Mastercam Graphics Questions

[JJ_8]

New to Mastercam. One thing I immediately noticed is the graphics quality of Mastercam is not like what I am use to in Solidworks. Edges, lines, chaining arrow, are not as sharp or as clear as entities in Solidworks. Why is this? I wondered if others have noticed this and whether there is anything that can be done to make the graphic display in Mastercam sharp and clear like it is in Solidworks. We have Solidworks running on the same machine.

 

<img border="0" src="http://plugin.smileycentral.com/http%253A%252F%252Fimgfarm%252Ecom%252Fimages%252Fnocache%252Ftr%252Ffw%252Fsmiley%252Fsocial%252Egif%253Fi%253D36%252F36_33_7/image.gif">

 

:squawk:

Got try HOOPS, Gotta try HOOPS

:squawk:

Gotta try HOOPS, Gotta try HOOPS

:squawk:

 

 

[Matthew Hajicek - Singularity]

I think to a certain extent it's because the programmers over at CNC Software are more concerned about helping us machine parts than about making pretty pictures.

 

It's a different market segment. Solidworks users will likely be showing their design work on-screen to customers and managers who care a lot about what it looks like. Mastercam users shouldn't have to impress anyone with what's on their screen, just with the parts coming out of the machine. The graphics in Mastercam are just a tool to help you get the right code out.

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

As far as CAM Systems go, Mastercam is pretty god. Not as nice as CATIA's Photo Realistic rendering, then again Mastercam is about 1/4 the price by the time you equally equip them as much as possible.

[DanR]

Better graphics would be nice, but the first thing I do with my Solidworks files is to take all of the unneeded geometry and dump it to a level I usually mark "Unused Geometry"

 

If MasterCam were more friendly, I might even try to draw just that geometry that is needed in MasterCam, but it is about a decade behind in the "intuitive" department. User friendly and MasterCam are not something I generally use in the same sentence.

[JJ_8]

CNC Apps Guy and Matt the graphics in Mastercam are very slow compared to Solidworks. Zooming is slow. Regeneration is slow and the quality is not even close to Solidworks. The poor graphics capabilities in Mastercam slow down part programming. I did some checking around and I would like to know the reason that Mastercam does not use the same graphics engine that is in Pro/E, Ironcad, Inventor, Solidworks, Alibre, Powershape, Keycreator, PartMaker and other systems I am not aware of at this time.

 

DanR, while I agree with you I would like to point out that Mastercam does have some features that lots of other cam systems do not have right now. One big feature is the ability to edit common parameters so it is not like Mastercam is behind in all areas. I do agree that the Mastercam interface is certainly not what it could be and is not any where near as good as it should be.

 

I would like to know if CNC Software is going to fix the graphics in X3.

 

<img border="0" src="http://plugin.smileycentral.com/http%253A%252F%252Fimgfarm%252Ecom%252Fimages%252Fnocache%252Ftr%252Ffw%252Fsmiley%252Fsocial%252Egif%253Fi%253D36%252F36_33_7/image.gif">

 

:squawk:

Got try HOOPS, Gotta try HOOPS

:squawk:

Gotta try HOOPS, Gotta try HOOPS

:squawk:

 

 

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

quote:

---

...Regeneration is slow and the quality is not even close to Solidworks...

---

You're not comparing apples to apples. SolidWorks is CAD/CADD. Engineers are expectd to crank out photo-realistic renderings often times. Mastercam is expected to crank out PARTS.

 

 

quote:

---

...I did some checking around and I would like to know the reason that Mastercam does not use the same graphics engine that is in Pro/E, Ironcad, Inventor, Solidworks, Alibre, Powershape, Keycreator, PartMaker and other systems I am not aware of at this time...

---

Ummmmmmmm, I'd do a re-check if I were you.

 

Mastercam uses OpenGL. What other Graphics engine are you speaking of? SolidWorks, Autodesk Inventor, SolidEdge, etc... just about ALL that I am aware of use OpenGL. Surely you're not speaking of DirectX.

