I have tweaked settings many times to lower the time required. I think being able to get that info with the machine off would be a NICE thing to have… And I don’t think it would add additional burden to the cloud services of any noticeable amount. But it’s also not something I’m going to champion the cause of over some other software tweaks I’d rather see.
I have a problem of undererstimating, and if I overestimate I will probably lose clients… So it indeed comes pretty tight.
I must add that I do not think this is an absolute essential, but it would be very convenient and since it is already possible when the GF is on it doesn’t seem like a huge task to implement. I have no knowledge of the structure of the software of course so I might be wrong here, but it seemed like a suggestion worth doing to me.
It’s not difficult. It’s expensive (to GF)…
The majority of their cloud processing costs come from job processing, calculating “precision movements” ready to print. Once that’s calculated, it’s pushed down to the machine, which costs virtually nothing. There is virtually no load on the cloud services once a job starts printing.
So you’re asking them to significantly increase the number of job processing tasks when no print is actually going to be done.
I understand why some users might find it useful, but I also understand why it would be cost-prohibitive for GF.
Oh hey I just figured out a little trick. In inkscape:
control-K (now they are all one path)
While this new mega path is selected, go to Extensions-Visualize Path->Measure Path.
This will give you a total length of paths.
Undo undo undo to get back to your correct path divisions and colors and whatnot.
Now look up the speed of the GF in real measurements, which is … being difficult to find. Is this the correct thread?
Anyway, get inches per minute form whatever link they find for us, and then you should be able to algebra yourself to a pretty good estimate?
This is completely untested and may be terrible. it just seems promising.
I have an even better idea.
Put the machine on a Wemo or similar smart plug. Turn it on, calculate job, turn it off.
You are still getting at my point here, if people want to know the time they will still get it, the cost does not go down to GF because your machine is using electricity… I could see if the machine had smarts and was actually doing the processing the need for it to be on but its not.
That being said, it is a solution for our current problems. Definitely going to consider the smart-plug idea!
Just make sure it handles the current requirements of the unit. I was not discounting the idea, just saying that the argument was it costs $ but then suggest a work around, my original point was if someone wants to know the time it will still be found…
Good idea- folks be sure you’re using a relay /appliance switch and not a “dimmer”. The dimmer switches will frequently fade off and on, which would not be good for your gf.
If it were so expensive… They would process the job ONCE and store the settings on the client side. Don’t buy it.
I have mine on a 15A smart plug, but then I would have to enable Alexa on my phone. I would find this slightly useful when I am not at home.
I’m not saying it’s a great idea. Just a workaround to the problem posted by the OP here. I have two unused smartplugs sitting around, I have no need to use them for my Glowforge, as I never need to “estimate a print”…
… and the smartplugs work fine without Alexa (or Google Home, or whatever) - they come with their own app.
Yeah. The less said about the one that came with mine the better.
I think it is a very good idea for people who need it. I don’t need to estimate jobs for fun and profit, just fun, so it’s not pressing for me.
My home automation consists of having Alexa set timers for cooking and turning the glowforge on and off. And it only cost letting Amazon bug my living room!!! I only automated the glowforge because I kept knocking stuff over reaching for the power switch. If the switch was on the opposite side, or I had placed it in the other corner of the room, it wouldn’t be on a smart plug.
The new filter is the same way. They put the power switch on the back but the speed control on the front.
Pretty sure they do it this way because it’s right next to the power plug so it’s easy & less wiring to have the switch next to the plug. But, it’s not convenient for people.
I’m a proponent of putting stuff on the front where it is easy to access and black on black lettering is not acceptable. Designers may hate me, but I prioritize usability.
An Amazon dot and a smart plug are very easy.
This topic was automatically closed 32 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.