
This new Rhodia Webnotebook is the result of Clairefontaine's direct response to users wanting a superior product to add to their writing experience. As Clairefontaine manufactures their own paper, this new Webnotebook contains an all new French made 90g ivory paper.
So now we have a journal with an extremely similar form factor (design) but with increased functionality, over the popular (but overpriced) Moleskine.
The first version of the Webnotebook contained an 80g paper that was not manufactured by Clairefontaine. That version is still available. The paper in the 80g version was from what I heard, "not fountain pen ink friendly" and in direct response to the fountain pen community, Rhodia has updated the Webnotebook with a paper that is more responsive to the water based FP inks.

I, like many others, started writing on a regular basis through the purchase of a single Moleskine journal. Why did we buy a Moleskine? Perhaps due to their incredible market penetration and high profile marketing in the giant brick & mortar booksellers and art supply stores. They also spin a great story about how how similar journals were used by past literary greats.
But what exactly is a Moleskine journal? It's a product design. It's become chic to be seen carrying one if their little black notebooks- but how does that design perform? Especially since they are not an inexpensive product, (though manufactured in China) where many similar products are being made and sold for half the cost of a Moleskine. If you use a ball-point, rollerball, or maybe even a gel pen, they perform just fine. But what if you are one of the 10's of thousands of fountain pen users? Well...the Moleskine functions inconsistently at best. Moleskine paper is not friendly towards water based fountain pen inks. Spreading, feathering and bleed-through are all too common occurrences with the Moleskine paper.... sometimes. I say sometimes because one page will provide the perfect writing experience then the next...awfulness.
We fountain pen users use them to write with because they provide an effortless writing experience. Minimal effort to move the nib across the paper means less hand and wrist fatigue which in turn allows for longer writing sessions. Fountain pens are not cheap - they can range from $25 for the Lamy Safari pictured in the photo above - into the hundreds for a Montblanc.
So why are so many people paying such a high price for a product that isn't what it could be?
Because Mole-Clone products have not been able to meet or exceed the Mole's design AND offer a better quality of paper. So people keep buying the Moleskines.
- Pen & Ink brand - still bleeds & feathers.
- Cartesio - cover not hard like the Mole, reports of feathering
- Stifflexible - paper bleeds
- Piccadilly - not a premium product - paper quality inconsistent
- Pentalic - great paper, but vinyl cover stiff and awkward to use
- Canteo - rough paper texture, spreading, limited availability
- Ciak - books don't lie flat, ink spreads - some bleeding
- Clairefontaine - great paper, bright white only - no similar form factor. (no Mole clone.)
(Please see the sidebar on my blog for links to my reviews on all the above mentioned products.)

So let's start to look at the specifics on the Webnotebook -
Though the product description says "discreet embossed cover logo" I'd say that it could be smaller, and perhaps moved to the rear of the book to allow for a more minimalist look that the black cover journal people seem to prefer.
The cover is hardback, with a slightest bit of flexibility - very similar to the hardback Moleskine. The cover material is soft - almost like a very fine glove leather. It's very similar to the cover material on the Pen & Ink journals. I prefer the feel of this cover to the Moleskine - though whatever material this is made of, it will show a greasy fingerprint. Note to self... don't handle brand new much-awaited journal with tanning oil all over your hands. Luckily, it wiped right off. Because it is soft- over time, it may show scratches through normal use.

The Rhodia Webnotebook includes a finished ribbon bookmark, an elastic band to close the book, (at about the same tension as the Moleskine) and rounded corners on the book & paper. That's a feature that I really love. Anyone who has ever sat with a book in their lap and had corners digging into their belly, or a sharp corner digging into their hand as they reached a bottom of a page, appreciates the rounded corners.
Notice that the pages appear to be unruled. That is because the ruling on the Webnotebook doesn't run to the edge of the page. I think it makes the book look neater. As of right now, Webnotebooks are only available ruled. As one who is known to doodle, I would really, really like to see a plain version of this book at some time in the future.

Moleskine (top)
Size: 5.25 x 8.25 in.
Pages: 240 lined pages Run $15-18
Webnotebook (bottom)
Size: 5.5 x 8.25
Pages: 192 lined pages $20 (Not yet available for sale, this price is a guesstimate based on the 89g version currently being sold.)
So the Webnotebook costs more than the Moleskine - and it has less pages... but considering the materials used in its construction - it's more in line with its price point than the Chinese made Moleskine.

Front and back end papers on the Webnotebook are a very minimal plain black. No lead in/out pages - no product information, no superfluous pages of any kind. It allows you to jump right in. Of note - first and last pages of the book are attached to the end papers and aren't of much use. This is something I see in many different brands of journals, and quite frankly, I'm not sure why I'm even mentioning it.

