Create your free GitHub account today to subscribe to this repository for new releases and build software alongside 40 million developers. This is final release of PrusaSlicer 2. This release follows releases of 2. Several bugs found in the previous release candidate are fixed in this final release. See the respective change logs of the previous releases for all the new features, improvements and bugfixes in the 2. This is a fifth, hopefully the last release candidate of PrusaSlicer 2.
This release candidate fixes bugs found in the previous release candidate. This is a fourth release candidate of PrusaSlicer 2. This is a third release candidate of PrusaSlicer 2. This is a second release candidate of PrusaSlicer 2. This is a release candidate of PrusaSlicer 2. This release candidate fixes bugs found the beta. Unlike the alphas and the beta, the release candidate saves its profiles into PrusaSlicer directory, which is the same directory where the previous releases of PrusaSlicer keep their profiles.
If you were testing the PrusaSlicer 2. In the PrusaSlicer 2. Starting with PrusaSlicer 2. See the following discussion comment why we made such a change. To use Print or Filament profiles derived from Prusa3D system profiles together with your user Print profile, you now have to detach these Print or Filament profiles from Prusa3D system profiles by removing the "inherits" field from the respective profile.
We plan to add a "detach" button to the final release.
PrusaSlicer vs Cura
When the Printer profile derived from the Prusa3D system profile was active or a system Prusa3D profile was active, and when the Print profile with the removed "inherits" field was active or any other profile derived from the "-- default --" profile was activethen the filament selector offered just the profiles with the removed "inherits" field or any other profile derived from the "-- default--" profile.
This behavior has been now changed, so that in this scenario the Filament selector will offer the Prusa3D vendor profiles compatible with the active Print and Printer profile as well as the user profiles see this discussion and When "Show incompatible print and filament presets" is enabled in preferences, PrusaSlicer allows showing incompatible presets at their respective parameter tabs by toggling the "Green flag" icon at the preset tab to a "Red flag".
We implemented this feature mainly to help us debugging the profile print and filament compatibility conditions, however some of our users learned to use this feature to work around profile compatibility issues. It was not possible to select an incompatible Print profile with the "Red flag" enabled, which is possible now Slicer was also changed to keep an incompatible preset selected at its respective tab if its respective "Red flag" is enabled.
For example, if an incompatible Print preset is selected and a Printer profile is switched to another one which is not compatible with the active Print preset that was red already, the active Print preset is not switched if the Print "Red flag" is active.
However, if the Print profile was compatible before the Printer profile is switched and now the Print profile becomes incompatible, another compatible Print profile is selected.There are two main applications for managing 3D prints and G-Code generation. Cura is a fantastic application that is seeing a lot of development from the heavy hitters in the industry.
Slic3r, as well, has seen a lot of development over the years and some interesting hacks. Do you want to print non-planar surfaces? Slic3r can do that. The ability to combine the extensibility of Slic3r with the user interface of Cura has been on our wish list for a while now.
What are the benefits? Check that out below. The biggest change in this branch of the Slic3r family tree is the addition of variable layer thickness slicing. In short, variable layer slicing allows for very, very high-resolution prints that are only high-resolution where you want a lot of detail. The variable layer thickness slicing in the Prusa Edition of Slic3r is fantastic. We took a look at one of the first releasesand it does exactly what it says on the tin.
Using the standard slicer settings for a high-resolution print, I got a printed Pokemon in five hours. Using low-resolution settings, I got a Pokemon in one hour. With the variable layer height settings, I got a fantastic looking print in just over two hours. However, something is rotten in the state of Slic3r. While this may come as a surprise to anyone who has been using it for half a decade, Slic3r is not easy to use.
Newbies are buying 3D printers by the container load, and manufacturers need an application that is easy to use. Cura will be the default application shipped with all new printers. Its ease of use cuts down on customer support, allowing for a lower cost to the consumer. Ease of use means lower support costs, though, so the best solution is a Cura frontend with the Slic3r backend. Is it for everyone? The interface is exactly what you would expect from a simplified, Cura-derived slicer.
You can edit printer settings such as material various brands of PLA and ABS are included, as are some Taulman and E3D filamentsquality, infill, and if supports should be generated or not.
There are a few more options, available from the settings menu. These include the UI language, the model of printer, nozzle diameter, and a few radio buttons for debug.You do realise that if the steps on your extruder cannot handle the 3 decimal place of mm extrusion, which most cannot then what you have written is not true.
With Absolute extrusion there is a global extrusion error, which can be a maximum of 1 motor move which is actually a fraction of a full step With Relative extrusion every extrusion distance can have an error of 1 motor move.
