Might be a fluke but it seems like I’m seeing improvements in alignment this morning.
I have never seen perfect alignment, even at dead center it’s been a millimeter or two out but today it’s closer than it’s ever been. Have you noticed any changes?
13 Likes
Mine have been VASTLY off alignment, but I didn’t take screenshots. I’ll have to mock up a target file and show the results.
I do hope this is something that can be fixed eventually.
2 Likes
Agreed.
Dey betta rekanize!
Update:
Got another Glowforge today. Similar results (although different). All things considered, I really miss the accuracy of my original Glowforge. No kidding, I was able to drop a 1" wide piece of material in, and it’d nail it every time. No laying down tape or scrap or whatever and testing the alignment first… it just worked. Like I’d expect.
Anyway, here’s today’s tests…
Upper-Left
Lower-Left
Upper-Right
Lower-Right
Center
So I guess I’m going to have to hope that this is a software issue and that it will be fixed by the Glowforge gods.
Until then I’m just a bit disappointed.
Additional…
HOLD ON… This thing is WAY OFF. Decided to run a raster to check vertical lines (I had an issue with them with my 1st unit). This is center-bed. That’s not even close!
It’s late. I’m going to bed. This sucks.
12 Likes
I this your third machine now?
Hard to imagine how it can be that far off in the centre. This one is horizontal but I have seen one about the same off vertically as well.
I saw something like this last week. Like @mpipes I’ve always had generally good accuracy, especially centered under the camera, but I tried to run a couple of jobs in the center of the bed and ended up cutting right off the edge of the material >_<
I have to say, that is dissapointing. Optical alignment has been something I’ve been looking forward to. Not that I can’t work around it for the most part, but without a hard 0,0 point and a currently skewed optical (and no, I don’t really want to get that dead horse up and running again 
) let’s just say we’ll need to avoid “sharp-shooting” till Glowforge gets this figured out. Thankfully a lot of what I want to do won’t be terribly affected, but I can forse wasting a lot of material by not being able to utilize tight spaces. Hmmm…maybe the guys in the proofgrade crew and purposefully sabotaging the optical alignment to increase usage and demand…sorry, it’s Tuesday and my brain defaults to conspiracy mode on Tuesdays 
Please carry on. Nothing to see here.
6 Likes
and no, I don’t really want to get that dead horse up and running again
O lets! hehe
Well I guess cause it was working we can assume they can get it working again???
2 Likes
Could this have anything to do with a difference between material height entered and actual height of the material? Just shootin’ in the dark.
3 Likes
Have you tried running a paper print of your target pattern, then placing that paper into the glowforge, load the SVG file of the pattern into the GFUI, and see if the lid camera image at least matches the design file?
If it matches, you might rule out issues with the camera itself (focus, mounting mis-alignment) and possibly the image de-warping software.
1 Like
The out of alignment areas are also way out of focus. Is that a consistent correlation in your experience @Tom_A?
The corners of the bed will always look less sharp than the centre after the image is de-warped because a single camera pixel covers a much bigger area of the bed due to the acute angle.
3 Likes
Yep.
Yep!
Did it return to normal for you?
SO disappointing. Part of me feels like I made a mistake purchasing an unproven product. They say they’re going to fix the alignment issues. But, instead, we get copy/paste or the ability to add users. I don’t know what to do. I know that, at this time, if somebody asked me, I’d tell them to hold off on accepting their Glowforge. I made some great stuff with my 1st one, and nothing but crap thereafter. I’ve wasted materials and time testing things. And now it seems that before every… single… job I’m going to have to waste my time laying down some test material, run the job, then align to it, then run the real job.
I know you’re kidding, but the above tests were on Proofgrade. The alignment is just garbage for me right now.
I’ll hope, but I’m definitely not going to assume.
Nope. Proofgrade.
I haven’t. But wouldn’t that be the same as the tests above?
That’s just a matter of the camera. I’d expect it to be out of focus on the outside, and that’s okay. But it’s crystal clear dead center and, as you see, way off on alignment.
5 Likes
Makes sense, I suppose the bed is enormous and the camera close, but yes the center being so out of alignment is worrisome.
1 Like
Has anyone looked at their head yet and found the camera? Its so far behind the release, I hope we aren’t getting an empty box. 
It’s time for @dan to step up to the plate and give a realistic assessment of the head camera integration to fix alignment problems.
2 Likes
Although it shouldn’t need the head camera to fix a gross error in the middle like this. Even the most basic calibration algorithm should get the centre right.
2 Likes
I hear what you’re saying, and boy does it make my ears hurt 
I do get the strong impression that this particular aspect has been moving backward lately. Let’s hope it’s a set up for a big improvement in the very near future. I know @dan says it’s coming, but I’m not sure it can get here quickly enough. The last thing Glowforge needs to do is give their detractors more fodder for their cannons, especially in a core part of their product and sales pitch.
I hate that you’re stuck wasting time and materials. I like it better when you simply get to show what you’ve made!
3 Likes
I am seriously saddened today by last night’s results. I’m going to waste more time and do another run tonight to see if it was some fluke. But I think we can all agree, it wasn’t.
I submit the last thing they need is an advocate turning into a detractor.
I’m really upset by this.
3 Likes