PDA

View Full Version : Help with Photos?



Vicki Rivers
02-04-2011, 1:15 AM
I've been reading your forum for a long time, but never have much to input, as we are still new to this.

We're doing pretty good with most things, but photos are really doing poorly. I see all this cool stuff people have done, but mine come out like a blob.

I've used regular Corel Draw. It didn't work.
I used One Touch Photo on the Universal. That didn't work.
We've used PhotoGrav....that didn't work.

We can get really good pictures of people usually...but animals are completely out.

What are we doing wrong?? I've attached a couple pictures of an animal...i've seen what you guys have done so I KNOW it can be done. When I tried asking the people who sold us the lasers, they just say "oh some things just won't work"

So is there any suggestions someone can give?

Right now I make it 300 DPI for the picture, and we've ran them at 300 and 600. Do the grayscale first. Various speeds/power...still, it doesn't come out.

We have an epilog 50W laser and a universal 60W laser. Laser beam itself is .005

181205181206

Larry Bratton
02-04-2011, 9:38 AM
Vicki:
First of all..welcome to SMC. I see this is your second post. Lots of help here.
You don't say what your trying to engrave these photos on. The white dog is a good subject for engraving on something black, such as black granite or marble. As far as that particular photo goes, I would remove the background, especially all the vegetation behind the dog. However, I suggest you do a search on here for photos etc. This subject has been discussed over and over and you should find plenty of good reading. Unfortunately there is not a "one size fits all" solution to your query.

Chris DeGerolamo
02-04-2011, 10:18 AM
What material(s) are you trying to engrave? I little more insight would help. 600 DPI is high for engraving onto marble or granite - we use 300 (and 100 speed and 30 power on our 35 Watt Epilog) and results are good. What power settings have you tried? This may be a dumb question but are you inverting the color in the image after you grayscale it?

Dan Hintz
02-04-2011, 11:32 AM
A picture of the problem would help immensely...

Vicki Rivers
02-05-2011, 1:10 AM
Hi Larry and everyone else :) I read this forum all the time, but still struggle. I'd love to post more but I don't have any good ideas to give back to people so I stay quiet.

We are trying to engrave on wood, leather, and tile. All colors of tile.

I am getting a picture of the dog eyes, I don't have it yet but hopefully Saturday I will. I had my dad run it on the machine, but his net is down so he can't send it to me.

I am attaching a picture of the dog on the grass. When we tried to engrave it on wood, his eyes and nose came out, but nothing else. it's like the body just disappeared. So then we ran it out of focus, and this is what we came out with, which is better than anything else I could get. I'm also attaching a picture of a dog face, the face itself turned out just ok, but the rest of him didn't even engrave on the board.

We are engraving on wood (for this purpose baltic birch). Using settings of 100 power, 43 speed. I have not tried inverting, I didn't think we needed to invert unless it's on black.

181353181354

oscar martinez
02-05-2011, 2:42 AM
On my opinion the dog is white. Try to removed the background like Larry said the plants etc. and create a dark contour around the dog because the main thing is the dog not the plants also you can play a little bit wit gamma or contrast on gray scale that will increase more dark details to engrave because the dog is white, you said you have photo grav read on your manual about it. some times is dificult to explain here, is like engraving a dalmatian dog you will obtain spots of the dog unless you have a good back ground in contrast of white.The engraving of the dog is not to bad.
Atte Oscar
from the Golden State

Larry Bratton
02-05-2011, 10:17 AM
Hi Larry and everyone else :) I read this forum all the time, but still struggle. I'd love to post more but I don't have any good ideas to give back to people so I stay quiet.

We are trying to engrave on wood, leather, and tile. All colors of tile.

I am getting a picture of the dog eyes, I don't have it yet but hopefully Saturday I will. I had my dad run it on the machine, but his net is down so he can't send it to me.

I am attaching a picture of the dog on the grass. When we tried to engrave it on wood, his eyes and nose came out, but nothing else. it's like the body just disappeared. So then we ran it out of focus, and this is what we came out with, which is better than anything else I could get. I'm also attaching a picture of a dog face, the face itself turned out just ok, but the rest of him didn't even engrave on the board.

We are engraving on wood (for this purpose baltic birch). Using settings of 100 power, 43 speed. I have not tried inverting, I didn't think we needed to invert unless it's on black.