 

quote:

---

...I would like to know if CNC Software is going to fix the graphics in X3...

---

What video card are you running? What resolution? What color depth? What kind of monitor? What refresh rate are you using?

[JJ_8]

I am comparing apples to apples.

 

Powermill = cam.

 

Partmaker = cam.

 

Concepts NREC = cam

 

Keycreator has their own built in cam

 

Pro/NC = cam

 

Why do you keep mentioning photo realistic rendering? This has nothing to do with photo realistic rendering.

 

<a href="http://www.techsoft3d.com/customers/mcadcam.html" target="_blank">http://www.techsoft3d.com/customers/mcadcam.html</a>

 

<img border="0" src="http://plugin.smileycentral.com/http%253A%252F%252Fimgfarm%252Ecom%252Fimages%252Fnocache%252Ftr%252Ffw%252Fsmiley%252Fsocial%252Egif%253Fi%253D36%252F36_33_7/image.gif">

 

:squawk:

Got try HOOPS, Gotta try HOOPS

:squawk:

Gotta try HOOPS, Gotta try HOOPS

:squawk:

 

 

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

quote:

---

...No need for me to re-check. Suggest you check for yourself...

---

You said...

quote:

---

...Mastercam does not use the same graphics engine that is in ...

---

Mastercam DOES use the OpenGL Graphics ENGINE. TechSoft3D appears to be a wrapper, apparently enhancing the performance of the OpenGL Graphics ENGINE.

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

Editing so soon JJ????

 

You KNOW I'm right.

 

quote:

---

...I am comparing apples to apples...

---

No, you're saying...

quote:

---

..Regeneration is slow and the quality is not even close to Solidworks..

---

and

quote:

---

...Pro/E, Ironcad, Inventor, Solidworks, Alibre, Powershape, Keycreator, PartMaker and ....

---

Only 2 CAM systems mentioned there. The rest are CAD. Engineers needs vs. CNC Programmers needs. VERY different animals.

 

BTW, have you actually seen Partmaker in person? I took a look at it at a show recently and the "round" parts looked more like allen wrenches than cylinders. Not exactly better IMHO.

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

:popcorn:

 

Why do new folks like to come in and their first day like to stir the pot? :headsratch: I don't get it.

[3R!< W3NG3R]

I have the opposite problem. MC is much faster on my system then SW (much faster).

 

I will agree that the graphics look better in SW, but not a concern here. They are plenty good for CAM and customers get impressed when I show them their parts on screen while it gets machined.

[Lee.]

JJ,

 

Funny you have to hide, no-name?

 

Anyways we peeps on the forum are mighty happy with MC.

 

If things crop mup that we want changed, then here's the place to make it happen.

 

Better you go back to your office, if you have one, and be quiet.

 

Oh, my name is Lee.

[jctjct]

Bash away at the new guy, but I agree Mastercam has some graphics issues. When customizing this latest PC during the ordering I was confident that getting the Quadro FX 3500 would get rid of some of the ones I experience. The way I use Mastercam it has to have quite a bit of CAD functionality. Quite often when I do a simple Xform Offset the created geometry is invisible until I hit F3. WTF? Also the chain arrow will occasionally disappear - especially if I am rechaining.

 

My name is Jeff, if that is relevant to the topic.

[JJ_8]

Jeff, Thanks for the acknowledgement that Mastercam X2 has some serious graphics problems.

 

Mastercam uses Parasolid for its solid modeling engine because it makes sense to do so. Mastercam also needs a graphics engine because what exists now in Mastercam X2 is certainly not adequate for our needs.

 

 

<img border="0" src="http://plugin.smileycentral.com/http%253A%252F%252Fimgfarm%252Ecom%252Fimages%252Fnocache%252Ftr%252Ffw%252Fsmiley%252Fsocial%252Egif%253Fi%253D36%252F36_33_7/image.gif">

 

:squawk:

Got try HOOPS, Gotta try HOOPS

:squawk:

Gotta try HOOPS, Gotta try HOOPS

:squawk:

 

 

[Guest]

quote:

---

because what exists now in Mastercam X2 is certainly not adequate for our needs.

