When I first started boxing, I picked up a stamp pad without looking too
closely; it was a tri-colored pigment ink. I used it a few times in the
summer months. I can see it being messy, especially if the last finder
does not clean off the stamp adequately for the next finder. This would
explain why fine details could easily be lost. Scrapbookers and ink
specialists, please add your two cents on this one.

In one of my logbooks I used regular copy paper and the ink on some of the
entries did bleed through. I don't know what ink was used, maybe the
"chalk" type. The letterbox container was pretty tight, so I don't think
moisture was a contributing factor. The ink dye stamps didn't run or
fade. The dry time on pigment inks is probably longer and, if not
completely dry, I can see that causing a mess.

I changed my sig stamp this year and I now use a archival ink (sepia
tone).

speedsquare




__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com

Pigment ink dries much slower than dye base inks, which causes smudging. It is great for card making when embossing - using a heat gun and embossing powders. Pigment ink comes in a better variety of colors, so I think that's why people use them in letterboxing. I do put it in my PLBs, because I use a lot of gold and silver. I figure that when the person stamps in, they can blot it or leave their logbook open until it dries. That is not so convenient when hiking out in the woods.

I always carry several colors of dye base ink with me when I go letterboxing. If there is pigment ink in the letterbox, I use my own.

Enjoy!

donutz716

kirbert2001 wrote:
I recently ran across something I haven't seen before: Instructions
to NOT use pigment ink to stamp in. Not just once, but several. One
explained that the log book was thin paper and it would soak through.
One explained that the log book was card stock and it wouldn't soak
in. One explained that the rubberstamp featured very fine lines and
that the pigment ink would fill them in and clog them up.

I don't personally use a pigment ink pad, but I have placed quite a
few boxes and nearly all have either thin paper, card stock, or fine
lines on the rubberstamp. Are any of these concerns valid? Does
anyone have bad experience with pigment inks?









SPONSORED LINKS
Gsi outdoors Outdoors The great outdoors

---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


Visit your group "letterbox-usa" on the web.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
letterbox-usa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


---------------------------------






---------------------------------
Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "kirbert2001"
wrote:
> I don't personally use a pigment ink pad, but I have placed quite a
> few boxes and nearly all have either thin paper, card stock, or fine
> lines on the rubberstamp. Are any of these concerns valid? Does
> anyone have bad experience with pigment inks?

(jumps up and down wildly)

Oh, I have a LOT to say on this subject, but remember, it is *ONLY MY
OWN PERSONAL OPINION!*

I use pigment ink exclusively. I wish everyone did.

Yes, it takes a bit longer to dry. About 3 or 4 more seconds longer
than dye based. Blow on it. It's worth it.

Yes, it can get smudgy. And the problem is ????

Yes, it bleeds through thin paper. If I encounter a logbook with thin
paper, I make sure that I place an index card under the page before
stamping in and make sure that the image is dry before I close the
logbook.

Yes, it can sometimes give off a pebbly looking image if used on
textured card stock. I think it looks cool.

Yes, it can clog fine lines on stamps. That's why I clean the stamp
after I use it. Doesn't everyone? (rolls eyes)

Now *WHY* do I wish everyone in the universe used pigment ink?

BECAUSE IF THE LOGBOOK GETS WET, THE IMAGES STAY INTACT. Any sig
stamps with dye inks just bleed away. I've got about 40 or so boxes
out there, and sometimes they get wet. I've lost so many precious
entries because of the prominent use of dye based ink pads.

So that's my experience with pigment ink pads. I'm strong in my
*opinions*, but they are my *opinions*. I don't expect anyone to
actually read them as *directives*.

YMMV.

Warrior Woman
who will take a smudgy permanent image in her water soaked letterbox
logbook over a plethora of washed out blank pages anyday

You've made some good points, WW. Just want to add that I have a stamp in my personal logbook that I stamped in from a letterbox, which had pigment ink from 4 weeks ago and it still isn't dry. My friend Suz has one from months ago with the same issue. She has to keep a paper towel between the pages so it won't get over everything. When I was talking about smudges, I was referring to my personal logbook that I take with me, not the logbook of the letterbox. I stamp dye based inks exclusively in my personal logbook now, so that it doesn't get ruined by the pigment inks.

Enjoy!

donutz716

Warrior Woman wrote:
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "kirbert2001"
wrote:
> I don't personally use a pigment ink pad, but I have placed quite a
> few boxes and nearly all have either thin paper, card stock, or fine
> lines on the rubberstamp. Are any of these concerns valid? Does
> anyone have bad experience with pigment inks?

