Yes, I ran the Camera Calibration. Accuracy to within a quarter inch is fine for placing a cut/engrave onto a piece of unused material, but it’s not accurate enough to place a cut/engrave so that it’s positioned precisely to align with the material - I still have to set up a jig (or SnapMarks) if I want precise alignment to existing material. For example, engraving front and back of a medallion can’t be done with just the camera, because even a slightly off-center engrave looks wrong.
The issue is that the lid camera has an extreme angle, and not great resolution, so for precise placement (e.g. cuts aligning) the Glowforge needs to use the head camera. That’s the approach that Dan’s been talking about for years now, and that’s how SnapMarks are precise, but it’s not otherwise used by the Glowforge.
That’s what Set Focus does. If you use it on the center of the medallion, it will be treated as if it is directly underneath the lid camera. (It corrects for the camera distortion in that spot.) I’m getting` within a mm accuracy when I use it, even out at the edges of the bed.
Although, I do agree the Snapmarks are definitely better for some things. (Print and Cut files and re-use of jigs mainly.) So i’d absolutely like to see them do something with it down the road. I don’t have a problem with them finishing up on the filter and the Passthrough software first though - I think more people are waiting on those and it’s been a long wait for most of them.
It’s all triage. I can wait my turn. I’d really like to encourage everyone to be patient. And try to enjoy the releases when they come out…it keeps things exciting, instead of frustrating.
But don’t you already have Snapmarks? I guess I’m not sure what we’re waiting for. There is absolutely no promise that we’ll ever get Snapmarks if we don’t already have them. There’s no promise that we’ll get anything at all in the ballpark. I’m wishing for them, but not waiting; it’s been well over a year now.
I think it’s a false dichotomy to suggest that we can’t be happy with one set of things because we’re disappointed with another, though. I love my GF, even if everything isn’t perfect. Heck, I love my husband and kids and they aren’t perfect either! (And I’d like to think they feel the same)
@jasonmichaeljones I have been suggesting that putting the source up on github and letting real developer hobbyists help on this very thread for over a year. Since we could program, test and support features developed easily 1000x faster than the cousins and dorm mates currently hired…
Some of us work for real development companies too and would be thrilled to help for no money, just the ability to HELP add features through iterative hypothesis based development (like our day jobs) instead of the single threaded process where development stops because you get a ticket… IDK maybe this guy has the right idea, @dan YOU COULD LIKELY hire him… https://www.instructables.com/id/3D-Printer-Laser-Modification/
Or anyone in this thread https://hackaday.com/category/laser-hacks/
It is really sad that this “organization” is set up in a way that tickets actually affect development… That should never happen (it hasn’t been the way real companies work since the 90s) Maybe you should have your developers develop and your support staff support… or better yet see my earlier entries about how we could just support ourselves (and likely you too) if you opened the source, and it wouldn’t even cut into your profits… most likely it would improve them.
I don’t think tickets stopped development. I think they had limited resources and chose to prioritize other things. Snapmarks were a means to an end and they felt like they had gotten what they needed. The volume of tickets kept them from releasing them as an unsupported option, though.
I’d love to see the option for people to build tools, mods, etc, but I don’t see that happening any time soon. Dan’s point about “unsupported” features still generating support tickets is a valid one. We see it every day with non-PG materials. And GF doesn’t only draw savvy, hardcore DIYers who will seek out their own answers. They are drawing a lot of people who want easy answers with minimal effort. GF is marketed to them.
Yes, I do. I was one of the first to volunteer to beta test them, and got to help develop uses for them. (And I’m not using them now in solidarity for all the people who don’t have them yet. They need to see how other people are going to use them, and gather data from them.) If the other testers who have them aren’t using them, they might decide not to allocate the resources to it in the future.
But…to everyone who is still concerned about it… I know they’re still considering them from things Dan has said here on the forum. The beta test is still going on. The only thing that changed was that they closed the beta test when they had enough machines to get a good sample for data gathering, and it got temporarily “back-burnered” from a support standpoint. They are still gathering the data from it.
