Wednesday, January 8, 2014

Scoring with the Silhouette SD

I'm sure others have tried this, but I've never done it myself. I've got all these old Silhouette SD blades lying around, and I thought - what if I cranked it down to the smallest cut setting, and used it to cut rather than score? "Scoring" to the Silhouette means perforate, and it is terribly slow. Cutting seems much faster.

I tried it out on a 6" tile, and it worked perfectly. Now, I realize for reverse scoring, it isn't going to work too well. So, what I'll do is use this on the tiles (and posts, for example) to reduce the amount of perforating that goes on. Aesthetically, I don't mind it either way, but anything that saves me time (and makes less noise) is a good thing.

UPDATE: A word of caution... I've been cutting tiles out with this method, and I like it a lot. The edges are clean and easy to edge, and it seems a LOT faster than letting the machine perforate. However, I've apparently been forgetting to switch the blades between cutting and scoring, using the cutting blade for everything. It's still doing an OK job just scoring and not going through the tile, probably because I've got it set on the lowest pressure possible, but I'm a little worried that it's cutting deeper than necessary and making some of the corners weaker.... If you try this yourself, don't be lazy like me!


  1. I am intrigued and might have to give this a go. Walls and posts sometimes have an odd look to them aesthetically when perforated and I am curious to see this put to the test with actual scoring.

    Do you have to send it through the cutter twice (once for cuts at normal depth and once at scoring depth)? Does it still work out to faster cut time with that factored in?

    1. So, yeah - I send the file through twice. Basically I've modified the cutfiles for a 6" tile so I have two files - a score file and a cut file. The score file retained only the original score lines, but I set them to cut rather than score. Also, I set it to speed 10, single pass cut with a thickness of 1. When I use this cutfile, I'm supposed to be using my old blade that is set to a depth of 1, but I've actually used my newer blade at depth 3 and it hasn't ruined the piece. Still, I think I'll try to use both blades. The change is quick.

      The second cutfiile retains all of the cut lines, is set to max thickness, a cut speed of 5 and set to double-cut. I think if I do pieces with reverse scores, I'll leave the reverse scores as scorelines in the file that does the cutting.

      Yes, it seems MUCH faster than when I let the machine perforate all the score lines.