Walnut ink (left) and India ink (right) on bristol board; line work done using Hunt 107 nib; wash fills using nondescript #5 round sable brush; open in new window/tab for high-res. version
Molly was kind enough to give me a bottle of her hand-made walnut ink to test. Having worked with nothing but good ol' India ink and watercolor lampblack, I was excited by the prospect of trying something new.
This particular blend of walnut ink reminded me of coffee at first glance, and smelled rather strongly of alcohol, which I gather was added to prevent molding. Overall, said ink was visibly less viscous (it lacks additional binding agents) and nowhere near as light-fast, which made it less useful for hatching and fine line work. Fortunately, I had no trouble seeing what I was inking on the light table, and was on the whole pleasantly surprised by how easy it was to handle. It flowed effortlessly when used with both pen and brush, and was just as easy to clean.
Differences in opacity aside, the walnut ink I used also demonstrated some other curious characteristics. For instance, upon closer examination I noticed that it tended to pool at the edges of strokes (see detailed inset), leaving the center palpably lighter, though the effect was hardly unpleasant. Together with the ink's natural sepia tone and transparency, it lent the drawing a rather soft, low-contrast, somewhat nostalgic feel. When used in a wash, it bled less when applied to a pre-wetted surface, and barely needed diluting to achieve relatively high values and lighter mid-tones. Shadows are another story, and I suspect a more concentrated admixture will be required.
Alas, I won't be able to speak to its archival value for quite some time, though I'll venture to say that it's just as durable as India ink if properly stored. In the last analysis, I still prefer India ink for its opacity, contrast, and versatility, but odds are you'll see select illustrations rendered in walnut ink in the future.
