or a cartridge, for that matter), am I looking at an "ink window"? I dunno...
Just hazarding a guess, I suspect "ink windows" came about from the introduction of translucent materials. An unexpected "benefit", so to speak, that marketers were quick to capitalize on. "Our new material allows you to see how much ink remains!!!" sort of thing, which perhaps led to the intentional inclusion of windows. Running out of ink while away from the bottle could be inconvenient or even problematic, which I suppose was a motivation for developing the cartridge.
Anyway, I find them useful when they're present. I kind of like them, but don't choose or not-choose a pen because it has an ink window or not.
Ink windows only really work well with "ink in the barrel" pens and it is the increase in popularity of those filling systems that has given rise to the increase in ink windows. I like them but most of my pens don't have an ink window and I don't miss it. If a pen runs out I always have another to hand so I'm not constantly trying to gauge how much ink is left.
I like them very much when they actually have ink in contact - as Eachan says above - "ink the barrel", but find them a bit pointless when they're just showing a converter or cartridge, which can be so easily checked otherwise.
I think it's one of the reasons I tend to favour piston filled pens over those with sacs, despite my having far more of the latter.
What I don't particularly like is an "ink in the barrel" pen without one. I have a piston fill Momento Zero which had some ink starvation problems early on (turned out to be a faulty feed). Not being able to judge whether the pen was empty or not made figuring out the problem so much harder than it needed to be, and I rather fell out of love with the pen along the way.
I've seen Parker advertisements about the "TV View Barrel" of the laminated clear Vacumatics since the fact that you could see the ink level(or at least when new, now there's no guarantee). Sometime after that Sheaffer started putting the little window in the section on I think both lever and vaccuum fillers, but I've found that to be of mixed use. By the 40s and 50s, American makers seem to have given up as you couldn't see the ink level on Sheaffer Touchdowns or Snorkels, nor could you on the original Vacumatic 51. You sort of can see it on the Aeromatic 51s-it's easy with a fresh, brand new sac but they color pretty quickly and can usually only be seen with strong backlighting.
My oldest piston pen is a Pelikan 100, and it has a(very ambered) large ink window. Striped Pelikans, whether vintage 400s or modern 400/600/800/1000s don't have them, but you can see the ink level in the entire barrel(other than on pens like my brown M800 where the stripes were opaque black). The solid color Pelikans like my M205 that was my first piston pen, the black M1000 that a friend of mine says will be his last pen he gets rid of, or my new 101N, have windows. All of my Montblanc pistons have windows, although I always feel like on the 12/14/22/24 it's in a weird spot since it's narrow and in the middle of the reservoir. I'm pretty sure all the 13x MBs had them, although I've never owned or handled one of them in person.
One oddball one I had was a C/C Montblanc 221PR. It had a tiny window that would let you get a peak at the level in the cartridge(never tried a converter in it)-seemed pretty useless but it was there.
Some Montblanc WE pens have solid barrels without windows but I don't really miss the fact that they don't have a window as, like you, I always have more than one pen to hand so if one's empty I pick up another.Quote:
Originally Posted by eachan
Also, it's one way of always knowing whether I'm writing with my Montblanc 146 or 147. :)
I think maybe the Dunn-Pen Company was the very first company to allow for a visualized fill sometime in the 1920s--I think those pens were moderately successful but that filling system was never used again in the U.S. Not too long later, Parker released the Vacumatic, which was the first highly successful pen with visualization, and pushed Sheaffer, Wahl-Eversharp and Conklin to follow suit. It became an integral advertising point for all of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by bunnspecial
I'd guess the Pelikan 100 (originally without model number iirc) was the first European pen with an ink window. Did it start a trend? Maybe for German pens?
I think the overall trend for visualization goes from pretty popular from the start, takes a big dip in the '60s through the '90s, and starts to come back in the aughts.
As for the structural integrity question--my understanding from Brad Torelli (who makes pens with them) is that there is no loss of integrity if the window is made properly. He makes them using cast acrylics which are more stable than injection-molded plastics. The only structural integrity issues with ink windows seem to come from modern injection-molded pens.
Dunn-Pen is one I'm going to have to look up and read up on.Quote:
Originally Posted by fountainpenkidI think maybe the Dunn-Pen Company was the very first company to allow for a visualized fill sometime in the 1920s--I think those pens were moderately successful but that filling system was never used again in the U.S. Not too long later, Parker released the Vacumatic, which was the first highly successful pen with visualization, and pushed Sheaffer, Wahl-Eversharp and Conklin to follow suit. It became an integral advertising point for all of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by bunnspecial
I'd guess the Pelikan 100 (originally without model number iirc) was the first European pen with an ink window. Did it start a trend? Maybe for German pens?
