LightBurn Post-Processor

Unfortunately, LightBurn did not give any feedback regarding my feature request for thumbnails in Snapmaker 2.0 output. So I made a LightBurn post-processor myself which can be used to add a thumbail to a Gcode file.

Every feedback is highly appreciated.


Hi Daniel,

I’ve passed this along to our developers to take a look at implementing within LightBurn.

1 Like

@Colin-LightBurn nice to see people from lightburn team hanging around.
Do you guys developing anything towards snapmaker or it’s on per issue basis?

I recently discovered LightBurn when I purchased a 10W laser, and after trying it out, I found it to be a fantastic software. I was dissatisfied with the fact that I couldn’t work with photos as backgrounds like in Luban, but I was able to resolve this by installing Snapmaker Lightburn Host. This was one of the factors that convinced me to purchase a license. I’m also planning to try out the LightBurn Post-Processor soon.

I think it would be great if manufacturers had a system in place to pay for incorporating such excellent software into their products. The amount of compensation would depend on the specific content, but for example, providing a license for a few years free of charge could be one option.If such a system were in place, it would fuel the motivation of talented individuals to develop outstanding features. Additionally, manufacturers would be able to add new functionalities at a lower cost, resulting in significant benefits for both parties.Could you please consider it at your company?

It’s actually a common practice to pay one another for integration.But with snapmaker and their Luban development - this wouldn’t be an option I imagine.
On the lightburn side - there would be motivation for support without snapmaker incentive if there were many of us crying about it to them. But that not the case either, snapmaker users paid a lot of money for their machine and either think snapmaker should pony up and make Luban great fast. Or just don’t know of lightburn and why it’s superior for laser jobs. Hence no activity on lightburn forum/support channels about improving supportfor snapmaker machines.
Also don’t forget weird development habits snapmaker has with all the outcries when they push new firmware out. This is not exactly helping 3rd parties to keep things stable.

There may be a possibility that I am creating misleading sentences or not fully understanding the text due to my use of translation software. I made the request as stated above because I believed Colin from LightBurn was affiliated with the LightBurn company. I did not make the request to Snapmaker.
No matter how hard Luban tries, it will never catch up to third-party products like LightBurn or PrusaSlicer. The development of Luban will remain at a minimum level necessary to support SM hardware sales. The enhancement of Luban’s features and firmware improvements do not directly contribute to hardware sales.

Also don’t forget weird development habits snapmaker has with all the outcries when they push new firmware out. This is not exactly helping 3rd parties to keep things stable.

What does this mean? Does it imply that third-party companies do not enter markets with hardware that receives many complaints? If that’s the case, I disagree. Depending on the nature of the complaints, it can be seen as an opportunity for third-party companies. By understanding and addressing the users’ needs, they can expand their business opportunities.

1 Like

We have an Artisan on order (looks to ship sometime in June) - we try to have supported devices with at least one of our Support/Dev team so we can diagnose issues when they arise. We’ve been getting requests for Artisan support, unfortunately the delays are just long.

Thumbnail generation has been pushed to LightBurn’s dev branch, I’d expect to see it in LightBurn V1.5.00 or shortly thereafter.

1 Like

That’s awesome @Colin-LightBurn! Thanks for pushing into code.

I should also mention @Slynold & @Mayco with the working method of camera capture:

And @Skreelink with his awesome guides on merrying Lightburn and snapmaker machines.

Also @macdylan with his OTA uploader development

Also, there is a list an “awesome list” - GitHub - shurushetr/awesome-snapmaker: Curated list of things that help you make something awesome with Snapmaker machines.

Maybe some of this can help your team.

1 Like

Something definitely lost in translation, no big deal tho :slight_smile:
I’m with you on luban not being able to catch up with specialized tools. It just doesn’t make sense. However, I don’t agree with your statement that software development doesn’t directly contribute to hardware sales. Take for example PrusaSlicer, it’s amazing and it makes people think that their printer is amazing too, and it’s 100% true. Any 3dp farm will say so. But if Software is bad, people go and complain on social networks, other people hear about it and decide against purchasing the hardware. It’s just a pile of metal without good software.

About development habits, hear me out. 3rd party Software talks to Firmware, Firmware talks to Hardware. When I talk about 3rd parties in this case, I mean the software. Like lightburn will generate G-Code, push it to controller, then firmware on that controller will interpret the g-code and command the hardware.
Now imagine you’ve been working hard and long to adopt snapmaker in Lightburn (or Prusaslicer, or Fusion360) . You released your software and in two weeks, snapmaker updates firmware but there is some bug in it that make hardware act crazy, because it all of a sudden doesn’t like comments in G-Code in some places. And you as a developer of the software get bunch of complaints. Not a desirable outcome.

This sounds oddly familiar and specific. :wink:

1 Like

It can be quite challenging to accurately convey nuances, indeed.

But if Software is bad, people go and complain on social networks, other people hear about it and decide against purchasing the hardware. It’s just a pile of metal without good software.

I completely agree with you on this point.

Luban is not a selling point for Snapmaker, and it will not reach that level in the future. That’s why I mentioned it.

Excellent software like Prusaslicer, which is actively used with hardware from other companies, becomes a selling point for their own hardware.
Luban, which is only used in Snapmaker, does not become a selling point like Prusa.

I have also been involved in development for nearly 30 years. While my main expertise lies in Windows applications, I also have experience in developing control software for microcontroller boards.
I started familiarizing myself with GCODE after getting into 3D printing. I have been using my own application to make partial increases in flow rate for GCODE files created with Prusaslicer, among other things.

This sounds oddly familiar and specific

Ah, I think I finally understand. I thought you were concerned about the presence of people writing complaints about firmware bugs. Translation can be tricky, indeed.
I also validate my own application every time Prusa releases a new version. If there are any issues with the GCODE converted by my custom application, it could potentially damage the hardware. It’s unavoidable when you develop something on your own. Since I don’t have a formal business partnership, I don’t have access to all the information. If third-party involvement is considered, it would be wise to enter into a business partnership agreement in order to mitigate risks.