Feature request to MSLA manufacturers: selective per-layer exposure to reinforce supports (I already contacted Elegoo and Anycubic)

3D Printing
1

Hi everyone,

I recently sent a feature proposal to both Elegoo and Anycubic, and I think this is the kind of improvement that only gets traction if more users ask for it publicly.

The problem (current MSLA limitation)

In MSLA/LCD printers, every layer is exposed once with a single mask and a single exposure time. This forces a bad trade-off:

  • Increase exposure → supports get stronger, fewer failures

  • Increase exposure → surface quality and fine details get worse due to overcure

In practice, supports are the main mechanical failure point, so users overexpose globally and sacrifice quality where it is not needed.

The proposal (firmware + slicer, no hardware changes)

Allow two exposures at the same Z height, using different masks:

  1. Primary exposure

    • Mask: model + supports

    • Time: optimized for surface detail and dimensional accuracy

  2. Secondary exposure (structural pass)

    • Mask: supports and/or low-detail regions of the model

    • Time: short extra exposure to increase mechanical strength

No Z movement between the two exposures.

This does not require grayscale, new screens, or new optics. LCD panels already support arbitrary masks. The slicer already knows what geometry is support vs model. The missing piece is firmware support for multiple exposures per layer.

Why this matters

  • Stronger supports without sacrificing model surface quality

  • Fewer partial failures and delamination, especially on heavy or suction-prone prints

  • Less need to “overcook” the entire model just to keep supports alive

  • Much better reliability for difficult resins (e.g. brittle or castable resins)

Trade-offs

  • Slightly longer print times

  • More firmware/slicer complexity

  • Should be an optional advanced feature, not default behavior

Why more people should ask for this

Manufacturers rarely prioritize firmware features unless they see repeated demand from users. This is a high-impact, low-cost improvement because it does not require any hardware changes. If more people request this kind of feature, it becomes harder for vendors to ignore.

If you think MSLA printing still fails too often because of supports and peel forces, consider requesting similar features from your printer manufacturer. Even if the exact implementation differs, the core idea - separating “structural exposure” from “detail exposure” - is a meaningful step forward for consumer resin printers.

I already sent this suggestion to Elegoo and Anycubic. If others do the same, the probability of this becoming a real feature goes way up.