Machsupport Forum

Mach Discussion => General Mach Discussion => Topic started by: KNS Supply on September 10, 2008, 01:55:24 AM

Title: Lazy cam problems
Post by: KNS Supply on September 10, 2008, 01:55:24 AM: Does anyone know of a simple 2 or 3d cam program like Lazycam
but better?
I paid the money for Lazycam but it really sucks.
I could sit here for 2 hrs explaining the problems but it's a waste of time
Brian already told me that they weren't going to fix anything.

It's a shame because I really like Mach 3.
You would think they would have a little more pride in their product
like they do with Mach 3
Please let me know,
Brian
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: budman68 on September 10, 2008, 04:59:32 AM: Hi Brian, yep, I was hoping LazyCam would have been "fixed up" a little more by now as well >:(

Have you tried Cut2D? They have a free trial download and it looks pretty slick and user friendly. I've been playing with it and may jump in but not quite sure yet.

Dave
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: bowber on September 10, 2008, 05:31:50 AM: I use Sheetcam for my 21/2D work, it was $150 but I think it's gone up a little now, Les is working on a new version that is worth trying called TNG, it's free to try at the moment and there is no restrictions on the output.

For 3D work I use Meshcam

Steve
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: RICH on September 10, 2008, 06:52:56 AM: Is there a program out there that dosn't have any bugs? Maybe it's a matter of degree. A lot has come on the market
over the last few years. What starts to happen is we look for some magical program which reminds me of the Word processor development days ie; each one had something which the other one didn't and all you do is spend time learning new programs that sooner or later you find to be short for some reason.
I believe that the learning and bug problems will be around for a long time to come. Don't care how much you spend.
In fact if you have to read 1000 pages of crap to get some GCODE it can't be to good. So if you find something really good
at an equivilant price let me know as I'll give it a try.
Just some thoughts and tired of looking for the Magical Wond,
RICH
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: KNS Supply on September 10, 2008, 10:22:40 AM: Thanks for the input guys.
I am really in need of a 3d program.
Let me rephrase that A Simple 3D Program.
But I'm going to try sheet cam as a trial.
Thanks

Please let me know if there are any others out there.
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: Chaoticone on September 10, 2008, 11:07:30 AM: Simple 3D? Never heard of that. Have a look at Artcam and solid works with a solidcam add on. Also might want to look at Vectric. What type of work are you doing?

Brett
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: KNS Supply on September 10, 2008, 11:42:06 AM: Artcam seems like a nightmare.
I'm mainly creating simple 2 and 3D drawings for
either engraving or just simple profiles.
The need for 3D is when I have a 3D part that I need to engrave on it.
usually with just single line geometry.
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: budman68 on September 10, 2008, 11:42:39 AM: Quote from: bowber on September 10, 2008, 05:31:50 AM
I use Sheetcam for my 21/2D work, it was $150 but I think it's gone up a little now, Les is working on a new version that is worth trying called TNG, it's free to try at the moment and there is no restrictions on the output.

For 3D work I use Meshcam

Steve

Got a link for "TNG" Steve? Googled it and couldn't find it, thanks-

Dave
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: Kristin D on September 10, 2008, 01:21:58 PM: Dave,

I think you'll find TNG on the download page, TNG= the next/new generation which is how it's listed.

Kristin
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: ger21 on September 10, 2008, 01:34:45 PM: If you want to engrave in 3D, get your wallet out. None of the inexpensive 3D CAM packages will do it.

If you want a simple, easy to use 2D CAM package, Cut2D is what you want. Should be about as close to bug free as you'll find, as well. All Vectric products set the bar for ease of use, have awesome support, and just plain work. SheetCAM is good as well, but I haven't seen it in a long time, so really can't comment on it.
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: Kristin D on September 10, 2008, 01:37:34 PM: Brian,

I have to agree LC is not user friendly... at all. One thing was driving me nuts was offsetting and getting wierd loops in the paths, Art told me to highlight what I wanted (in or out) and zoom way in then hit offset, fixed it problem 100%. I do wish they would keep the layers tab on top, seems to be the one I need most to make sure my tool settings and cut depth are set correctly. I think a bit of effort in writing up some (any) instructions would go a long way in making people happier with the software there is nothing except the one or two videos and that does me not much good when I want to do something to watch a 20 min video. I usually have to go about three rounds with LC before I can get a good file out of it, but I usually load it on my desktop first and find the obvious warnings like zero radius line 23 and the like and fix those first.

