RIP software for universal laser?

[Scott Einsig]

Does anyone know if there is a Rip software that is compatible with the Universal Laser system? I have the VLS 2.3 10w HDPFO, I use to make printing plates.

[Scott Shepherd]

Scott, why would you need to run it through a RIP? What are you trying to accomplish through the RIP that you can't accomplish in the core file?

[Scott Einsig]

I'm looking for a software that will do color separations without having to manually separate the file in PS or Corel

[Scott Shepherd]

Corel does that in the print function doesn't it? When the print dialogue box comes up, on one tab, pick "Separations" and then on the "Separations" tab, you can control the output. Is that not doing what you want?

[Scott Einsig]

Wow, that was an easy solution. As an aside, do you know what the Image density of 7 corresponds to in relation to LPI in the new driver? The manual only references ID of 6 = 180lpi. My application requires as much detail as possible. And correct me if I'm wrong but I've read in other threads that the PPI controls the DPI for the X axis and the Image Density controls the DPI for the Y axis?

[Scott Shepherd]

LOL, I don't know about the ID of 7. I don't know if the old 6 is now 7 and everything moved around below that, or if 7 os now higher than the old 6. I've not had a use for it yet, so I haven't called to ask. If you do call and find out, let us know :)

Glad it was such an easy fix. Certainly easier than buying a RIP!

[Chuck Stone]

Wow, that was an easy solution. As an aside, do you know what the Image density of 7 corresponds to in relation to LPI in the new driver? The manual only references ID of 6 = 180lpi. My application requires as much detail as possible.

Keep in mind that no matter what your image density or setting, it isn't going to change
the size of the laser beam. That is what decides your image detail. Think of the beam size
as your DPI. (1" ÷ beam width = your effective DPI) For instance, the 2" lens on my
machine has a spot size of .005" . 1 ÷ .005 = 200, so 200dpi is the most detail I'll
get from an image. (which is not to say there's never a reason to go higher.. but it
won't be true resolution) the 1.5" lens has a spot size of .003", so that's an effective
resolution of 333DPI.

More LPI will give you a deeper raster because the lines will overlap if they're closer
than the width of the beam. But the beam size will always remain the same (or
larger if you're out of focus!)

[Martin Boekers]

Scott, did you do halftones? If so you may be able to share that experience with us.

There is/was some laser processes that work with seperations and a colored "frit"
to make permanent colored engraving. I forget who they are but they never were able to
create a commercially viable product.

Still a little confused on how you are using color seperations with the laser, are you making
a seperate pass for each sepration?
See "Cermark" for the standard in our industry for black marking of metals.


Welcome aboard!

Marty

[Mike Null]

Chuck

While your math is correct, the idea that 200 dpi will produce the most detail you can get from an image using a lens with a .005" spot is not correct. What that will produce is an image that is not fully engraved. The 200 dpi will leave areas between the spots which are not engraved. I use a 2" lens and have tried numerous times to achieve satisfactory work with lower dpi and find that in nearly all cases I need to use 500 dpi to get good detail. (My next step down is 333 dpi)

[Rodne Gold]

Martin , he may be engraving silicon or rubber printing plates for a litho type machine?

[Rodne Gold]

All that really happens when you increase output DPI beyond what the laser can resolve is fire more dots in more or less the SAME place , you will get a bigger dot cos of heat affected zones and possibly a smoother output by increasing DPI.. There might be a Nyquist reason to double the sampling rate , thus increase it to maybe double the lenses resolving power - ie to 600 dpi if you are using a 0.003" spot.

[Mike Null]

Actually when you increase the dpi you get overlap--the dots are not really in the same place.

[Scott Shepherd]

I agree with Mike. There are certainly better results when you go higher in the DPI, in quality, in most materials.

There is a lot of material that would not be removed if you used 200 DPI.

Here's how much.....

238775

[Chuck Stone]

Chuck

While your math is correct, the idea that 200 dpi will produce the most detail you can get from an image using a lens with a .005" spot is not correct. What that will produce is an image that is not fully engraved. The 200 dpi will leave areas between the spots which are not engraved. I use a 2" lens and have tried numerous times to achieve satisfactory work with lower dpi and find that in nearly all cases I need to use 500 dpi to get good detail. (My next step down is 333 dpi)

While I understand what you're saying, I'm not sure you understood my point. Perhaps
I could have stated it better. I didn't mean to imply that you should never use anything
over 200DPI.. I was saying that an image file with higher resolution will not give you more
detail than one with 200dpi. You don't get a higher resolution image than the lower res
machine can resolve. The software will lose that extra detail before sending it out to the laser,
and I'd rather do my own dithering, interpolation etc. on screen so I know what I'll get beforehand
and make adjustments as necessary.

[Martin Boekers]

Martin , he may be engraving silicon or rubber printing plates for a litho type machine?
Ahhh....Your right Rodne, I missed that when I read it. I wonder how close you can hold the registration though.

[Rodne Gold]

As to engraving on the same spot , well the laser ONLY fires when it sees black , whether it fires 10 dots into that black or one , it will still ONLY fire when it sees black. The effects of firing 10 dots into the "black" vs 1 (assuming your laser spot = 1 pixel of black) will be more depth and a greater heat affected zone leading to dot gain.
HOWEVER dot gain might give a better/smoother picture , but matching input to output and using the right settings will give better resolution.


Chuck is 100% right , in fact our lasers cannot even resolve more than 100 pixels per inch on the input side if you want to represent 64/128 shades of grey.

It is as important to concentrate on input..the wrong PPI/DPI on input will do you no favours , and as chuck says , 200PPI/DPI is what you want (100 which is the limit of resolution might be too low , there will be guestimates , so according to nyquist , 2x the sampling rate will give a 100% perfect representation , thus you use 200 PPI/DPI.

[Mike Null]

I cite Steve Sheperd's example as applicable for the purpose of laser engraving. What are we after, better resolution or better engraving? They are not necessarily synonymous.

[Rodne Gold]

I think the answer , in aesthetic terms , should be better engraving. A bit of "smudging" wont hurt.
Higher resolution can open up cans of worms , like revealing banding and so on.