(jumps up and down wildly)

Oh, I have a LOT to say on this subject, but remember, it is *ONLY MY
OWN PERSONAL OPINION!*

I use pigment ink exclusively. I wish everyone did.

Yes, it takes a bit longer to dry. About 3 or 4 more seconds longer
than dye based. Blow on it. It's worth it.

Yes, it can get smudgy. And the problem is ????

Yes, it bleeds through thin paper. If I encounter a logbook with thin
paper, I make sure that I place an index card under the page before
stamping in and make sure that the image is dry before I close the
logbook.

Yes, it can sometimes give off a pebbly looking image if used on
textured card stock. I think it looks cool.

Yes, it can clog fine lines on stamps. That's why I clean the stamp
after I use it. Doesn't everyone? (rolls eyes)

Now *WHY* do I wish everyone in the universe used pigment ink?

BECAUSE IF THE LOGBOOK GETS WET, THE IMAGES STAY INTACT. Any sig
stamps with dye inks just bleed away. I've got about 40 or so boxes
out there, and sometimes they get wet. I've lost so many precious
entries because of the prominent use of dye based ink pads.

So that's my experience with pigment ink pads. I'm strong in my
*opinions*, but they are my *opinions*. I don't expect anyone to
actually read them as *directives*.

YMMV.

Warrior Woman
who will take a smudgy permanent image in her water soaked letterbox
logbook over a plethora of washed out blank pages anyday








SPONSORED LINKS
Gsi outdoors Outdoors The great outdoors

---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


Visit your group "letterbox-usa" on the web.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
letterbox-usa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


---------------------------------






---------------------------------
Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

In a message dated 11/17/05 10:23:06 AM, donutz716@yahoo.com writes:

<< Just want to add that I have a stamp in my personal logbook that I stamped
in from a letterbox, which had pigment ink from 4 weeks ago and it still
isn't dry. >>

Do you have glossy pages? Pigment ink never dries when stamped on glossy
paper -(unless you emboss it)
leslie c

As a scrapbooker and stamper I can tell you that the pigment inks
take much, much longer to dry and that could definitely cause the
problems in the logbook. Most srapbookers use pigment because it is
archival safe. A dye ink dries much faster... we use dye ink for our
letterboxing.








--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, Karen Ruhl
wrote:
>
> When I first started boxing, I picked up a stamp pad without
looking too
> closely; it was a tri-colored pigment ink. I used it a few times
in the
> summer months. I can see it being messy, especially if the last
finder
> does not clean off the stamp adequately for the next finder. This
would
> explain why fine details could easily be lost. Scrapbookers and ink
> specialists, please add your two cents on this one.
>
> In one of my logbooks I used regular copy paper and the ink on some
of the
> entries did bleed through. I don't know what ink was used, maybe
the
> "chalk" type. The letterbox container was pretty tight, so I don't
think
> moisture was a contributing factor. The ink dye stamps didn't run
or
> fade. The dry time on pigment inks is probably longer and, if not
> completely dry, I can see that causing a mess.
>
> I changed my sig stamp this year and I now use a archival ink (sepia
> tone).
>
> speedsquare
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>

Try heat setting it. If you are not a crafter and
don't have a heat tool try a hairdryer.

--- Donna Magner wrote:

