I'm trying to make the switch from #cura to #OrcaSlicer for my #3dPrinting.
-
I'm trying to make the switch from #cura to #OrcaSlicer for my #3dPrinting.
In Cura, I can specify the bottom line directions, which is actually super useful for some parts that fold.
However, in Orca, it appears you don't have these options, just a pattern, but no options for these patterns (even with 'advanced' on).
Am I missing something?
-
@linux_mclinuxface I dont think youre missing anything, orca is a bit lacking in quite a few areas
-
@SarraceniaWilds looks like I'm not the only one who wants this.
https://github.com/SoftFever/OrcaSlicer/issues/3095
I thought that Orca was the hotness. Sigh.
-
@linux_mclinuxface You'll inevitably find things that are in Cura but not in the Pru-derivatives.
I'd say from the things I'd have wanted, it's more of the opposite (flow limiter, 1 wall at the top, fuzzy skin in vase mode, flow visible in numbers etc). But that's before I've actually switched. I'm sure I'll find a bunch of things to miss too. -
@linux_mclinuxface There's "Solid infill direction".
I much prefer the Prusa forks than Cura as I don't like the way Cura tries to create 45 degree bridges. -
@mfraz74 Thanks.
That's close (and helps) but isn't quite the same thing since it's only one direction which is then alternated: In Cura, you specified a series of direction.
Also, I don't think I would ever thought of the top/bottom layers as "infill"! What strange naming.
-
@Triffen yeah, i think the difficult thing is that I’m actually competent at Cura and don’t really want to switch but the lack of good profiles for my new printer is a forcing function.
I do, however, like that Orca isn’t run by a printer company. Unlike Cura/PrusaSlicer.
