Our Gift to You: 20% off your own designs in Strong & Flexible Plastic through Dec 23, with promo code MY2014 · details
Home » Support » Suggestions » Preventing Rejections - Update on Project Caterpillar
Search Search  
 () 4 Vote(s)
Show: Today's Messages    Show Polls    Message Navigator
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #67395 is a reply to message #67393 ] Fri, 03 May 2013 14:16 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar AmLachDesigns  is currently offline AmLachDesigns
Messages: 1360
Registered: September 2011
Go to my shop
Shapie Expert
It is a good suggestion, and I believe may even have been suggested before in one of these myriad threads - what is missing from these discussions is any meaningful, official, response from Shapeways ... imo.
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #67397 is a reply to message #67350 ] Fri, 03 May 2013 14:23 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar Dragoman  is currently offline Dragoman
Messages: 173
Registered: August 2011
Go to my shop
Senior Member
matt_atknsn wrote on Thu, 02 May 2013 19:59

Good day ladies and gents,
I'm curious though: had the nuance rules for FD/FUD material gone out of favor?



Apparently, yes. The text has been changed, there no longer is a detailed discussion about thin wires.

They could have announced it more prominently, though.

Greetings
Dragoman
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #67400 is a reply to message #67397 ] Fri, 03 May 2013 14:40 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar stop4stuff  is currently offline stop4stuff
Messages: 3178
Registered: June 2010
Go to my shop
Shapie Expert
Yes indeedy, wires or bars are no longer considered walls, and therefore do not have the same 'rules' as walls - or is someone made a blanket decision for FUD that should be applied to FD?

Hey ho, once again what worked without any reported issues now does not work due to whatever issues weren't reported Confused
Had it myself with customers FUD models recently Sad

Paul

[Updated on: Fri, 03 May 2013 14:41 UTC]

Re: Preventing Rejections [message #67402 is a reply to message #67397 ] Fri, 03 May 2013 14:58 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar matt_atknsn  is currently offline matt_atknsn
Messages: 26
Registered: August 2011
Go to my shop
Junior Member
Dragoman wrote on Fri, 03 May 2013 14:23


Apparently, yes. The text has been changed, there no longer is a detailed discussion about thin wires.

They could have announced it more prominently, though.

Greetings
Dragoman



Cheers mate!

Wish they'd update the page http://www.shapeways.com/design-rules/frosted-detail Rolling Eyes (like with some explicit ones ex. 1:3 wire thickness:length ratio; or where should they start measuring them structures... unless I missed it somewhere)

Chalk more tiny ships unavailable :/

Best regards,
RoeT
icon4.gif  Re: Preventing Rejections [message #67405 is a reply to message #67400 ] Fri, 03 May 2013 15:19 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar FabMeJewelry  is currently offline FabMeJewelry
Messages: 268
Registered: December 2012
Go to my shop
Senior Member
Shapeways Crew
..........

1: All communications between shapeways and customers should be anonymously forwarded to the shop owner so that he or she is aware of everything, it is not only shapeways shop and reputation that's on the line !

2: When there are problems with a model ordered by a customer shapeways will put the order on hold with consent of the customer to give the designer the chance to fix the problem (rapid prototyping)

= Customer happy, Shop owner happy and Shapeways happy


Just do it Razz

[Updated on: Sat, 04 May 2013 19:08 UTC]


Wesley Günter - FabMeJewelry.com - Set a course, for the future !
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #69114 is a reply to message #62565 ] Mon, 03 June 2013 16:07 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar MichaelMueller  is currently offline MichaelMueller
Messages: 221
Registered: July 2011
Go to my shop
Senior Member
Hi,

I'm really tired of getting mails saying "You've sold models which could not be 3D printed".
Especially the silver material seems to be very complicated.
http://images1.sw-cdn.net/model/picture/220x165_567334_477852_1341080143.jpg
It's fine for me that a design has to go along with the material rules...
but today I've got a rejection which says "minimal 1,5 mm for this particular model", instead of the usual 0.6 / 0.8 mm.
This way rules make no sence and you never know if your design will be printed or not. I think I'll no longer offer the silver material option in my shop.

