Good show, Scott. One silly question, if I may, since the i1Pro3 aperture is larger, and charts need to account for that fact, did X-Rite have to the increase the size of the iO Table? / Roger -----Original Message----- From: colorsync-users <colorsync-users-bounces+graxx=videotron.ca@lists.apple.com> On Behalf Of Scott Martin via colorsync-users Sent: Friday, January 31, 2020 10:54 AM To: 'colorsync-users?lists.apple.com' List <colorsync-users@lists.apple.com> Subject: i1Pro3 review I’ve been working with the i1Pro3 “standard aperture” for a few months now and just posted a short review, FYI: https://www.on-sight.com/xrite-i1pro3-standard-aperture-review/ <http://www.on-sight.com/xrite-i1pro3-standard-aperture-review/> Short story: it’s great! Just like you’d expect, with only one surprise: strip reading is really much more forgiving. Cheers. Scott Martin www.on-sight.com Precise color science for printmaking professionals
So, just to be clear, there’s the i1Pro3plus “large aperture” device and the i1Pro3 “standard aperture” device. Prepare for people to mistakenly refer to one or the other. I have the i1iO3 table and it looks just like the latest black i1iO2 table. The internal arm mechanism has been re-engineered with more precise and longer laster metal parts. The scanning area is the same size. I hear you - I imagined a huge table myself. The i1Pro3 is capable of even smaller patches than the i1Pro2. While the recommend patch size is 7x7mm, can you crank that down to 6x6mm. Scott Martin www.on-sight.com Precise color science for printmaking professionals
On Jan 31, 2020, at 4:08 PM, Roger Breton via colorsync-users <colorsync-users@lists.apple.com> wrote:
Good show, Scott. One silly question, if I may, since the i1Pro3 aperture is larger, and charts need to account for that fact, did X-Rite have to the increase the size of the iO Table?
participants (2)
-
graxx＠videotron.ca
-
Scott Martin