Topic to discuss the Feb 2020 update.
You are a year behind!
It’s been quite a fast year, so we can give him a small break!
Thanks for DXF support.
I’m really happy that there is going to be dxf support, especially because I’m going to be grandfathered in.
I don’t quite understand the rational behind making it part of the premium service. Premium’s main offering, at least in my opinion, is allowing people to design right on the Glowforge app. The people most likely to use dxf’s would be the ones creating their designs on other apps, so are less likely to get the Premium service. It just seems like it’s not a big add to Premium.
My guess is because the DXF filetype is such a mess that 1) the software probably had to be developed by the Premium team, as the other developers are too busy with the regular stuff to take on such a feat, and 2) it’s going to generate a lot of support requests, so making it a premium feature will help to support that moving forward.
That’s probably true, but I don’t see the return-on-investment to have the Premium team to work on that instead of something else. I don’t know what GF has planned with Premium, though.
It’s also something I and other’s have been asking for since the beginning, considering that was advertised in the original crowd-funding campaign, so I am happy they will be grandfathering people in.
As Dan says, proofgrade is now available.
Availability at the cost of quality.
Nothing like the original proofgrade with the masking hiding blemishes.
It’s a real disappointment when you finish cutting and engraving a job and then find out the Maple Plywood had hidden blemishes.
Complaining on the forum won’t help. Send photos to support – they guarantee the quality of PG materials, and it’s likely you could get it replaced.
The update says “Want us to put your work in our social media spotlight?” Sure, who wouldn’t?
I was going to submit information about The Void, which is a deliverable Escape Experience manufactured with the Glowforge (including the crate itself and a dozen puzzles inside). But …
The “Terms and Conditions” say that I grant Glowforge
a worldwide, royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, paid-in-full, fully sublicensable and transferable right and license to use the Creator’s Work(s) for any use, distribution, public display, transmission…
and that Glowforge may make
modifications to the original work(s).
Simply put, NO!
Anybody who uploads a design file is giving up the design, handing it over to Glowforge, for free. I was just going to upload photographs and a description, but Glowforge can do whatever they want with them, change them however they want, without any additional permission and without recourse if I don’t like it? They can use the photographs without mentioning me, without crediting me, and they can even pretend that it’s their product, not mine.
C’mon Glowforge! This isn’t reasonable. Your lawyers are way too overzealous. You’re asking for rights you shouldn’t ask for and which you certainly don’t need.
The Void is a fantastic example of just how enabling the Glowforge can be, of how much can be done with it beyond the things that we all see done over and over again. The ability to rapidly iterate on prototypes, for example, made a huge difference. It’s an interesting story. But there’s no way I would submit it under those terms.
@dan, I suggest you reconsider.
Man that sounds rather all encompassing. Since I had already opened the link, I read the terms a little closer because of what you point out here.
I think there may be a bit of misunderstanding about the definition of Creator’s Work.
… you warrant to Glowforge (“Us”) that you (“Creator”), created the original image(s), photo(s), video(s) being uploaded (“Creator’s Work(s)”).
See how it solely specifies " images, photos, videos"? In this case, the modifications of the original works would be photo editing / video editing / collaging, etc.
In that case, sign me up! It definitely sounds like Glowforge PR wants to show the best pics/video possible, not steal the design of the maker.
Thank you for pointing out this detail of the Terms of Service. After thoroughly reading them I feel much more comfortable about sharing my work
Oh no! If you’re finding a blemish under the masking, just send us a picture and we’ll replace or refund it. We haven’t changed suppliers - they’re usually rigorous about quality, but if something slips through, we’ll make it right.
Thanks for your concern. It just seems that the quality is not the same. Some blemishes and the general overall finish is not as bright and shiny as it used to be.
I will take some photos and send them in.
ps. Who says they don’t read the forum?
Support doesn’t read the forum, outside of P&S. Dan reads some here and there, but you’re taking a gamble by waiting for him to possibly read what you post. Also I feel compelled to point out that he pretty much told you the same thing I did two days ago.
I think Dan does try to keep an eye on these update threads. But yeah, any problems really should be posted in the #problems-and-support section so the support staff can act on them.
@jamely: First, the word “image” isn’t adequately defined. Anyone who uploads an image is giving Glowforge a free, perpetual, irrevocable license to not only use that image but to modify it in any way they see fit. You upload an image of a design you spent a lot of time on. They take that image, trace it, and give it away for others to make for free. Are they going to do that? Probably not. But they should not be asking for the right to do so.
