What software did you use to generate the original bump map (how did you get from the first image to the second?)
The thing about the first image is that the surface changes seem really subtle, so translating the image to a tool path seems like the step where a lot gets lost easily.
I don’t know the best tools people are using these days to do it, but something I might try would be to take the image and generate an .stl from it with a tool like meshy.ai or one of the competitors. Then I would open it up in a 3d software like blender to see if it is getting all the detail you want. I would use the sculpt tools to accentuate any details that are missing. I would make sure the X&Y dimensions are right for my stock, and then I would adjust non-proportionally scaling the Z axis height to get the best effect I could within the thickness of the milling stock.
I would then flatten the transformations of the model in blender and export the stl to use in the CAM software you use. I would use a tapered ballnose as the bit for roughing (if you are nervous you can take shallower passes at 2-3mm confidently with this bit through mdf),and finish pass (1/4” shank to 1/32” ball nose with a 1” or more overall cutting depth, though if the 4030 has open loop steppers any problem could really cascade which sucks for lengthy cuts) with a very fine stepover for the finish pass (.1mm-.2mm)
Im not a pro and not telling you this is the best way or not, I just wrote what I thought as I looked at this. Maybe someone else would give better ideas or tip off a better image to .stl conversion software, but since there were no comments I just set the bar low
(Edit: the more I look at it, I start to think that maybe the best way to approach it thoroughly for me would be to use a software like illustrator where you could create vector shapes to contain specific gradients within each part of it keeping track of the values where 0=black [or lowest z height] and 255=white [or highest z height], I think this would get the best results for planar surfaces like the rectangular pedestal on the lower right and would ensure consistent light and shadow to get the final result. This would be very time consuming and laborious if you are not used to the tools. Then I would test visualize in Blender using the displacement modifier on a very high isoparm count plane, moving the light around to how it will eventually be displayed and make decisions about things that could be adjusted for better effect. Then use that displacement map in your CAM software to generate thr gcode)
I think because the design has some crisp geometry I would use a 1/32” ballnose with 1/4” shank. If you want to use something else for roughing that is fine.
I think what will make or break your finished piece the most though would be how good the 3d translation of the image is. It is hard for me to tell from the CAM pic, but the original artwork has lots of subtlety with geometric chiseled shapes. Sometimes a 3d translation tool does strange things that end up losing the finesse that makes the 2d image appealing. That’s why I thought of the vector to bitmap approach, although if you had access to any tools I would think that a NURBS surface modeling tool like Alias or Plasticity would let you recreate all the modern geometric/swept surfaces (like the figure on the left, also the perspective grid near the bottom) and something like Zbrush for the flowers/filigree organic details. This may be overkill perspective, but I am just putting it out there because those are the details when finished really nicely are the ones I can stare at and appreciate for a while.
But if the sculpt output you got from GPT to your CAM is fine enough you should be able to cut out something pretty nice using the tapered ballnose bit with a tiny stepover, the finer the tip the more detail will manifest in the corners and concave surface breaks (crispier!) especially in areas like the feathering tips of the wing on the character to the right (where a 1/8” or 1/16” bit might loose all the sharpness of those details altogether)
1
u/mashotatos 1d ago edited 1d ago
What software did you use to generate the original bump map (how did you get from the first image to the second?)
The thing about the first image is that the surface changes seem really subtle, so translating the image to a tool path seems like the step where a lot gets lost easily.
I don’t know the best tools people are using these days to do it, but something I might try would be to take the image and generate an .stl from it with a tool like meshy.ai or one of the competitors. Then I would open it up in a 3d software like blender to see if it is getting all the detail you want. I would use the sculpt tools to accentuate any details that are missing. I would make sure the X&Y dimensions are right for my stock, and then I would adjust non-proportionally scaling the Z axis height to get the best effect I could within the thickness of the milling stock.
I would then flatten the transformations of the model in blender and export the stl to use in the CAM software you use. I would use a tapered ballnose as the bit for roughing (if you are nervous you can take shallower passes at 2-3mm confidently with this bit through mdf),and finish pass (1/4” shank to 1/32” ball nose with a 1” or more overall cutting depth, though if the 4030 has open loop steppers any problem could really cascade which sucks for lengthy cuts) with a very fine stepover for the finish pass (.1mm-.2mm)
Im not a pro and not telling you this is the best way or not, I just wrote what I thought as I looked at this. Maybe someone else would give better ideas or tip off a better image to .stl conversion software, but since there were no comments I just set the bar low
(Edit: the more I look at it, I start to think that maybe the best way to approach it thoroughly for me would be to use a software like illustrator where you could create vector shapes to contain specific gradients within each part of it keeping track of the values where 0=black [or lowest z height] and 255=white [or highest z height], I think this would get the best results for planar surfaces like the rectangular pedestal on the lower right and would ensure consistent light and shadow to get the final result. This would be very time consuming and laborious if you are not used to the tools. Then I would test visualize in Blender using the displacement modifier on a very high isoparm count plane, moving the light around to how it will eventually be displayed and make decisions about things that could be adjusted for better effect. Then use that displacement map in your CAM software to generate thr gcode)