Bug: Make Default for Layer / All Layers Ignored

I tell it to set the default, then newly created layers ignore it. What does this even do?

By default all layers retain the last used settings for the layer into perpetuity.

The defaults you set will be used if you select “Reset to default” in the Cut Setting window or if you use “Load default layer settings on new or restart” in Edit->Settings->File Settings in which case settings will not be retained between sessions.

So I have “Load default layer settings on new or restart” set. Why is it not using my defaults?

2 conditions I’m aware of for this to work:

  1. Each layer for which you want a default needs to be set
  2. You are starting a new file or restarting

Have you met both of these conditions?

  1. I have clicked “make default for all”.
  2. It is a new file.

Yet the settings are not used.

Can you describe what actually happens instead?

It uses whatever settings it had before I assigned the defaults to all layers.

What happens if you push the “Reset to default” for a given layer? Does it swap for the settings you set for “Make default for all” or something else?

It seems to be working now. I think on the last test I had confused things and tested a non-image layer, which ofc has different settings.

@Asher, as you go through the LightBurn learning curve and find things that do not work as you’d like or expect, that does not mean it is a bug. Posting the word “Bug” is not required to get assistance. If you do find confusing behavior, or you believe is not working as intended, we do want to hear about it with as much detail as possible. We will determine if what you note is expected or an anomaly that needs further investigation.


I’ve used the term “bug” only when it appears to actually be one. That is to distinguish between issues that appear to be improper functioning and issues related to usage.

I have learned that the Lightburn community apparently thinks most of what I see as bugs are “feature requests”, which is insane to me.

I understand, yet…

Bug, or working now?

If you find a bug, we want to know about it. If something is not clear or confusing, not working as you’d expect, we are here to assist. Feature Requests, or adjustments to how we currently do a thing is entirely different, and also on the list of things we would like to know.

I’m pretty sure there is a bug, but I don’t seem able to reproduce it immediately, so I’m not entirely sure exactly what context corresponds to the bug. So, I guess it has to be called “working now” until I encounter it again.

Asher, having been a software developer for many (40+) years, I can say with authority that software bugs do not fix themselves. If a problem fixes itself (starts working), it is very likely a procedural issue. This is why these guys are so insistent on you (anyone) documenting EXACTLY the steps required to reproduce the error condition.

Having also been a software developer for many decades, I can say that bugs frequently appear in intermittent modes that depend on exact context and whose behavior can shift when small adjustments are made. A bug being resolved by changing behavior does not mean it was not a bug. Similarly, perfectly implemented bad logic is still a bug.

At the risk of starting an argument, here is my reply… A bug is an error in coding logic. An unexpected action after a sequence of operations is not a bug. It could be a procedural error or an unanticipated sequence of steps by the user. If it is a bug, everybody will have it. If it is a procedural error (user input), it can be localized to a single user. In EITHER case, explicit details are required by the developers to analyze the issue. If you try to shift into fourth gear with a 3-speed transmission, that is an unexpected action, not a bug in the automobile. The developer needs your eyes and ears to help them decide which path to follow. It serves you best to let them know what you DO know as fact.

You make clear that you are not a programmer and don’t know what you are talking about.

Bugs frequently occur to a complex set of intersecting conditions. If the program crashes or fails to act as expected, that’s a bug. If the program acts in a way that is not what the user intends, that’s a design flaw, which is a type of bug.

It’s rather amazing how many apologists show up to defend bad software design.

There you go being all humble again :slight_smile:

You really seem to have trouble using language.

I’m so sorry you feel that way…but I understand how you use Lightburn. It works well for what I use it for, and I don’t have a Chinese laser.