I think the overall trend for visualization goes from pretty popular from the start, takes a big dip in the '60s through the '90s, and starts to come back in the aughts.
As for the structural integrity question--my understanding from Brad Torelli (who makes pens with them) is that there is no loss of integrity if the window is made properly. He makes them using cast acrylics which are more stable than injection-molded plastics. The only structural integrity issues with ink windows seem to come from modern injection-molded pens.
While we're at it, I've never handled one but isn't Waterman's Ink-Vue sort of a take on the general Vacumatic concept?
I know the only cracked Montblanc barrel I've ever dealt with was a on a 60s 149, and it was cracked along the edge of one of the "stripes" in the ink window and continued down through the threads. I fortunately found a replacement barrel for it...
I'd been under the impression that at least the older resin MB 149 barrels were double-shot injection molded, although certainly don't hold me to that. That's just a guess from looking at them, and also sometimes seeing what looks like casting flash in the clear portions. If that's the case, it would give a stress point that could explain why mine cracked where it did.
Yes I forgot about Waterman's too with the ink-vue! And across the pond, Onoto, and Swan Viso-fil...(and I guess Ford's Patent counts).Quote:
Originally Posted by bunnspecialDunn-Pen is one I'm going to have to look up and read up on.Quote:
Originally Posted by fountainpenkidI think maybe the Dunn-Pen Company was the very first company to allow for a visualized fill sometime in the 1920s--I think those pens were moderately successful but that filling system was never used again in the U.S. Not too long later, Parker released the Vacumatic, which was the first highly successful pen with visualization, and pushed Sheaffer, Wahl-Eversharp and Conklin to follow suit. It became an integral advertising point for all of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by bunnspecial
I'd guess the Pelikan 100 (originally without model number iirc) was the first European pen with an ink window. Did it start a trend? Maybe for German pens?
I think the overall trend for visualization goes from pretty popular from the start, takes a big dip in the '60s through the '90s, and starts to come back in the aughts.
As for the structural integrity question--my understanding from Brad Torelli (who makes pens with them) is that there is no loss of integrity if the window is made properly. He makes them using cast acrylics which are more stable than injection-molded plastics. The only structural integrity issues with ink windows seem to come from modern injection-molded pens.
While we're at it, I've never handled one but isn't Waterman's Ink-Vue sort of a take on the general Vacumatic concept?
I know the only cracked Montblanc barrel I've ever dealt with was a on a 60s 149, and it was cracked along the edge of one of the "stripes" in the ink window and continued down through the threads. I fortunately found a replacement barrel for it...
I'd been under the impression that at least the older resin MB 149 barrels were double-shot injection molded, although certainly don't hold me to that. That's just a guess from looking at them, and also sometimes seeing what looks like casting flash in the clear portions. If that's the case, it would give a stress point that could explain why mine cracked where it did.
I like ink windows. I have said to myself that I won't buy another piston filler without one, but, you know, we all say crap to ourselves that we don't stick to.
I like ink windows, particularly on piston fillers.
With cartidge pens it is easy enough to stuff a spare cartridge into my wallet to carry out and about.
With pistons, it's not always practical. An empty imk window tells me to fil the pen before I take it outside.
The ink window also helps when the pen won't write.
If there's ink in the window, chances are it is a dried feed, which just needs wetting rather than refilling.
Indeed we do :)Quote:
Originally Posted by TSherbs
I like ink windows, not only for its ink-indicator function, but it's also very helpful when you try to re-cork old piston fillers.
Since I love German piston fillers, I restore quite a bit of them, and interestingly, although they may look similar from the outside, there are quite a few variants on how the piston fillers are constructed, and each of these little variants may ease or hinder restoration. But in all of my experience with these, the presence of an ink window helps a lot to ensure that the new cork does its job properly or not.
Great point about a view of the repaired mechanism. Very handy, that.Quote:
Originally Posted by penwash
Hadn't even thought of repair...
Another one along those lines, though-
I'm always afraid I'm going to break MB telescopic pistons because you turn them SO much and you get a definite "hitch" when the piston actually starts to turn. The ink window lets me confirm if I've dropped the piston far enough. Since they can wear and slip also, it helps me when evaluating one if the piston is actually working correctly.
Attachment 66642Hi. I've got a bit of a thing for Watermans glass cartridge pens, and this one turned up a while back .with the little gold S on the cap and I was surprised that it had the small round ink window .... it's the only one I've ever seen !