Hopefully some of our $75 "donations" will go towards at least a basic manual writeup and perhaps a cleaner user interface so I don't have to bounce from tab to tab to check all the parameters.

Kristin

Quote from: KNS Supply on September 10, 2008, 01:55:24 AM
Does anyone know of a simple 2 or 3d cam program like Lazycam
but better?
I paid the money for Lazycam but it really sucks.
I could sit here for 2 hrs explaining the problems but it's a waste of time
Brian already told me that they weren't going to fix anything.

It's a shame because I really like Mach 3.
You would think they would have a little more pride in their product
like they do with Mach 3
Please let me know,
Brian
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: budman68 on September 10, 2008, 04:36:05 PM: Thanks for the info, Kristin. As for waiting for a manual, I'm really doubting that will happen. I think LCam is just way too far back on the back burner (it actually probably fell behind it). I think the attention is mainly focused on Mach 3 Turning and then LazyTurn maybe after that. Just an observation, I surely don't know for sure what's involved with the company doings so I think I'm going to seriously be looking elsewhere for a CAM program at this point. I do "ok" with LCam but like I said earlier in this thread, I'm looking for something a little more user friendly like Cut2D. The folks on the forums over there are terrific as well.

Dave
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: budman68 on September 10, 2008, 05:09:02 PM: Ok, Kristin, I'm an idiot, please post a link to it as I've look on the downloads page here and I just don't see it lol!

Thanks,
Dave
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: Kristin D on September 10, 2008, 05:45:26 PM: Dave,

The sheetcam downloads page! Third Item down with "NEW" next to it. And no your not an Idiot!

http://www.sheetcam.com/downloads.shtml

Kristin
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: budman68 on September 10, 2008, 05:58:26 PM: oooooooooohhhh! Thanks for the idiot-proof link, downloading now - ;D

Dave
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: Kristin D on September 10, 2008, 06:10:28 PM: E-mail just sent, I suggest anyone else that coughed up $75 for this POS do the same, or contact me and we can start a class action suit about it.

Scott,

I am really disappointed in Lazycam, I thought I would get some documentation with my $75 and not just added "features" that barely work. I want a refund, tired of banging my head against the software wall, no docs, no real support and hearing that no new versions are forthcoming. You guys really need to clean this program up and get a better user interface where we don't have to click on 16 tabs to see all the parameters and then still after a dry run and cleanup of code ruin parts.

Kristin Dugan
Clearlake California

--- On Tue, 8/26/08, Scott Nichols (Mach Support) <scottn@machsupport.com> wrote:

> From: Scott Nichols (Mach Support) <scottn@machsupport.com>
> Subject: LazyCam License
> To: kd006@yahoo.com
> Date: Tuesday, August 26, 2008, 12:54 PM
> Hi,
>
> Thank you for registering your copy of LazyCam.
> Enclosed is your license
> file. To load it, simply copy it into your Mach3 program
> folder. If you
> are unsure as to how to do this, most can simply select
> Save Attachment in
> your mail program, and save the attachment of this letter
> to the folder
> C:\Mach3. You may check that it is loaded by using the
> Help/About LazyCam
> selection on the menu when the program is running.
>
> Welcome to LazyCam and its group of users.
>
> If I can help in any way, please let me know,
>
> Thanks again, Happy Drawing,
>
> ~Scott
> --
> Scott Nichols
> License Manager
> www.machsupport.com
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: budman68 on September 10, 2008, 06:27:19 PM: Had you done this about 8 months ago, I may have been along for the ride but I have definitely got my $75 worth from LCam and it would be just plain wrong for me to ask for it back. While it's not the easiest CAM program to work with, I have gotten used to it to at least get parts done succesfully and at a fairly reasonable pace now. Now it's not like I'm doing complex parts here with this stuff but hey...