181353181354
I notice your machine is an Epilog. Assuming you are using the Dashboard driver, you can try different dithering patterns before you send the greyscale image to the machine. The default in the driver is Standard but you have other choices in the drop down. I would suggest trying them all to see what you get with each. I use Floyd Steinburg and Jarvis a good bit. You see, the Epilog takes that greyscale image and coverts it to 1 bit, black and white to process it. One bit images use dithering,a pattern of dots to reproduce your image. Same thing happens when you use Photograv to convert the image, some people like it, some don't. I personally process my photos in Corel Photopaint and convert them to 1 bit Black and White there and choose a dithering pattern at that time. Also, if you process your photo at 300dpi, stick with that in your Epilog driver when you send it to the laser (in your print setup for the file).
(Edit) I also notice you are are using Baltic Birch- plywood? If your using plywood, that might be part of your problem. Are you by any chance lasering through the top layer of the veneer?

Dan Hintz
02-05-2011, 10:35 AM
You have a major contrast problem. This is not something that can be solved with adjusting contrast with the picture as a whole, you will need to mask and adjust various areas differing amounts.

Bill Cunningham
02-05-2011, 2:41 PM
Here's a tip to make your 'animal' photo's 'pop' .. Animal fur does not reflect light like human hair does, so you have to give it an 'edge' When processing your photo convert to greyscale, use the 3d 'Emboss'. Only set the emboss to 1-4 pixels depending on the photo, and generally tweak it till it looks good to your eye.. this will take some practice. Then process it with photograv and use the cherry setting (there is only one).. Then engrave.. Do not change the size of the photo after running it through PG.. The image you uploaded, is only a low res image so this will not work all that well on that image. I won't work on a wood image less than 300 dpi if I don't have to,, The lower the input res the poorer this results....
Engrave this, and see it it works any better (it may not because the source is far from optimal)

181375

Vicki Rivers
02-06-2011, 4:37 PM
Larry,

We are using the baltic birch because it was recommended somewhere on the forums here, due to the light color. I don't know for sure whether or not we are going through the veneer.
I prefer to use the Epilog laser, my dad prefers to use the Universal Laser.
What I've been doing with the photo grav is converting it to 300 DPI grayscale, and putting it in the size I want. Then I open up Photograv, select Baltic birch (Which I've just discovered I should use Cherry instead!) and hit process. Then transfer it back as the TIF image and hit print. Printing either 300 or 600.

Dan, I wasn't aware I could change the image contract of just sections....that is really cool. I will have to figure out how to do that in Corel, thank you. We use Corel Draw X4.

Oscar, the dog on the left we accomplished by running the laser out of focus, putting the beam close to the wood instead of far away.

Bill, thank you. Animals are way harder than people, I've done a couple of people and they turned out okay. When we ran them through 1Touch, they were really crappy but using the same thing through PhotoGrav they turned out as the picture I'm attaching. This is the best one I've done. I'll try out the 3D Emboss deal and see how that works. And I'll try running the engraving through you sent and see how that comes out...Would you still use 100 power 43 speed on the Universal for this as well? i think if I could see how pictures should look before they engraved, I could figure it out...so it's definitely going to take some time to get to that point!

181531

Vicki Rivers
02-06-2011, 4:53 PM
Here is the full photo of the dog, you can see what it looked like. We tried to engrave the whole thing but only the head came out at all.181533

Larry Bratton
02-06-2011, 4:57 PM
"What I've been doing with the photo grav is converting it to 300 DPI grayscale, and putting it in the size I want. Then I open up Photograv, select Baltic birch (Which I've just discovered I should use Cherry instead!) and hit process. Then transfer it back as the TIF image and hit print. Printing either 300 or 600."

If you processed it at 300, you should print at 300. Once you get it into Corel, don't resize it. Once processed by Photograv, you don't worry about dithering, PG has returned a black and white, 1 bit image that has been dithered and is ready to print. Now you say you have been "converting it to 300 DPI grayscale". How exactly are you doing that? Are you scanning the image from a hard copy photo or are you downloading something of lesser resolution and res ing it up with the software? You need to start with a 300dpi image that you have acquired by a scan or other means. Digital camera settings have to be adjusted also to produce what you need .

Scott Shepherd
02-06-2011, 5:49 PM
Vicki, I agree with Dan, the contrast on that dog is all wrong. In my opinion, when engraving photos, is that the laser doesn't like what the eye likes. You have to make contrast adjustments that look wrong to the eye, but the laser really likes. The laser doesn't do well with huge contrasts, for example, a bride in a white dress and the groom in a black tux. It just can't handle it because of what it's doing. One person will be "blown out" where it engraves everything like mad, and the other person will be not engraved at all (their clothes). You have to "flatten" the images out so they don't have a wide swing from one extreme to the other. In the dog photo, his face is blown out, his eyes and nose are solid black. In my opinion, you need to tone down the dog's head, and then bring up the brightness for it's body. Make it more of an even tone, across the entire dog.

Just make sure you do all that with a copy of the original, as anything you do will overwrite the original.

