I have this project with pin hole perfrorations. I know LB doesn support pin holes but my bed cuts what i want if I use these 0.050mm circles.
The issue is only in the visual UI not in the cut that I need. I zoom out these nearly compleately dissapear. Is it possible to increase the line thickenss so that when zoomed out these are still visible as dots or something similar?
If I understand correctly, for visual purposes only (not for cutting/sending to the machine), temporarily selecting the 0.05 circles as “Fill” instead of “Line” doesn’t solve the problem?
That much-requested UI feature appears to be so far down on the To-Do list that it just ain’t gonna happen.
In your layout, however, setting a layer’s Output switch Off dims the geometry, which makes the visibility even worse:
AFAICT, there’s no good workaround other than @RalphU’s crosshair targets …
Drawing the geometry at any other line width (1 pixel) incurs a pretty significant performance hit when updating the display. So no, we don’t plan to allow it.
Inkscape, et. al., can draw & modify lines of any width without noticeable screen lagging and can update a seriously complex layout in a blink.
Is this another example of QT6 producing retrograde UI progress as part of a “dual platform” abstraction?
Straight up: I would cheerfully endure nearly any performance hit just to see the layout without squinting.
Yeah, Qt is weird.
We’ll consider adding it regardless. We generally go for performance above all else. Granted, in 2.1 there are some more High DPI display options that should greatly help.
What resolution is your display?
They’re 2560×1440, which barely qualifies as high-res these days.
The monitor on my desk upstairs is 27 inch diagonal at 110 DPI and the monitor strapped to the laser is 24 inch diagonal at 121 DPI.
In round numbers, one pixel is 8 mils = 0.2 mm, which makes on-screen vectors just about exactly the size of the focused laser spot:
So you do get some points for verisimilitude…
greater than 96dpi is generally considered high dpi - do you know what scaling factor your displays are running at?
Those are all the physical pixel dimensions.
On the Linux desktop box, the scaling is 100%, with programs like GIMP calibrated to make the displayed distance match the physical distance.
On the Windows box, it’s 125% (Recommended) with all the LightBurn High-DPI options turned on.
I don’t know how Windows display settings interact with the RDP transfer encoder, but I suspect it just sends whatever plops into the screen bitmap buffer.
I run the remote desktop full-screen in Remmina with matching 2560×1440 resolutions, all the encoding “quality” settings cranked up as high as they’ll go, and vectors on both monitors look the same, dot-for-tiny-dot, under a hand lens.