Still doesn't make it right, I know... :(

Good luck to you, my friend, I have a feeling they just might make it right. These are good people- ;)

Dave
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: Kristin D on September 10, 2008, 06:39:44 PM: Dave,

I hope your right, this may not seem like a big deal to most folks, but to me $75 is a BIG chunk of money probably like $750 to most! I should have screamed the first day when the offset thing was acting up, really no reason for that type of crappy behaviour out of software and as Art said the Zoom thing was a workaround to fixing a known bug! I've tried to be patient and "try" to learn the software but when it takes several tries just to drill a few holes, and cut out a part that is rediculous. The complete lack of even a rudementary "user guide" is even worse, which is why I am so ticked, I suppose I should have asked what I get for $75 before pressing the PayPal key but I didn't. Might go there and open a dispute too, unless I get some good answers in 24 hours or less.

Kristin

"Can you say, Rabid Badger?"
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: budman68 on September 10, 2008, 06:50:31 PM: Completely understood, Kristin, and yes, $75 is a chunk to me as well - ;)
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: Kristin D on September 10, 2008, 07:07:37 PM: Just opened a dispute on PP as you only have 20 days to do so, hope it puts a fire under them ;D

Kristin
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: ART on September 10, 2008, 07:08:46 PM: Hi Guys:

First, Im retired so none of this is official , but Im sure Scoitt and Brian will be reasonable.

OK, first of all , LazyCam was written to replace a very bad DXF importer. LazyCam as it stands is a
free program. It was added because allot of OEMs needed a "mini" cad package to inport DXF's and
manipulate them. Its been great for that. It isnt heavily supported, nor was it ever meant to be, at its price
point ( free) it is simply to help those it canhelp. ( and I have hundreds of letters showing it does..)

Second, the "Pro" version was offered because of the many who didnt want to learn cam, but still need to pocket or offset,
and at its price of 75.00 ( almost all of whihc went to purchase the code that does the offsetting and pocketing (none of that was written by me)
it also does the job for many people. I always recommende people try it and see if it is OK for them, before licensing the pocketing
or the offsetting features. This is beacuse its real hard to refund a web license. ( believe me, if you offer a refund on a web license, people will
ask for it, then continue uising the program...) . That having been said, if its driving you nuts, just ask Scott at the license address for a resolution,
he's pretty fair and Im sure you can negotiate a deal thatll make you happy. No need to start spouting about class actiona and such, thats plain silly,
if you can find a cheaper product that can do what it does, you would've. Your obviously used to dealing with companies that dont particularly care
what you think or if you have trouble.. thats not Brian and Scott, and it definitely wasnt me when I ran things either.

Remember a couple things, before we created allot of downward price pressure with things ike Mach3 and LCam, you definitely would have
paid that 750.00 you talked about. LCam is kept pretty low priced because it doesnt pretend to be all things, it is a simple import facility, free in its basic version,
and it isnt well supported, but it Does do the job for a great many people, its why its there. If youve been around awhile you may remember what it
used to be like to import a DXF into a controller, its still not easy but its a far cry from what it used to be like. Mach3 is a controller, it isnt supposed to import
drawings, manipulate graphics and do text convcersions, but many people cant afford the full package of Cad/CAM as well as a controller and a machine, so LCam
has allowed allot fo people to find a way to do what they need.

What comes out of LCam depends allot on what goes in, and DXF's are not like any other file, they differ remarkably depending on what created them..so user experiences with LCAm vary allot.

Personally, I always recommend SheetCam over LCam when asked, Les provides excellent support as well as an excellent program, its a bit more expensive, but
its obvious why when you have to deal with any issues.

As I said, talk to scott, tell him your feelings and see if he'll fix you up, or at least meet you halfway.. I suspect youll find he's pretty easy to deal with..I wasnt, and they arent..a faceless
corporation screwing you over..

