Comparison – Wite Out Quick Dry/Extra Coverage/Super Smooth

Previously I’ve compared the two major brands of correction fluid: Liquid Paper and Wite Out. Back then I didn’t take a look at the fact that Wite Out comes in a few different kinds (but there is one that is basically “regular”), so I’ll attempt to rectify that this time. Now, the various “flavors” of Wite Out do go in and out of production, with the majors being “quick dry” (regular) and “extra coverage”. I also have a bottle of “super smooth” that I picked up second hand and surprisingly still works (it’s old enough to have the previous graphic design) but that type is currently out of production. How do they compare?

photo-1-2photo-1-1

Quick Dry – The standard of correction fluids and one that I’ve looked at before. Quick Dry is fairly “standard” in properties; it dries shiny and little warm in hue (yellow-ish). It is a bit finicky and tacky, sometimes making it difficult to get a smooth finish with multiple strokes. It covers regular pen, pencil and stray marks well (though it sometimes leaves a divot where the ink “repelled” it. But on darker lines like those made by Sharpies it only minimizes the effect.

photo-4

Extra Coverage – The other currently (easily) available Wite Out, Extra Coverage is smoother, dries matte, and is colder (and much more white) in hue. From my experience it layers well, always being fairly flat, even minimizing visible strokes. It covers pens and permanent markers with ease (though it’s still got that weird divot displacement thing going on) but doesn’t blend in as well with the paper. And, though I did no super thorough testing, it actually seems to dry faster than the “quick dry” or at least not remain tacky as long, but that could be because my “quick dry” bottles are older.

photo-2

Super Smooth – Being no longer available I have no idea what a “brand new” bottle of Super Smooth would be like, but I would hope it’s better than what I’ve got here. The bottle is old enough that it has a brush (not a sponge) applicator, and that’s not an asset since this particular type is very fond of clumping up. It’s visually similar to “quick dry” but more matte, and it doesn’t cover nearly as well (it just makes things look kinda hazy) forcing one to reapply it, causing many clumps and visible brush strokes. It dries much slower than the other two as well (maybe that’s why it lasted this long) and while it may be “smoother” in the technical sense I don’t see that as much of a positive either in the abstract or the comparison.

photo-3photo-3-1

If I had to pick a winner it would be “extra coverage” as the only flaw I see in it is that it doesn’t quite match the color of the average sheet of paper. The “regular” “quick dry” is still a good product but one I will be using less often now. It depends on whether or not you want the correction to blend in or completely cover up the mistake. But if there is one thing to take away from this, it’s that I now understand why “super smooth” was discontinued.

 

Review – Tach-It Metal Tap Knife (Carton Cutter)

Depending on the size or type of art (or craft) works one is doing, carton or box cutters may or many not be on one’s radar or considered a useful tool. But even if one isn’t using them for opening supplies or actually during the art-making process, it still isn’t a bad idea to have one around since they’re cheap and easy to use. The dozen-for-five-dollars that these are priced at might be a bit larger set than most people would need, but it’s still inexpensive enough that it wouldn’t be hard to pick up.

photo-124

Tap knives are one of the simplest types of box cutter. On this model, the outside sleeve is a single aluminum piece that has been bent around on itself. Inside is another piece of aluminum that has been folded with a cutout at one end and a flare at the other. A standard single-edge razor blade fits in the cutout end (and can be replace by sliding the insert out of the housing) while the flare prevents the knife from protruding too far forward.

photo-125

Use is simple. Tapping the back of the knife against a hard surface will extend the blade until it is stopped by the protrusion on the back. And when the cutting is done, the front of the knife can be tapped on a hard surface to retract the blade. Very little of the blade is exposed making it fairly safe to cut with, and it’s held in securely enough that I wouldn’t worry too much about accidental deployment of the blade. How well it cuts and how long it lasts depends on the razor blade used. And the ones that come in the package are not the greatest. The points are especially brittle, and while they can keep an edge for a decent amount of time, they will crack and split with too much stress.

As far as a cheap, effective, and simple box cutter goes, they work well enough. The fit and finish leave something to be desired: the edges are rough, the tolerances vary quite a bit, and no surface is smoothed and finished, but they are so inexpensive they are practically disposable. They cut, they’re reasonably safe, and they could last quite a long time since there’s not much too them. One could get better quality, but I’m not convinced you’d really need to.

Review – Moleskine Pocket Softcover Notebook

I’ve already reviewed the Moleskine pocket notebook in hardback, but I’ve also used the softback version, and since there are a few key differences besides the obvious, I though I’d highlight them. So this is only half a review, if you want to know about the paper you can look up my other Moleskine pocket review.

