PDA

View Full Version : PhotoGrav versus CorelDraw x4



Terry Swift
06-28-2010, 12:32 PM
All,

I do a lot of photo's to wood, granite, etc for people. My question centers around which provides the best quality output photo for lasering. I only have PhotGrav 2.1.1 with it's enhancements; so don't think I'm getting the best since 3.x is out. Some people say they strictly do their photo's in CorelDraw using the Mode control and going to either 1 bit B&W or 8 bit grayscale (which PhotoGrav requires to create its output). Is it better to use strictly the CorelDraw 8 bit to laser, especially on black granite or go the 1 bit route. I'm experimenting using different settings; but would like more input on the subject. Video's on YouTube by Roy Brewer and others use CorelDraw; but usually mode down to 1 bit B&W and then adjust using Jarvis, Stucky, or Floyd. Certain pictures I can do that and they do fine; others need the grayscale; but my Universal print driver then makes you select halftone, dithering, or B&W. B&W doesn't seem to give me the resolution necessary to print 8 bit grayscale.

Inputs please.

Chuck Stone
06-28-2010, 12:53 PM
I shouldn't even speak here .. I do everything in Photoshop unless I need
something vectored. Even then, I do it in Photoshop and then import into
Corel and use the trace function and then do any necessary cleanup.

But that's because I've been working in Photoshop since the early 90's and
it's what I know. But coming from Photoshop, I've never seen what the
advantage of Photograv is. (I've only got version 2.11, so don't feel bad)

Mike Ireland
06-28-2010, 1:34 PM
Since you have a Universal, why don't you contact them and get the free 30 day trial for 1-Touch Photo and see how that does.

Lee DeRaud
06-28-2010, 2:28 PM
I don't own PhotoGrav, but I played with it a few years back and came to the following conclusion: it's definitely easier/faster than Corel, but whether it's better depends too much on the particular photo and material in play. For $100, I'd probably buy it...for $300, it's going to take a lot more to convince me.

Separate subject: feeding gray-scale images to a ULS machine. Have you tried using the driver in "3D" mode? Obviously not the right answer for "on/off" materials like granite or glass, but for materials where more power = darker/lighter, it can work a lot better than the available dithering options.

Scott Shepherd
06-28-2010, 2:50 PM
Since you have a Universal, why don't you contact them and get the free 30 day trial for 1-Touch Photo and see how that does.

Because the 1-touch doesn't have the materials for either of the items he listed? No wood, no granite. I love my 1-touch photo, but they wet the bed on the release of that without having wood or granite. That's 90% of what people with lasers are engraving in to.

Maybe they have resolved it, if so, they must be keeping it a secret because they've not told any current owners about any updates to the material selection.

Larry Bratton
06-28-2010, 4:08 PM
Let me put in my two cents worth. I have used Photograv for a long time for granite with results that don't really please me. Lately I have been experimenting with other methods. One of the latest things I tried, was to simply take my photo into Photoshop, manipulate the contrast and any other things I feel need adjustment. I then convert it to greyscale and then engrave it using nothing but the Epilog dithering, Jarvis, Floyd Steinburg, or Normal and let her rip.
If you use Corel Photopaint, and convert to 1bit, you have the option of choosing a dithering method there with a preview. However, it is my belief (and I may be wrong) that if you dither it here (or in Photograv for that matter) that Epilog is going to dither it again when printed. Maybe it matters, maybe it doesn't but it's sticky with me. So, for the moment, I'm going to stick with the Photoshop method for granite.
As far as the version of PG goes, Bill Cunningham submitted some engravings he did that come close to being or maybe even the best looking pieces I have ever seen. He uses PG 2. Based on what he has taught me, I am beginning to believe that initial photo file preparation is the key to getting good granite. He also paint fills and seals using tried and true procedures.

Kevin Huffman
06-28-2010, 4:15 PM
I am not even going to lie, I am a PhotoGrav lover.

I remember the first time I used it, I had been working on a photo of my wife for over 1 week (in my spare time/on breaks) and hadn't been able to get it to come correctly no matter what I did. No matter what settings/suggestions I used in whatever program I used, it came out like junk.

I received a package in the mail and it was this program called PhotoGrav. I installed it, glanced through the manual and the first time I used it, I made that picture come out perfect. I had never seen anything like it. I wished they had sent it to me a week prior. When I do any photo, that is the first program I open.

I do work in a tech support section and tell every one of my classes I teach, if you want to make it easy use this program. With all of the people I have told and all of the people that have purchased it. The response is about 50/50. Either people love it and it works awesomely or people hate it and can't get it to work no matter what.

Dee Gallo
06-28-2010, 4:32 PM
I am not a "one-size-fits-all" person. There are times when PhotoGrav is the the perfect tool, others when PhotoShop is. I have never been impressed with CorelDraw's Paint section, so I would never prep a photo there.

I think it depends on what you want the final product to look like, what you have to start with and how skilled you are with photo-retouching.

My guideline is if I want a more realistic and detailed work, I use PhotoShop. If I want a high contrast, high impact from a distance work, I use PhotoGrav.
Of course if you have to remove background, make a montage/combine photos and/or add a special effect, you must use something like PhotoShop for best results... or at least I do.

It never hurts to have as many tools as possible so you have the right one for the job. Just take the time to learn how to make the most of each one.

cheers, dee

Tim Bateson
06-28-2010, 9:42 PM
...For $100, I'd probably buy it...for $300...

I do own it & I agree for $100 it's not bad, but for the actual $300+ someone just got taken.


...The response is about 50/50. Either people love it and it works awesomely or people hate it and can't get it to work no matter what...

Hmmm, I wonder which group I fall into?