Rhodia paper is a bit yellower in color than the Moleskine. Ruling width is 7mm (27 lines per page in the large version) to Moleskine's 6mm (with 30 lines per page.) Each book has a margin on top/bottom which I really like. Not sure why they chose to place a Rhodia logo on the lower right corner of every right hand page - I don't mind, but some people might find it intrusive.

The spine is pretty much collapsible. (Why isn't every journal like this?) So it pretty much allows the book to lie completely flat.

One of my only concerns with this product is that the signatures are sewn a little tight, (like most Clairefontaine products) and it prevents the book from opening completely flat - like the Moleskine. In my opinion...it's flat enough - but I wish they would consider improving the tension. (On all their products)

Pages are an off-white with a yellowing cast. Reminds me of the color of a manila folder, or of the pages in the Moleskine Sketchbooks. They are actually a bit more yellow that I'm used to using, but quite frankly, I prefer anything that isn't white.

Large black pocket inside the back cover of the journal. It's rare that I use these, but it's nice to know it's there if you have something you'd like to save.

13 different fountain pen inks (3 different manufacturers - Herbin, Noodler's and Diamine) tested in 13 different fountain pens ranging in extra fine to medium nibs plus two cursive italics in .5 and .7 nib widths. This paper is super smooth with every single pen/ink combination tested, and I experienced no feathering, spreading, (meaning that each nib wrote at its actual size) and no bleed-through to the other side.
I have heard of another tester experiencing some bleed through with a wide nibbed pen. That always makes be wonder... why him and not me? 90g Clairefontaine paper should not bleed - but to note, this paper does have different characteristics than the typical 90g bright white Clairefontaine offers in almost all of their products. I find the 90g bright white to be smooth but draggy.... in that the paper almost feels coated in some way. This paper is much smoother.
Many writing papers include some kind of a clay wash to make the paper resistant to ink. Resistance = no bleeding or feathering, but the more resistant it is, the longer the ink will take to dry. Water based fountain pen inks seem to dry quicker on this new paper than on the regular 90g bright white.

Note - the image above is an extreme test example.
I inked up a (very wide) Brause Hatat calligraphy nib (approximately 1.5mm) with some J. Herbin Pearle Noire ink and tested it on this paper. The nib was writing super wet and there was, not surprisingly, bleed-through. Interestingly enough, I also tested this ink/dip pen combination on a sheet of Clairefontaine Triomphe writing paper and while there was only minimal bleed-through, the ink took a good ten minutes to fully dry.

This is the first of two water color experiments I did in the Webnotebook. I used a Niji Waterbrush and artist grade watercolors to paint a design, and then I used a Pitt pen over top to draw the doodle. Like many papers designed for writing - that is to resist ink, the paper somewhat resisted the water, blending wasn't fantastic, but the colors did stay quite vibrant. The paper didn't start to wear down/crumble until I went over the same area multiple times, and while the paper did buckle, it didn't really affect the page behind it.

