Talk:Laser engraving

Questionable technical matter

"Since metals are good electric conductors, they virtually reflect the entire laser beam (electromagnetic wave), and the residual metal-beam interaction is negligible."

I don't disagree with the result but I'm not sure the proposed reason is correct. I haven't studied this in a while but it seems suspect. -- Zhyla Sun Mar 5 20:19:03 PST 2006

The OP may be right about the idea, but it works differently in practice.

Answer: http://science.howstuffworks.com/light10.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.119.148 (talk) 12:13, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Possible Copyvio

The first version of this page is a copy-vio from http://www.masterliness.com/a/Laser.engraving.htm, however, the page has been changed quite a bit since then; would it still be a copy-vio?

Layman Terms

Can someone make this article a bit easier for those of us not in the laser engraving buisness to understand? :) -GregNorc (talk) 22:56, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

Not only that, but it is too specific on one type of laser engraving. I couldn't even figure out exactly what a flexo plate is, but I know laser engraving can be done straight onto almost any piece of metal or other material, like a brass plate on a trophy. I added an external link that is a little more general in what it covers. I also found some info on photopolymer plates, but didn't find enough to create a whole new article yet.

I'm new, so I don't know much about wiki. Is there a sort of "Request someone who knows their stuff" page? I'm sure some wikipedian somewhere is familiar with this. -GregNorc (talk) 22:09, Mar 4, 2005 (UTC)

Is there still a problem? I've read about halfway through and no problem.MarSch 16:24, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I think the latter half of the article can be improved more. HappyCamper 03:14, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

"it is also sometimes incorrectly described as etching"

This statement is itself incorrect and should be simply removed from the article.

Etching is a common, widely accepted term in the industry and common among consumers. It can refer to the liquification, gasification or ablation of the material being cut by the laser beam. Engraving implies the use of a tool to carve into a material, while etching refers to the removal of material (often through a chemical bath as the link states, but also through ablation of a laser).

Etching is especially used to distinguish CNC laser cutting work from router cutting because a cutting tool can only engrave while a laser can ablate the material. Since "ablation" is perhaps not a term in the average person's vocabulary, "etching" is a suitable replacement - just as the common phrase "etched in stone" was not referring to a chemical milling acid bath, the stone that the phrase refers to was carved.

I believe the dictionary definition of "etching": "To cut into the surface of a material" is entirely appropriate. The term "laser etching" is also used when discussing laser frosted glass, as it accurately describes the glass, while laser engraved glass may not. For a further example, Laser etched tile may refer to the laser rasterization of an image onto the tile, while laser engraved tile refers to carving a vector into it. Rasterization of images and cutting of vectors are two very different industrial processes and the term "etched" rasters versus "engraved" vectors help to distinguish the two.

Different parts of the world refer to the terms laser engraving and laser etching interchangeably or prefer one over the other but the article should not imply that one is not the other. When a laser is used to replace traditional chemical bath etching processes, it is called "laser etching" as well, to add to the confusion.

Laser engraving can safely be called laser etching or even laser ablation without causing confusion, however the simplest fix would be to remove this controversial statement at the beginning of the article.

Additionally, it seems some advertising has snuck into the external links. Can someone please fix those problems? Thanks! Engravingwithlasers (talk) 08:15, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

The original comment about laser etching is correct in so far as there is confusion by some (not many maybe) that laser etching is the same as laser marking. Etching is the cutting into a material, as you have pointed out, but marking does not involve cutting, so there clearly is confusion by some. By removing the comment "sometimes incorrectly described as etching" the confusion is unfortunately reenforced, but not appropriately so. Anything that helps clarify the subject to beginners should be included. NF 3/11/14

Help me make this look good!

Hi. This is my first real wiki experience. I thought I would make this article over, to make it cover more than just its use in printing. I do not wish to delete somebody else's work, would rather work it in with mine, since it is interesting. What I think I would like is for others to add some of their knowledge to what the two of us have constructed so far. And then make the headings and such reflect the topics properly. I will revisit the entry soon, I expect, but may have to play in the sandbox first. ;-)

Thank you Petaholmes-- THAT was what I was trying to do!!! ;-)

Wikified too much now?

