Is photograv worth it?

[Charles Mottram]

Will probably get it but would greatly appreciate any input.

[Mike Null]

Charles

Welcome to SMC. If you'll do a search you'll find quite a lot about this software.

[Dan Hintz]

It depends... how industrious and/or meticulous are you? I decided not to go with PG, but so far I'm not missing it. I'm turning out gorgeous images on granite, marble, and glass without it, and I've only been hands-on with this machine for a couple of solid weeks (owned it for 3 months, but I only get 1, maybe 2 days a week to play).

[Tom Winters]

PhotoGrav is worth it IF:

You run many engraved pictures from your machine

If your machine does not accept greyscale

If you are not skilled in Photo conversion techniques

PhotoGrav has the ability to save a picture in a 1 bit bitmap form. This conversion makes the file size smaller than that of a greyscale. Smaller file size equals shorter engrave time.

From importing an image into PhotGrav to saving an imagea laserable form takes only a matter of minutes.

Pro's and Con's must be considered. At $395 plus shipping, you want to know you will get your money worth. Everyone will have there own opinion on PG, but it comes down to you willingness to justify the cost. Good luck to you.

Happy Engraving!

[Dan Hintz]

PhotoGrav is worth it IF:

You run many engraved pictures from your machine
I will be one to disagree with this statement. While I don't do a lot of pictures, I don't feel my current process takes a long time to ready an image for engraving. If I spend the same amount of time with or without PG, it doesn't matter how many I do.

If your machine does not accept greyscale
I imagine most machines worth their salt accept grayscale images. I know the smaller Chinese ones don't, so this applies mostly (exclusively?) to them.

If you are not skilled in Photo conversion techniques
I'm 50/50 on this one. Most work involves nothing more than a brightness/contrast change with sliders, and the occasional use of lasso tools to make those adjustments to specific areas. It's not rocket science and can be learned in a day or two of playing, but sheer newbies to imaging programs may find PG useful in this regard.

PhotoGrav has the ability to save a picture in a 1 bit bitmap form. This conversion makes the file size smaller than that of a greyscale.
True, but is disk space really a concern these days? And do people really hang onto the 1-bit converted image and delete the larger pre-processed 8-bit grayscale? Probably not.

Smaller file size equals shorter engrave time.
I have to disagree with this one. While transfer time may take a few minutes longer on really large files and those using serial (and maybe even parallel) comm, this time is lost in the noise compared to the amount of time actually doing the engraving itself. Others can feel free to correct me if this affects your machines more than it does mine... form the moment I press go on my ULS, it starts to engrave, regardless of file size, as the processing is done on the computer, not on the engraver itself, therefore there's no need to send over a large file (just the firing sequence).

From importing an image into PhotGrav to saving an imagea laserable form takes only a matter of minutes.

Pro's and Con's must be considered. At $395 plus shipping, you want to know you will get your money worth. Everyone will have there own opinion on PG, but it comes down to you willingness to justify the cost. Good luck to you.

Happy Engraving!
True, it comes down to personal opinion and how fast it gets you up and running. I spent a few days trying to dial in granite, marble, etc. without the use of PG. Now that I have, I feel my manual process is just as fast and I don't have to work with yet another tool that amounts to a black box.

YMMV...

[Doug Griffith]

Also do a search for the "Gold Method". I wrote a script that allows you to dial in settings. It can be found at: http://www.dogcollarlabor.com/smc

In my opinion, it comes down to your photo manipulation skills and willingness to experiment.

Cheers,
Doug

[Dave Johnson29]

PhotoGrav has the ability to save a picture in a 1 bit bitmap form. This conversion makes the file size smaller than that of a greyscale. Smaller file size equals shorter engrave time.


Hi Tom,

I may be wrong here and am happy to be corrected, but... I can't see how it can make a smaller file, or result in shorter burn time. One dot to burn regardless of intensity (8-bit grayscale) is still one dot to burn.

If the PG version has less dots then it has less resolution and should not be compared with a grayscale file because the grayscale takes longer to burn.

If PG reduces the DPI then it would create a smaller file, but also the resolution comparison issue would apply there too.

Charles: There was a recent thread on conversion to monochrome in Corel. I followed the instructions and burned a damned nice pic on black granite.

[Stephen Beckham]

Charles,

I won't get as specific as Dan and others - but I learned with PG 2.1 because the Epilog driver didn't yield great results for me back when I got the laser. Now that the laser does as good and in some cases better with the newest drivers - I'm having to ween myself from PG.

