Hey all, question about supports in Studio. If I let the software decide where to put supports, it will create supports with a light green colour, which are very difficult to remove after the print. If however I paint supports myself, the software adds a dark green colour layer between the model and the light green colour support, which is much easier to remove. Is there a way to set Studio to interpose this dark green layer between the model and automatically generated supports? I don’t see why the default is to use supports so hard to remove when there is a better option.
It would be really helpful if you could provide a photo.
Here’s my attempt at an explanation:
- The normal green part is the support structure - it’s like the foundation. It’s called “Support”
- The dark green layer is exactly where the support and the actual model come into contact. It’s called “Support interface”
“Support interface” is used primarily for larger surfaces and overhangs. So it depends on the model whether you need just “Support” or also “Support interface.”
By the way, in the linked wiki, you’ll also find tips on what settings you can adjust to make support easier to remove.
Now let’s get to your actual problem: If you’re having trouble removing the support, there are probably other reasons for it. I saw that you’ve already started a thread on this topic - it turned out to be a bug in the slicer.
Are you sure there isn’t a bug in the slicer, or that the model is defective? Or maybe your printer is configured incorrectly? Normally, the support should be easy to remove.
Does it look the same as last time?
I think you’re approaching the problem the wrong way and looking for a function that’s supposed to fix a problem, when your problem actually lies somewhere else entirely.
Please upload the 3mf file to the forum so we can take a closer look at it. Thanks. 
Hey, sorry I got carried away with other stuff. The problem still persists. It’s very simple. When I define the settings for the supports, I check the Enable Support box, then if I select Type “tree(auto)”, then the support interface layers are not included by the slicer, whereas if I select “normal(auto)”, they are. See pictures below:
If I paint the supports myself, in the areas where I paint the supports, the interface layers are included, in the areas where I don’t (the default supports apply) then the interface layers are not included:
So very simply the slicer doesn’t introduce interface layers when slicing using default tree(auto) supports.
The slicer is Bambu Studio. If there is a bug it’s bug of the software. My printer works fine - it prints the interface layers if I use Normal(auto) supports because the slicer introduces them in the model. The model is not defective, it’s the slicer that doesn’t include interface layers when I use tree supports.
If you always want to have an interface layer, you’ll need to enable it; otherwise, the slicer will decide automatically. This isn’t a bug - it’s simply the “Support Interface” setting.
If you only select “Tree” or “Normal Support,” that’s not sufficient - you’re leaving the decision to the slicer’s automatic settings. If you want it to behave that way consistently, you need to enable it explicitly.
That makes sense as well: As the name suggests, the “Support Type” setting only determines the type of support. The “Support Interface” setting controls the interface itself. These are two separate settings.
The wiki I linked to in my first post explains this in more detail.
Then the slicer’s automatic decided that you don’t need it; if you want it anyway, you’ll have to force turn it on.
Otherwise, as I mentioned earlier, please feel free to provide the missing information / 3mf; then forum members can analyze it more thoroughly. 
I do think there is a bug in the creation of interface layers for automatic tree supports, but it is not what I expected.
I find that most interface layers are often omitted from Tree (auto)/Default supports if the interface filament is Default. Slim/Strong/Hybrid styles generate a little more interface, but not everywhere it is expected.
Change the interface filament to a different material (like PETG for a PLA print), and full interface layers will be generated.
This makes me think the interface layer is omitted when using the default filament because, in some circumstances, it is better to let the model bridge across the tree branches. Generating a full interface layer of the same material could make the interface impossible to remove.
What I think is a bug (or at least an inconsistency) appears when I slice with a dissimilar interface filament, get a full interface, change the interface filament to Default, and re-slice. I still have a full interface, not the minimal interface generated when the initial slice is made with the Default filament.
That’s wonderful to hear that everything worked out. You basically did exactly what it says in the wiki that I linked for you.
As I mentioned earlier, this isn’t actually a bug, it’s simply two separate settings, which you’ve now discovered. You only need to decide whether you prefer the slicer to handle things automatically in the way it thinks is best, or whether you’d rather give it precise instructions yourself.
As I mentioned, unfortunately you didn’t provide the 3MF file even after repeated requests. Of course you’re never obligated to share it - but it would have made it much easier to offer very targeted help.
Still, I’m genuinely glad the issue is resolved and hope you continue to enjoy your 3D‑printing journey.
That matches what I found.
If the support interface filament is Default, or the same material type as the model (model 1 PLA/interface1 PLA or 1 PLA/2 PLA), interface layers are created only in some areas. I think those are areas where the slicer can create a support pattern that is easily removed but still provides more support than just the ends of the tree branches. Other areas may not have room to create a better pattern at the branch ends, so no interface layer is created, and the model simply bridges across the branches. When the model and support are the same filament, adding a small interface may not provide an advantage. Setting Top Z distance to 0 may make the support difficult to remove— the support is basically adhered like another layer added to the bottom of the model
A different type of interface is created when the model filament and interface filament are different materials that do not adhere well to each other (1 PLA/3 PETG), an interface layer can provide continuous support without the risk of permanent attachment, so it is generated for all supports.
The inconsistency I mentioned in my earlier post is my mistake, not a bug. Selecting a dissimilar interface filament pops up a recommendation to change other interface settings, including top Z distance=0 and interface spacing=0 (creating a solid surface), which I accepted. Those changes were not automatically reversed when I later changed the interface filament back to Default. I would expect that with those settings, and model and interfaces of the same material type, the support will be impossible to remove— the interface becomes just another layer or two added to the bottom of the model.