I'm in the camp that thinks it's usually a gimmick ( amongst other gimmicks obviously) , as when the pen runs dry it's time to refill it, and most of us have a bunch of pens inked up at any time anyway. Quite often the see through bits discolour as well.
I think there's a bit of irony in that statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robalone
In 2022, ink windows seem to be the norm on pens with an integral filling mechanism and especially on pistons, although there are certainly exceptions(like a lot of MB LEs as mentioned above).
I don't think it's a stretch to think that in 2022, the typical person using a piston pen is a person likely to both own multiples and to have more than one ready to go.
Back in the day of latex sacs, I'd venture to guess that most people only owned or at least actively used a single pen at a given time. Someone who just needs to pick up their pen and write all day certainly would have appreciated having a way to know when it was running low. There again, the pens that did have the ability to visualize it often made a big deal out of it.
Of course with levers, buttons, Vacumatics, etc I've heard plenty of folks talk about how it was normal at the end or beginning of the day to dunk your pen in your ink bottle, give the lever a few flips or the button a few presses, and know that your pen was full and ready to go. You'd only fill that pen out of your bottle of Skrip blue-black or whatever ink you were using and keep using it until it was empty, then probably buy another bottle of the same ink.
In 2022, in my immediate view on my desk I count 20 ink bottles, and there are well over 100 bottles in my office at home(and probably 25 at work). Yes, the bottle of Waterman Serenity Blue I bought in 2021 is nearly empty because nearly every pen I own has had that ink in it at some point or another, while the bottle of Superchrome Turquoise it sits next to is there for decoration other than a few times I've dipped it and the one time I filled a Hero 51 clone with it. I say all of that to underscore that even though I have my old faithful inks I use, I still enjoy variety and changing inks.
Most here probably know this already, but I remembered back when I first encounter it, thinking that it's quite unintuitive for an ink sac-based filling system to have an ink window.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...298919b7_c.jpg
[QUOTE=penwash;351623]Most here probably know this already, but I remembered back when I first encounter it, thinking that it's quite unintuitive for an ink sac-based filling system to have an ink window.
Hmm, maybe I'm missing something, but it's more than counterintuitive!
Even if the sac was say pliglass you wouldn't see very much if anything of the ink, and a latex sac would show a big fat nothing ?!
Is it even a thing that a sac filler has an ink window ? That doesn't make any sense !!
Possibly a 'demonstrator' with a clear sac ......but how many of them are there ? Anyway, that's not an ink window .
With some sac fillers a clear section gives a small view of the ink.
Especially with visualated sectionsQuote:
Originally Posted by eachan
https://i.imgur.com/lRH9JLM.jpg
[QUOTE=Robalone;351741]It gives an indication on how much ink is in the section, not the -- of course -- opaque ink sac.Quote:
Originally Posted by penwash
It is an ink window.
[QUOTE=penwash;351802]I'll add the caveat that I don't currently have a functioning pen with this feature. I had a Balance with it that I didn't ever really use much, and do have a couple in my "I'll get around to it" cup(plus one I've been soaking on and off for a few weeks since it's been stubborn to open. The only Balance that's really been a permanent resident for me is the red-veined gray OS that belonged to a great-great uncle, and it's old enough to not have that.Quote:
Originally Posted by RobaloneIt gives an indication on how much ink is in the section, not the -- of course -- opaque ink sac.Quote:
Originally Posted by penwash
It is an ink window.
In any case, the ink window is about the size and location of the one on the Lamy 2K. If nothing else it should be a "You're about to run out" warning, and I imagine you can get some idea by turning the pen on its side.
Aahhhh. Cool, Of course. Didn't think of that .Quote:
Originally Posted by eachan
Takes foot out of mouth . D'oh.
The Pelikan M101N, both the 1935 original and the recent limited edition, have a transparent portion between the piston and the section.
https://i.imgur.com/3IxWEIi.jpg
There are (were) ways to adapt, as you've noted. Early in my career there were still a few court reporters who were pen-writers. One used a Parker 51: he kept an open bottle of ink next to his steno pad and would dip the nib during pauses in testimony. Can't imagine the 51 would have gone dry anyway. Another would refill his lever filler when we went off the record. Don't remember the pen, but can't remember him ever wiping the nib after filling. An official reporter would have several pens out on his desk. They were the pros.Quote:
Originally Posted by bunnspecial
When I was in law school I had two ways to make sure not to run empty: refill at night when studying was done without regard to whether I thought the pen needed it or not. Second, carried a plastic bottle of Quink in my backpack. To bunnspecial's point: I survived college and law school on Quink blue-black. Solv-X meant never needing to flush my Parker 45.