20131030-010203.jpg

So the cover is obviously soft. It is a lot thinner and as such you can see the binding through it, especially on the back where you can see the attachment points for the elastic band. They are a bit intrusive and noticeable. The cover is blank aside from the name Moleskine stamped rather deeply into the back cover. The look is a bit like the regular Moleskine, but the pages are cut the the same length as the cover, and it looks a bit more shiny. The front cover can roll up on itself and then bounce back, but it never fully regains its former shape. The back is much less flexible due to the back pocket that comes Moleskine standard. The cover also feels almost moist and rubbery, and any minor scratches and such simply bounce out unlike the Rhodia Webnotebook. The softness does mean that the elastic band leaves very noticeable marks on the cover and sometimes the paper. The spine in contrast to the hardcover feels much more durable and able to stand up to long, continued use.

20131030-010210.jpg

Which style of cover is better is a decision you have to make. This one is flexible, easily fits in a pocket, and is harder the permanently damage than the hard cover, but it offers less page protection and stability for writing, so it’s give and take.

Review – Royal Langnickel Nano-Liner 02 Red Technical Pen

So, you really need a red technical pen. You’ve heard good things about Microns, but you can’t find them in red at your local store. You instead find a red Royal Langnickel Nano-Liner pen. Is it a good substitute for a micron pen? Let’s see.

First off, the body of the pen is not sleek. It is grippy as a result but feels a bit rough on the hand. All necessary information is printed on the side and is fairly hard to rub off, though it can be done more easily than with other pens. The metal clip on the cap does its job well and the number on the top is easily visible and rub-resistant.

20130215-233456.jpg

The ink is a bright red, unmistakeable for any other color. It’s brighter than most other red pens and would most likely have to be diluted to even begin to simulate reality. It is permanent and a bit more liquid than most technical pens. It bleeds through thin paper with ease and pools at starting and stopping positions. With card stock it works just fine, but with a heavy grain paper the line tends to seep out and become wider. Precession drawing is difficult, even with the 02, which would seem to make a line as big as a Micron 05. However, for large sweeping motions this pen seems right at home, just don’t push to hard and destroy the nib.

20130215-233502.jpg

So, is this pen an adequate replacement for a Micron? Certainly not! It does have several good points: large amounts of ink are good for long, and sweeping lines, but less so for the precision drawing it is marketed for. It does do the drawing job better than a standard office pen and is cheaper than a Micron. I think it’s really up to personal preference as with all art supplies, but one should really try a Micron first before checking this pen out.

Review – Sakura Micron 005 Technical Pen

Ah, Microns, the main technical pen of the trade. This one specifically is the 005 (.2mm) black version. The body is easy to hold. The finish is glossy, but grip-able. It is just long enough to be comfortable in the hand and is a nice comfortable plastic. The nib size is neatly marked on the side and top, making it easy to find the right pen for the job. After much use however, the makings on both the side and top fade away, with the top going first.

The nib is very thin, good for fine detail work and writing. It does bend easily and one should be careful about how much pressure is applied when using it. When the correct amount of pressure is applied the line is very smooth and even. The ink itself is a nice deep black that is resistant to bleeding when wet but does fade when an eraser is rubbed over it. Other then that minor fading the Pigma ink is very reliable. The ink does not bleed through thin paper and mark other sheets below it.

After heavy use the markings on the pen do rub off as mentioned. The nib begins to wear down and the metal past it begins to mark the paper. The lines begin to become jittery and inconsistent. But that is after a long and useful life. The amount of time it takes to wear the pen down to that point is incredible. And it more then makes up for its price.

The Micron is the premiere technical pen (almost) and does its job incredibly well. They are expensive but amazing (in my opinion) and at the very least write well. And the amount of time that they last easily allows for them to be replaced when they begin to show signs of wear.

Review – Office Depot 20-Pound Copy Paper

By: Austin Smith

When one is starting to review art supplies, it’s difficult to find a starting place. So I picked the thing all art is put on; paper. More specifically I’m starting with Office Depot, 20-pound copy paper. The kind of thing that everyone has access to. And the kind of thing you’re most likely to start making art on. (or at least preliminary designs)

20-pound paper isn’t that thick, take it off the table and you can see right through it (not clearly, but you can). It obviously won’t hold much and buckles almost instantly in moisture. Thus it won’t be useful for anything more then pencil or light ink. Although it being copy paper and 8.5″ X 11″ it probably won’t be what your finished piece is on.

 

The paper is slick, mostly, it’s got enough grip and texture to not feel glossy and go sliding around on you. It takes both ink and pencil very well. When using a good eraser, pencil almost completely disappears. The ink shows through the paper, the pencil does not. And the texture is fine enough that it is barely noticeable to the naked eye. Which is something good if you’re planning on creating a workable draft of something and not just sketching.

The fact that this type of paper is almost universal and its small size make it great for sketches and drafts. Its main limitation is that, aside from copy paper, its dimensions are almost never used. Most printed and official online “art” documents use different aspect ratios from copy paper, making it almost exclusively for drafts and amateur art projects (in the art world).

It’s always good to have some around, to sketch or to find out how things fit together, and it can always be scanned and posted on a Blog with ease. It’s obviously a starting material, but one that never really leaves the desks of experts.

It’s also really cheap, which is a bonus.