» Differences between Rhodia/Clairefontaine/Quo Vadis Paper
I spend quite a bit of time reading the forums over on the Fountain Pen Network and I often see questions about the differences between the papers used in the various Clairefontaine (Rhodia, Clairefontaine, Quo Vadis) writing paper products.
I would first like to note that I am specifically referring to the selection of Clairefontaine products that Exaclair imports into the US, (or are manufactured in the US for the US market.)
Most Clairefontaine branded products (Spiralbound, Staplebound, Clothbound & Hardcover) contain what I would refer to as their “typical” bright white 90g paper. Though the Clairefontaine Triomphe writing pads also contain 90g bright white paper, it’s surface texture is somewhat smoother and more glass-like than the “typical” 90g paper.
Most Rhodia branded products (Staplebound & Wirebound) contain what I would refer to as their “typical” bright white 80g paper. The main exception would be the off-white 90g paper used in the US manufactured Webnotebook. (Note: The rest of the world will also soon have access to the 90g Webbie.)
The US made Quo Vadis Habana journals contain a 64g Clairefontaine paper in the small version, and the “typical” 90g in the larger version. These same papers are also used in the Rhodia Planners- 64g in the small version and 90g in the large. (Note: The new small blank Habanas will contain 90g paper.)
Having had the opportunity to try all of the above options, my personal preferences tend to lean towards the 80g Rhodia paper and the 64g in the Habana. (At least until the blank Webbies arrive.) While this might be a less than scientific way of describing my experiences with these products, I find the 90g Clairefontaine to have a bit of “drag” and the 80g Rhodia to be “faster.” I write super fast (and often sloppy) and I am always looking for a paper which can send my pen nibs flying at 100mph. The Clairefontaine Triomphe which is also 90g, is one of the “fastest” writing surfaces I’ve yet to encounter.
The 90g off-white paper in the Webbie is a fast smooth paper like the Triomphe, though maybe just a tad less so.
Using a fountain pen on any of the above papers? Each of these papers are super smooth, and be sure to take notice that the pen nibs will write true to their nib width as there isn’t any of the “spreading” that can happen with other kinds of papers. The 80 & 90g papers are fairly impervious to ink bleedthrough, but some have reported seeing inks push through on the 64g.
Quo Vadis planners use a variety of different paper weights that I have not tested – a handy chart on which paper is found in each planner can be found here. Exaclair claims the papers used in the Quo Vadis planners to be fountain pen friendly at 85g and above. (And yes, technically, the Rhodia planner is made by Quo Vadis but it is a Rhodia product.)
Comments
Thank you! This is something I tend to geek out about, but always in strictly qualitative/anecdotal terms.
My personal preference, particularly for fountain pen writing, is absolutely for the Rhodia 80g paper followed by the Triomphe pads.
The regular Clairefontaine 90g paper I used to love, but more when I was writing with either ball pens and roller balls or with cheap, rigid steel nib fountain pens. (Like the $2.00 Sheaffer drugstore model, which I still remember with great fondness.)
For the pens I use most now (esp. my Pelikan M250), the Clairefontaine 90g paper seems a bit slippery, so I’ve mostly steered away from it.
Unfortunately, what I would really like most is a graph-ruled Rhodia 80g notebook in something like a Webnotebook form factor. ::sigh:: : )
This may be dependent on nib size. As I use B, BB, IB, stub, and OBB nibs, I find the Clairefontaine 90g paper is faster for me. As I recall, you’re using narrower nibs. I also have a tendency to use wetter inks in the Herbin and Private Reserve range, with only occasional forays into the drier Montblanc inks, or Visconti black, which seems to be finicky in my pens, but I have a gallons of so use up in times of need.
Nice way of providing a succinct explanation of the properties of each paper. While I just started playing with the Triomphe blank pad, I already discovered the Creapen brush pen glided quite fast and effortlessly on its glass-like surface. Can’t wait to try some of my other sketching tools on it, for it seems quite suitable for speed sketching.
Thanks for clearing that up! I t can be difficult to sort through all the competing claims at FPN. I usually wind up throwing up my hands or ignoring the advice (to my chagrin, usually).
I am fortunate to have discovered Triomphe very early on. I wish there were more varieties of it.
I do in fact use thinner nibs – and I would have to admit that my findings would most likely be representative of my specific usage – though I do have a few wide Lamy M nibs and a Binder EF that just “gushes” ink… (in a good way) As always, “YMMV” or “Your mileage may vary” depending on nib width, inks used and in some cases, even relative humidity.
Re: Triomphe varieties – Agreed!
Using juicy Medium and Bold nibs, I can say that Triumph is the best, like writing on ice, one just want to write and write and write with that paper, the best hands on.
Next is Rhodia pad paper a little less just as smooth but it feels harder to the touch of the nib, great for indentation.
Great quality but one needs to break from writing on them.
I had only one Clarefontaine notebook, I am not a notebook person but I remember that the paper was very smooth, so much so that I took some of the page in the middle of the notebook to make loose leaf paper.
I also used Clarefontaine binder filler paper. It was a very long time ago and the paper was also very smooth.
I remember that it was a pack of color pages. It was so nice I saved them for special projects.
The “hardness” of Rhodia notepad paper might come from the fact that it is tightly bound.
I will try wirebound notepads in the future to see if the effect is the same.
Stephanie, This is great stuff. I’m always interested in the precise paper used in various notebooks + journals. It may be geeky, but it is a good, creative, positive geekiness!
Glad you found it useful! I like to know these things as well.
Very Nice review for understanding the diffrence between Rhodia, Clairefontaine, Quo Vadis papers.
I am asking your permission for sharing your impressions in my blog ??
Thanks
Trackbacks
Leave a Comment