There is. If my testers would just stop finding bugs.... All joking aside, they are doing good work, I really see it as very viable to release this month. Mostly what needs to be done now is non-coding tasks like screen-cap tutorials.
upvote on better filament library - or even just a blog post where people can post something. I don't want to have to figure out TD for 20 different filaments. Why not make it a community effort?
It is more or less how far through solid filament the light will travel. I've found in my testing with the FilaScope, that it's not ACTUALLY when the light stops, but when the losses stop being visibly linear to the human eye.
So at some point you get a very faint light that you mostly only barely perceive because of the pitch darkness in the scope and moving it around in front of the light. At that point it really doesn't matter and doesn't count.
So I need a calibrated way to measure when the light falloff hits a certain point. From what I've seen, the vast MAJORITY of filaments have extremely similar responses over their entire depth range if they have the same transmission distance, so I suspect that I could put in a calibrated thickness onces (1-2mm) and measure that response and tell you what the full transmission distance is.
The transmission distance is used in HueForge to measure the blending by layer height of the filaments. My current plan is a fixed number of LEDs in a square tube with a light meter at the other end and you drop a "slide" into the middle and measure the luminance.
You are clearly very well versed in this field and I barely know anything about it. But I don't need an exact number here. There is going to be enough variability in a melted, nozzle deposited medium - just from the FDM printing methodology to easy swamp any kind of precision. Testing also indicates I need a number within about 0.5mm of correct to get very good results - especially with the functional minimum layer heights in the 0.04-0.08mm range. (Though at 0.04m thickness the scattering is often different, like there isn't enough pigment in some filaments to actually scatter at all until enough layers build up)
I do understand making sure I have good tools for the job. I can get good equipment up to a point - but I want to make sure that the precision of the tool is only somewhat better than the precision of the filament itself, not so much more precise it can spot the variations in pigment between layers if you know what I mean. So I'm not sure why you need to know my equations to understand the problem and the use case. Suffice it to say they are entirely perceptual and not at all rigorous.
Is there a tentative launch scheduled for this month? Trying to keep anticipations in check ☺️.
There is. If my testers would just stop finding bugs.... All joking aside, they are doing good work, I really see it as very viable to release this month. Mostly what needs to be done now is non-coding tasks like screen-cap tutorials.
Love to see polymaker stepping up! They are one of the best on the market. Shut up and take my money already. Lol. Had to say it. Much love.
upvote on better filament library - or even just a blog post where people can post something. I don't want to have to figure out TD for 20 different filaments. Why not make it a community effort?
Looking forward to getting this in my hands. I have customers that will love this.
It is more or less how far through solid filament the light will travel. I've found in my testing with the FilaScope, that it's not ACTUALLY when the light stops, but when the losses stop being visibly linear to the human eye.
So at some point you get a very faint light that you mostly only barely perceive because of the pitch darkness in the scope and moving it around in front of the light. At that point it really doesn't matter and doesn't count.
So I need a calibrated way to measure when the light falloff hits a certain point. From what I've seen, the vast MAJORITY of filaments have extremely similar responses over their entire depth range if they have the same transmission distance, so I suspect that I could put in a calibrated thickness onces (1-2mm) and measure that response and tell you what the full transmission distance is.
The transmission distance is used in HueForge to measure the blending by layer height of the filaments. My current plan is a fixed number of LEDs in a square tube with a light meter at the other end and you drop a "slide" into the middle and measure the luminance.
You are clearly very well versed in this field and I barely know anything about it. But I don't need an exact number here. There is going to be enough variability in a melted, nozzle deposited medium - just from the FDM printing methodology to easy swamp any kind of precision. Testing also indicates I need a number within about 0.5mm of correct to get very good results - especially with the functional minimum layer heights in the 0.04-0.08mm range. (Though at 0.04m thickness the scattering is often different, like there isn't enough pigment in some filaments to actually scatter at all until enough layers build up)
I do understand making sure I have good tools for the job. I can get good equipment up to a point - but I want to make sure that the precision of the tool is only somewhat better than the precision of the filament itself, not so much more precise it can spot the variations in pigment between layers if you know what I mean. So I'm not sure why you need to know my equations to understand the problem and the use case. Suffice it to say they are entirely perceptual and not at all rigorous.