Second, anyone who uploads anything is giving Glowforge the right to whatever they want with their upload, without their name, without attribution, etc. You assume that such editing is photo editing / video editing / collaging and nothing more, but it doesn’t say that. So they can take your image, stick it in a marketing campaign about how great the Glowforge is and give you no credit. In fact, they can even claim it’s their design. Will they do this? I don’t know. But they should not be asking for the right to do so.
@dan, I’m disappointed in you. How many years have we known each other? A dozen, at least. And you just ignore this feedback? This is a great opportunity for you to respond, to correct what (presumably) your overzealous lawyers have done, and come out looking a lot better. As you well know, bad things can overshadow all the good things you do. It’s just that most of the complaints are on Facebook rather than here. Maybe you should rent The Void (I’ll give you a discount). Your wife and kids will love it and I think you will too (no word puzzles!) and you’ll see just how cool it is in terms of what can be done with the Glowforge. Not only is it a great testament to rapid prototyping, but I don’t have to keep spare parts around — if a piece gets lost or broken, I can just make a new component when I need it.
So how would you word a release as to allow permissions that can’t be awkwardly revoked years after it was put into an ad who knows where when someone like an angry, unstable person decides to make a lawsuit when you can’t take all the instances down when they demand it so after they purposefully burn their own unit, allows for cropping or resizing, or the terms for such? We had to fight for someplace to talk about settings and materials around here and you think the lawyers are gonna go easy on release rights?
I over-emphasized the “forever” part. My point there was, not matter what they do, no matter how much you don’t like what they do, you have absolutely no recourse once you submit.
They could make it much more specific. For example, as written, they could use your image to criticize and ridicule you, and you would have no recourse. Yeah, they won’t do that, but no lawyer (other than Glowforge’s) would encourage you to sign this agreement. The agreement, as written, could also backfire. Glowforge does something somebody doesn’t like and they sue and win because they claim that Glowforge knew that people wouldn’t understand the agreement, and counted on that fact, and that makes it invalid.
It’s not like it’s hard to fix. Glowforge could say they would only use your image with attribution. They could acknowledge that your images are your copyrighted property and that they would include that copyright wherever they use the image (e.g., “© 2021 Wesley James. Used with permission”). They could explicitly state that modifications will be limited to cropping, color correction, etc., that they won’t create any derivative works, and that, should you upload something resembling a design, they won’t make that design available for others to use. I’m not a lawyer, but I know bad terms when I see them.
Sure, let’s talk about that.
There are many things I love about the Glowforge. I’ve said before it’s a mix of brilliant design mixed with some really stupid decisions (I won’t get into most of that here). One of the stupid decisions is the false promise of Proofgrade, which, as most people now know, can’t possibly work for wood. When I first heard about it, I thought it was brilliant. Having boards tested so that the right settings could be provided in advance! Wow. I told people before my GF arrived that I would probably only use Proofgrade, the promise sounded so good. But it turns out that every Proofgrade board of the same type gets the same QR code, with no per-board testing or even anything remotely resembling it. Unfortunately, wood is highly variable. MDF is even more variable. The Proofgrade setting solution is to overburn to cover the worst case for a given type of board. (The other problem with Proofgrade wood is that MDF is full of glue, which gums up the interior of the Glowforge.
I do understand that Glowforge thinks of Proofgrade as an extra revenue stream. I even support that to some extent. But, given the reality of the situation, it doesn’t make sense that Glowforge would insist that using anything but Proofgrade is frowned upon (lots of people on Facebook think it will void their warranty!) and that users shouldn’t talk about settings (and other materials). To me, this is customer hostile.
I’m still a Glowforge fan. I still recommend it to people. I want them to succeed and continue to grow their business. But I think they can and should do better.
Thank you for the legitimate reply. I actually agree with most of what you’ve expounded to. Fb is gonna fb. And a Mos Eisley Star Wars comparison is not completely unwarranted.
Maybe useful context, maybe noise:
Here’s an article about why these kinds of licensing agreements are necessary (short: because otherwise places you upload your content to wouldn’t even have the right to store your files so they can perform the services requested). COPYRIGHTS AND PRIVACY: What is the Irrevocable License and is it Really a Privacy Concern? - Future of Privacy Forum
And here are some examples of license agreements, specifically for photo-sharing sites, but I think it’s interesting to read through them. As you can see, there are some things they all have to say, but some go further than others, and a few explicitly state “we do not own your content”. 16 Photo Sharing License Agreements - Street Photo Tip