-- I tend to value ink price over the rest of features, and that depends highly on the market, as I have already pointed out in previous chronicles.
-- I am not picky with inks. Of course, I have favorite colors, but this is a very personal choice. My wonderful green might be horrible to the eyes of the next guy. And performance is more important than color.
Clean, fluid and stable. Those were the three properties Spanish ink company Sama advertised for its inks in 1926.
-- Ink performance is dependent on several factors. At the end, as any pen user knows, the triad pen, ink and paper is the eternal golden braid of writing performance. On the analysis of a pen, in contrast to that of an ink, there are some features (filling system, pen design and dimensions, etc.) that are independent of the other two components of the trio—ink and paper.
-- Reviewing an ink implies the definition of many a standard—set a pen, and a nib, and a selection of paper. But those might not be available to everybody. And that particular combination of ink and pen might result in a poor performance that would improve with another pen.
-- Last, color rendition in a screen is, to say the least, a complex issue, and a proper calibration must be performed by both the author and by the reader of the blog. Actually, nonetheless, the problem is prior to that--the perception of the color changes with, among other factors, the light under which we see what we wrote. What color temperature do we choose as the standard? Sunlight at noon in Madrid is very different to that in Glasgow.
In summary, these are some of the reasons behind my reluctance to review inks. But there might be some exceptions in the future.