Lithophane sled and attempts #1; #1.5, & #2

[brdad]

I received my acrylic panels Thursday and thought I'd share the results of my first attempts at lithophanes.

I decided I'd make a sled which would accommodate only a panel sized for 5X7, slightly over actually, so that if placed in a box there would be a 5X7 viewing area. Simple enough for the CW veterans here, but figured I post pics of it so that anyone interested could see my design.

I used a scrap piece of melamine shelving I had. This seems to work good but because of the smooth surface, I have to make extra sure I clean all the acrylic off from the rollers from the previous carve or the CW can't move the board.

I routed the 1/4" deep opening in the sled with my CW using the 3/8" jointing bit. Not sure as this was the correct way, but it worked well and took only 8 minutes IIRC. I also routed the circles in the corners opening to prevent the corners of the acrylic from catching and breaking off on removal, and also to help facilitate that removal. Final depth was ever so slightly more than 1/4", but it works well.

On my first attempt, I taped the acrylic to the board right on the top, but decided afterward to carve with nothing holding the acrylic in but the sled. However, it seems that the 5X7 acrylic will always be under at least one roller, so I don't think it can go anywhere. I also cut the acrylic to fit fairly snug into the opening, so it can't move sideways.

I set up a template in designer. I made a board the size of my sled and placed a rectangle centered on it. I then resized the rectangle so that it was about 1/2 inch less in X/Y dimensions in order to leave about a 1/4 inch border from the actual size of my acrylic. Then I set a carve region in this rectangle to .25. I can now place an image on this template and set Clip Carving: Inclusive so that I can resize and move the image about on the board, and yet only what is within that carve region will show and be carved. Hope that makes sense!

[brdad]

My first attempt was a bit of a disappointment. I knew I was using an image with a lot of detail, which I had read could be an issue. Also, I was afraid my acrylic was too white so I carved it deeper than recommended. And I didn't realize it until I fretted over how bad it turned out overnight that I had mistakenly placed the 1/8" carving bit in the machine instead of the 1/16" bit! I also found that after carving, there is an area where the water is black, so it didn't carve that area at all. Since I was using acrylic, this left a shiny spot in this area. This probably could be sanded slightly, but in the future I may adjust my height so the highest point is slightly less than 0.

My settings

Material: Solid white acrylic
Original image: 2048 X 1536; Color; Unedited - NO greyscale, NO negative image, NO invert carving
Depth: .17
Height: 400
Bit Optimization: Best
Carve Quality: Best
Bit: 1/8th carving (by mistake)
Power consumption: 0.43 KWH
Apx. time: 1 hour
Lighting: Temporary small cardboard box with 14 watt CF lamp

It didn't look like much lighted, which I expected. But lighted, it still does not look like much! This is one instance where the photo looks better than the actual results, I am not sure why.

[brdad]

I actually did this carve after #2, but am putting it in order to save confusion. I carved over my previous mess up, keeping the depth the same so it would carve no deeper, but altering the height until my highest point was about .1 inch above the .17 depth. I also made sure to use the correct bit! My hope was that this would produce a better looking product, but that it may take a lot less light due to much thinner material.

My settings

Material: Solid white acrylic
Original image: 2048 X 1536; Color; Unedited - NO greyscale, NO negative image, NO invert carving
Depth: .17
Height: 75
Bit Optimization: Best
Carve Quality: Best
Bit: 1/16th carving
Power consumption: 0.42 KWH
Apx. time: 50 minutes
Lighting: Temporary small cardboard box with 14 watt CF lamp

Unfortunately, although this did come out better, it is far from good. If I wasn't familiar with the location, I would probably have trouble guessing what the picture was. Again, the photo looks better than the actual product. It did cure the issue with the shiny areas, as expected. So I would conclude this image is just way too busy to make a good lithophane without spending some time with photo software or carve settings.

[brdad]

I found an image that was less busy. I set the depth to .1, figuring I can carve over it if I don't carve deep enough, but I can't put the material back if I carve too deep. I also thought the image looked better with no bit optimization in designer, so I left it that way. I did, however, use best quality for carving. Even though I have the depth set at 400, there were no full black areas in my photo, so I didn't end up with any shiny areas on this one.

