> In the image you provided, there are elements at or below the .2mm.
Sure, but I'm not concerned about the ones under 0.2 mm. That's my fault. I'm concerned about the ones at 0.2 mm, which according to the data materials page, *are *acceptable.
>The problem arises that a customer will see the default render, and expect these ridges. If the item arrives and those details aren't there, or as prevalent as they expect, Shapeways is responsible for the refund. That's why the rule is there, and that's why they won't print it. Also we don't want to send out unacceptable product. So it would cost us money to have to reprint items that we feel don't stand up to our expectations.
Actually, here is what the customers says:
"I like it very much.
The WSF polished material is great, the smoothness is close to the FUD. I
hope there coming more"
Now I am aware not all *potential* customers may think like this one, but that's why my products carefully state that not all details will print out with all materials. As it is, he's my *actual* customer, and he hasn't got problems.
>If you can share the image of an item that was rejected for elements above the .2mm I can investigate and try to explain what's going on with them as well.
Sure - here the smallest rejected feature is 0.4164 mm.