Thanks
Art
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: Overloaded on September 10, 2008, 07:22:32 PM: It is what it is......And it ain't what it ain't.
I bought it as well assuming that it was on its way to being finished. Looks like it may go in the basket with that G-Rex thing.
I had no experience with Cam at the time,(still don't really) and wanted it for a learning tool. I learned a lot....I guess.
Mainly, how the CAM process "SHOULD" work. Sort of wish I had spent my time with a more stable product.
But...along with Chip's free help, I suppose I've gotten my $75 worth.
I hope LazyTurn doesn't end up in the same basket.
Just my 7500 cents worth,
RC
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: Kristin D on September 10, 2008, 07:27:49 PM: Art,

Put your claws away or I'll sic the bear on you! ;)

All I am saying is that the "added" features do not work or work well. There is no way to evaluate them before taking the $75 plunge, and as you point out with a "Web License" that is a bit too late. There should be a Warning that the software
will not work as expected
[/color] [/size], the basic "free" version does what it does, the "PRO" version does not work well at all. Witout a doubt Artsoft has made a big dent in the industry, I had a BobCad-Cam sales guy call me last week offering their new version for $900, then for $700, then for $500, $400 and finally for $300 with added CD video disks!

I've e-mailed Scott, awaiting his answer and also opened a PP dispute just so I didn't get busy and go past the deadline. Mach is a great product, very well supported, it's a shame LC can't be as good.

Kristin Dugan
Clearlake California

"Can you say, Rabid Badger?" ;D
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: RICH on September 10, 2008, 08:32:28 PM: Well, since it's seems we are providing feedback on LazyCam this newbie might as well express 7500 cents worth.

Can't speak on the mill part since I haven't tried it to any great extent.

I purchased the Pro version just for the Lathe capability. If you can generate an "accurately" properly drawn piece out of a CAD program ( Autocadd or Microstation in my case), and have learned a few quirks of Lazyturn to watch out for, you got a rather powerfull tool for generating lathe gcode. Coupled with the turning wizards, you have additional options in turning. Yes, you may need to edit some code sometimes. I have looked and waited a number of YEARS for an economical lathe program. Scan the whole WEB for lathe programs, put a price tag on each, tell me you found something better for $75 than Lazcam turn along with the wizards, that the program is solid/ rather bug free/ easy to use program and i will buy it tomorrow.

Till then, it's my "MAGIC GCODE WAND" in a bag of tricks
RICH
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: Kristin D on September 10, 2008, 08:49:32 PM: As predicted by ART, Scott did the right thing a few moment ago. I still stand by my warning that LC is not worth the price and will be looking for recommendations from satisfied users of programs of even twice the price or more, when you take in to consideration how much time and material you can waste with something that is buggy and does not work it becomes a matter of weighing the cost vs. time. I really can't afford a high priced program, I may dual boot and look at what Linux has to offer.

Kristin

Feeling much less like a Rabid Badger Now!
[/color] [/size]
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: ART on September 10, 2008, 09:37:58 PM: Hi Kristin:

No claws.. I promise. :)

In all seriousness you have to understand quite a bit about the file formats to understand the issues in LCam.
When I say user experiences vary I really meant it. I have letters praising LCam for what it does in the Pro Features,
but its highly dependent on the DXF program used, as well as the user and his setup in Cad. For example when one says that
a profile is all spearate lines, it means the DXF lines dont connect to each other. ( I have hundreds of example file that do this..)

Now youd think it'd be easy to fix.. youd be wrong. The math is incredibly difficult because various drawings cannot be fixed. For example,
if a user tells the program that any line thats withing .1" of the next can be connected ( Tolerance of .1) , many drawing will then have 2 lines that are within .1" of the endpoint
of the originating line.. makes it near impossibel to figure out for the user. LCAm was meant to be easy. For those that it works for it isnt far from it, but when
drawings vary in things liek connection and such, pocketing, or even offsetting can fail in many strange ways.. Almost all CAM programs suffer from this in various forms,
and the users who find another that is to their liking often find that simply because that cad program was designed around similar dxf's to the ones they use. (Or its a dedicated program that
is constantly developed to overcome such limitations. ( like sheetcam..). )