Courtrooms and conference rooms are not places I choose to refill, which is why I always carry two fountain pens when there's going to be serious writing. Besides, that provides a perfectly logical explanation for needing more pens. If it's going to be boring I take a pen with a wide nib to enhance my doodles, add flair to the arrows in my notes, etc.
Ink windows are not an absolutely necessary but a cool feature on some pens:
https://live.staticflickr.com/3668/1...df3a8996_c.jpg
Pelikan 100N
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...3408a870_c.jpg
LAMY 2000
But there are also pens which just looks better without:
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...1be97270_c.jpg
OMAS Extra
https://live.staticflickr.com/8200/8...ee2c351a_c.jpg
Parker "51" Vacuamtic
So to me, it's rather a question of design than of functionality. here's a picture of my favourite ink windows:
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...0c229f03_c.jpg
...the LAMY safari wouldn't be the same without!
There was an earlier model by Waterman's with a huge ink window:Quote:
Originally Posted by Robalone
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...434a8aa6_c.jpg
Will has a pen with an ink window on a lever filler: the Ink-D-Cator.
https://m.facebook.com/redeempens/po...ale=zh_CN&_rdr
( Sorry, limited talent on my IPad)
The Parker Televisor (approx 1937) had a section that was half opaque black plastic and half ambered ink window. It is difficult to see in this picture because it really needs light going through to see.
I marked a little arrow to where it is, you can just about make out the difference in color.
Attachment 66712
This is a sac filling pen so by virtue of new materials they created a half transparent section.
It is quite different to the Waterman Ink Vue which has the visualizing section as part of the barrel.
Attachment 66713
In this case the sac is just a part of the pumping system which fills the barrel.
I've never owned an Ink-Vue, but does it not operate on a similar principle to the Parker Vacumatic?Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrawler
Vacumatics have a pump with a latex sac-type structure sealing off the end of the barrel. When the pump is pushed down, air is pushed out of the barrel, and when it is released ink is sucked up the breather tube. This continues until ink reaches the top of the breather(or actually a bit over, although generally I pump to expel this and prevent potential blobbing).
The ink is held directly in the barrel, and the most common Vacumatics are laminated with alternating "stripes" of color and transparent celluloid, although 70+ years later they can range from as clear as when made to only visible under strong backlighting.
The first pen you show looks like the section used on later Sheaffer balances. If I had to guess, like the Vacumatics, it was probably very clear when new and may or may not have darkened in the time since. The Sheaffers I've had with this feature vary in their ink window color.
The Ink-Vue mechanism is unnecessarily complex and quite different to Vacumatics. Ink-Vue is really a bulb filler with a linkage to an external pumping lever. The Vacumatics were made of striped material with transparent lines between lines of colour and you can see the level of ink by holding it up to the light and looking through. One of my Vacumatics (a 1946 US made) still has clear lines. The rest are ambered.Quote:
Originally Posted by bunnspecial
The Televisor came with an amber ink window, but mine is certainly darkened. The (Canadian) Televisor came with a very decently flexible nib.
Not to get into a sidetrack discussion too much, but in my mind the Ink-Vue and Vacumatic are still very similar. I have never handled an Ink-Vue, but am quite familiar with the Vacumatic both as a collector/user and in repair of them.
Both operate on the principle of the ink being stored directly in the celluloid barrel(as opposed to in a rubber sac). Both have a latex rubber seal at the top of the barrel that does not serve strictly as a container for the ink. Both work by manipulating that latex seal to expel air from the barrel(through a breather tube) and then in turn to use that latex seal to draw ink into the pen body, also by a breather tube.
The fundamental difference is that the Vacumatic "pumps" the latex in and out of the barrel to achieve this using a rod that is in-line with the body of the pen. The Ink-vue, as I understand it, forms the top latex seal into a bulb that is squeezed by operating a lever from the side of the pen to expel air, and then expand back out to draw ink in.
At the end of the day, the Ink-Vue looks basically like Waterman liked the Vacumatic and what it offered but came up with a Rube Goldberg mechanism with the same operating principal as the Vacumatic presumably to circumvent Parker's patent.
At the end of the day, I personally consider the Vacumatic a rather elegant mechanism, and Parker use it for around 20 years. As long as you have a wrench to remove the filling unit, the mechanism is simple to service(caveat about the pellet cups on late fillers that can break if you're not careful removing the pellet) and is reliable aside of course from the diaphragm with a finite life.