Calibration misses exactly one target to the side

I’ve tried my first calibration, and am really sorry I ever did. My workable print area got smaller. It is also missaligned all the way south, which means it doesn’t allow me to print in the northern area on the app, but I cannot physically move the material more south to use the space the GF does allow me to print. And the new image of the bed since calibration is totally warped to the point of unusable.

Any new attempts to calibrate have failed after 'Processing measurements
Now recalibrating your machine.


Camera calibration failed
Clean the lid camera and put in a new piece of material to retry.

If the problem persists, contact support.’

And now I’ve also ran out of proofgrade material, and I cannot order new, since I do not live in the USA.

When using Set focus, the targets are pretty well aligned when firing test shots on the calibration sheet. But in what world is it useful that is spot on, one spot to the left of where it is supposed to be?


Anyone with a suggestion on how to get calibration to work again, what can i use to calibrate since i don’t have any proofgrade anymore? and how can i reset my bed image to what I had before calibration? because this simply sucks.

I don’t have an answer for why you’re calibration is what it is, but as far as rerunning the calibration process, just remask the whole sheet with several layers of masking to make the old scores not visible and run the process again.

They can roll back the calibration results if it doesn’t work for some reason, so you can rest easy now that you’ve contacted support. :slightly_smiling_face:

(They’ll let you know what they need, if they want to see further testing.)

1 Like

Clearly something went wrong with the initial calibration. The results are what I would expect if the material used for calibration were warped. Maybe your material was flat, we have no way to know. But just in case… The material needs to be dead flat for successful calibration (zero give if you press down on it at any spot).


I don’t believe that to be true. It’s actually building a 3D map of sorts which compensates for imperfections in the machine flatness, crumbtray flatness, etc. Each snapmark is measured on its own.

Technically correct. It will complete calibration, but it you will get more success with consistency starting from dead flat material as the reference surface.

Don’t disagree. I have gone around and around in my head about how the mapping is done over the past month or so. I agree that a map of the entire bed is made. That compensates for a lot of things but you never want to do calibration with an unflat piece of material. The reason being is when you put in a flat piece for the next print your calibration will suck.

The distortion in the final image suggests to me that the height measurements across the material were wildly different. Could be badly warped material or maybe a likelier cause is an inability of the head camera to take a good image of the red spot for height measurement. Might be as simple as the head camera or laser diode window being dirty. That would also explain the calibration failures.

1 Like

If it’s (failure) the case of warped material, the team would like to know, according to Dan.

I do agree that it definitely makes sense to have as flat of material as possible for any type of calibration.

The material height and flatness wouldn’t seem to make a difference. It’s not building a flat map. And it’s not building a database of points across the z-space at different heights. It’s analyzing each snapmark and measuring the height, and ostensibly comparing its actual location to its expected location (from the data in the file).

I’m sorry for the trouble with your print alignment after trying the camera calibrator. I’ve rolled your unit back to its previous calibration. Please reboot your Glowforge and try printing again.

The recalibration feature is in Beta and support is only available at this community post, so I’ll need to close this thread, but could you please post in that thread so the team can know about your feedback regarding this? Thanks!