Its why I dont think Id ever like to do CAM seriously, Im more of a chiphead into the drivers , pulsing times, and electronics. Cam is typically expensive for
a good reason. I use some very expensive programs and curse them all allot. Even the $10,000.00 programs can be cursed daily for not doing what I want,
or putting out destructive code. Ive run almost every program in existance , and if you really really hate LCam, I can tell you you can pay much more to
get pissed off. Make sure you test any program your looking at a great deal before jumping, CAM is like a religion, you wont want to switch to a different program
after you spend the time getting used to whatever you pick.

I guess what Im saying is that your experience with LCAm was a bad one, it really menas more that its not a good match for you, but then its meant for
very simple things, and with DXF's that match its input philosophy. It could use a good manual, rather than just the videos' , but Ill leave that for the future deveopers.. :)

If your looking for good full featured CAD, Sheetcam is great, VCarve is the master. A bit expensive for low end users perhaps, but VCarve is the true winner in the evolution sweepstakes over the past few years, I cant recommend any product more highly that VCarvePro. Tony and the Guys are great as well and very trustworthy.

I kinda figured Scott woudl fix you up, when I passed on MAch3 I did so only after a long releationship with Briian and Scott, and they both have my respect as honerable people.
No hard feelings over any of it, my skin is leathery like a crocodile after all this time. ( Besides.. I have no real responsibility anymore. LOL )

Small note to Rich:

Havent forgotten you, Im still coding in LTurn as I can. I hope to get a "roughing " output soon. I discovered last month some of my assumptions were wrong, I wasnt detecting collisions
of the tool in the previous pass of the tool in the material .. I had to recode many sections, but its working better now. Im real slow on LTurn because I cant settle for anything other than a "lazy" program with few settings. Since it will be free I cant have support on it because Im donating it from my retired chair, last thing I need is support trouble.. Cant dump that on Brian either.. So true to form LTurn takes about 3 clicks to generate a roughing path. And your right, for us hobbiests, there is no real Lathe programs out there.. what there is makes LCAM look like solidworks.. :)

Finish pathing may takle more time after that, I have to figure out an algorithm to only remove material where its left from previosu passes. Tough slogging.:)

Art
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: Overloaded on September 10, 2008, 09:54:39 PM: Probably a hideously daunting task to say the least......especially for a retiree !
Happy to hear that you are still working on LTurn.
THAT would be the icing on the cake !
Thanks for what you do ART,
RC
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: RICH on September 10, 2008, 11:10:23 PM: Art,
Just want to say thanks for your efforts. Your filling a real void in lathe turning.
Now if everyone would just say one "God Bless Art Who Created This" when they use it, your
sure to to recieve a just reward.

RICH
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: KNS Supply on September 11, 2008, 12:27:31 AM: WOW I never thought this thread I started would go this far.

To Art,
I applaud all that you have done with the Mach programs. I have to say that I have made my feelings
known with Brian regarding Lazycam and frankly one night I got so pissed because the create pocket function
doesn't know what it wants to do nor does the offset function; I e mailed Brian regarding this problem and he just told me that
some things don't work well and they won't get fixed for a long time because they have better things to take care of.
Well I told him that I wanted my money back and he never replied back.
We all bought this Pro Package knowing it was in the early stages, but what it should of said was "give me $75 and
I'll give you 20% of the program.
I have been working with cad programs
for many years and the one I use mainly is Cadkey99. Cadkey is well known in the industry for having a
very strong dxf export and import function. So the idea that it's the program that created the DXF file
in my case just doesn't cut it.

Here are just some of the problems that Brian won't address.

