Deoxidizing BHR

[Jon Szanto]

Did Syd (aka Wahlnut)have something to reblacken old BHR pens?

Indeed he does; take a look at Pen Potion #9. Of interest is a bit of text at the bottom of that section of the page:

The Wahlnut says:

The choice to restore any antique object should not be taken lightly. Some antique and vintage items including Fountain Pens may be of considerably higher value if left in their original, aged, with respectable "patina", condition. If you have any concern about whether the item you are considering restoring is going to suffer a loss in value by being refinished, do not restore that item. However, there are many wonderful daily writers that will never become the most prized among collectible, investment grade pens, yet they bring pleasure to their users. The outward appearance of these delightful instruments however may need a boost so they are more "presentable" in public and more pleasurable to use.

What Syd says there is pretty much what I've said above as well, and it is the way I choose to approach these pens.

[Jon Szanto]

oh gosh - you want me to read all of that link at this time of night

Well, that's up to you! I snipped the rest because if you *do* read the article you'll see what I'm getting at: I *know* that RW is not new and that was part of the point in the article - it took a few years for the problematic aspects of using it to show up. I am not comparing it's use on pens alongside the reblacker, I am noting that with a new product you may be in for some surprises down the road, just as in this case with RW. It is simply a good example of letting some time go by before you trust a valued object to some manner of alteration.

[Farmboy]

Potion 9 is a dye. Easily detected.

I have been offered deoxidized pens and I significantly discount my offer.

I prefer undeoxidized pens.

[kirchh]

The metals conservator at the British Museum told me they stopped using Renaissance Wax.

I don't recommend it.

--Daniel

[Jon Szanto]

The metals conservator at the British Museum told me they stopped using Renaissance Wax.

I don't recommend it.

Daniel, I've certainly had you in mind during all this. I've known your thoughts on RW from the past. Would you care to offer any thoughts on the issue of whether or not to treat BHR and if so, under what circumstances?

[kirchh]

The metals conservator at the British Museum told me they stopped using Renaissance Wax.

I don't recommend it.

Daniel, I've certainly had you in mind during all this. I've known your thoughts on RW from the past. Would you care to offer any thoughts on the issue of whether or not to treat BHR and if so, under what circumstances?

Here's my philosophy: What's the rush?

I will also say that the way I collect, I view pens as artifacts, and destructive facelifts are outside the scope of how I believe these objects should be handled. I suppose for more common pens that show considerable wear, one can tart them up as desired, but that rarely applies to a pen that I would acquire.

I worry that in a decade we will be awash in pens that anachronistically show 80 years of honest surface wear but have glossy black skin. And we'll regret it.

--Daniel

[PaulS]

yes, of course I shall read that link on R.W. - and today it will be

Lest it be thought I'm a philistine, I do agree with virtually all of the practical suggestions made so far - my bookbinding interest has taught me to tread carefully when approaching both the use and conservation of materials, and have to say that I wasn't aware of the B.Ms. current attitude to R.W., but they obviously know best.
In recent years there has been some change by institutions with a moving away from physical conservation of many 'antique' items, with the consequence that more sensitive materials are now simply stored in their 'as found' condition .............. as opposed the work practice of the 1950 - 1990s of tarting things up. I'm not gainsaying that habit, but it does have the down side insofar as presently some items cannot be handled whilst experts wait for divine providence as to the most suitable treatment, and it might be argued that the fear of making the wrong decision is now a phobia. In the meantime the public are unable to view older items as they are in boxes awaiting treatment.

A very good point, and I'd very much agree, with this fear of anachronistic appearance, whereby a 1915 e.d., over 100 years later, looks as though it's just come out of the factory - but remember there are shed loads of collectors out there who view appearance as everything, and routinely restore their pens - of whatever age - to pristine condition. Does this removal of all visible signs of the natural aging process show a lack of care for how an old pen should look?? Do we have the right to air-brush away the effects that make something look more naturally old? A lot of people think they do - just have a look at the higher value put on un-inked pens, and there's a part of me that groans when I find a good Parker that has more wear than I'd like to see.

So what do I do with a cabinet full of f.ps. that once were black and now are coated with this brownish/greenish skin. only joking.

[FredRydr]

Daniel and I are pen show friends, and we've poked one another in the eye from time to time, usually on a forum where eye-poking is rampant. Daniel is a conservator with a substantial well-researched collection of writing instruments. I am a pen user with a relatively small but fun group of vintage and modern instruments that write. I don't like my BHR pens to be olive hard rubber, because I use them. My pens have to perform for me, and while they do that, I want them to look nice, not as new, but with that sense of history without having to be curated. If you ever collected antique cars as I have, you'd understand the term "driver" with a "frame-up restoration." That's what I want in a 100-year-old fountain pen.

Be aware that already oxidised hard rubber gets fugly fast when perspiration and oil from skin come into contact. Over the time that one fill of ink is used in my favorite Conklin writer, a 4NL, I can see the change in color when I write with it. Why? That pen already has a coating of oxidised hard rubber, especially on the barrel, that reacts far faster to my skin than does my "deoxidised" hard rubber pens. And in my eyes, it's ugly. So the 4NL will be treated to a bath in Mark's stuff.

Some comments above reference the old solution that was once heralded as the answer. I've never used it, but I once sent a Wahl BCHR pencil to Richard Binder, asking him to apply it to the pencil to better match a Wahl pen I sent along; he talked me out of it for reasons cited above. And I sympathised with the reasons. Now Mark Hoover has created a solution that doesn't harm or dye the hard rubber as do alternatives. (If it affects the underlying hard rubber, I'll be dead long before it manifests itself.) Yes, it does remove the oxidised material, but I can see the chasing and imprint better after than before. It does not leave a glossy surface; if you want that, you have to polish and wax which I am loathe to do. I wish Mark was more apt at presenting his products on the internet, in the fashion that we take for granted from Brian Gray. I can tell you that the latest version of the deoxidiser is not anywhere near as sticky as the first. It is more like a slow-flowing translucent cream. I've dunked caps and barrels, but I've also used the deoxidiser on a rag and applied like a polish when I didn't want to disassemble a pen. I followed up with mineral oil to remove the deoxidiser. The stuff works for me like nothing else; Daniel might be horrified.

