This topic contains 19 replies, has 13 voices, and was last updated by 
David 1 month ago.
-
Posts
-
As part of our development planning we are considering changes to slicing engine offerings.
In the first release of AutoMaker the only slicing engine available was Sli3r. Because of an issue in the development of Slic3r we pushed forward the plan to offer multiple slicing engines, the first of these being Cura.
We are considering the removal of Slic3r to concentrate our efforts. If we can remove this slicing engine we will be able to add more features and improve what is currently offered without the complications of supporting Slic3r.
Please post below if you still use Slic3r and why. If you don’t use it at all please also post so we can see a balance.
The result of this small poll wont be a final decision, just an impression from our community to help us plan for the future.
I sometimes use slic3r, cura ingores some fine details in some models, also if im in hurry printing (read lazy or no time to fix it) some badly designed model (too thin intercections for example) slic3r melds them better togeather while cura treats them as seperate and parts of model come lose.
Mostly i use cura, but i still use slic3r sometimes
I see motion to drop Slic3r kind of regressing and limiting options than moving forward. While some other 3d printer software developers are trying to increase amount of accessible software so users can choose - this would be completely opposite. But, again, it seems more and more that I am not the target customer for Robox. It seems that it is more aimed to total beginners or intermediate users who won’t astray a lot from preset defaults…
Slic3r is sometimes better for fine stuff. With Cura some fine features disappear from the print. I think both should remain in Automaker, as long there isn’t one which is works perfectly for every geometry ( i.e. 99,9% of the time).
Maybe it’s time to talk with a slicer software company to be able to include one which is fine-tuned for the robox ?
I have not used slic3r in a while but I like having it in hand in case cura fails to adequately reproduce my models, the flexibility to swap is a plus for AM unless removing slic3r would considerably step up the slicing experience, meaning whatever engine is left in AM, is so fine tuned that it would slice every model in a flawless manner everytime.
MohI have also used it where cura has failed on fine features. It does seem to be good to have both but would be best having an integrated slicing preview as at the moment always take them into the web based one which i can’t remember what its called at the mo and not at my home pc..
@streatsi like Cura, for instance has?
Wouldn’t be nicer if CEL provides plugin for Cura for post processing of gcode for Robox? Or, separate command line tool that would allow Cura’s gcode and produce Robox gcode? With that we would be able to use Cura directly and from what I’ve just seen it is quite impressive.
Here are some pictures of Cura itself.
I use the Robox with slic3r for printing enclosures with fine features for ultrasonic bat detectors.
The cura engine really doesn’t work well and I don’t think you should even make it the default until it is further improved. I am using the Normal setting with slic3r and a bridge speed of 85mm/s. With this high speed the bridges from slic3r (with T0 only) are almost as good as those from cura. The better bridge support in cura seems to be to be its only advantage but unfortunately it prints fine features uneven and stringy. I am using PLA.If support for slic3r were removed, I would be forced to slice manually and try to emulate the Robox post-processing filter (which unfortunately is not yet OpenSource). I would then have to upload the gcode, which would be very inconvenient. I don’t have time for this and it would probably force me to return to the Robox and buy another 3D printer.
Please focus on adding flexibility, not removing it!
I have switched between Cura and Slic3r because Slic3r provides better surface finish and better infill on the top surfaces. Cura also tends to randomize the rapid paths between surface features, causing drag marks as the nozzle passes across the top layer at an angle. While this has improved recently, it still is a concern. One project I am working on has several raised features in the middle of a large surface. For some reason, Cura likes to make three or four random passes to get to those features while Slic3r tends to follow the previous layer path or make only one rapid pass.
I have also found that Cura doesn’t like really small details, but Slicer doesn’t fully fill certain features. So I swap between them depending on what I need for each print.
I am not affiliated with CEL; I operate two Betas and one Production Robox.I use mostly Slic3r because Cura, doesn’t handle correctly fine details. I think that is important to maintain Slic3r as a option, at least until Cura can hadle fine details properly.
Cheers for the feedback guys. I asked because we are concentrating our efforts on Cura as it is still new, we don’t often use slic3r and wondered if you guys were.
Latest: We wont remove Slic3r until it is not required. We are talking to other slicing engine authors constantly.
We would love to see some examples of the issues you have seen in Cura prints that Slic3r has resolved.
Boss Man has offered a reel of filament for the most constructive feedback, data and example images. Your PrintJobs would be a great help if you have one each for Cura and Slic3r of the same model and similar settings.
Here is one, .stl you can find @ http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:86635
http://www.cel-robox.com/forums/topic/cookiecutter-slic3r-vs-cura/
-
This reply was modified 2 months, 1 week ago by
poju.
-
This reply was modified 2 months, 1 week ago by
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
