Harry Klippton
Well-known member
So uh, anybody got build reports with uv printing or faceplates from amplifyfun?
I was finishing up some faceplate designs a few weeks ago, but my computer died for good (luckily I have multiple forms of backups for everything, so I should hopefully be okay). When I get my new computer up and running I’ll be ordering some faceplates, and build reports will be shortly behind.So uh, anybody got build reports with uv printing or faceplates from amplifyfun?
Those look great. I'm not sure I can even tell a difference from the photos. Your second paragraph basically answered any other questions I had tooHere's a comparison of faceplates from Amplify Fun and Ponoko using similar typefaces and design direction. Overall, Ponoko has better quality, but the service is much more expensive and can have potentially long lead times. It really only makes sense to go through them if you have a significantly large order (they essentially charge a panel rate) and can get volume discounts. Amplify Fun is less expensive and has a flat-rate for faceplates. Also, the faceplates themselves have an adhesive backing. The Ponoko material does not, so it must be held in place with the hardware. The faceplates have less 'resolution' and have jagged edges when inspected closely. When looking at them during normal use, this isn't really an issue. The only problem I've had is that finer details may be lost; faceplates in general should be designed while considering the material and process constraints.
Amplify Fun is a fine service with good products, and Spencer is very helpful and responsive. The price is right, the results are good, and the service is done in the spirit of DIY and with pedals in mind. I'd recommend anyone curious to give it a shot. Especially since there's an affordable flat rate, experimenting with one or two is very doable.
Ponoko:
View attachment 21709 View attachment 21710
Amplify Fun:
View attachment 21712 View attachment 21711
Agreed, both look outstanding in the PhotosThose look great. I'm not sure I can even tell a difference from the photos. Your second paragraph basically answered any other questions I had too
That would be a question for Spencer. The Amplify Fun engravings seem to be shallower than the Ponoko’s, though.How deep is the engraving in the faceplate roughly?
Nice! Looks like it’s not too deep. I was concerned if it was too deep then finer details might be prone to catching on stuff and chipping.Tried to get an angle where you could see that.
View attachment 21760
Yeah dragging my finger over it, it feels basically level.Nice! Looks like it’s not too deep. I was concerned if it was too deep then finer details might be prone to catching on stuff and chipping.
Damn...after seeing this it’s starting to make me question dropping $ on a decent laser printer...And here’s another print from @amplifyfun both with and without flash to show the detail.
View attachment 21762
View attachment 21763
The kicker for me is that Spencer will do prints of raster images instead of vector. That was one of my main reasons for getting a laser printer and doing waterslide and stuff, and now I can get those properly UV printed by Spencer, which Tayda doesn't offer (at least from the last time I checked).Damn...after seeing this it’s starting to make me question dropping $ on a decent laser printer...
There's certainly a practical reason to that. If you don't know what you're doing and you try to print a raster image, you may run into formatting or resolution issues. (Reference every pixelated banner you've ever seen.) I think some people have been able to print raster images through Tayda, but I can't speak from experience there.The kicker for me is that Spencer will do prints of raster images instead of vector. That was one of my main reasons for getting a laser printer and doing waterslide and stuff, and now I can get those properly UV printed by Spencer, which Tayda doesn't offer (at least from the last time I checked).
Yeah I definitely understand that. But it's a bit of a pain when I have a ton of design assets that are really high definition raster images that I have to then convert to vector (which can negatively affect the detail) just so that I can use them on a print. That's why I mention it as a real plus here.There's certainly a practical reason to that. If you don't know what you're doing and you try to print a raster image, you may run into formatting or resolution issues. (Reference every pixelated banner you've ever seen.) I think some people have been able to print raster images through Tayda, but I can't speak from experience there.
Definitely get that. I typically stick to text-based graphics, so vector isn't a huge ask for me.Yeah I definitely understand that. But it's a bit of a pain when I have a ton of design assets that are really high definition raster images that I have to then convert to vector (which can negatively affect the detail) just so that I can use them on a print. That's why I mention it as a real plus here.
I think Tayda says that Affinity Designer shouldn't be used because you have to ensure a lot of parameters are correct to get a good export for them to use—and I don't think they really want to deal with supporting it. If you ensure that the spot colors are imported/applied correctly, the layers properly structured, and the file is exported while honoring spot colors, you shouldn't ever really have a problem with Affinity (at least it's always worked for me).As for printing raster images, I'm honestly not sure. Tayda's first step in their rules says it must be vectorized. They also say not to use Affinity Designer, which @amplifyfun does allow for.
Yeah that makes sense. Especially with the massive amount of printing they are doing. Do you know if the spot colors are just specific CMYK values or is there something else at play there?Definitely get that. I typically stick to text-based graphics, so vector isn't a huge ask for me.
I think Tayda says that Affinity Designer shouldn't be used because you have to ensure a lot of parameters are correct to get a good export for them to use—and I don't think they really want to deal with supporting it. If you ensure that the spot colors are imported/applied correctly, the layers properly structured, and the file is exported while honoring spot colors, you shouldn't ever really have a problem with Affinity (at least it's always worked for me).