That’s my read on it anyway. And it fits with the way they have been doing things, and with good business practice in general. I’m not sure I would have released the beta test widely as early as they did, but it turns out they were actually using the Snapmarks beta to fine tune the Recalibrator and Set Focus tools. Those went out to everyone, so everyone has already benefited from it, and I think it turned out to be a good call.
Just think of the Snapmarks beta as a Preview of Coming Attractions. Good things are coming once they shoot the film.
Sure, I’m not angry or anything - any time you buy a product before it’s finished there’s a risk that it won’t happen, or won’t be what’s promised, and (from doing many Kickstarters) I accept that risk in return for early access and a discount. What I was reacting to what posts that were rather insulting to people who were upset about Snapmarks not getting rolled out, because I can certainly sympathize - Snapmarks makes the GF much closer to what was originally promised.
For me, Snapmarks effectively gives me “passthrough” because you can break your design into panels and put snapmarks on the corners of the design (in an area that you aren’t using), and each panel aligns to the previous one, so you can slide the material up and cut /engrave the next section, repeatedly, allowing me to make huge things like partitions.
I know that GF is saying that the support costs of SnapMarks are too high. Of course they have to manage costs, but I’d hope that with disclaimers everywhere that SnapMarks is an unsupported feature, that their support system could auto-respond to any SnapMark questions with a link to the support forums.
True that, the waiting is hard. It’s hard on all of us, but it also gives us something to look forward to. With another company I would likely worry a lot more about it, but they are slowly but surely rolling out what is feasible to implement, and what we have asked for, wherever it is possible. (Been watching them do it for the last four years…this isn’t the same machine they originally dreamed of…it’s better. )
And with the small team they’re working with, it’s kind of astonishing too. I’d be afraid to look like a complete fool if I ever met them.
I do have one major criticism…they do not do the best job of heralding their own achievements. People don’t seem to realize exactly how spectacular some of the things they’ve already accomplished are. So they get overlooked in favor of what still hasn’t been released yet.
But…it’s all good. It will just keep improving, and the company will be surprising us with good things for years to come. I like long term planning.
And unfortunately now I have to go get ready for a funeral.
Honestly, I think they should focus on Snapmarks. A promised feature to the entire owner-base was precision alignment, and they haven’t provided that. As was said before, the current system is fine for placing a cut on a fresh piece of material, but it is absolutely impossible to correctly align print and cut type projects with visual alignment, even if they had sub-mm accuracy on the camera. The biggest problem is rotation. If my page is rotated even a fraction of a degree from the cut file, then I lose the page. With Snapmarks I can cut 200 stickers on one sheet perfectly.
Anyway, Snapmark is a resolution to provide the entire owner-base with precision placement. If I ever lost it I don’t know what I would do. Visual placement is just not accurate enough for my use.
[Edit] I recognize that I am extremely lucky to have Snapmark already. I love the Glowfogre, but my usage would be extremely limited if I didn’t have the feature. Sorry if I sound ungrateful for this amazing machine and the ability to be involved in testing this feature.
I also was on the very early volunteer list, but my may machine was never deemed compatible (it was specifically deemed incompatible at the time). I was well aware, long before they discontinued them, that I might never get them. I’m fine. So while I appreciate the attempt at solidarity, it doesn’t do any of us any good for you to not use Snapmarks. Honestly, I’d rather you use them and enjoy them and make amazing things. It’s frustrating to see people say they’ve never even tried them!
I think what you may see as negativity is actually what we’re using to show solidarity. No amount of pep talks in the world are going to make those of us who want Snapmarks stop feeling disappointed when we think about not getting them, but knowing we aren’t alone in that disappointment helps a bit.