> You've made some good points, WW. Just want to add
> that I have a stamp in my personal logbook that I
> stamped in from a letterbox, which had pigment ink
> from 4 weeks ago and it still isn't dry. My friend
> Suz has one from months ago with the same issue.
> She has to keep a paper towel between the pages so
> it won't get over everything. When I was talking
> about smudges, I was referring to my personal
> logbook that I take with me, not the logbook of the
> letterbox. I stamp dye based inks exclusively in my
> personal logbook now, so that it doesn't get ruined
> by the pigment inks.
>
> Enjoy!
>
> donutz716
>
> Warrior Woman wrote:
> --- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com,
> "kirbert2001"
> wrote:
> > I don't personally use a pigment ink pad, but I
> have placed quite a
> > few boxes and nearly all have either thin paper,
> card stock, or fine
> > lines on the rubberstamp. Are any of these
> concerns valid? Does
> > anyone have bad experience with pigment inks?
>
> (jumps up and down wildly)
>
> Oh, I have a LOT to say on this subject, but
> remember, it is *ONLY MY
> OWN PERSONAL OPINION!*
>
> I use pigment ink exclusively. I wish everyone did.
>
> Yes, it takes a bit longer to dry. About 3 or 4
> more seconds longer
> than dye based. Blow on it. It's worth it.
>
> Yes, it can get smudgy. And the problem is ????
>
> Yes, it bleeds through thin paper. If I encounter a
> logbook with thin
> paper, I make sure that I place an index card under
> the page before
> stamping in and make sure that the image is dry
> before I close the
> logbook.
>
> Yes, it can sometimes give off a pebbly looking
> image if used on
> textured card stock. I think it looks cool.
>
> Yes, it can clog fine lines on stamps. That's why I
> clean the stamp
> after I use it. Doesn't everyone? (rolls eyes)
>
> Now *WHY* do I wish everyone in the universe used
> pigment ink?
>
> BECAUSE IF THE LOGBOOK GETS WET, THE IMAGES STAY
> INTACT. Any sig
> stamps with dye inks just bleed away. I've got
> about 40 or so boxes
> out there, and sometimes they get wet. I've lost so
> many precious
> entries because of the prominent use of dye based
> ink pads.
>
> So that's my experience with pigment ink pads. I'm
> strong in my
> *opinions*, but they are my *opinions*. I don't
> expect anyone to
> actually read them as *directives*.
>
> YMMV.
>
> Warrior Woman
> who will take a smudgy permanent image in her water
> soaked letterbox
> logbook over a plethora of washed out blank pages
> anyday
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
> Gsi outdoors Outdoors The great outdoors
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
> Visit your group "letterbox-usa" on the web.
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
> to:
> letterbox-usa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
> Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in
> one click.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
>
>




__________________________________
Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.
http://farechase.yahoo.com

Count us in the pigment crowd for all of W's reasons. We recently
had to replace a soaked logbook. Dye Ran. Pigment Stayed.

Life goes on,

LB

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Warrior Woman"
wrote:
>
> --- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "kirbert2001"

> wrote:
> > I don't personally use a pigment ink pad, but I have placed
quite a
> > few boxes and nearly all have either thin paper, card stock, or
fine
> > lines on the rubberstamp. Are any of these concerns valid? Does
> > anyone have bad experience with pigment inks?
>
> (jumps up and down wildly)
>
> Oh, I have a LOT to say on this subject, but remember, it is *ONLY
MY
> OWN PERSONAL OPINION!*
>
> I use pigment ink exclusively. I wish everyone did.
>
> Yes, it takes a bit longer to dry. About 3 or 4 more seconds
longer
> than dye based. Blow on it. It's worth it.
>
> Yes, it can get smudgy. And the problem is ????
>
> Yes, it bleeds through thin paper. If I encounter a logbook with
thin
> paper, I make sure that I place an index card under the page
before
> stamping in and make sure that the image is dry before I close the
> logbook.
>
> Yes, it can sometimes give off a pebbly looking image if used on
> textured card stock. I think it looks cool.
>
> Yes, it can clog fine lines on stamps. That's why I clean the
stamp
> after I use it. Doesn't everyone? (rolls eyes)
>
> Now *WHY* do I wish everyone in the universe used pigment ink?
>
> BECAUSE IF THE LOGBOOK GETS WET, THE IMAGES STAY INTACT. Any sig
> stamps with dye inks just bleed away. I've got about 40 or so
boxes
> out there, and sometimes they get wet. I've lost so many precious
> entries because of the prominent use of dye based ink pads.
>
> So that's my experience with pigment ink pads. I'm strong in my
> *opinions*, but they are my *opinions*. I don't expect anyone to
> actually read them as *directives*.
>
> YMMV.
>
> Warrior Woman
> who will take a smudgy permanent image in her water soaked
letterbox
> logbook over a plethora of washed out blank pages anyday
>

Someone on a wedding board was talking about this kind of ink & how it
doesn't dry. One person suggested to use a heat drying tool or
hairdryer & another said you could spray it with hairspray to set it
as well.

~Littlemonkey



--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, MaryAnn Lockard
wrote:
>
> Try heat setting it. If you are not a crafter and
> don't have a heat tool try a hairdryer.
>

--- Lightnin Bug wrote:

> Count us in the pigment crowd for all of W's
> reasons. We recently
> had to replace a soaked logbook. Dye Ran. Pigment
> Stayed.

