nanoDLP

I also had to remove the current mask

As far as I can tell, both masks perform within the measurement error of my sensor. I am averaging readings since the sensor will jump around. Perhaps someone that has a better sensor than mine could perform this experiment?

In any case, the software allows a method to gather the mask values and create the blocky mask and a method is provided in a prior post to smooth the mask with the resize algorithm, so both masks are possible at this point. 

I suppose over time this mask capability will be refined. I'm sure the community will weigh in. Muve3D support made some nice comments about this capability.

Thanks so much for trusting my concept and then helping me implement this capability into nanodlp!!!

Last edited by lcluff2000 (2016-08-23 03:06:29)

Thank you. I will replace help with the above one.

It working ! 

actually I do not try the original one , I use only blur one .
it workse well , but it increase care time double , frome some point it was  83 mv I down it to 38.9mv
I guess original is too much sharp gradient .
I use 16 x 9 = 144 point it take around 2 and half hours for complete measurement.
but to use it with original save mask  I think it has to be much more measuring points

Right now it is not possible, but it could be easily added. Not quite lots of people are using slc2png so do not keep it updated.

this one is original from nanodlp

this one is blurry one

I don't check it with UV sensor , I just print sample with blur mask it ok , at the moment I printing with original mask , result will know in few minutes .

It will be great 
thank you !

Thank you for the test results. I think printing much larger pieces will show differences much better.

Wow you guys move fast!  This is very cool.  So is there a difference in over/under cure - can you tell?  Also, in speaking with Dean we had a question on real-time updates - if the mask is toggled on or off after the original svg upload - does this change the print or does it need to be reloaded each time?  Also- In thinking about the grey-scale masks this might be the reason for extending cure times as the grey scale (I think) is from fluttering the DMD - reducing the dosing each pixel throws to the plate.  If this is the case, it might be best to change the initial brightness setting (if this is a different setting overall to even out the throw).  I have heard that removing the lamp filter can help even this out as well which is what the experiments are for today...

Larry - can you send the link to your sensor?  Mine is completely different from yours (hence the square base for the handle...) I really like the grid drilled pattern you did!  Very simple, elegant and precise!

I think you mean DLprinter...

I agree DLprinter went very fast creating the templates. And DLprinter, I too would be interested in knowing the sensor you are using?

Shalin explained that he deletes the svg when the slices are processed to conserve space. If we didn't care about space then maybe he could keep them and auto apply the mask when chosen/created? (SD cards with lot's of space are very cheap). If users changes mask often then this may be useful, otherwise it means uploading svg's every time a mask is created/changed.

Thanks!

And I think it would be useful to integrate a newly created mask to an upload already on the disc - that way it can be added to the original file and that file doesn't need to be altered every new mask.  I would think new masks need to be created each time a major resolution change is done.  I use several.  I hope there are more who can comment if this is useful for them too.

E

Last edited by elliot (2016-08-26 08:51:39)