|
|
Post by Back Road Rustics on Jun 16, 2015 17:29:09 GMT -8
Ok talked to Oliver again. They are sending me out a new MB and a image disk since I didn't get one originally. I guess I'm going to have to flash the new MB once I get it installed. Hopefully this all goes smooth once I get it. Supposed to be mailed out tomorrow in the AM. Bob or anyone else, just in case you missed it in my last post, where do you get your bits typically from.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2015 18:48:53 GMT -8
On the subject of bits, I have been generally just calling Oliver and ordering or thru Woodcraft supply for the original bits that come with the machine. I did find some at Toolstoday.com which were similar ( enough to work) The only way to use bits with different geometry is to use a cad program to define all perimeters of your carve as I-Picture software only has settings for the 1/8" endmill, 1/32" conical, 1/50" conical and their metric equivilents. I copied and pasted below info from a post I made some time back in regards to the bits from Toolstoday. I just received a bit I ordered from toolstoday. It is their 1/32 ball nose carving bit, in looking at it and comparing to the 1/32 that came with the machine it is nowhere near that size, so I compared it to my 1/50 bits and it is almost a dead ringer of that bit. I have carved 2 small 5 x 7 projects with it so far, having set it up in I-Picture as a 1/50th bit and it works perfect. The nice thing here is the following: bit has 3 cutting flutes instead of 2, it was $ 42.96 with free UPS ground shipping and I received on Tues after ordering on Thurs and having the labor day holiday in there as well. Only draw back was the bit is 3" long instead of 2.36" bits that came with the machine, ...won't make a difference unless you are carving really thick material. Read more: olivermachinery.boards.net/thread/30/cutter-selection?page=2#ixzz3dHckCDiK |
|
|
|
Post by Back Road Rustics on Jun 17, 2015 7:16:51 GMT -8
From the sounds of it there isn't really that big of a difference in pricing on the different bits out there. What is the average depth your typically cutting at?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2015 9:20:51 GMT -8
Most items I carve at anywhere from 4 to 6 mm deep
|
|
|
|
Post by Back Road Rustics on Jun 30, 2015 7:28:56 GMT -8
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2015 17:30:52 GMT -8
I don't ever use the slow setting or the fast, just the medium speed. Too many errors with the fast setting and the slow setting really seems to have no advantage other than to use up time. Adjustment of the scan step to a lower setting will help in some areas, but will increase carve time. More rounded tops on the letters will help take care of the fuzzy edges to a degree. I recently ran a project the was 12" x 10" at medium speed with a scan step of .1 mm or .003937" and it took 10 hrs to carve. The scan step was 1/2 the default setting of .2 mm (.007874") and that accounts for the long time, my guess would be that the piece would run in 5-6 hrs with the default setting. Included pic below:  |
|
|
|
Post by Back Road Rustics on Jun 30, 2015 18:18:10 GMT -8
Thanks again Bob. Im going to try and adjust my blur settings and try another run at the medium speed. Hopefully it will drastically reduce the run time. This isn't even the full size of the final one I need. One thing I did run this time was the 1/50 but and did notice the difference running that bit. So glad you follow up on the posts on here. If you ever decide to stop following hopefully we can exchange numbers so I can continue to pick your brain.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2015 18:21:33 GMT -8
I generally check the forum a couple times a day just to see what is new on here.
You have a message....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2015 19:12:39 GMT -8
I just thought about another thing pertaining to designs. When creating a project with GIMP or Photoshop, it is best to create a large image ( 1500 x. 1500 px or more ) because when you run your file image thru I-Picture, the software takes a really close up look at the image to create the Gee code file for the machine. I f you look at your image at 200 - 300 % and you can actually see pixel squares, the I-Picture will pick up on that and it will affect the carved image. I found this out when I first got the machine and used a low resolution image, say 400 x 600 px, the software picked up the pixel squares and the actual squares were visible in the carve
|
|
|
|
Post by Back Road Rustics on Jul 1, 2015 6:31:30 GMT -8
Pm sent back. I have picked up on that one myself. When I first started I was just creating things on the default settings that I have set for web design. I typically use fireworks and had the setting at 72. I didnt realize it when I ran it through I_Picture but I did when I ran the border. The image size would be way off typically smaller than expected. Since then I started running a resolution of 100 when creating for the carver. I wonder if creating at a resolution of around 300, which is typically used for print, then just figure out the correct downsize to make the image the size of a resolution of 100 would give really good results. If that makes sense?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2015 10:01:09 GMT -8
I use GIMP software to do my images, it is what I started out on and I have learned the best as a result. In Gimp I could create an image and scale it in inches to my desired finished project size, then change the size to about 4 times what I wanted to end up with ( your image that you use to start with has to be at a high resolution, you can enlarge a lower resolution image but you would still have the distortion of jagged edges from pixels ) Say if I wanted something to be 8' x 10", I would scale the image to 32" x 40" thus having the same aspect ratio, when opened in I-Picture it would be set at the larger size, then I would change the setting to 8" wide x 10" height for the project. I-Picture will look at the image as if it were larger to create the code, but would use the size you input for the carve. Sorry but I can only reference to using GIMP for images, as I know nothing about how Photoshop or other software works simply because once I started with GIMP I wanted to learn every aspect of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Back Road Rustics on Jul 1, 2015 16:01:31 GMT -8
Ah after that description I am seeing what you mean. The big thing I didn't realize is having a bigger object and then letting I-Picture resize it down. Im going to have to try this one. I am going to have to look at GIMP and see what it can do. The reason why I like Fireworks is that it handles vectors really well, I am personally not a big fan of Photoshop. Have you ever messed around with Artcam?
|
|
|
|
Post by Back Road Rustics on Jul 1, 2015 17:17:50 GMT -8
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2015 18:44:58 GMT -8
Those look a lot better and better time to boot. I think the amount of blur you added did what you needed by adding a bit more slope the letters and getting rid of some of the fuzzies. The more straight up and down design edges are, particularly lettering the more fragile they are and prone to break off somewhere.
|
|
|
|
Post by Back Road Rustics on Jul 1, 2015 19:11:01 GMT -8
I see how much of a friend the blur is. Like you stated the letters are much stronger and I had no breakage like I did when I ran my first ones. I am glad this one is getting close to being finalized. Maple isn't cheap. lol Now the question is going to be how well does it look stained. The other half that goes with this has a stain option and I might have to limit which stain can be used with the sign so it doesn't lose depth.
|
|
