Ionlab
Fan of Printing
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2016
- Messages
- 70
- Reaction score
- 26
- Points
- 53
- Printer Model
- Epson WF3540
Using Colormunki i have profiled the 1500w using the L800 inks...
I also profiled my rx520 using the same inks (only the normal ones not the LM, LC).
Using perfX gamut viewer the two profiles look VERY similar. In fact the RX520 profile seems to cover a larger volume, but since I am a novice here I try to not jump to conclusions. Also the difference with the default Epson profile for the claria inks seems not substantial. Paper used was epson premium glossy paper.
I did print the Colormunki patches in 10x15cm paper so these were scaled down to 50% of actual size (had no A4) but i did not have false reads so i do not know whether that played a part.
Will post the profiles soon. I will also test with a completely different paper and see if the profile produced is different, because if not then the munki, as is, seems like a big waste of money.
I also profiled my rx520 using the same inks (only the normal ones not the LM, LC).
Using perfX gamut viewer the two profiles look VERY similar. In fact the RX520 profile seems to cover a larger volume, but since I am a novice here I try to not jump to conclusions. Also the difference with the default Epson profile for the claria inks seems not substantial. Paper used was epson premium glossy paper.
I did print the Colormunki patches in 10x15cm paper so these were scaled down to 50% of actual size (had no A4) but i did not have false reads so i do not know whether that played a part.
Will post the profiles soon. I will also test with a completely different paper and see if the profile produced is different, because if not then the munki, as is, seems like a big waste of money.