1) The zoom issue - scroll mouse = zoom in or out
2) DXF importing lines and arcs. some of the curves turn into facets or lines.
DXF import platform just stink.
3) DXF import - Lines are not connected. When arcs are imported- some are some aren't some come out as facets.
4) To choose climb mill or conv. mill is a joke. Click on it and it works -- oh wait no it doesn't-- it's really
piss poor.
5) Should be able to start from scratch. IE... Import a file - choose the entity or chain - choose the direction
and go. At the start all rapids, start points, and end points should be removed.
6) Be able to move entities or chains to different levels.
7) Can cycle type. I choose none. it gives me a G81 at the start of each posting. Why?
8) Should be able to group entities using mouse.
9) Tons of people use corel draw for their cad drawings we should be able to
import a cdr file.
10) Move chain function by #'s in X and or Y does not work.
11) Rotate drawing using degrees doesn't work.
12) when rotating with mouse there should be a DRO telling you what angle you're at
13) Create islands and or offsets is a JOKE It does it well for 1 maybe 2, oops not this one, ok the 4th will do it, oops not the 5th. Get it !!!
14) Connection Tolerance should actually work in the extents box when you hit enter

Art, I think that you started a good program here.
I for one think that if these functions worked it would be a very easy program to use.
1 more idea : A lot of people create simple wire frames that go in X, Y, and Z
When you import a DXF file with simple single lines in Z LazyCam should be able to post them just like
single line moves in just X or Y.

Have I gotten my money out of this program Yea maybe.
Have I wasted countless hours trying to get this program to do very simple things that it says it can do.....Definitely
Way too many hours.

It's a shame that the 2 guys aren't keeping up your good name.
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: KNS Supply on September 11, 2008, 10:22:17 AM: Kristin,
We get the point that your obsessed with bashing Art.
Give it a rest.
The point of this is to get Arts guys to get these problems fixed.
This is not being helpful.
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: ART on September 11, 2008, 01:28:06 PM: Kirstin:

>>Art, I used to work correcting customer graphics in all sorts of formats for laser and waterjet cutting with Autocad, Corel and a host of other software, now you mean to tell me I can't find a .1 gap in a 1" square? I might be loosing my vision but I still can see when everything is connected and not overlapped by using different programs to examine a DXF looking at all the i

We're probably beating a dead horse here.. But the normal files with a problem ARE where lines dont match up. Just having a square isnt the typical drawing. Usually, the drawing is comprised of lines that have been approximated from a bezier function.. Lines from such an approximation algorith will generate a profile where the lines dont quite match, and the tolerance can fix them, but then what tends to happen is you get some lines so short they are smaller than the actual connection tolerance used. These small lines are then rejected as they match multiple points within the tolerance. Ive seen it many times. LCam's problems really result form so many patches to ciorrect so many types of drawings. Now Im not about to convince you, nor do I particularly want to, but as a primary coder in that code I can tell you that Ive seen more horendous drawing errors than I have horrendous interpretation errors. Kinda moot now that Scott fixed you up, LCam is simply a "if you like it..good, if not..good.." type of program.
As a DXF importer, its helped more than its hurt. ( And I have seen the results to prove it. ). I have OEMs that use only LCam, and have spoken to the shops that use it and love it. SO in the end, it does what I needed it to do. But if you search the group posts, youll find one thing to be true, I have always recommended people buy a real cam program.. LCAm is there for a specific purpose, if it mathces what you do.. excellent..if not.. theres lots out there to choose from.

Its normal though, for any software to have its proponents and its detractors. Look at windows, not hard to find a person who says its total crap, or to find people that say its a modern marvel. Any software is similar. ( Just google for "Windows VS Linux" ).

Now that Scott has fixed you up, just try the others available.. Sounds to me like your frustration isnt quite settled..beat the neighbours dog for a bit or do what I do..watch the beverly hillbillies for bit.. Jethro removes my tension. Basically youve lost some time and got frustrated by a piece of software.. join the club, hasnt everyone? Your only alternative is to learn to program, write an importer yourself.. and then sit back and be prepared for the hundreds of drawing that will be sent to you that are total crap..fix the code to match the crap, thus making the program more likley to fail on other drawings.. its a self-perpetuating thing.. goes on endlessly..