Just my two cents :)

Dan Hintz
02-06-2011, 7:33 PM
Looking at that original image... there's not nearly as much detail as one would like to me a good picture, it's too blurred and grainy. You will have to use a heavy-handed sharpen tool to get the hair to stand out any, but unless you're careful with the masking the rest of the dog will look too sharp. It's just not a good image to work with if you want any detail.

Luke Phillips
02-07-2011, 9:34 AM
181598

181599

Vicki - is this what you're looking for?

Frank Corker
02-07-2011, 2:37 PM
Luke I think you have nailed it! Spot on as far as I can see

Dee Gallo
02-07-2011, 2:55 PM
Nice work, Luke... now what did you do that Vicki didn't do?

Luke Phillips
02-07-2011, 3:47 PM
Nice work, Luke... now what did you do that Vicki didn't do?

Well, nothing magic - I use Photoshop Elements with some shading filters developed for photoengraving that allows me to lighten or darken as needed. I then run the bitmap image through Photograve and adjust accordingly - only took a few minutes and the laser results were pretty decent, The images I posted were of course just the simulations on Baltic Birch but the end result was very good and detail was acceptable.

Vicki Rivers
02-07-2011, 5:13 PM
181598

181599

Vicki - is this what you're looking for?

That's exactly it!!!! You nailed it, absolutely perfect. How did you mange it?

Vicki Rivers
02-07-2011, 5:18 PM
if I have missed anyone's questions, I'm sorry....the posts are out of order for me, it's weird.

By converting it to 300 DPI, I mean what I got from the Photograv instructions...I convert to bitmap and under resolution I put in 300. The instructions there said to use 300 DPI if you are going to be lasering in 300 or 600...and use 200 DPI if you're going to be lasering in 200 or 400.

Larry Bratton
02-07-2011, 6:49 PM
if I have missed anyone's questions, I'm sorry....the posts are out of order for me, it's weird.

By converting it to 300 DPI, I mean what I got from the Photograv instructions...I convert to bitmap and under resolution I put in 300. The instructions there said to use 300 DPI if you are going to be lasering in 300 or 600...and use 200 DPI if you're going to be lasering in 200 or 400.

But wait..I guess what I am digging for is...Where did you get the original photo and what resolution was it to begin with? You can't take a 72 dpi photo and just convert it to 300dpi and expect the quality to change. Photograv wants a 300dpi image, and you can get it to accept the image by changing the dpi in Corel Photopaint, Photoshop etc., but if it was low resolution to begin with, it's still junk and won't give you a decent result. Your working from the Corel Draw screen, right? The "Convert to Bitmap" in Corel Draw is intended to convert a vector to a bitmap. Your dog photo was a bitmap to begin with. You can go to Bitmap/Convert to Bitmap put in 300 and resize it, but it is not what you need. You still have a low resolution photo that has just stretched the pixels to the size you commanded. Garbage in..Garbage out.

Amy Shelton
02-07-2011, 8:39 PM
I've gotten some decent results converting a 72 dpi photo, in photograv, to a 250 dpi. I don't know how, but somehow it kinda works. And I know others might cringe at this, but I just convert everything to 250, which is compatible with my laser.

There are a bunch of different ways to change contrast in certain areas. In Corel Photo-Paint, I use the Dodge-burn tool. I use X3, so it may be different on your menu. It's on the paint-brush fly-out, the Effects Tool, that looks like a Q-tip. After selecting it, above the drawing area is a pull-down menu... select Dodge/Burn, and play with it some. You can change the size and density of the tool. You can bring out highlights that you didn't know were there, and tone down too light areas.

Hmmm.. there are always things to learn. I see a Contrast tool there, too. I haven't ever even used it!

I agree with the others, that you need to flatten the image, get it to a gray scale look that is rather blah. The laser will do wonders with it.

Larry Bratton
02-08-2011, 9:50 AM
Amy,
I have found that if your original 72dpi photo is really large (like 11x17 or something) you can size it down and get decent results. Where you get into the most trouble is trying to take a 72dpi photo of say 2" x 2" (which is OK for the internet and screen viewing) and try to size it up.
Some people use that Contrast Enhancement Tool in Photopaint but I personally can't figure the thing out, so I usually go back to the Brightness-Contrast-Intensity tool. Had not thought of using the Dodge/Burn for that purpose.

Luke Phillips
02-13-2011, 5:23 PM
Final result in frames

Mike Null
02-14-2011, 4:17 AM
Vicki

There is no substitute for understanding how to use your software and then your equipment. Any one of your software programs can do a fine job for you. There are many tutorials available on the internet for CorelDraw and Corel PhotoPaint. PhotoPaint is a powerful program that can be learned fairly quickly (depending on what you put into it) and can produce wonderful results.

