Maybe they’re actually starting to learn?
My guess is you want blurry to get sub-pixel accuracy, similar to how star-trackers work.
I shouldn’t have used ‘blurry’ to describe the height images.
The head pictures used for the height measurement look like this:
While the image itself is in focus and not blurry, the edges of the laser spots are not very well defined, given the nature of the material surface. They claim to get ~.001" accuracy in their measurements from these images.
1 Like
And to be able to track curved surfaces in real time, although I think they removed that from the specs a long time ago.
They changed it to multi-point.
Another WAG - they may have been hoping to leverage the built in image processing capabilities of the iMX6 SOC. It is a pretty capable device in that regard, and probably explains why they opted for that particular device family instead of much cheaper options. Since the heavy lifting for motion planning is done in the cloud, they could have went with a much less expensive processor.
Sadly, it seems that this major selling point, like many of the other lofty claims, has been walked back.
I’ve been holding out hope that the team over there is just busy with developing GFv2, and that is why there is little progress on the promised features (continuous autofocus, highly accurate visual alignment, auto-alignment for flipped over material, passthrough alignment, auto detection of phones/tablets, etc.).
The low hanging fruit is ignored, and only updates of very little utility seem to creep out. This would lead one to think they are sandbagging, and planning to include all these wonderful enhancements in a new product.
Then, they go and do something like the autofocus speed up. I don’t seem to recall any torch bearing mobs storming GF HQ because the autofocus wasn’t fast enough. So, why expend developer time on it? And why roll it out in such a haphazard way that it ends up taxing your already overworked support staff, and further damaging your shaky QA reputation?
To be a fly on the wall in that organization.
BTW - it looks like shortly after we chatted about their mixed Glassdoor reviews, there are two new reviews up there (this one and this one, both dated Aug 30) that look suspiciously like they were written by a marketing person.
No doubt in my mind that someone there is reading this site.
I’ve been holding out hope that the team over there is just busy with developing GFv2, and that is why there is little progress on the promised features (continuous autofocus, highly accurate visual alignment, auto-alignment for flipped over material, passthrough alignment, auto detection of phones/tablets, etc.).
I would think it’s premature to start developing new hardware when they haven’t even gotten the first one right (or even released, in the case of the air filter.) But that seems to be their standard procedure, so who knows?
The low hanging fruit is ignored, and only updates of very little utility seem to creep out. This would lead one to think they are sandbagging, and planning to include all these wonderful enhancements in a new product.
They’ll have a riot on their hands if they do this. But then again, pissed off customers don’t seem to bother them.
Then, they go and do something like the autofocus speed up. I don’t seem to recall any torch bearing mobs storming GF HQ because the autofocus wasn’t fast enough.
They weren’t. I imagine this was some employee’s big idea for the month, and when you have no big improvements to report, you blow small improvements out of proportion. This enhancement would have taken an experienced coder all of a few hours to implement and test.
So, why expend developer time on it? And why roll it out in such a haphazard way that it ends up taxing your already overworked support staff, and further damaging your shaky QA reputation?
Here’s my take on it: they have an incredibly inexperienced team trying to do some very hard things. Dan has prioritized hiring a young and diverse (and presumably inexpensive) workforce over hiring an experienced one, and it shows. Look how long it’s taken to get to this point (minimally functional product, no real enhancements since launch, long list of unfulfilled promises.) Compare that to what one guy has been able to do with a few months of spare time here. Imagine where they’d be if Glowforge had just hired a half dozen @ScottW514’s to start with.
BTW - it looks like shortly after we chatted about their mixed Glassdoor reviews, there are two new reviews up there (this one and this one , both dated Aug 30) that look suspiciously like they were written by a marketing person.
Glassdoor is notorious for looking the other way in exchange for cash when HR posts shill reviews.
And the reports of a strong top-down management culture are more evidence of the inexperience of the team - it’s a common mistake made with young, inexperienced managers.
4 Likes
IIRC they picked up a bunch more venture capital so it would seem they don’t need to care… and if anyone was worried about how the users feel about the ‘Forge they would only have to visit the Joy-filled(*) forums to see how glowing the praise is
(*) Joy-filled as in Compulsion Games’ ‘We Happy Few’
I find it unlikely that an investor would be interested in giving more money just to keep them afloat while they try and finish the product they already sold, which lends weight to the “GFv2” theory.
The other interesting development is the claim that they are now sold out due to demand.
This is fishy.
Either they shut down the US factory too soon and are having problems getting their new Guadalajara factory up and running, or they stopped production on the old ones in preparation for a launch of the new ones.
The former would be a classic Glowforge planning fiasco. The latter would be a refreshing change if the new product launches without a hitch. Sadly, I fully expect it to be the former.
Whatever it is, it will be interesting to see how long they are without inventory (and sales revenue), especially with the Dremel launch coming up.
They are still selling the plus model, so they do have some revenue.
Blockquote
I use Onshape (CAD cloud) and LightBurn (laser software) and follow both forums. It’s interesting to see how many features both companies have implemented and how responsive they are to their forum communities. Onshape introduces a handful of new features every 3-4 weeks and will often push minor fixes within a few hours of 1st report. They maintain an user-driven list of feature requests and prioritize implementation partly in response to user votes. Anyone can see the requests, how many votes it has, and make comments. When bugs are mentioned one of the developers will usually pop into the thread and give some explanation as to the cause and when a fix might be expected. Very open and above board and a huge contrast to GF’s reputed “hopper”.
Lightburn was started by one guy to improve on the RDWorks software that folks like Russ Sadler use on their Ruida-controlled lasers as well as a bunch of the DIY lasers. By my count he has had 13 software updates since January this year. He seems to have no problem acknowledging bugs, often explains what caused them, and usually has them fixed with in anywhere from a day to a week.
Glowforge could learn a lot from either company.
5 Likes
So, I finally received the Snapmark® feature in the GFUI.
Obviously, without the cameras working, it isn’t functional with the OpenGlow.
Did notice, when you scan for the fiduciary marks, it sends a new option with the command:
{"id":27052616,"action_type":"lid_image","machine_serial":"DMQ-793","status":"ready","settings":{"IMjq":80}}
I haven’t seen the IMjq setting before. I wonder if it is specifying the JPEG compression quality.
I’ll see if I can fool it into thinking there are marks on there, and then find out if there is anything new in the commands it sends to take the up-close picture with the head camera (at least, I assume it takes a closeup with the head cam…).
1 Like