Michael


Michael Mueller
www.pookas.de
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #69124 is a reply to message #69114 ] Mon, 03 June 2013 17:34 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar FabMeJewelry  is currently offline FabMeJewelry
Messages: 268
Registered: December 2012
Go to my shop
Senior Member
Shapeways Crew
Seeing your beautiful designed products this could happen to anyone Crying or Very Sad

With both shops I'm running i didn't have a lot rejections overall but still I'm scared every time someone places an order.
Maybe it's a good suggestion to leave the "Yippee!" from the "you've sold models" notification ? Wink

Just some more ideas that would help to dissolve these issues a little bit :

3: There should be an option to thoroughly check prototypes i order for sale in my shops to ensure they can be (mass) produced in the material i choose, i would even pay a fee for that !

4: When the design rules change the material should be locked and the shop owner should be notified to check if the design rules are affecting the producability of the model.


Wesley Günter - FabMeJewelry.com - Set a course, for the future !
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #69150 is a reply to message #69114 ] Tue, 04 June 2013 02:05 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar stevecim  is currently offline stevecim
Messages: 7
Registered: June 2011
Go to my shop
Junior Member
Hi all

Have not read every post in this thread, but have had rejects with a few designs lately , first I want to make clear that my rejections were valid.
I mainly sell models in silver, well when I do sell any Smile, Not being a expert in design, looking at some of the rejects posted some are valid,
You need to remember with silver , it,s a 3 step process, designs are first printed in wax , then loss wax cast in silver, then finished . And the fishing can be a mixture to mass finishing and hand finishing.

Some points.
1 . Mass finishing means a machine does the finishing , I.e the piece get placed in a machine, turned on , then removed ... No control over what gets material gets removed . Hand finishing is a little more selective .... The thing to keep in mind is .2mm or more can be removed from all surfaces at each stage If you have a surface detail that's only .283, you can end up with no detail left... You need to allow for finishing in your design .... The problem is you either have to design a different model for each version of silver or just accept that the each type of silver will look a little different and design in and extra .2 mm I.e if I want detail to end up .3mm I'll design it at .5mm , then I know the final piece will be some where between .51 and .28mm. Smile ..
And it not so straight forward sometimes small details can be protected by other details, so you can get a way with detail .283
I guess the main thing is to allow for polishing, it will remove material every where....


2. Your design needs to allow for sprue placement, this is the biggest problem I've seen with some of the designs I've seen post here.
If you have a design that has detail over every surface you don't leave any where for the sprue to be attached .

Also The pressure of the investment will bend the wax if there is not enough support. .

Having worked directly with casters, 90% casters will only place 1 sprue on a design, if your design needs " runners" to support the design that's upto the designer. This is where the process falls over because there is not a method of telling shapeways what is part of the final design and what is sprue / runner which can be removed.

Just recently I had a caster make a bangle from 4.1 mm round wax, 60mm diameter , now I only had 1 x 4mm sprue and no runners and the final cast bent out of shape. No big issue nothing a hammer can't fix. For me. But for shapeways it would eat into profit for the 1 piece. And the wax I used is a lot stronger then wax used in 3d printers

My guess, it it could be way off and not being able to see the back of the above ring, is there might not be enough area to attach a sprue, the more silver that needs to flow into the design the larger the sprue needs to be.the design has lots of changes from thick to thin which could have flow issue Just a guess Smile

[Updated on: Tue, 04 June 2013 12:56 UTC] by Moderator

Re: Preventing Rejections [message #69496 is a reply to message #62565 ] Sat, 08 June 2013 19:53 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar Roy_Stevens  is currently offline Roy_Stevens
Messages: 143
Registered: November 2009
Go to my shop
Senior Member
I GIVE UP. Seriously. I am taking every single model that I have in FUD and setting it as not for sale. I admit, this is probably what Shapeways wants. I don't think they want to support that material any more. They find new 'problems' in every single model that has been sold in the past four months and I'm tired of it. If there is a new material with 'better' detail later, I may come back. Hasta la Vista Shapeways.