My advice? Buy it and try it on a junker, or best, go to a pen show and Mark will demonstrate. Be forewarned that the stuff is made in small batches, so be prepared to wait.

Fred

[Farmboy]

Is applying mineral oil standard practice after deoxidization?

[FredRydr]

Is applying mineral oil standard practice after deoxidization?

With Mark's stuff, yes. See: http://www.lbepen.com/deoxidizer-instructions

Fred

[Hawk]

This is an interesting thread. While I haven't used mineral oil, some people have used it on their pipe stems. At smokingpipes.com, there is a thread that discusses restoring the black on pipe stems, some use Obsidian Pipe Stem Oil with good results. a product that they sell. I don't smoke or collect pipes so I can't vouch for either one. The term 'deoxidation' is being used on this thread and used improperly. The term is used in the making of steel by removing excess oxygen.

[PaulS]

don't doubt that comment, although it's a word that has fallen into common parlance, so is now used, by most pen folk, to describe a certain degraded surface appearance on BHR - and rightly or wrongly, we all seem to understand what is being discussed

So what word or phrase would be more correct/appropriate to describe the particular problem affecting f.ps. ?

[Deb]

Oxiidised is correct. That's what happens to BHR. Deoxidation is a fiction by those selling reblacking products. Once the oxidisation has happened you can't reverse it. You either paint it over with something or you remove a layer.

[Hawk]

Oxiidised is correct. That's what happens to BHR. Deoxidation is a fiction by those selling reblacking products. Once the oxidisation has happened you can't reverse it. You either paint it over with something or you remove a layer.

Thanks, Deb.

[Farmboy]

Oxiidised is correct. That's what happens to BHR. Deoxidation is a fiction by those selling reblacking products. Once the oxidisation has happened you can't reverse it. You either paint it over with something or you remove a layer.

There is a third possibility, you can do both.

[Hawk]

I read in an old telephone site where Thomas Handcock vulcanized rubber with mercury, slightly before Goodyear. The timeline and year of 1844 is OK but the mercury appears to be wrong; he used sulfur also. Further investigation said RHR was made with rubber using mercury. Any comments, corrections or more information. They also said mercury isn't used anymore since it is a heavy metal. As a side note, in high school chemistry we played with mercury with our bare hands. I also heated mercury oxide, a pounder and it transformed into the silver liquid. Sorry for the digression.

[PaulS]

To be fair, the word which was suggested as being used incorrectly, was 'deoxidation, and not 'oxiidation' as picked up in the last couple of posts. It is true that when we remove, by whatever means, the surface degradation, we aren't deoxidizing the BHR - we're simply removing material that according to Marshall & oldfield 'has become brittle and lost suphur' - the crud perhaps.
If 'oxidized' is what happens to the BHR (and I'm not arguing that) on exposure to light (presumably the uv part) - then it might be thought by the less well educated, like me, that if we 'deoxidize' the surface we are simply undoing the first process - hence the perceived act of 'de-oxidizing' - so whilst incorrect, the term deoxidizing has fallen into common and informal use by the technically ignorant.

So, we still do need a word to replace 'deoxidizing' - a word which is accurate in its description of the process of removal of the degraded oxidized surface material.

[PaulS]

now had a chance to read this link, provided earlier in this thread http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic...35-01-001.html with particular reference to the ingredients (micro-crystalline and polyethylene waxes) of R.W. as used on the Benin Bronzes. As we've already said, the connection lacks sufficient relevance to pen materials to say with conviction that if used on our pens they might disintegrate in the near or distant future, but going on the premise that it's better not to use intrusive chemicals or at least those of whose long term effects are unknown, then better to be cautious and not experiment with them. Just as good results can be obtained using Micro-Mesh water based products, or similar.
I can't remember which of my pens I treated to R.W. - but flicking through the draws I've not been aware of any problems. Has anyone here, with certainty, found R.W. to be guilty of harming a pen?
Will ask the Brit. Lib. if they use the stuff on leather.

I'd maintain that used with caution, and only on pens that you know will never need any restoration or repair work, then you might try one or two second or third tier pens, just as an experiment - and to provide some sort of control sample - for future collectors. The main drawback - in the absence of anyone coming forward to advise of harm to their pens - is the almost impossible ability to remove these waxes, if the pen does at some future date need attention. As said above though, I now wouldn't use R.W. - it's expensive pound for pound, and doesn't really offer massive advantages over other methods. Mine is now kept for my books.
It goes without saying that we cannot treat our pens - for removal of micro-crystalline wax - using the same method as found appropriate for the Benin Bronzes.

All of this won't stop people wanting shiny black BHR pens, and so other folk will continue to 'blacken' them.

[Deb]

You can't "deoxidize" BHR. No such process exists. You don't need another word to replace re-blacking.

[Cob]

Well respect is diue to all the experts. However I recently purchased a terrible BHR Blackbird and also a bottle of Mark Hoover's horribly sticky product. I have to say that it works and the result may be seen in my photo which shows the barrel in its original state and the cap which has been "Hoovered". I should add that the Hoover product is not a black substance: it is a clear syrupy preparation.

Hoovered Blackbird.jpg

It is however a very sticky business. Hitherto I had had some limited success using Savinelli pipe-stem restorer.

Cob