OK. However, having found quite a few wet log books
in my time (especially geocaches), I'd have to say
that if it gets wet, it's ruined, regardless of
whether the ink runs or not. I've found some that
were a solid mass of wet cellulose, no discernable
pages. I suppose if it just gets a LITTLE damp and
you manage to dry it out, the pigment stamps might
have an edge. But it seems as though a log book is
rarely merely damp; it's usually either dry or
completely waterlogged.

-- Kirbert





__________________________________
Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.
http://farechase.yahoo.com

I love that pigment inks are waterproof, but in Humid Houston, they
take days and days to dry. And of course dye inks dry fast but fade.

My alternative when letterboxing is to combine the best of both worlds
with a hybrid ink. It is a waterproof dye inkpad. I use Ancient
Page (made by clearsnap) but I'm sure there are many other
manufacturers as well. The pads come in many bright vibrant colors
and can be found at most stamping or craft stores. The package says
archival quality and it driest lightning fast. What more can you ask
for in an inkpad. (Do put a rubberband around it though when tossing
it in your pack or the lid will probably come off and your stuff will
be oh so colorful)

"One person suggested to use a heat drying tool or
hairdryer & another said you could spray it with hairspray to set it
as well."

Yeah, I tried the hairdryer trick but the cord wouldn't reach far
enough into the woods. *grin*

But seriously, I think StarSaels and Kirby made some excellent points.
Having found almost 200 boxes and having planted over 100, I have
definately learned something.

I am annoyed at people who put bags around the outsides of boxes! It
just makes the water problem worse. I now use Lock n- Lock containers
covered with camo tape and hunter green or black plastic spray paint
(Fusion by Krylon. I use pint size Ziploc freezer bags except for my
micro boxes. I separately bag the logbook. I no longer provide ink or
pens in my boxes...unless a specific ink or pen is required, such as my
Glow-in-The-Dark Box, The Haunting. After having 2 boxes near streams
being carried away....I no longer hide boxes low along a creek edge. I
will hide them in a tree or up a slope.

I have found boxes with the logbook double bagged, the stamp double
bagged, then everything in a bigger outer bag, and then the outer
container. I think this is overkill. While I am careful to close all
that stuff up, I wonder if an boxer in a hurry (we all know they are
out there) would take the time to close all of that stuff? And doesn't
that negate the whole idea behind all the extra bags? It's one reason I
switched to the Lock n-Lock...you KNOW when they are
sealed...no "burping" the edges or other stuff required. They are
completely air and watertight once closed and they are EASY to close.
Even children will close them! As for the Ziploc, the freezer style
bags are easier to close than the regular ones and are thicker to boot.
They also have an area to write on with a marker. I have been told the
Zip "tab" style can break and will force people to tear open the bag,
so I no longer use that type. Basically...make it EASY for boxers to do
the right thing. Easy to close containers and plenty of hiding material
nearby.

As for disappearing ink, I have a soaked logbook right here that was
returned to me. It had been muggled and strewn about, but a few pages
were recovered. The stamp image from SpudHund was clear as could
be...while WINK's and Tarheel's signature stamps were
obliterated....except for the "tar" spot on Tarheel's image. I will
find out what each of them used.

Hope this helps.

Lock Wench

--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Cyndie" wrote:
>
>It's one reason I switched to the Lock n-Lock...you KNOW when they
are
> sealed...no "burping" the edges or other stuff required. They are
> completely air and watertight once closed and they are EASY to
close.
> Even children will close them!

Hey Lock Wench,

Never bet your life away on people closing those Lock'n'Lock
correctly! Yeah, it seems easy, even obvious... BUT...and I kid you
not, Girl Scout's honor...I found one of Crafty Mouse's boxes with
the Lock'n'Lock lid latched UP SIDE DOWN!!! Even though we found it
less than 24 hours later it already had water in it! No harm was done
since the contents were double bagged but MtnMan and I had to remove
the seal to dry under it and then reassemble it! I can only surmise
that the previous boxer had been in a hurry...probably letterboxing
in the drizzle like we were! Our best defense is still a well sealed
and even doubled bagged ziplock !!

Sorry to shake your faith! I do agree that Lock'n'Locks come the
closest to fool proof I've seen...provided those latches hold!

Nothing like a good old North Country (NY) winter to put that to test!

MTnestRobin :)

"Mtn Nest Robin wrote:
Never bet your life away on people closing those Lock'n'Lock
correctly! Yeah, it seems easy, even obvious... BUT...and I kid you
not, Girl Scout's honor...I found one of Crafty Mouse's boxes with
the Lock'n'Lock lid latched UP SIDE DOWN!!! Even though we found it
less than 24 hours later it already had water in it! No harm was
done since the contents were double bagged but MtnMan and I had to
remove the seal to dry under it and then reassemble it! I can only
surmise that the previous boxer had been in a hurry...probably
letterboxing in the drizzle like we were! Our best defense is still a
well sealed and even doubled bagged ziplock !!"