Earl Grey, hot.
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #69950 is a reply to message #67402 ] Mon, 17 June 2013 12:48 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar matt_atknsn  is currently offline matt_atknsn
Messages: 26
Registered: August 2011
Go to my shop
Junior Member
matt_atknsn wrote on Fri, 03 May 2013 14:58


Wish they'd update the page http://www.shapeways.com/design-rules/frosted-detail Rolling Eyes (like with some explicit ones ex. 1:3 wire thickness:length ratio; or where should they start measuring them structures... unless I missed it somewhere)


Hmmm... seems they've taken down that particular page... quite alarming as it'll mean rejection for all my FUD-exclusive models... (0.8mm FUD wires seriously? Rolling Eyes )
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #69973 is a reply to message #69950 ] Mon, 17 June 2013 18:43 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar Roy_Stevens  is currently offline Roy_Stevens
Messages: 143
Registered: November 2009
Go to my shop
Senior Member
Yep. If I want to put mullions into a window through a wall they need to be three times the thickness of the wall. Oh, and they have to be 0.8mm in all three dimensions. I had some L-braces that worked for a while by being 0.8mm on each leg with 0.3mm walls, then they started rejecting them by measuring them from arbitrary points inside the corner.


Earl Grey, hot.
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #69975 is a reply to message #69973 ] Mon, 17 June 2013 19:06 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar stop4stuff  is currently offline stop4stuff
Messages: 3178
Registered: June 2010
Go to my shop
Shapie Expert
with you there Roy, previously printed models with small walls now rejected due to someone's arbitary interpretaion of 'the rules' = sucks for us trying to explain to CS that the model has been printed already without any reported issues....

Maybe I'll sign in again next month if there's been any changes to Shapeways policy of arrogance.

Paul
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70393 is a reply to message #69975 ] Mon, 24 June 2013 14:11 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar AmLachDesigns  is currently offline AmLachDesigns
Messages: 1360
Registered: September 2011
Go to my shop
Shapie Expert
For those who are interested, this thread complaints has been locked and re-directed here.
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70422 is a reply to message #69975 ] Mon, 24 June 2013 20:45 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar dcyale  is currently offline dcyale
Messages: 138
Registered: February 2013
Go to my shop
Senior Member
I originally posted this on another thread. It was pointed out that it was more appropriate on this thread:

It's become a wack-a-mole game. A model printed successfully, you make it available, a customer orders it, it won't print and you fix the error and re-upload it. Another customer orders it, and it won't print for another reason. You fix it, and there's another problem. It's the mole jumping up in another hole and you keep bashing. [I see this has been expressed previoulsy in this thread]

I cannot say Shapeways is wrong. Unfortunately by printing these designs in the past they "lured" me into some sloppy habits and enabled me to push the design limits a little too hard. I am in the process of going through all my designs and reworking them.

Lately I get a new rejection- shells that aren't attached. However they are (except one that was my oops). My understanding was that intersecting shells were OK (and they printed OK in the past). Now I am no longer sure, and the topic doesn't seem covered in the materials guidelines. I have just ordered some new models that have intersecting shells- we will see what happens.

My thoughts at this point is to only order prints myself, and after I have the physical model in my hands sell it on ebay. It totally defeats the zero inventory, just in time production process that shapeways makes possible, but I just look like an idiot when a customer orders a model and gets an email that it can't be printed.

I also pointed out to customer service that a "square" wire that measures .88 has an equal cross section to a 1 mm round "wire." No luck.

And no one can tell me when a wall is too narrow and becomes a wire. With FUD that can make a huge difference.
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70425 is a reply to message #70422 ] Mon, 24 June 2013 21:06 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar dcyale  is currently offline dcyale
Messages: 138
Registered: February 2013
Go to my shop
Senior Member
And another thing- as long as we are complaining- breakage during shipping should be an non-issue. As part of my intent to sell my models on ebay I ordered cotton filled cardboard jewelry boxes. About .40 each by the case.

http://www.dcyale.com/shapeways/box.jpg

This is an example of some rolltop desk and chair models I have produced in FUD (and have been trying to get to print again ever since) in a jewelry box. Yes, some are painted, others are half painted- these were tests.

But I think the production model will get to the customer OK when they are sold on Ebay, and have this box put into a flat rate box.

I suggested to Shapeways that they could offer packaging like this for $1, prevent breakage, and make a little bit extra on the mark up in response to the survey they sent around a while ago, but didn't hear anything back.