Ergo the Global extrusion error accumulates vastly faster with Relative extrusion. I have been having some issues that are in retrospect likely to find origin in this matter, so I am curious to your thoughts. I am asked several times a month about the difference between absolute and relative extrusion and which one is better to use. So let's jump in and see Absolute and relative positioning are two different ways to specify how far, overall, to travel, move, or even extrude.
In absolute positioning, you start at position "0" typically called the origin. All positions from there are given as the distance from the origin. With relative positioning, you also start from an origin "0"but each time you make a move to a new position, you reset to "0" at that new location. Each move is the distance from the previous location, not from the origin. Imagine you are in your car and need directions to the nearest ice cream stand.
You pull over origin and ask a stranger for directions. Her directions go like this: drive 1.
Cura vs. Slic3r: does slicing software affect quality?
These directions are simple and straightforward to follow. The direction giver is using relative distances to describe each segment you must drive. Overall, you will drive 3. Absolute and relative extrusion work the same way. The following diagram illustrates the difference. These rounding errors accumulate as the print progresses and reduce the accuracy of the extrusion.
With relative extrusion, the round-off error is reset with each segment so it does not accumulate. This is generally done in the pre-amble - or header - in your g-code file and is done by your slicer. The code for absolute extrusion mode is M82the code for relative extrusion mode is M Most slicers simplify this with a simple menu or checkbox to specify extrusion mode.Appreciate any thoughts or recommendations.
PrusaSlicer and the Slic3r slicer it's based on support the use of a Maximum volumetric speed setting corresponding to the maximum throughput of your hotend. By using this, you can avoid painful tweaking of print speeds to avoid overrunning the extruder's capacity and the associated extruder clicks, skips and jams. You can set MVS on a per-filament or per-print settings basis and not have to tweak speeds. Set your preferred speeds in your print settings and the slicer will print up to those speeds, but throttle when and only if necessary to maintain an appropriate MVS.
Without this, you have to set "worst case" maximums for your speeds which can really slow things down. I also prefer PS' ability to separate printer, print job and filament settings into individual discrete profiles, which is very handy if you're experimenting a lot with different filaments and nozzle sizes.
Finally, PS is being developed by TeamPrusa, and it is highly optimized for the expensive Prusa printer you spent all that money on. If you want to make the most of the features this printer provides, you're likely to find supporting features in PrusaSlicer first e.
Cura at least current releases is a fine slicer, and has great features if you're doing one-off prints, especially for things like miniatures. I really like Cura, but I always figure things out 1st in PrusaSlicer formerly Slic3rPEthen translate the settings to other slicers. We would be thankful, if you guys could expand on why Cura is better for printing miniatures and what does Cura better than PrusaSlicer. I know there are tree supports, ironing, the fuzzy skin. I wonder what are the other things people prefer or pick Cura over PrusaSlicer.
PrusaSlicer vs Cura
I don't do a lot of miniatures, but there are some features in Cura that help with fine detail prints:. Finally, someone should look at how Affinity is taking on Adobe Photoshop and some of the big players.
One of their strengths is the total control they give the designer:. It would also be great if each print profile allowed a selection of nozzle sub-configurations to be associated with it. I'd really like to have different settings for coated and hardened nozzles of the same diameter.
There's no reason you can't have both in your toolbox. I view PS as the "Engineer's" slicer. You can get in and tweak settings until you find settings that will give you repeatable results print after print. Cura is more of my "Artist's" slicer, allowing me to get the settings just right for a specific print.
I like to figure out all the hard stuff with temps, speeds and general settings in PS, then switch to Cura or another slicer for specific needs.
Have fun with it! IMHO "the best slicer" is the one which you know best. If you get used to Cura and knows how to tweak it for best results then you will get worse results with the defaults settings in another slicer. So my recommendation is if you don't miss any features in Cura and don't want to use any specific feature in PrusaSlicer then stick to Cura.
There is no reason to print another benchys to understand the settings of the new slicer. As you note, these can be easier to remove, especially around delicate features. I have to look into their algorithm. I searched the Internet and I did not find much information apart from some experimental prints after the Cura release containing this feature. Ultimaker keeps this feature still marked as experimental.I am using a stock Prusa i3 slic3r has the default.
Take a look at print preview in print speed mode radio button near the top you can see what kills the speed is the default print apeed settings in slic3r for outer perimeter, small perimeters, and solid infill are set way lower than in cura. Ok, I have a really stupid question I dabbled with Cura at the beginning with no dicernable difference, but finding slicer a little easier to use i stuck with that evntually. Up until litrally this last week, I had been getting I can't say excellent but at least very good prints and accuracy that i was happy with.