My honest opinion - you've got a learning curve either way. You're going to do your part to help some landfill with scraps, leftovers and oops!!! See what your machine will do first - read the posts that deal with photos - figure out if you want to add the extra step into the process and then get addicted to it as I am or if you just want to learn to do it right off of the laser's drivers.

It would help us with responses if you told us what machine you have and then other members with that type/brand could weigh in specifically. Otherwise, you may be getting a "it's so easy" comment that doesn't apply to your machine.

[Dan Hintz]

I can't see how it can make a smaller file, or result in shorter burn time. One dot to burn regardless of intensity (8-bit grayscale) is still one dot to burn.
Dave,

I imagine the idea here is a 1-bit image is (roughly) 8 times smaller than a grayscale. This assumes the final 1-bit image format accepts 8-pixels/byte, and not all do (BMP is one of those formats, and programs that use it as their primary save format, like PG used to, are becoming similar to 8-track tapes)... many formats will accept a 1-bit image, but still end up saving it as 1-pixel/byte anyway.

[Dave Johnson29]

I imagine the idea here is a 1-bit image is (roughly) 8 times smaller than a grayscale.


Hi Dan,

er, but, a dot is a dot to burn. The main point I was questioning was the burn time to complete between 1-bit and 8-bit. I can't see it unless the dot count or DPI is different.

Moot for me anyway as my 17-year old laser does not fit into your "worth" scale. :) I get a dot or nothing. If I try to burn anything in grayscale, I get a complete burnt pad. Don't ask how I know. :D

Soooo, it is monochrome or burn everything that is not white for my setup.

[Tim Bateson]

My turn :cool:
PG 2.1 - :mad: My comments are not fit for this forum.
PG 3.0 - :o Much improved.
I threw away $410 on software I might find a use for once in maybe 100 jobs, maybe even once in 500 jobs. It'll never pay for it's self.

My advice - take that money and invest in material to practice on. That's an investment that will pay for it's self many times over.

[Rodne Gold]

IOf youy are a total novice to lasers and dont want to fiddle a lot with pics and clipart (works well on vector and colour clipart) or you are mploying an operator and you intend to do lots of photographs - it's worth while.
Having said that , with 6 lasers , 3 operators and a full time designer and myself , in my operatiuon , we use it maybe 20x a year............ and could easily not use it at all.
I think it is way too expensive , $79 or so would be a good price.........

[Martin Boekers]

I tend to use it frequently, mostly on graphics. I don't have much time for turn around ( a couple hours) I know what I'm getting quickly and consitantly. May not and probably isn't the best way to convert, then again depends upon your needs so for me it's worth the bucks, it covers me on the jobs I don't have time play with.

If your just starting out I'd consider investing in a Corel tutorial series DVD you use that everyday and there are so many easier ways to do things if you understand the tools.

Also photo editing. It's not quite as simple as adjusting contrast and brightness as suggested. That is just a step in the process. It's too easy to lose detail in the highlights and shadow areas if that is your main tool. A day or two of playing around with editing programs may get you "in the ballpark but won't put you in the starting lineup". The one thing to remember is the higher quality image you send to the engraver the higher quality image you should expect to get out.

Again there are many tutorials available for free on the net that will help you through conversions, actions and learning your software.

Photoshop CS and above have a highlight and shadow adustment tool that is good for quick fixes.

Sometimes the line is small between acceptable and high quality work always strive for the best!

Marty

[Dan Hintz]

It's not quite as simple as adjusting contrast and brightness as suggested. That is just a step in the process. It's too easy to lose detail in the highlights and shadow areas if that is your main tool.
Which is why I also suggested use of the lasso tool, for when you need to modify different areas of the image separately. I just did a baby photo on marble... I had to lasso her head and arms and brighten less than the surrounding blanket and pillow. Lassoing, even with hair sticking out, took me about a minute.

But again, whatever the OP feels comfortable with, just trying to give him both sides of the story.

[Steve Chalmers]

This recent thread about Photograv being worth it or not, has prompted me to post a photo of the test run an eagle that I'm doing on 40 12x12 pieces of black marble.

It was done with the gold method. . .and while the initial test run might be just a tad hot on the top of her head, overall I believe it will work very nicely. I'm not sure how Photograv would work cause I just don't even use it anymore.

The size restrictions for attaching a file really don't allow all the detail to come through on the photo.

Steve

[Charles Mottram]

By the way i have an epilog mini 24, so maybe i'll practice some more first.