Getting a Laser...

[Keith Outten]

Hey Scott,

I think I will pass on the challenge. If I have to change drawing sizes to many times I would lose the race at the starting line
If we were vector cutting letters or numbers half of mine would end up in the garbage can.

LOL

I hope that Guy Barone will accept your terms though, it would be interesting to see a real world challenge back up his claims.

.

[Amie McGee]

Hi Matt,

I would be happy to put you in contact with some Trotec owners in your area if you wish. I can also arrange a demo for you as well.

[Matt Haymond]

That would be great, please pm me!

[Guy Barone]

Scott, We'll be glad to participate even under your tight control. Please call me directly at 225-752-0225 x306 to dictate your conditions.

It would be optimal if we can get a representative sample of typical, daily jobs. If practical, we could ask members of the forum to submit jobs. Once submitted, you and I could review the jobs and mutually pick several to run. Members of the forum would benefit most from this kind of sample and test.

We do these kinds of tests at every trade show. Potential customers bring jobs to our booth on a jump drive or CD and we run them just as someone would run them in their shop. They are able to compare and contrast performance from job layout to completion. I highly recommend that anyone considering the purchase of a laser engraver visit with the respective manufacturers, understand the benefits (strenghts and weaknesses) of the systems, and put the system to the test with jobs that represent the bulk of their current as well as prospective work.

Thanks, Guy

[Scott Shepherd]

I'll be in touch Guy. My main concern is getting fair benchmarks where we're measuring from the same starting point. I can easily setup a video camera and capture my actions from start to finish. Not sure what you have available or are willing to do.

I'm not interested in having a bunch of people submit samples. I'm interested in some specific type jobs and we'll sort those out along with all the details over the next few days.

If Keith is willing, perhaps we can perform the tests on his machine. He's 70 miles from me and I'll gladly drive over to see him and watch him run the tests. If that's not acceptable then we'll need to work out a way to verify the start/stop times.

I'll be in touch.

I'm planning on being at the NBM show in Baltimore next week, perhaps you or your people can run my files while I'm timing them on the show floor?

[Keith Outten]

Scott,

Your welcome to visit us at CNU, our Xenetech XLT1325 is 60 watt. The power supply will definately be a factor to be considered.

.

[Rodne Gold]

Is the test to prove throughput or to prove that time between finish of Corel design and running the job is faster or what?
Part of the productivity process is contained within Corel itself , as the design of the graphic often has elements which have to work around laser issues or correspond to some machine property.

If a job is to be tested , it has to be from start of Corel design outwards.

I don't believe a test like this can actually show anything significant that would mean that one laser is better than another.
In terms of our Gcc's , well the time between finishing the graphic and getting it to print is a minute fraction of the total job time.
Thruput is dependant on a ton of things like how the graphic is optimised , the lasers optimisation routine and what is acceptable quality vs time taken. Speed or utility of a laser has also got to include downtimes , if your laser is blindingly fast and you are down for 2 days , vs a slighter slower one that's up , your thruput is shocking.
Another factor to consider is repeats , how quickly can you load and unload the machine and how quickly can you repeat the job , in my case repeating a job , considering the file etc is stored on the laser , is a simple button press. I also have my puter freed up after a print job is sent , in fact i dont even have to have the laser connected to a puter , we have a facility to store multiple jobs on the memory of my one set of lasers , switch it off and start running the same jobs the next day....sans puter.
Produtivity and thruput translate directly into money , as laser time is money assuming you are chock a block with work , anything that affects the generation of profits , like expensive repairs , dud jobs , laser tube replacements , waiting for tech support etc is relevant , not just how fast the machine performs. How do you factor in the fact Keith has to repeat jobs cos of letters middles falling out? Its double machine time , double material costs and a huge aggravation factor.

I have seen most of the lasers ppl own here in operation and have spoken to owners re their issues , it seems to me that what you lose on the swings you gain on the roundabouts and no mainstream machine in the power/price class is better than another.
As I say , I do not believe a simple head to head test proves much , one need to test over a longer time period with a multitude of jobs (most of us arent single task users , we are jobbing shops)

At any rate , the simple fact , proven time and time again , and re-itterated by experienced users is that the real determining factor of which machine to buy is the length and quality of it's warrantee and the accesibility of tech support and parts.