Im usually amazed by those that hate it to the point of real frustration.. first, the basic LCam is free.. why would anyone spend hours and hours trying to beat themselves up, if a free program doesnt work, dump it and buy one that does.. When it comes to Pro functions, they all work in demo as opposed to what was written earlier, they just wont post the Gcode, so its easy to test it to see if it WILL do what you want..if so, good ,purchase it, if not, good..dont. I do it all the time.. and reject more programs than I buy. Life is too short Bud.. getting mad at a computer is counter productive.. theirs too much available out there to match anyones needs, jsut find one that matches.. Dont know how much more I can possibly say on that topic.

As I started with, we're beating a dead horse.. but if it makes you feel better to vent.. blow your mind.. My skin is pretty leathery..

Art
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: Kristin D on September 11, 2008, 03:42:09 PM: Just to get the last word in!
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: ART on September 11, 2008, 04:02:35 PM: LOL!! OK, you got the last word.. :)

Art (Writer of the last word.)
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: Kristin D on September 11, 2008, 04:37:20 PM: Now I do!
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: KNS Supply on September 12, 2008, 02:21:25 AM: Art,
Please let me know what's going to be done with the Lazycam.
Thanks
Hope your retirement is going well
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: HimyKabibble on September 12, 2008, 02:15:07 PM: That, IMHO is in extremely poor taste, and totally uncalled for. Can't we at least remain a bit more polite and respectful?

Regards,
Ray L.
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: vmax549 on September 12, 2008, 10:33:16 PM: Just another oppinion on LCAM. I run surfcam,mastercam and Solidcam so I might understand cam a little bit. I also own LCAM. LCAM is just what it stands for LazyCAM and to that point it works just fine. Is it perfect? NOPE but neither is any of the others I run. For the LCAM Pro version $75 that would not even get a Mastercam decal to your doorway.

Most errors I have run into were indeed drawing errors(self inflicted) by me and OTHERS being in a real hurry to do something. Most were fixable some were not. FUNNY how a CNC machinist makes a great CNC draftsman once they understand how a Gcode file works. Where as a great Draftsman can make a terrible CNC drawing for lack of how Gcode has to work with the drawings. ( Just my own accessment over 30 years)

There are some things that Lcam just cannot do. But for the $75 it is only surpassed by MACH as a bargain of the century.

IF you do not understand CAM then Lcam may NOT be for you.

YES the manual does not exist but for the price what do you expect? IF you are patient help is available just about 24/7 on the wedsites. A lot of functions may not work as YOU expect them to, BUT neither does the big boys costing$10k or more PER SEAT. THere is usally a reason they don't work as YOU would expect them to (;-)

DO I really use it??? YOU bet every day to do simple conversions of simple drawings. Has it paid for itself??? MANY MANY times.

DO I want the guys to make it into a world class CAM??? NOT ON YOUR LIFE It is fine just as it is. It works fine for its intended purpose.

I want the guys to spend their time on the MACH controller software to KEEP shaking out the bugs and make it as rock solid as possible. THen start on a NEW generation controller based on the gleamings from MACH.. I want them to keep added in needed features to MACH. I want them to stay focused on controller software NOT CAM software.

If you want to have cheap fault free CAM software, LEARN TO PROGRAM GODE BY HAND. (;-)

I guess by now you have figured out I am happy with LCAM (;-)

(;-) TP
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: docltf on September 13, 2008, 02:22:28 AM: Well said Vmax

bill
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: KNS Supply on September 13, 2008, 08:35:31 AM: VMAX,
I think most of the people using this software do not have the experience that you have
and also don't have 20k in software to use when Lcam can't do what it is supposed to do.
The whole point of this thread is not to make Lcam a world class cam program but to just
fix the existing programs faults.
For example, I downloaded sheetcam the other day. Was generating code in 30min. Problems
yes, but when I imported the dxf I did nothing special and it imported perfect, was all connected
and was much easier to choose climb cut or conventional cut.
I personally like Lcam. Its perfect for what I do but I need the pocketing and offsetting functions
to work like they should along with the other functions I mentioned before.
Man oh man if they just got the program to just work better I think it would be one of
the best programs in the industry.