My settings

Material: Solid white acrylic
Original image: 2048 X 1536; Color; Unedited - NO greyscale, NO negative image, NO invert carving
Depth: .1
Height: 400
Bit Optimization: None
Carve Quality: Best
Bit: 1/16th carving
Power consumption: 0.25 KWH
Apx. time: 38 minutes
Lighting: Temporary small cardboard box with 14 watt CF lamp

I am happy with this carve! Biggest problems are the wheelchair ramp next to the building is quite busy and is tougher to visualize. Also there is a white plumbing stack which extends up from the roof that doesn't show up in the carve, excepting leaving a white spot on the top of the roof. The top of the lighthouse itself looks a bit off as well where it does not show a border on the left side. That and the stack would be easy to photoshop a bit to make it look much better.

I's also like to note that the lighted photos shown here appear more brown than they really are. The actual lighted product looks more like a light greyscale. Not sure as if this is the case with corian, but it is with the acrylic I used.

EDIT: I found if I put the litho in a window and take the picture that way, it's a much better representation of the color. But that golden glow is kind of neat, I wonder how that could be achieved.....

[Bubbabear]

I found an image that was less busy. I set the depth to .1, figuring I can carve over it if I don't carve deep enough, but I put it back if I carve too deep. I also thought the image looked better with no bit optimization in designer, so I left it that way. I did, however, use best quality for carving. Even though I have the depth set at 400, there were no full black areas in my photo, so I didn't end up with any shiny areas on this one.

My settings

Material: Solid white acrylic
Original image: 2048 X 1536; Color; Unedited - NO greyscale, NO negative image, NO invert carving
Depth: .1
Height: 400
Bit Optimazation: None
Carve Quality: Best
Bit: 1/16th carving
0.25 KWH
Apx. time: 38 minutes
Lighting: Temporary small cardboard box with 14 watt CF lamp

I am happy with this carve! Biggest problems are the wheelchair ramp next to the building is quite busy and is tougher to visualize. Also there is a white plumbing stack which extends up from the roof that doesn't show up in the carve, excepting leaving a white spot on the top of the roof. The top of the lighthouse itself looks a bit off as well where it does not show a border on the left side. That and the stack would be easy to photoshop a bit to make it look much better.

I's also like to note that the lighted photos shown here appear more brown than they really are. The actual lighted product looks more like a light greyscale. Not sure as if this is the case with corian, but it is with the acrylic I used.

For what you worked with I like them all but dude this last one was fantastic

[Firedkm]

Brad.
I believe you want to use an opaque plastic not a solid color. The opaque will let more light through.

Good Luck

[Kenm810]

I think you mean,
Translucent plastic -- permitting the passage of light
not,
Opaque plactic -- blocking the passage of radiant energy and especially light

[liquidguitars]

The top of the lighthouse itself looks a bit off as well where it does not show a border on the left side.

Nice..

Regarding buzzing around the eages, this could be some Jpeg compression issues in the image.
Try working with a 24 bit non compressed format like PNG or BMP..

LG

[brdad]

Brad.
I believe you want to use an opaque plastic not a solid color. The opaque will let more light through.Good Luck

Name is Dave, my nick is brdad, which is short for "Brian's dad" - but don't worry about it, everyone makes that mistake.

Anyway, you are correct. I carved two of the same image to test, one on the solid and one on the opaque and the one done on the opaque is easily visible but much too light. I'd post the pics, but I got home late and it's dark in my window.


I think you mean,
Translucent plastic -- permitting the passage of light
not,
Opaque plactic -- blocking the passage of radiant energy and especially light

Well, you learn something every day. I have always used opaque and translucent interchangeably. Even the guy at the glass store called it opaque! But, translucent it is!


Nice..

Regarding buzzing around the eages, this could be some Jpeg compression issues in the image.
Try working with a 24 bit non compressed format like PNG or BMP..