Then the prints over the last week had just turned to absolute crap pardon my lingual skills with no change to settings or firmware and no update to repetier or slicer that I know of!
Unless it auto updated? However i finally swapped out the underpowered factory psu for the "double wattage" upgrade! The new psu had been sat in my desk drawer for the last 6 months, and I finally got it ticked off my 'to do' list Dialed in the trimmer to Suddenly everything went wrong! Started getting x and y skips, belt jumping teeth randomly etc. Pegged it for the usual belt tension, hot end binding on an occasional blob or even a loose gear on the stepper.
Although the last was very unlikely as i thread locked those during assembly ;-! Double and triple checked everything, even a complete strip down and rebuild with no change! Was loosing my mind and just thought to give Cura a try. So i transferred all my setting super methodically and hit print again in one ditch effort before shooting myself!
Hey Presto! Everything fixed and my last batch of prints are now excellent! Like proper over the moon, run down the street starkers excellent!! Now I don't dare touch a setting! I know that the psu is a major recommended out of the box upgrade but I didn't think and am very sceptical that it would screw up tried and tested slicer and result in major print improvement like it has done Anyone else have any similar experiences as a result to a psu upgrade?
Or is it just a freak coincidence like I'm leaning towards?The most of newcomers in the 3D printing world already know that except the 3D printer, they will need to obtain 3D models on the internet or create their own in a 3D modeling program.
Creating a properly tuned G-code is an essential operation which is crucial for the quality and trouble-free printing.
You can set up almost anything in the slicing software, and every detail can have a significant impact on the printing result. But do not worry! Basic slicing is very easy, and you can handle it without any problems with our PrusaControl software.
PrusaControl will not allow you to fiddle around and everything is pretty straightforward. But sooner or later you might feel limited. And this is the time for Slic3r Prusa Edition. Slic3r PE is based on original Slic3r.
There are many boxes with the settings. An inexperienced user might wreak a disaster just by unchecking seemingly unimportant button. But once you puzzle out all the options, you will love it. You just have to overcome the first difficulties. This article should help you with that. Slic3r spread among users quickly. When Josef Prusa was looking for a leading slicing software for our printers the choice fell on Slic3r. It is open-source, powerful, decent software.
We needed to make changes to the software, and the changes had to be done asap. We also needed to add more features. At this point the co-operation with the detached original Slic3r team was unsustainable.
The bottom line is that Prusa Research decided to establish an offshoot. Slic3r Prusa Edition was released in November — read more about the launch here. Meet our Slic3r guys! The team is still growing. And even though they have gone a long way and made so many improvements, there are still many ideas to work in. They are programming under one roof with all the Prusa Research folks in our new headquarter.
The best way how to get the Slic3r Prusa Edition on Windows is to install it together with the drivers for our printers. When installing on MAC and Linux the profiles are not installed automatically. Backup your old profiles before you proceed.See some of my previous posts for that process. Custom Heated Bed — I hacked this to mount under the aluminum print bed.
These models target very specific aspects of printer performance and are designed to bring out common flaws in printers. I would recommend referencing the article for a more in depth explanation of these models and their purpose.
Note: These models are more-or-less intended to test printer hardware and performance; however, I felt like using them to test differences in model slicing algorithms.Slic3r and Cura: Which One is Better
Both of these prints turned out far better than I expected. Cura produced a lot less strings filament not attached to anything but the bridges sagged quite a bit. Slic3r, on the other hand, produced several strings but was able to keep the bridges from sagging.
Because I feel a consistently support bridge is the most important, I feel Slic3r performed the best here. Simply looking at the prints should indicate that Cura was the winner for this print. This test was also pretty easy to judge. Basically looking at how uniform the cones are as the Z-Axis rose. Considering I broke one of them from the Cura print while removing it from the print bed and the Slic3r ones are quite uniform, I believe Slic3r performed the best here.
These two prints were more-or-less equal in quality. Ultimately, I looked at the infill on the top surface of the cylinders and noticed the Cura print was lacking infill material where the Slic3r print was not. Because of that and performance at the higher Z-Axis values, I determined Slic3r performed the best at this print. Therefore, I believe this one was a Tie between the two programs. This model is primarily a test of the printer hardware, but I did notice some difference in quality between the two prints.
Therefore, I think Cura had the better quality of the two, but both were more or less the same. Performance for this model was similar to the bridge test.