Great explanations< defiantly answered my questions I had no idea about the flood fill until your previous video. Then this one answered it. Thank you.
Thanks Steve, great explanation of the whole procedure to get clean pockets for inlaying. This also helped with where to find flood fill, I've heard it mentioned quite a bit, but wasn't sure where it was hidden. Happy New Year and best wishes.
Glad you found this. I did the same thing when I started out. This is a huge time saver. If you play with it, you'll discover you can save presets for different types of tests. Happy New Year!
@JackInTheShop I just started in late June this year. And I had NO previous laser experience. Go back and watch my videos starting in June. The progression was really quick, and I shared everything I learned as I learned it. The early videos were quite hilarious at times. The production values have increased over time. But the early videos have a lot of good info.
Haven't done any inlay but I find that there is a difference in quality of image and darkness of burn between, the species of wood, AND cross hatch, flood, or offset fill. It can make it somewhat confusing to know what to use especially if you don't have a lot of test pieces. I'm generally a flood fill guy for most of the stuff I do but I like to check the offset to see if the time is substantially different. I really like mesquite (I'm in TX) because it takes the laser so well and engraves so dark with jus one pass of flood fill. I haven't used cross hatch much. I've run some tests on baltic birch for Christmas ornaments and didn't think the results justified the time. Again, I'm not doing inlay just commenting on the differences of settings. Of course we can then add different angles to the regular burn and even cross hatch. LB is powerful but the amount of options can almost result in a paralysis of analysis. Nice to see your channel growing. Keep up the good work.
You mentioned not having a lot of test pieces laying around. That is the first thing I do when working with any new material. I even run a test on all new batches of wood I receive. I run tests on the same wood between my different lasers. It's been my experience no two lasers how the same performance. They can be close, but never the same. I've received different batches of Baltic Birch, one that engraved beautifully and the next look like... So I test. After nearly six months of doing this I hardly have any cut library settings saved. It's largely because I'm testing each material each time. One of my viewers mentioned running into a problem after buying some hardwood from the southwest. Once it arrived to his shop, added humidity in his area caused the wood to warp drastically. Buying local is always a good idea. Then even letting the wood acclimate to your shop before using it. You are 100% correct that you can get paralysis from analysis. There are so many ways to accomplish a desired result. With so many variables, it's best to find a method that works for you and stick with it. I never use Flood Fill except as a last step at a reduced power to clean the pocket of an inlay. I've had mixed results trying to use it as the actual engraving procedure. But I've also never worked with Mesquite, (except to bar-b-cue). Thanks for being a regular viewer and here's wishing a prosperous new year.
Steve, I have been doing laser engraving for about 8 months now and noticed that you use mm/s for your speeds while most others use mm/m in their speed settings. I think it may confuse some new users. Just my thought (not nitpicking). One thing I like to do is once I determine the settings I use for engraving or cutting a particular item I save the g-code. Hope you have a great year.
I use to get the same confusing feeling when I would watch others using MM/M. I don't understand why the two different methods were created to begin with. It's not like imperial vs metric. I learned using mm/s. A lot of it was self taught. They say one is for diode and one is for CO2. Why? I use both CO2 and diode lasers. Converting is very simple. You either divide by 60 or multiply by 60. As I mentioned to another viewer, after nearly 6 months of doing this I still do not have a large cut library. With so many inconsistencies in the variations of wood, I test cut every material before doing a job. I've never shared my settings intending for anyone to use them as their own, but more as a reference. You can't please everyone. And I no longer try. Hope you have a great year as well.
@@HoboWithWood Diodes normally use MM/Min. Co2 uses MM/SEC Why ? Don't know never could find a exact answer. Maybe it has to do with GRBL. BUt again no clue.
Hello Steve, have you tried this on engraving bricks? I just started engraving some bricks and I flood the engraving with black paint after the brick has been engraved and I wanted a nice clean and deeper engraving and was wondering if the technic you just showed would work for this as well. Yes I do know and will be trying it. But wanted to know if you had more advice for me on this.
“Human sacrifice! Dogs and cats living together! Mass hysteria!” - oh, wait. No. That was Ghostbusters. It won't hurt anything. I look at as the Flood Fill at a lower power as the final "rinse". The line after fill may potentially create some hangers-on at the base of the engraving. Buy using Flood Fill as the last step I believe it to leave the cleanest possible surface to receive the inlay. But, I'm still learning everyday. 6 months from now I may find an even better way to do this. But as for now, and from my personal experience, I engrave, line, then flood. But there is no right or wrong way. This is just my preferred technique... at this time.
Thanks for breaking that down so nicely, Steve.
Glad it was helpful!
Thank you!
Very patiently and clearly explained.
You are welcome!
Have a super good 2023.
Happy New Year to you, too.
Thanks for explaining.
You're welcome!
Great explanations< defiantly answered my questions I had no idea about the flood fill until your previous video. Then this one answered it. Thank you.
Glad it was helpful!
Great video, explained well. Thanks for sharing
Glad it was helpful!
