Vector vs Raster

[Edmcgarr]

Playing with the Emblaser, I put the same photo to the test - Cut2D vs PEP5. Both on birch. Settings were basically the same with one pass for the Cut2D. Notice the uneven cross hatch of the vector on the top corners (left and right are different density) and lack of detail on the body. While the engraving itself looks okay and almost woodcut like as the picture was meant to look, the PEP5 is just cleaner and has more detail with a vertical engraving. The PEP5 is a bit lighter but has better shading (obviously, the Vectric software isn't meant to be able to do that)

20160522_095330.jpg (80.65 KiB) Viewed 6235 times

20160522_170320.jpg (73.04 KiB) Viewed 6235 times

I think I'm going to do the PEP5 @ 60imp instead of 75 and do two passes to see what kind of effect it gives. My daughter already confiscated these so I need one for my work space anyway

[Picengraver]

Thank you. First time I've seen a comparison of the two different methods.
You might try the VFR feature in PEP5 to improve a little more.
John

[Edmcgarr]

VFR? I'm still learning all the ins and outs of the program and I guess its about time to read the tutorial now that I have some practice time finished. The more I play with this, the more I like it!

[Picengravertoo]

Hi Ed,

Raster engraving will be sharper/cleaner because the laser continues in the same direction when it travels back & forth. Vector engraving is constantly changing directions and vector engraving is a trace of the image which will surely come up with some errors.

I think John is talking about the Feed Rate Change. It will enhance/expand the shading by running at a higher feedrate in white areas and slowing in the dark areas. You can set a higher feedrate to start with when using FRC. It may cut down on your engraving time.

Thanks for sharing your results.
Jeff

[Picengraver]

Thanks Jeff, indeed I did mean "FRC" and not "VFR".
My apologies.

John

[Edmcgarr]

Thanks for the help guys!