I realize that the Community Portal asks for help specifically Wikifying this article. It did before I put forward my additions. I am grateful that someone stepped in to do all the "tagging" of Wiki entries in the text, as well as cleaning up and making clearer some of what I was trying to say. Everybody needs an editor; thanks for getting it done.

I am though, a bit puzzled, because many of the links to other wiki articles really don't make the subject at hand any more understandable. When a word is used and the meaning is clear in its context, must it be tagged anyway since some article had been written with that name? I mean, right off the bat, to send someone off to explore the word "object"? Hmmm.

To be frank, it is my impression that one should provide signposts to more information when it edifies the subject, not just by rote or without discrimination. I don't know if there are "automated wikifiers" that note each and every instance of a wikied word, but it sure LOOKS like the aim was not clarifying, but "wikifying". And that may be the case. Certainly that was the category this entry was in at the Community Portal.

I'm not going to do any changing of the situation myself. It's not only my entry, of course. But I sure wish some brain would look at the words, click and see if the entry invoked helped to understand what was being said. Otherwise, it is just putting pretty codes on the page, not really adding value.

My opinion only. As I say, some of the editing was needed. If nobody else minds, I guess I won't either. --Kittyslave 08:33, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I went through and removed some of the Wiki links that I thought didn't add to the subject or were simply linking to pages that would be "definitions" (i.e. object, effort). Some of the things I removed may actually need to be wikified, and some more links may need to be removed. It's a start, though. --Schultz.Ryan 01:29, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

unqualified analogy

designs incorporating large or monolithic sized crystal

In what way does "monolithic" convey size information? Monolithic objects come in all sizes, from asteroids to integrated circuits. The word (meaning "of one rock") simply means that the object—regardless of size—is comprised of a single chunk of stuff.
—überRegenbogen (talk) 08:46, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Laser Tattoos?

there is a half-assed possibly cancerous or anyway dangerous technique where people mark their skin using laser engravers.

i think it is worthy of a mention in a new section. sources: [1] [2] [3] [4]
--CuteHappyBrute (talk) 01:55, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

SSLE Example Picture Available

I have a picture that I took of a commercial, custom-made sub-surface laser engraving. I think it would add nicely to the SSLE section, but is there an issue with it being a picture of a commercial product? Where can I find WP rules regarding this kind of matter? —63.249.110.34 (talk) 03:03, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

New to Wikipedia and unfamiliar with linking guidelines

Hi. I just added a picture under the glass section of a glass microscope slide that I laser engraved then photographed at 40x and 100x. The photo is on WikiCommons but I would really like a link back to the post on my site, Book Worm Laser & Design, where I wrote about laser engraved glass and posted 2 other similar pictures (at 1pt font and 2pt font). Any guidance? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlanReeves001 (talk • contribs) 19:40, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Earliest known laser engraving

Maybe somebody can insert into the article some info on when laser engraving was first available? ...I haven't researched it in published sources. although I can tell you I collect watches, and I have a Teamsters union watch which has a laser engraved image of Jimmy Hoffa on the metal lid on the underside of the watch. The watch dates to the late 1960s/early 1970s. MS, Dania Fl 206.192.35.125 (talk) 12:44, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Laser Engraving vs Laser Marking

Should laser engraving and laser marking be split into 2 different topics to help clarify? Very clearly the manufacturers of these machines don't feel that laser engraving and laser marking are the same. Here I have included a reference from a manufacturer with videos that explain each, but a simple Google search will reveal more: http://www.ulsinc.com/

Yes, sometimes engraving and laser marking can be done on the same machine, but that doesn't make them the same. Engraving means the surface is physically cut into. Marking means the surface is discolored without removing any material. To some this is a very important distinction.