darcshadow
-
Content Count
3,048 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
208
Posts posted by darcshadow
-
-
I drove the road to Hana back in '11. Man was that fun, only down side was the wife being with me I couldn't drive like I really wanted to.
I was doing the speed limit or below the entire drive and she still complained I was driving too fast.
-
2
-
-
Some times the simplest solutions are overlooked the easiest.
-
2
-
-
Overcut could explain not closing the cut fully, but if the egg is a solid path the cutter/software shouldn't be cutting it segments.
-
It'd also be worth your time to work with and learn AI so that you can do your design in AI and skip the vectoring portion. Vectoring is never as good as an original vector, especially when fonts are involved.
-
2
-
-
same here, just used some clear scotch tape.
-
Ok, so the egg has three segments when cutting the plastic, it does the same when cutting Vinyl? That sounds like a design issue. If the egg is designed as one continuous line it should cut that way. Post the egg vector and we'll take a look at it.
The fact that it cuts the vinyl just fine in one pass and the plastic takes 4 passes and doesn't cut perfect would be a tracking issue for the plastic. But if we can get it to at least do the whole egg in a continuous segment that would help.
-
Does it cut normal vinyl fine? Or if you have a pen attachment option will it draw a circle fine?
When you say it's cutting in segments, you mean like it cuts a portion then picks the blade up, moves do a different part of the circle and cut another portion? Or are you just meaning when it completes the circle the start and end points are matching up exactly?
If it's the first problem, that could be a funking vector file, post it here and someone can take a look.
If it's the second problem, that's just a tracking issue and depending on the cutter you have, there may not be much that can be done to correct it. Confirm your offsets and over cuts are set correctly and that the material is not slipping while cutting.
-
1 hour ago, bikemike said:No, the height goes down. I think we are all going crazy. Lol.
Ok, re-looked at my equation and I'm still happy with it.
Regarding your statement, yeah, the height will go down but if you start with a tall skinny image even after shrinking it down to the desired width it might still be too tall for the glass.
-
1
-
-
I need to re-look at my equation from the other post, I think it maybe a bit off now.
One other thing to think of, using a percentage coverage might not be the best method. It gives you the max width for your image, but if your image is tall, when you resize it tot he calculated width it might be too tall for the glass.
-
The problem with just subtracting is it is only correct if your design has equal height and width. If for example the design in your example was only 0.41" tall to start with now it's height is 0. The correct height for the new width should be 0.35.
You need to shrink the height by the same percentage as the apparent width shrank. So in your example the actual width is 2.83, the perceived width is 2.42 so that a change of 85.5%. So shrink the height by the same percentage and the image should then look correctly, when viewed straight on.
-
1
-
-
Couple of comments. You start out by multiplying by 360 then dividing by 360, you could have just started with 0.3, which is the same as 30%. You do need the angle so 360*.3 is necessary at some point.
PI * Diameter * coverage, I agree with
sin(angle) * Diameter, I agree gives you the apparent width of the design. But unless your design is a square you will need to do some division and multiplaction, not simple subtraction.
New height = original height * apparent width / original width, or using your numbers above, you never stated a design height so I'll just say it is 2" after you scaled the design to 2.83 wide,
New height = 2 * 2.42 / 2.83 = 1.71
So now, scale the design, without the width/height locked, to a height of 1.71
-
Here's what I came up with, I worked it so the original image width says the same and the height is adjusted to account for the distortion.
H = h/w*D*sin(w/D)
- h - height of image
- w - width of image
- D - diameter of cup
- H - new height for image
-
No, the template from the link only accounts for the cone shape and ensures that what ever you put on it comes out looking straight. The distortion I'm referring to is from the fact that when you look at the image, the edges curve away from you giving the appearance that the image is not as wide as designed. You don't notice it on most designs, but things like circles that the mind knows is suppose to be symmetric in all directions will jump out as Cal mentioned. In order to get a circle to appear correct you have to start with an oval that is wider than tall, then put it on your template.
The math I came up with is for a cylinder, but it should be close enough for most cups/glasses.
-
Something else to keep in mind for glasses, aside from accounting for the cone shape, you might also want/need to account for the cylinder shape. Meaning once you account for the cone and get things straight, if you want to put say a square on the glass, and see the whole square when you look at it straight on, it will appear as a rectangle. Most designs it's not an issue, but every now and then you'll have something that just doesn't look quite right. Here is a thread discussing this as well as the math I came up with to account for it.
-
The plotter will NOT show up in your device screen. The USB device that you install is a comm port not a printer/plotter. Look in your comm port listings and you should see your new comm port. Plug your null modem cable into your adapter and point your software to the comm port number that you see in device manager and you should be good to go.
Some software limits the comm port numbers you can use so you might need to change the comm port number through the device manager page.
-
1
-
-
I think you just make do on wine glasses, there's no easy way to do stuff on curves. And once they drink enough of the wine the image will look just fine.
-
1
-
3
-
-
Personally I prefer 25%-30% coverage. Anything much larger than that and you can no longer see the full image without rotating the glass.
-
I don't think goo gone works well on paper.
-
1
-
4
-
-
How complex is the logo, it maybe easier and faster to recreate it, or manually trace it. Manually tracing is a good skill to have regardless. If the image isn't protected and you don't mine posting it, post it up and we can offer suggestions on how to get a good vector version to use for cutting.
-
4
-
-
I think it is redsail.
-
I believe that should be Avery, guessing auto correct dropped the A. ha
-
1
-
-
The MH's are pretty "dumb" and things like speed and pressure can only be set through the control panel on the machine.
-
Have you tried setting up your anti-virus to ignore the signblazer program? The code of signblazer has long been thought to be a virus by most scanners simply because the program is so old and how it did things are not considered "safe" in today's computing world and anti-virus programs think something suspicious is going on.
You should be able to setup your On Demand scan to ignore individual programs that you know are safe and ok to run.
-
I'd have to double check, but I believe that is all it should show up as in Device manager. The "USB" connection is nothing more than a cheap USB-2-Serial converter. Just point your software to Comm 7 and you should be good to go.
Poorly cut
in General discussion
Posted
That looks like way too much blade. For normal vinyl anyway, you can only just barely see the blade.
I also agree with haumana, that cut doesn't look like the blade is rotating. I suppose it could possible that is caused by too much blade exposure and too much pressure.
Look for Mz. Skeeter's posts on how to set correct blade height and start from there.