All of us have had to spend many hours studying and testing and finding a quick answer is probably not in the cards. But we're all here to help so keep posting your results and questions.

Vicki Rivers
02-21-2011, 8:46 PM
So here is a dog I did today, thanks to all your guys help...especially Luke. Holy cow he's spent so much time helping me in the PMs, and giving me tips on programs, etc it was really awesome.

This dog we've had an issue with ever since we got the lasers, and today I finally got it to come out. Maybe not the best, but I know it'll only get better from here!

Thanks for everyone's help, much appreciated.

183671

Vicki Rivers
02-21-2011, 9:05 PM
183673183674 Here are two of my niece and her husband, and then her baby. We did those today as well.

Frank Corker
02-22-2011, 2:37 PM
Vicki they are better than what you have done, but you are burning these way too hard. You are hitting pockets in the wood and destroying the surface, especially noticeable in Grunt Finished.jpg. I'm guessing it might also have something to do with the wood that you are using, but I do believe that you have you power settings to speed ratio completely out of the window.

Vicki Rivers
02-22-2011, 6:09 PM
Frank,

These are what the book recommended at 100 power, 50 speed (or 45 speed).

We have tried:

100 power 45 speed
100 power 55 speed
100 power 60 speed
100 power 65 speed
100 power 75 speed

100 speed 45 power
100 speed 55 power
100 speed 60 power
100 speed 65 power
100 speed 75 power

Then a mix of a bunch of them...

70 power, 70 speed
70 power, 60 speed
60 power, 70 speed
45 power, 70 speed

And I can't remember the other combos...

The ones I attached were the only ones that you could really make out....

using an epilog 50 w and a universal 60 w...

What would be your suggestion??

Frank Corker
02-22-2011, 6:41 PM
Vicki I agree that those are some of the recommended settings, however it still remains that the one of the dog has the shotblasted appearance and it shouldn't have. It should be lightly marked as in the examples posted by Luke above your post. The recommended settings in the handbook work very well if you are trying to engrave writing or letters 3D and eps files, but require more finesse when it comes to greyscale imaging. What I am pointing out is that it might be the wood that you used for the dog, the one of the girl and the baby is fine by the way, or it could be the way that you are processing the image. Luke's images have been run through Photograv and the darkest points have been equalled out. Remember also that the darker the wood, the more likely it is that you will have to do the image in negative in order for it to look right. Plywoods will often be a good media to work with because the wood is light and bright, but it is also very thin, hit it too hard and you will uncover the ugly underneath which is a poorer quality of wood.

Frank Corker
02-22-2011, 6:45 PM
Just taking a closer look at the dog portrait. It doesn't look like you removed the background from the image before engraving it or did you? Why I ask is that the collar of the dog appears to be the same depth as the background and the fur on the head appears to be much lighter in colour. If you didn't, I would suggest that your remove the background from the dog before processing it and I think you will find that you would get a much better result.

Dan Hintz
02-22-2011, 7:36 PM
These are what the book recommended at 100 power, 50 speed (or 45 speed).
Vicki,

Throw away the suggested values... they're rarely helpful (others may disagree). With my 60W, the only time I'm at 100P is when I'm trying to engrave deeply (e.g., text or 3D work), so the first few settings you listed are way out of the ballpark for etching photos. The second batch is more appropriate, especially the lower powers. For such large items, there should be no need to go lower than 100S.

EDIT: Looks like Frank beat me to the punch...

Vicki Rivers
02-22-2011, 9:13 PM
Ok my first question: Does just the dog look wrong, or all 3? I have nothing to compare to, I don't know anyone else around here that does it...Because if it's just the dog, perhaps something with the photo, but if its the people too, perhaps the parameters? The reason I ask is, when I tried to do the lower powers, the image was so light you couldn't hardly see it. if you stood REALLY close to it, you might make it out...but until we got to the 100 power we couldn't make anything out. In fact, until we got up to the 100 power/50 speed we weren't seeing anything at all. Even the lower power high speeds were super light.

If it's just the dog, then I'll go with background....I had removed the background but put a black border in the back because when there was nothing, he didn't show up at all, no matter what power/speed :(

Dan Hintz
02-23-2011, 6:05 AM
Vivki,

If you're not engraving into the wood (1/32-1/16") with a 60W unit at 100P and <100S, you have problems with the system. Let us know so we can suggest some appropriate tests.

Vicki Rivers
02-23-2011, 8:10 PM
Thought I posted this earlier..

I've attached a picture of grunt. This is on 1/8" plywood. We were using the 45 power, 100 speed and it barely showed up. Up close you can see it, but a step away you can't make it out. 55 power did the same thing, and then once you got into the 65 and above, it went super deep as you saw. 183994