This is the 2nd example of watercolor in the Webnotebook. Same Niji Waterbrush, same paints - but this time, I drew the design first, and then painted it in - using a lot less water in the process.
With paper like this, if you are going to paint on it, you'd be best served to use as little water as possible for the best results. Light washes would be best. Colors stayed very vibrant on this paper, and of note - there was no bleed-through with either painting.
The new Webnotebook is not yet available for sale, (it's still on its way from France) but please keep checking The Quo Vadis, and Rhodia Drive blogs for updates on availability. Quo Vadis (Exaclair's blog) will also be raffling off a few of these "advance copies" so if you can't wait to get your hands on one, I suggest heading over and checking them out.
In closing - while this product may not be all things to all people, I'm going to say that it's immediately moving to the top of my list as the #1 plain black journal for "preferred writers."
25 comments:
Fabulous, in depth review, Stephanie.
Thanks Zoe - I didn't initially realize how long it was but whew! It is long!
Squee!
Thanks for the great review. I think I've seen these for sale on Jetpens. I may snag a few based on what you've posted, although the Rhodia logo is something I'd rather not have on all of the pages. Thanks again!
Cathy - be aware that the ones at Jet Pens are NOT the 90g version with the Clairefontaine paper.
*Currently being sold at Jet Pens
Good to know. Thanks for the info!
Great review! I agree about the size and placement of the Rhodia name.
*sigh* why doesn't anyone make a notebook as nice as this one with narrow rules. I am soooo not a fan of wide-ruled paper!
I've been curious about the new web notebooks (here's a dumb question: why do they call them "web" notebooks--?) so thanks for this review-- what a great, thorough product assessment you've written.
I just got a pair of ePure notebooks from Rhodia. They may be more in line with what you're looking for if you want unlined paper.
Strikethru - no idea.... but it is a goofy name.
Lanzman - Thank you, but I've already reviewed the ePure. The ePure doesn't use Clairefontaine paper. I also prefer off white paper, and hard covers as I like to write on my knee a lot...
Link to my ePure review -
http://www.biffybeans.com/2008/09/review-rhodia-epure-journal-pretty.html
I'm in my happy place waiting to see how these react to my stub and broad nib pens and super saturated inks.
You're our hero for doing these reviews!
Stephanie,
Great review. I compared the 80g and 90g paper versions and the latter is definitely superior. I have the small Webnotebook with 90g paper and it takes fountain pen ink very well. As you noted, pens that write a little dry will have virtually no showthrough. It's all about the paper!
The ones that were on sale at The Daily Planner were the 80g versions, but they stated that up front.
Thanks,
Walter
I so agree with you on the Moleskine...when I browsed American journal sites, I ran into them for the first time and reading about them so often, I thought I had to have at least one if I took myself seriously as a journaler. And boy, was it expensive! So, when I started writing in it, I was expecting miracles. And well, it suffices to say it didn't live up to my expectations AT ALL!!! It took my fountain pens, drawing pens and immensely thin layer of watercolors sooooooo very badly! I was instantly annoyed! I tried a few different types of moleskine, but none of them left me satisfied. I ran into this Rhodia and it's sooooo much better! I'm totally happy with it! It doesn't only hold fountain pen ink well, but it also takes thin layers of watercolour and drawing ink without too much hassle. No more moleskines for me!
wow, really great blog with reviews of all these things :) by the way, my husband loves moleskin, but I get so frustrated with the bleeding that I can't use it...maybe I'll try this one in the future, though I guess I'm also more of a "not black cover person" ;)
Just speculating, but one possibilty for variations could be down to temperature and humidity, and on the "web", maybe its about the binding?
How does the paper compare to Paperblanks (if you have used any of course)? I've got a smith-sewn mini notebook with magnetic closure, no gsm marked ("acid free, sustainable forest-paper") and it has this smooth, but still fibrous quality and its offwhite. I prefer it over Clairefontaine since I like some~ feedback, and inks really stick with no feathering (mainly using bp black), if this is anything like it i'm interested, even though i'd really like it in plain.
Thank you Beth!
Hi Walter - I never tried the 80g version, too many people said "no good" with FP's, so I only tested the new version. Thanks for your comparative comments.
Mandy - yes... Mole's are expensive if they don't work with the pens you use on a regular basis. Rhodia/Clairefontaine paper is much more suited for FP inks.
Jessica - I hear you. If you don't like Black Cover journals, keep an eye out for my upcoming Paperblanks reviews....
drawline - I do think that humidity might be playing a factor. Re - Paperblanks... I'm actually using one right now. I've got the pictures taken and the reviews just need to be written. The paper is very similar - but maybe not quite as smooth as the Rhodia. I'll speak more about it in my upcoming review.
Great review... Looking forward to seeing a plain version!
Thank you very much for such an in-depth review of this notebook.
I will seriously consider ordering one from the web, since they're not available where I live.
Regarding the Paperblanks,if you wish I could give you some input, I've got 4 of them and they are my favourite so far.
MiniMaupassant - me too! i also want a plain version!
Hi Oni - I'm glad that you found my review to be useful. if you look in my sidebar, I do have a few posts on the Paperblanks products - and you are most welcome to comment on them.
The quality of these Rhodia pads, are great! I have been using these books for years.
I get mine from www.artyfect.com, I am sure many other places do them as well, but I hope they are going to start doing the new range of dot pads!
LJ
Hi Stephanie,
Have just wandered over here to check out your site after you informed me of it in your reply to a comment I left on Rhodia Drive. And boy am I glad you did. I LOVE your in depth reviews about all the journals out there on the market and your Diamine swatches are THE most authentic true reflection of their inks, on the web.
Thanks for asking me over, I'm now a firm fan.
Keep up the awesome work!
Rebecca
Rebecca, thank you for the kind words about my blog! I'm glad you are finding my reviews useful.
This is a superior review. I too am searching for some moleskine "alternatives" and while I love my new ecosystem notebook, I am eager to try one of the Rhodia webnotebooks and see how it compares. I'm not a big fountain pen user, but I'm a huge fan of clairefontaine paper. Thanks for the review!
Post a Comment