Adam Orton
06-29-2010, 1:25 AM
I'm mentally handicapped and I laser engrave for a hobby. I use an Epilog 45watt and I could not get the photos to work at all except for one but I had no idea why. I ordered Photograv and the first sample pic I did was perfect then the second one my choice worked perfect and the third one. I do admit that if I studied the set up enough in CorelDraw I could do decent photo outputs but for the 300 I get Photograv and it has made very many people happy as well as myself. I guess that was my 2 cent meandering..

Adam Orton
06-29-2010, 1:31 AM
I would like to take a second and thank everyone at Sawmill Creek. Though I don't chat with you directly I certainly listen to what you say and jot it all down so I can try and improve my work. Yes I am a bit slow but I like to think my self meticulous and I believe measure twice cut once. So once again, hats off to the Sawmill creek gang I do appreciate your words.

Rodne Gold
06-29-2010, 3:13 AM
Check this thread
http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?t=91076

Niklas Bjornestal
06-29-2010, 8:29 AM
However, it is my belief (and I may be wrong) that if you dither it here (or in Photograv for that matter) that Epilog is going to dither it again when printed.
Epilog wont dither it if it's already 1-bit. When you dither you reduce the number of colors (tex. from 8-bits -> 1 bits), you cant dither an image that is already black/white.

Larry Bratton
06-29-2010, 9:11 AM
Epilog wont dither it if it's already 1-bit. When you dither you reduce the number of colors (tex. from 8-bits -> 1 bits), you cant dither an image that is already black/white.
Ah..finally an answer to that! Thanks for the info

Martin Boekers
06-29-2010, 10:41 AM
I use many tools to create things, and just as Dee said each tool shoulld be used with a purpose in mind.

I do have PhotoGrav and don't feel I was taken. It has paid for itself many times over.

I tend to look at software purchases as how long will it take and will it ever pay for itself. If the going rate for my time is $60 an hour that would only take 5 hours of my time to pay for it. (that's not counting material wasted testing and tweeking the image) So I feel that is a bargain! Same with PS, I do use that daily, so it too has paid for itself many times over.

My shop stays consitantly busy, so anytime I find software that maximizes my time and effort it usually is worth the price.

Marty

Tim Bateson
06-29-2010, 11:51 AM
I think people are overlooking the fact that engraving a good photo isn't rocket science. I can sent a "good" picture through an old outdated version of PhotoShop CS - so old even the Gold Method will not work with it. Anyway, I can send a picture through and be laser ready in minutes. This does not account for bad photos we all have to deal with from time to time - Trash in - Average, but not great engraving out.
It's all about technique with skill & knowledge.
Corel Paint
PhotoShop,
PhotoGrav,
Gold Method,
etc....
They will all get the job done and they "might" all produce great engravings. Only your skills & knowledge can make any of these work for you. Without skill & knowledge, you are wasting your time with any technique.

Dan Hintz
06-29-2010, 12:28 PM
Never used PG, never will... I get excellent results in just a few minutes using free programs like Paint.NET and Inkscape, so I see no reason to spend $300 on a program written by one person who has a hard enough time keeping an up-to-date database of decent material settings, let alone bug fixes.

Terry Swift
06-29-2010, 2:01 PM
All,

I have PhotoShop CS, Adobe Elements, PhotoGrav 2.1.1, PrintShop 22, Paint.Net, and CorelDraw x4. While PhotGrav gives me good results and a lot less tweaking and hassle than using PhotoShop or CorelPaint doing wood; granite really stinks on some of my photo's. Granted the photo's are the greatest in the world and usually they get silohuetted and some PhotoShop work to even out and balance the photo, I have one that has me just saying no. Then we get into the 1-bit B&W versus 8-bit Grayscale war and that is again a play and tweak thing. I have a Graphic Artist who does a lot of my PhotoShop work as I'm in the beginner stage on it and most everything else in the graphics department. I look at the video's on YouTube with like Roy Brewer and they have a totally different way of doing things; so nothing is concrete amongst us all, but some similarities do exist.

I've still got to look at Rodne's "Gold Method" and some others people have mentioned along with my Laser U materials.

I downloaded all the "new" parameter sets from PhotoGrav; but when I load some like for the black marble and it says blkmrble or something like that - when it comes up and you do your stuff - it sometimes says its printing out for Black Acrylic - which I'm not sure if they may or may not be the same set of equations.

I'll get with Universal, as they are usually very helpful and the PhotoGrav people to see what may be up with the parameter sets they have. Mine may have gotten corrupted.

Great input everyone.

Martin Boekers
06-29-2010, 2:15 PM
To each thier own. There is nothing that beats knowledge of your engraver and systems to get to a final product. Each of us have different levels of expertise in hardware and software hence the variety of options available.

I use the variety of software that I feel comfortable with to get expected results. Each of us can chose what works best for ourselves.

Software discussions surface from time to time just as Chinese vs USA lasers.

That's what's great about this forum, with a little searching through the archives you can find enough information to make an educated choice
about software and hardware.

Marty

Bill Cunningham
06-29-2010, 9:28 PM
I downloaded all the "new" parameter sets from PhotoGrav; but when I load some like for the black marble and it says blkmrble or something like that - when it comes up and you do your stuff - it sometimes says its printing out for Black Acrylic - which I'm not sure if they may or may not be the same set of equations.

I'll get with Universal, as they are usually very helpful and the PhotoGrav people to see what may be up with the parameter sets they have. Mine may have gotten corrupted.

Great input everyone.

Pg2 uses the base parameters like arylic and adjusts them for granite etc.. That's also why it asks you if you want to flip the image before saving, which you would normally do on glass, but not on granite. It will automatically save it as a negative image for you. If your using the generic granite data file, it simply has taken the acrylic or glass parameter, tweaked it for granite, and saved it using the granite name.