I can’t speak for anyone else, but I’m not spending any real energy moping over Snapmarks. I know the data led to other great things, and I know more great things will come in time. But as a complex human being, I am able to see all of those good things and still hold disappointment where appropriate. I see the grumbling as positive. Not only is it unhealthy to sweep negative feelings under the rug, but the ongoing feedback allows GF to see that there continues to be a need. I’m the first to cheer them on when we get a fantastic new feature, but I’m also going to speak up when something isn’t quite right. Honestly, it’s what I’d want my customers to do for me.
Oh yeah, I know, that wasn’t directed your way…that’s why I made a point to mention “anyone who was concerned about it”.
Most folks don’t actually speak up on the forum, but they do lurk. A little perspective (from both sides of the issue) can’t hurt. If the complaints become too one sided, (which is normal, but unfortunate), it might actually cause Glowforge to decide it’s not worth it. Also, I really hate to see people fretting over something that a little time might resolve completely.
A lot of the angst might just boil down to most folks not having been exposed to a beta test before…they can run on for a long time, as you probably know.
I have done the calibration, and even with that, and using Set Focus on an object right in the center of the bed, the camera accuracy is not adequate to do something like align artwork in the center of a medallion.
Set Focus is great for making better use of cutting things out of scrap, but in terms of trying to line up art on an existing piece… It is inadequate for me.
If you already have snapmarks, you are not waiting your turn at all. You have the feature already and enjoying the benefit of a feature that is essential to any ‘pro’ use of these machines.
Set focus and camera alignment frankly sucks unless you are attempting alignment of items in the center of the bed/machine. It is an absolute gamble when you are trying to engrave something close to the size of the bed and want to make sure that the art and item to be engraved are precisely aligned at the same angle. The camera distortion makes it very difficult to confirm rotational alignment of art and material for large materials.
How long are people going to accept the ‘excuse’ that other features, bugs, and issue resolution are on the back burner because products or features promised years ago are not yet finished.
If you are not delivering on your obligations in a timely manner and are committed to your customers, you hire more people or hire consultants to help address workload. This is no longer a kickstarter product - this company and product are being sold directly by the company to paying customers expecting a finished product.
I am really looking forward to a day when Glowforge kicks the kickstarter culture and grows up into a real company that communicates and listens to customer wants, outlines what actions will be applied and in what order, commits to delivery schedules to their customers and delivers upon them.
I agree with your sentiment as a whole. It is my opinion that it would be better for Glowforge to focus on Snapmark than things that they have been having a hard time delivering… but there are a couple of points that I’d like to address.
Interestingly, the Glowforge was never a Kickstarter project. While their marketing very much looked like a crowd-funding campaign, it was a marketing campaign for pre-sales… pre-sales of a device that wasn’t finished, but pre-sales none-the-less. The money collected was not used to develop the machines in any way. It literally sat in an account for the 2+ years that it took to deliver.
I don’t know any relatively large company that communicates as well as Glowforge does. Whenever I come to this forum (less and less these days sadly), there is always something new from the GF crew, whether its a monthly update or something else. The things that you have called out for them to do are things that all companies do, but it isn’t shared for public consumption. Coke and Amazon certainly don’t advertise their action outlines and delivery schedules… why do we expect Glowforge to do so? I’ve paid WAY more to Amazon over the years than I have to Glowforge!
Another key element is to realize that our own personal wants are not in any way representative of the entire customer base. Sure, you and I think Snapmarks are more important than other items. But we are two people among thousands. While I expect a great number of people agree with us, I wouldn’t presume to think that my item is the most requested.
Another challenge with Snapmarks - today we had a minor update that shouldn’t have had any impact, but it broke Snapmarks. That tied up engineering to roll back the change, build a fix, roll it out again, etc. Unfortunately even “unsupported” still consumes resources that we could use for other projects.
Our priority right now is finishing Pro Passthrough, but in the future, we’ll look for a way to make Snapmarks available in a way that makes business sense for us.
This is really good news on two counts - that you’d work to fix an unsupported feature, and are even considering what I interpret as a “wider rollout”…
