MENU
Subtotal: $0.00 Cart
  • the source of our inspiration




    premium, archival fine art inkjet papers wrapped in the intimacy of a rural culture

  • juniper baryta rag


    our best reviewed and most award-winning paper yet

  • MOAB MASTERS

    Photo: Andy Biggs

    "All my portfolios are printed on Entrada. It's necessary that each print stands alone as a piece of art, and it's because of Entrada's weight and feel that my portfolio stands out from the rest."

Archive
Twitter

Moab Support Forum > Missing Epson 3880 printer profiles

I recently received the "Moab by Legion Sampler." I've started using the available profiles successfully.

I have studied the Moab site's profile info throughly. But there are a few profiles that don't seem readily available from the website. Please follow up on how/where I can acquire them. My printer is an Epson 3880.

Lasal Photo Gloss 270 (Use Lasal Gloss?)

Lasal Photo Matte 235 (Use Lasal Matte?)

Entrada Rag Bright 190 & 300

Entrada Rag Natural 190 & 300

Somerset Enhanced Velvet 225 (Use Somerset Velvet?)

Where to go, what to do?

Thanks.

January 12, 2015 | Unregistered CommenterFrank Goslant

Frank,
I'm glad you are enjoying the sample pack! As for the profiles, they are all there on the download page for the 3880, however we do omit the paper weight number from the file names: Lasal Gloss 270 is simply Lasal Gloss on the profile list, along with all the other paper types you list. For the Entrada, both the 190 and 300 use the same profile, as they are the same sheet, just a difference in thickness.

January 13, 2015 | Unregistered CommenterEvan Parker

Hello again. Thank you for the quick reply.

I understand about the numbers referring to thickness. Thanks.

But getting a little more specific:

So: I use the Lasal Gloss for the Lasal PHOTO Gloss?

I use the Lasal Matte for the Lasal PHOTO Matte?

The Entrada Bright for the Entrada RAG Bright?

The Entrada Natural for the Entrada RAG Natural?

And finally, use the Somerset Velvet for the Somerset ENHANCED Velvet?

Again, many thanks for your help in resolving these tedious details.

January 13, 2015 | Unregistered CommenterFrank Goslant

You are correct for all of the above.

January 13, 2015 | Unregistered CommenterEvan Parker