Wow, you will know that machine by the time you get caught up!
Perhaps, but itās what sets the focus for each piece of material being cut. Take it away (aināt gonna happen, btw) and the influx of āmy GF isnāt cutting consistentlyā complaints would skyrocket.
I wouldnāt mind a bypass button on uncertified material operations that uses my focal height input.
If you put in a manual focus does it not just use that number? Itās how I do wider score lines. Is it just that youād prefer it didnāt do its scan if you had already put manual focal values?
Yes. It uses the scanned height measurement if you leave the focus unchanged. It sets that originally based on your material height setting but then does the final measurement before the job starts.
When you put an uncertified material in, it will default the job focal heights to the material thickness you put in.
Then, the autoscan will take a height measurement. IF the material thickness and focal height are the same (default), it will use the autofocus height that was measured.
IF youāve changed the focal height from the default value, the operation will use what you inputted and ignore the autoscan height measurement.
Yeah I understand all of that. I was just curious why you wanted a bypass to that. I only change the focal height from the default value in very special circumstances and so I guess I donāt see the value in bypassing the scanning material height. I feel like its a good check to make sure I didnāt enter something very off. Though having the option certainly isnāt bad.
You must not use non-pg materials then?
I use zero proofgrade. Every single cut and engrave is manual for meā¦ so skipping that scan would be fine with me.
Iām not sure the conclusion follows from the premise. If anything, Proofgrade would be the one that doesnāt need a focus scan, since PG material is supposed to be made to close tolerances (the height could even be measured at the factory, since every piece has a unique barcode). I find the autofocus useful, personally, as I donāt want to be measuring everything with calipers. Epilogās solution is a lot faster though, as they used a fixed-focus lens and just raise the bed up until the material hits the probe. No motorized head focus system or machine learning required.
4 Likes
It would just be faster overall for it to take my uncertified material focal height and process the job instead of saying, let me double check what you entered by scanning, etc.
I donāt know what the actual scan time adds to running a job - 30 seconds? More?
At 30 seconds, if you run 15 jobs a day, thatās 32 hours a year - nearly a week of productivity.
2 Likes
You misunderstand my statement. I also use very little proofgrade. I measure everything with calipers and enter that as my material height which in turn sets my focal height. I rarely manually change the focal height that gets set from my material height. I like the check on my measurements that the autofocus does in the event I was rushing and was not careful.
Yeah I totally understand that and that time is potentially more important to some than the autofocus is. Personally Iām in this as a hobby and as a school makerspace instructor and the extra time it takes is of little importance and gives me a little peace of mind. The option to do either would be nice though.
Technically, both methods are autofocus. 
The red dot would be considered an active autofocus, in that its determining a distance to the subject.
Iām not sure what you would call the second method - it doesnāt fit the definition of passive autofocus (which is what most of your SLR cameras will do). But, itās still autofocus in that itās moving the lens to a set position to obtain focus at a certain depth.
This is in comparison to what Chris described of moving the bed up or down to obtain focus.
Either way - just a bypass button would be nice.
Very true and I agree.