So the replacement scoring head would be the best
No, Vector cuts and scores are fine and work with open paths correctly.
She was talking about if you try to Engrave vector paths from an svg instead of Score them, the S/W could get confused. Engraves are designed to work with image files. The engrave might fill in an open ended vector curve where no fill was planned. It’s not a S/W error. Just us trying to do something special. If the engrave is a jpg, png or gif then it works as intended.
I’m confused. If I make a vector line in illustrator and then expand it, it becomes a series of vector paths, each enclosing a tiny ‘line’
Why would that break this technique? Is it a Kerf Thing?
(If I had a gf already I could just pop some cardboard in and answer my own question, but for now I’ll just lurk and watch the people who do have 'em…)
I’ll definitely be playing around with light score lines for origami folds with my glowforge! I love big, macro-scale geometric patterns- so mesmerizing. This is where the two-sided alignment feature has the potential to shine brilliantly; trying to get opposite fold lines to line up perfectly on a universal laser back at school was literally impossible.
I hear ya!! Every time I see someone describing a technique or talking about the GFUI, I think to myself how much easier to will be to really understand what they’re talking about when I can see it for myself.
That’s what we do. (Not everyone knows what expanding a stroke is in Illustrator.)
Remember the whole discussion/tutorial about dashed and dotted lines?
This is why!
I was limited in the materials I could play with, but when we have a release machine my wife will definitely be experimenting with this since she makes lots of folded paper construction.
Yep, those are the tutorials…I didn’t have time to go looking for it last night. (Thanks for finding the link again.)
Note that we haven’t enabled the lowest possible power operation yet in prerelease units, so things will change (for the better).
Oh man can’t wait to play with this
Didn’t expect us to be screaming for less, I bet.
I just ran a paper scoring test using a production GF. Circle manual cut at 500/30, line at 500/1 focus height 0.1". I don’t know if the change of focus did anything useful, this was my first test. Standard printer paper, 22 lbs.
Aside from some visible discoloration, it appeared to work. The scoring did not cut through, and the paper folded exactly along the line.
Huurah! this will make some projects possible for me that just wouldn’t be otherwise.
So, just as a proof of concept, I took this file and changed the outline to a different color, so it would cut out last. Used some magnets to hold down all four corners. Max speed power 1 for the score lines, power 25 for the cut. I didn’t mess around with focus height this time, just kept everything at minimum 0.010".
There were some burn through at corners and you can see the crease lines. Cut separated cleanly. Paper folds at the creases, but not easily. Going through and prefolding all the creases definitely helps.
In the end, I was able to coerce the thing to make a not entirely impressive swan:
So yes, it kind of works, sort of, but unless the power can be ramped on cuts/scores to match the head acceleration/deceleration more precisely, you will see pinholes at corners. I think messing around with higher power/slower speed/defocusing might have improved results.
Yeah, they changed the power profile a couple of months ago giving us the ability to work on paper very nicely now.
(Can’t wait to see your Pepakura. )
By the way Jin, you have the option of converting the $100 credit that you earned from my order into $125 in Proofgrade credits if you choose…you might want to take it. The stuff is fantastic. Wasn’t sure if you had seen that yet.
(You don’t get it until I get my machine though. They want to make sure I don’t cancel.)
Even the lowest power setting burns through at corners. I think it’s because the printhead has to decelerate for turns, putting in more energy at the ends of runs than in the middle when it’s up to speed. When working at the lowest power setting, there is not any more room below to ramp down the power for the slower speed. One possible solution would be to start and stop scoring runs before and after the actual segment, taking the kind of path that craft cutters with swiveling blades do to realign the blade for the next direction of cut. I don’t think there’s any way to command that kind of thing from a design, however (introducing a portion of a cut/score with different power). Any independent path segments will be cut in a random order. Maybe someday GF can be persuaded to implement that sort of thing.
Yeah, I’m worried about that, too.
I have tried manually editing files in design software to stop score lines just short of intersections or corners, and it does remove the burn-through at the corner but you also get a tiny hot spot at any point where the laser starts/stops firing.
I believe that a power ramping feature for corners is in the plans for the Glowforge software but we don’t know an ETA.
If I’m doing my own designs I just remove the corners. (Round them a bit.) It provides a transition instead of a point where the laser pauses to make a turn.
If you want to be certain of no extra burn on corners, you can run as engrave. But that means the job will take quite a bit longer. Curious if the lowest LPI would be sufficient.
I know all materials are a bit different, but I had to use 10 power at full speed cut on my machine to get through a cue card, and just barely. Is printer paper that much thinner and easier to burn?