Glossiness of Inkjetfly pigment compared to ConeColor?

[costadinos]

I haven't yet had the chance to try these two inksets myself, but I was hoping someone with experience with both could help (I'm planning to convert one of my 1400's into pigment);
I ordered a sample print from conecolor, made with their pigment, and I found the glossiness to be excellent, on par with the OEM inks.
I also found this link on inkjetfly's site, claiming their pigment ink is a "9" compared to the OEM (inkjetfly is cheaper, so that would be a better option):

http://www.inkjetfly.com/information.php?info_id=14

The thing is, they also give the IS ink an "8", which, at least to my eyes, is not even close, IS pigment is a mess on glossy paper, more like a "3" compared to OEM

Can anybody comment on the glossiness/gloss differential of the inkjetfly pigments on glossy paper, compared to OEM or Conecolor?

 

[jtoolman]

The only Inkjetfly inks I've ever used were for the R1900 and they were not as glossy as OEM
A close friend who only uses CONE for his R3000 has said and I have seen smaples that CONE K3 VM inks actually exceed the gloss of OEM.
The priblem with IS is only in the Magenta which is practically Matte.
I bought OEM 110ml and 220ml carts of Magenta and Light Magenta and simply run them agains the other IS or even against OCP K3 and after custom profiling the results are great.
But back to CONE, yes they are really good inks and supposedly are the only other micro-encapsulated inks other than EPSON OEM.

 

[costadinos]

The priblem with IS is only in the Magenta which is practically Matte.

Never thought only one color was problematic in terms of glossiness, thanks, I'll definitely check that.

I'm currently using OCP with IS photo black and magenta (OCP PK and M were too weak).
OCP are also not good at all in terms of glossiness (also lots of gloss differential), so replacing the magenta with IS probably went unnoticed...