Thanks Steve, great explanation of the whole procedure to get clean pockets for inlaying. This also helped with where to find flood fill, I've heard it mentioned quite a bit, but wasn't sure where it was hidden. Happy New Year and best wishes.
Glad it helped. Happy New Year.
Thank you for the information!
_"This is going to be a quick one..."_ 15 min later 🤪 You're sounding like me!
15 minutes for me is quick. 😀
Needed this
Hope it helped.
OMG.. All this time I was making the test pattern my self by hand. I did not know about that test generator.
I am going to need this too. I have a new 100 watt JPT MOPA fiber laser source coming Tuesday to rebuild my 30 watt fiber.
Glad you found this. I did the same thing when I started out. This is a huge time saver. If you play with it, you'll discover you can save presets for different types of tests. Happy New Year!
@@HoboWithWood I always used RDWorks for my laser until just about 2 months ago. So I got a lot to learn. Thanks
@JackInTheShop I just started in late June this year. And I had NO previous laser experience. Go back and watch my videos starting in June. The progression was really quick, and I shared everything I learned as I learned it. The early videos were quite hilarious at times. The production values have increased over time. But the early videos have a lot of good info.
Haven't done any inlay but I find that there is a difference in quality of image and darkness of burn between, the species of wood, AND cross hatch, flood, or offset fill. It can make it somewhat confusing to know what to use especially if you don't have a lot of test pieces. I'm generally a flood fill guy for most of the stuff I do but I like to check the offset to see if the time is substantially different. I really like mesquite (I'm in TX) because it takes the laser so well and engraves so dark with jus one pass of flood fill. I haven't used cross hatch much. I've run some tests on baltic birch for Christmas ornaments and didn't think the results justified the time. Again, I'm not doing inlay just commenting on the differences of settings. Of course we can then add different angles to the regular burn and even cross hatch. LB is powerful but the amount of options can almost result in a paralysis of analysis. Nice to see your channel growing. Keep up the good work.
You mentioned not having a lot of test pieces laying around. That is the first thing I do when working with any new material. I even run a test on all new batches of wood I receive. I run tests on the same wood between my different lasers. It's been my experience no two lasers how the same performance. They can be close, but never the same. I've received different batches of Baltic Birch, one that engraved beautifully and the next look like... So I test. After nearly six months of doing this I hardly have any cut library settings saved. It's largely because I'm testing each material each time. One of my viewers mentioned running into a problem after buying some hardwood from the southwest. Once it arrived to his shop, added humidity in his area caused the wood to warp drastically. Buying local is always a good idea. Then even letting the wood acclimate to your shop before using it. You are 100% correct that you can get paralysis from analysis. There are so many ways to accomplish a desired result. With so many variables, it's best to find a method that works for you and stick with it. I never use Flood Fill except as a last step at a reduced power to clean the pocket of an inlay. I've had mixed results trying to use it as the actual engraving procedure. But I've also never worked with Mesquite, (except to bar-b-cue). Thanks for being a regular viewer and here's wishing a prosperous new year.
Steve, I have been doing laser engraving for about 8 months now and noticed that you use mm/s for your speeds while most others use mm/m in their speed settings. I think it may confuse some new users. Just my thought (not nitpicking). One thing I like to do is once I determine the settings I use for engraving or cutting a particular item I save the g-code. Hope you have a great year.
I use to get the same confusing feeling when I would watch others using MM/M. I don't understand why the two different methods were created to begin with. It's not like imperial vs metric. I learned using mm/s. A lot of it was self taught. They say one is for diode and one is for CO2. Why? I use both CO2 and diode lasers. Converting is very simple. You either divide by 60 or multiply by 60. As I mentioned to another viewer, after nearly 6 months of doing this I still do not have a large cut library. With so many inconsistencies in the variations of wood, I test cut every material before doing a job. I've never shared my settings intending for anyone to use them as their own, but more as a reference. You can't please everyone. And I no longer try. Hope you have a great year as well.
@@HoboWithWood Diodes normally use MM/Min. Co2 uses MM/SEC Why ? Don't know never could find a exact answer. Maybe it has to do with GRBL. BUt again no clue.
Hello Steve, have you tried this on engraving bricks? I just started engraving some bricks and I flood the engraving with black paint after the brick has been engraved and I wanted a nice clean and deeper engraving and was wondering if the technic you just showed would work for this as well. Yes I do know and will be trying it. But wanted to know if you had more advice for me on this.
What happens if you do your line fill after the flood fill?
“Human sacrifice! Dogs and cats living together! Mass hysteria!” - oh, wait. No. That was Ghostbusters. It won't hurt anything. I look at as the Flood Fill at a lower power as the final "rinse". The line after fill may potentially create some hangers-on at the base of the engraving. Buy using Flood Fill as the last step I believe it to leave the cleanest possible surface to receive the inlay. But, I'm still learning everyday. 6 months from now I may find an even better way to do this. But as for now, and from my personal experience, I engrave, line, then flood. But there is no right or wrong way. This is just my preferred technique... at this time.