Working with files that are too large to upload directly, I split them and rejoin via Inkscape as the guide suggests, and while this technically works, there is always a noticeable seam between the different parts, just a thin, under-engraved, line… Anyone experience similar or know a fix? I really wish we didn’t have to deal with this size restriction, I feel the GF should be capable of running any design that fits in its workable area >,<
Is the problem that the engrave is too large? You should be able to select the SD engrave setting in the GF interface and run an engrave that fills just about the entire bed.
There is a tutorial on an alternate method of splitting large engraves here, but most folks don’t need it anymore:
The issue is that I’m concerned about quality on SD engraves. I’m engraving photos for sale, so quality is paramount. The quality of the engrave is fantastic, but the issue with seams takes away from it a fair amount.
Also, not sure it’s relevant, but I have a Pro if that makes any difference.
Have you run one using the SD setting to see what it looks like?
It won’t be as dark, because the HD engrave is going to char the dickens out of the material, but if you want it darker, you can run a second pass at 195 LPI and lower power to darken the engrave a little bit. You should find that the actual image looks just about the same though, except for color.
And it won’t have any lines.
The LPI value for engraving has nothing to do with the quality of the photo results. It tells how many times the laser head travels back and forth horizontally in one inch, and if that value is set really high, the laser is just burning over area it has already engraved. So the engrave gets darker and deeper. And it adds a tremendous amount of data to the movement file.
Anyway, hope that helps to explain it - 300 PPI is fine for good results from a pixel standpoint, and the 270 LPI in the SD engrave setting is more than enough for a complete engrave without gaps. (Actual limit for no gap engraving is about 195-225 LPI.)
Thanks for the suggestion @Jules.
@Nyxiom Would you try the SD settings and let me know if they work for you? You can always test the photo by taking a thin horizontal slice of the image to save time and material.
Thanks for the tips, the SD engrave isn’t really giving me the quality I’m looking for, while the HD photo engrave looks fantastic if only I didn’t have to split it. I’m experimenting with some custom settings now to see what works. Is this restriction based on the movement data or the engrave time? For example, if I am able to increase the speed and power settings while keeping everything else the same in order to keep the same (or very similar)quality while decreasing the overall engrave time, would that allow the engrave? Or is it a restriction based on the size of the image/LPI?
It’s a combination. It’s an onboard storage location that receives the job and temporarily stores it for operations. The size of the puls file that instructs the machine is directly related to the length of operations. So it’s not necessarily that your image is too large or too complex, but that it exceeds the run time that the memory can currently hold (3 hours and some change).
Thanks @jbmanning5, that’s correct.