Same target: scanned by both Colormunki and i1Pro2, differences in profile quality ?

[pharmacist]

Thanks to The Hat who provided my this special 3D printed scanning jig for the Colormunki/i1Studio Photo I could do an interesting experience by using a special ArgyllCMS target that I have modified to be compatible with both the Colormunki/i1Studio 3D printed scanning jig and the i1Pro2 scanning jig:

The resulting profiles can be downloaded below for comparison.

This is the result in iccview.de:

softproofing with both profiles in Photoshop:

As you can see: the resulting profiles using 2 different scanning devices using the same target (Colormunki/i1Studio versus i1Pro2) are very similar.

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

The profiles are very much idential; what printer, paper and inks were used to print the patch sheet ?
The black point is pretty much neutral

 

[pharmacist]

The printer is the Epson SC-P900, using Inktec Powerchrome K3 ink (original Epson PB and Violet), paper: Netbit Glossy 300 gsm (Aldi), driver setting: Black Enhance Overcoat: on (better black level).

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

Thanks for the info, I'm reading a black level of Lab 2.67 0.37 -.03 for the Colormunki test, the i1Pro2 reads the same data.
That's a pretty good black level indeed , with an (almost) perfect neutral tone; it would be of interest how much of that is contributed by the Black Enhance Overcoat - if you just could redo the target print without BEO, all other parameters the same, and run a profile again.