Brian
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: AngelT on September 13, 2008, 08:53:52 AM: When I draw arc, circles or curves in Corel Draw 12 and save them to .DXF, when it is opened with LazyCam, everything look like polygons lines...What it is wrong? Corel Draw or LazyCam? Thanks for any imput...
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: KNS Supply on September 13, 2008, 09:22:52 AM: AngelT,
This is one of the main problems I've been trying to figure out.
I use Cadkey99 as my cad program and the import / export function
in that program is very strong. I also use Corel Draw X4 to do work
in. It doesn't matter what I do; whenever I export a dwg or dxf drawing
out of Corel and import it into any other program it brings it in as polylines
and or conics.

I believe the export function for Corel is really weak in this issue.
I exports for art purposes not for cam.
That's my 2 cents.

I'm going to try to turn a drawing into a bitmap from corel then use a
raster to vector program to see what it does.
I'll post my results in a few days.

Brian
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: budman68 on September 13, 2008, 10:25:05 AM: Quote from: KNS Supply on September 13, 2008, 08:35:31 AM
VMAX,
I think most of the people using this software do not have the experience that you have
and also don't have 20k in software to use when Lcam can't do what it is supposed to do.
The whole point of this thread is not to make Lcam a world class cam program but to just
fix the existing programs faults.
For example, I downloaded sheetcam the other day. Was generating code in 30min. Problems
yes, but when I imported the dxf I did nothing special and it imported perfect, was all connected
and was much easier to choose climb cut or conventional cut.
I personally like Lcam. Its perfect for what I do but I need the pocketing and offsetting functions
to work like they should along with the other functions I mentioned before.
Man oh man if they just got the program to just work better I think it would be one of
the best programs in the industry.

Brian

So true, Brian, I could not agree more. One thing though, I honestly (90 % of the time) never have issues importing dxfs though, and I'm using the free program ProgeCad and export to autocad 12 type dxf.

Now don't forget the connection tolerance needs to be changed when doing different size scale drawings as well.

Dave
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: bowber on September 13, 2008, 06:14:55 PM: You can get a program to add to CorelDraw that exports the curves properly, doesn't cost very much and works very well.
I'll remember the programs name and post back here with it.

For 3D cam I use Meshcam, I'll not claim it's perfect but it works well once you've got the hang of it.
That and Sheetcam are all I use, I too can't afford to use expensive programs but I'm willing to spend a little more to get a program that'll work reliably with relatively little messing.

Steve
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: bowber on September 13, 2008, 06:18:57 PM: Here's the CorelDraw plugin to convert curves correcly http://www.candcnc.com/DXFTOOLDetails.htm

Steve
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: vmax549 on September 14, 2008, 07:01:58 PM: KNS, sounds like you need to bUY a copy of SheetCAM. LCAM was never intended to replace the NEED for a cam package. I to have seen many people create a perfect working Gcode file useing nothing but Lcam. It will just depend on what your CAM needs are. Some people use Lcam everyday without problems with what they consider complex designs AND some can't seem to get anything to work properly on what they consider a simple drawing. ???????

To date I have seen more problems with the drawing itself OR problems with the drawing aspect in relation to what LCAM can interpete for the design. Add in the multitudes of the DXF standard and you now have the nightmare the ART describes in working in the CAM enviroment. (;-)

Lcam was created basically to help mach users do a simple import of a proper drawing into Gcode. It was never intended to replace even the simplest commercial CAM packages.

THe same holds true for CAM as well as CAD and Motion controllers. IF it doesn't work for you just move on to something that you think will (;-)

(;-) TP
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: RICH on September 14, 2008, 07:45:33 PM: KNS,
How's the raster to vector conversion working out? Every one we ever tried wasn't worth doggy poop!
Even at the very high end, the big $ programs, they are poop also. In fact, I had one them famous vendors
present the product using one of his top talented people to do something using their magic, they also watched at
the same time as one of my CAD persons drew it faster!
Let me know as I'm always open minded.
RICH
Title: Re: Lazy cam problems
Post by: KNS Supply on September 14, 2008, 11:56:33 PM: No time to talk right now but it doesn't look good, raster to vector.