I would never doubt a Girl Scout *grin* ..but despite your
experience, I will take my chances with the Lock n'Locks. I can't
believe someone managed to get a lid on upside down!! lol Mine are
pretty obvious because the camo tape is on the outside, but...never
underestimate the one oddball. In general, I would rather take my
chances with L & L. I have found almost 200 boxes and I've seen
multiple Rubbermaids not sealed all the way...screw lids with pine
needes in the grooves, rendering them useless...lock n lock "rip
offs" with hinges that don't close all the way.... I'll stick with
what I know and not worry about the one oddball that can't close a
Lock n'Lock...and then hedge my bet with Ziploc freezer bags and
regular maintenance. :)

"Sorry to shake your faith! I do agree that Lock n'Locks come the
closest to fool proof I've seen...provided those latches hold!
Nothing like a good old North Country (NY) winter to put that to
test!"

Don't worry...my faith is not shaken. I have found Lock n'Locks that
have been hidden through Central NY winters for over two years, and
have been visited countless times and are still working great! I know
there are no absolutes...but I'll stick with these until I discover
something better.

Nice hearing from you!!

Lock Wench

Yes, I believe I know that logbook. Your next finder came armed with Crayola Washable Markers--gee, wonder how well THEY stand up? Hope you keep that one well bagged.... Live and learn, Sheba

Lightnin Bug wrote: Count us in the pigment crowd for all of W's reasons. We recently
had to replace a soaked logbook. Dye Ran. Pigment Stayed.

Life goes on,

LB



---------------------------------
Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I have to say I agree regarding the putting bags around the outside of the
boxes. I had not encountered that here in WI, but when I was in OK for
Thanksgiving, several were that way - and they all had Spiders living in
the bag - right next to the boxes!!!!! Thankfully, I carry gardening
gloves for moments like these (I have not lived in OK for 10 years, but the
concept of the spiders that live there have given me a serious issues! - I
mean, with the wrong bite, one can have a lovely hole in their
skin!!!). Anyway - none of them were sealed, nor could they be resealed -
Ugh! And one of them, the logbook inside was soaked anyway! Go figure, LOL!

So I vote for no Baggies around the boxes!!

The Cat Herders

At 01:14 PM 11/19/2005 +0000, you wrote:

>But seriously, I think StarSaels and Kirby made some excellent points.
>Having found almost 200 boxes and having planted over 100, I have
>definately learned something.
>
>I am annoyed at people who put bags around the outsides of boxes! It
>just makes the water problem worse.
>
>Hope this helps.
>
>Lock Wench


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

When we first started planting boxes, we had some
pretty poor containers. We had found some boxes with
bags on them, so we thought it might be a solution to
protect our boxes better. As stated before, they are
pretty useless. Tearing and trapping water is about
all that happens. Fortunately most of these boxes
have been replaced with boxes that seal better. We
just go with the camo tape and hope they survive.

Leapin' Lizards

--- Melisa Hills wrote:

> I have to say I agree regarding the putting bags
> around the outside of the
> boxes. I had not encountered that here in WI, but
> when I was in OK for
> Thanksgiving, several were that way - and they all
> had Spiders living in
> the bag - right next to the boxes!!!!! Thankfully,
> I carry gardening
> gloves for moments like these (I have not lived in
> OK for 10 years, but the
> concept of the spiders that live there have given me
> a serious issues! - I
> mean, with the wrong bite, one can have a lovely
> hole in their
> skin!!!). Anyway - none of them were sealed, nor
> could they be resealed -
> Ugh! And one of them, the logbook inside was soaked
> anyway! Go figure, LOL!
>
> So I vote for no Baggies around the boxes!!
>
> The Cat Herders
>
> At 01:14 PM 11/19/2005 +0000, you wrote:
>
> >But seriously, I think StarSaels and Kirby made
> some excellent points.
> >Having found almost 200 boxes and having planted
> over 100, I have
> >definately learned something.
> >
> >I am annoyed at people who put bags around the
> outsides of boxes! It
> >just makes the water problem worse.
> >
> >Hope this helps.
> >
> >Lock Wench
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
>
>




__________________________________________
Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about.
Just $16.99/mo. or less.
dsl.yahoo.com