LG

I worked with the original jpeg from my digital camera, didn't have it in raw format. And, as the original image shows, there are only a few light lines on that side. I think it's also partly due to that one being carved with Bit Optimization: None.

[Amonaug]

Transparent - having the property of transmitting rays of light through its substance so that bodies situated beyond or behind can be distinctly seen.

Translucent - permitting light to pass through but diffusing it so that persons, objects, etc., on the opposite side are not clearly visible: Frosted window glass is translucent but not transparent.

Opaque - not transparent or translucent; impenetrable to light; not allowing light to pass through.

Just to be a smartass :D

[JLT]

Dave,

You might be losing some of the translation of the image to the lithophane if you are using the colored image as opposed to its gray scale equivalent. Since the lithophane is monochromatic, gray scale more directly aligns with the amount of light you wish to let pass through.

Typically, when converting an image to gray scale, the balance of color is 29.9% of the red, 58.7% of the green, and 11.4% of the blue. If the Designer, when importing color images, does not use these typical weights, then you're not optimizing the monochromatic version of the image...

R, Jon

Jonathan Trent
Leonardtown MD

[brdad]

I was curious if there was any validity to converting to gray scale before importing into Designer, thanks for the explanation.

I just imported two identical images (one color, one gray scale) and then saved as PNG in designer to compare. While I could not visually see any difference, but when I compared pixel colors there is a difference. So I guess this does show Designer uses slightly different balance. Though I am still not sure it makes a significant difference.

I am not sure if I can verify if my photo software (Paint Shop Pro) uses the balance settings you are suggesting. I'll have to see if I can find out.

[brdad]

I finally got home early enough to take pictures of the difference between the translucent and white acrylic lithos I created. And in the meantime I carved one in bone corian too. As expected, the bone corian wins hands down. Now I need to find something different to do with the acrylic I bought since I'll probably never make a lithophane out of it again!

Original photo was a scan from an old photo, but still came out decent.
Attached photos are in order - Translucent Acrylic/White Acrylic/Bone Corian

[Kenm810]

I totally agree with you on the Bone colored Corian,
I've tried them all and had about the same results.
Your lithophane looks Great, well done.
Next project to come is lighting it. http://forum.carvewright.com/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif

[JLT]

Dave,

Thanks for sharing the comparison of the various materials. Excellent lithos! I was thinking about dabbling with acrylic, but now that I see your results, Bone Corian looks like a no-brainer.

Where did you source your corian? And does it cut easily on the table saw?

Jon

[skeeterman]

Hey Jon, I have a lot of 1/2" thick bone white corian , and yes you can cut it on table saw, it is very dusty when you are cutting it.
what size are you looking for?
you can email me or pm me
Steve skeeterman93@yahoo.com

[Ron Heiden]

Quiet a while ago someone posted a link to turn images into vector.
I've looked in the forums but cant seem to find it.Any one know what im talking about??

[brdad]

Dave,

Thanks for sharing the comparison of the various materials. Excellent lithos! I was thinking about dabbling with acrylic, but now that I see your results, Bone Corian looks like a no-brainer.

Where did you source your corian? And does it cut easily on the table saw?

Jon

I bought it on ebay - it ended up costing less per sq in than I paid for the acrylic. I had to keep checking for a few days before I found someone selling 1/4 inch.

It cut real well with a table saw and a carbide blade, but like many plastics there will be a lot of tiny stinging projectiles flying at you - wear your safety glasses. Of course you should be wearing those all the time. :rolleyes:




Next project to come is lighting it. http://forum.carvewright.com/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif

Box and lighting are next on the agenda. I have the light and an idea for a box. Stay tuned for details. :-D

[JLT]

Steve,

Thanks for the offer, but am looking for 1/4" thick material, and I seem to recall somewhere someone indicating that planing down 1/2" makes the planer howl! (It would try it, except for the fact that the planer I have is on loan from my brother).

Dave,

Thanks for the 411 on ebay. I'll take a look. Hopefully I won't inadvertently get into a bidding war with one of the other forum members!

Jon

[IM2HAPPI]

http://vectormagic.com/