---

I am going to bite on this just because.

 

What are your specific needs that MCAM can not seem to provide for you?

 

How are they so different from most others that make some amazing stuff everyday?

 

Have you worked with your reseller at all to address what you believe to be an issue?

[mold100]

I use solidworks and Surfcam, and it has the same issues, but the reality is cam is cam and cad is cad. Most of the time when I am not creating a presentation, i have my resolution set to crap just so i can rotate my model at a very fast pace. I could never expect mcam or any other MACHINING package to what solidworks does, hell i wouldnt need it then. Also i am versed with what I consider another great CAD CAM system in cimatron, which has the same very powerful kernel solidworks has and nope its screen quality is no where comparable. And now with Sworks 2008 the realview options are phenominal, and no way I would want them to infiltrate my CAM system cause it would be robbing its processing power in some way shape or form. These are just my .02, not that they are worth much. Oh, and I am not a Mcam programmer, so I offer the most unbiased opinion.

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

JJ_8

 

You never answered...

[*]What video card are you running?

[*]What graphics display resolution?

[*]What color depth?

[*]What kind of monitor?

[*]What refresh rate are you using?

[*]What is your chordal deviation set to on your shade in Mastercam?

Each one of these is absolutely relevant to the topic at hand because you may have something set in a way that dowes not optimize your computer's potential.

[JNO]

quote:

---

but the reality is cam is cam and cad is cad.

---

I think mold100 said all right there.

 

In my opinion you can't beat the SW-MC combo.

[Guest]

I'm starting to think this guys is just a schill for another company trying to make waves.

 

Won't answer any questions, won't offer any information.

 

Just slam bang and try to stir the pot.

[JJ_8]

mold 100. Solidworks and Cimatron do not use the same kernel. Cimatron is based on the ACIS kernel. Solidworks is based on Parasolid kernel. Looks to me like most Mastercam users think that the lousy graphics in Mastercam X2 are just fine and that you do not need quality graphics in Mastercam for better selection, chaining and geometry manipulation so I guess we will leave it at that.

 

<img border="0" src="http://plugin.smileycentral.com/http%253A%252F%252Fimgfarm%252Ecom%252Fimages%252Fnocache%252Ftr%252Ffw%252Fsmiley%252Fsocial%252Egif%253Fi%253D36%252F36_33_7/image.gif">

 

:squawk:

Got try HOOPS, Gotta try HOOPS

:squawk:

Gotta try HOOPS, Gotta try HOOPS

:squawk:

 

 

[Guest]

Still NO answers to any of the above though.

 

You really are just looking to stir the pot and not for help.

[Thee Starry™]

Hhhmmmm. Why would you need better graphics for programming? I can't quite wrap my head around that one....Personally, I find them to be more than adequate for my needs.

Lets' look at it this way. I drive a Jeep Wrangler. I lifted it, added new gears, bigger tires and a winch. It does everything I want it to do very, very well. I have a stock cheap stereo, no AC, no nav system, no frills. It does however do everything I need it to do and I am happy with it.

I could add all kinds of bells and whistles, and a new paint job, etc, and it would look neater and shinier, but it would not perform the function I need it to any better. It would just have more glimmer. No added ability, no better functioning.

I feel that way about MC. It may not be the shiniest, most wonderful graphics experience in the world, but I don't need it to be. All the fancy more detailed pictures are not going to make my programming any better.

[jeff]

JJ, I would listen to CNC Apps Guy,

The man knows what he's talking about.

 

quote:

---

Still NO answers to any of the above though.

 

You really are just looking to stir the pot and not for help.

---

Looks like it to me.

[Thee Starry™]

quote:

---

I would listen to CNC Apps Guy,

The man knows what he's talking about.

---

And that ain't no lie! to you, apps guy and JP.

[Lee.]

JJ answer the questions or give it up, oh and by the way, don't waste our time if you are not really interested in answers.