I understand we want everything fixed today, and that is is not that easy when you are not only growing a buisness, you are growing a technology. But the Shapeways to designer communications could be better.
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70427 is a reply to message #70422 ] Mon, 24 June 2013 21:29 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar Mechanoid  is currently offline Mechanoid
Messages: 120
Registered: October 2010
Go to my shop
Senior Member
The real problem is, that ShapeWays doesn't seem to care about communicating their intents until you have ordered something that they then decide to reject. I've had Mrs Hagens do a manual check of models. She said they checked fine. But once someone, other than myself ordered them. ShapeWays kicks it out. Locks the model for NO SALE, turns off the materials selection and markup section. Then has the nerve to come to me and say,

"As at this moment we haven't got the possibility (yet) to put a model on private while doing the rejections, this hasn't been done automatically. This is something we are looking in to, that as soon as we are doing the rejections all the models which can't be printed will automatically get a restriction for the material we can't print it in. For now, the designer needs to put his model on private or a restriction on the materials and make the changes to the models and offer them for sale again. Of course I understand that this is something we have to provide and we are going to do this in the nearby future."

As if they haven't done it, But I watched as they did it. ShapeWays doesn't communicate it's intentions, or it's motives to others very well. It's as if we don't matter to them. Then when something happens, they expect you to just KNOW what they did and why. They dance around a simple answer as well as a seasoned politician in congress. They are experts at giving answers, without actually answering the question. And frankly it's starting to wear a bit THIN-walled.

This was the answer I got today about printable to now rejected models. Your going to love it, God knows I did.

"The Production Facility who checked the model in 2012 and printed this model as well unfortunately didn't check this model as strict as our own Production Facility does check them. We saw the notification that this model was printed before and if the model does meet the design rules or almost meets them, we always discuss this rejection with our Production Facility, but because the walls are really too thin this rejection was a valid one and we continued."

They've tightened up their guidelines so much, you couldn't breath thru a straw as they are now. You NOW have to design something for WSF for it to pass for FUD. And God help you if your designing for WSF material and want to use the dye feature. Used to be the same material as WSF. BUT, without telling a single soul in the universe. ShapeWays dumps that program to make dye now a POLISHED material. Again, CHANGING the guidelines without telling anyone.

I wouldn't mind some of what they have done. But dammit, COMMUNICATE that fact to me first. Just don't do it and then expect everyone to know what ShapeWays is thinking, and way. I ain't a mind reader. I got PMS, not ESP! ShapeWays has lost it's way. They are trying to so hard to top everyone else. They are changing their guidelines around. But yet THEY DON'T TELL ANYONE!

All of this, because I had a model that printed just fine last yr. Printed it several times. And WHAM! One day ShapeWays decides that my model no long works, shouldn't have been printed in the first place. I make corrections, upload the new model, it gets rejected, I make more corrections, it gets rejected, and I get so damm mad, I upload the last updated file, AS A NEW MODEL THAT NOW PRINTS! Turns out every rejection I got, was still using the original model to reject from. But the page showed that the updated file uploaded correctly and everything. And what is even more stupid. That first file of that model. I ordered 3 of them. They refunded all 3. But in the package was a set, IN WSF MATERIAL! The same material they kept rejecting it under. And not one person at ShapeWays has the guts to tell me "HOW A MODEL GETS PRINTED IN WSF, BUT REJECTED IN FUD, FD AND EVERYTHING ELSE!".

ShapeWays, YOU FAIL!

Or as Ann on "the Weakest Link" would say,

"Who's one Froot Loop shy of a full bowl?",
or
"You would be out of your depth in a car park puddle."
or
"Whose brain will be donated to science and rejected?"

Your's truely,

Samantha
aka Mechanoid


I.D.I.C. = Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70438 is a reply to message #62565 ] Tue, 25 June 2013 02:26 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar MrNib  is currently offline MrNib
Messages: 659
Registered: November 2012
Go to my shop
Senior Member
I think the words of the day should be the ones we hear at work daily:

ISO 9001
Total Quality Management
Six Sigma
Process Control
William Edwards Deming

I get the feeling Shapeways my have "winged" things early on and is now trying to get things under control. It might have been better to start with tighter design rules and loosen them up over time based on experience. But that's bridge under the water. I now try to design everything with the polished alumide rules to cover all plastics yet still seem to run into problems...
http://www.shapeways.com/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=14874& amp;start=0&

Last week I had some pens come back with flat tops even though they had rounded tops in the design file. I don't know if it was something in the design file (the shell issue I keep reading about?) or something bad that happened during manufacture. Instead of wading through customer service I just redesigned the pens to have a flat top and sent out for revised parts since I also had another change adjustment I needed to make.

The nexus of thorough design rule checks needs to be at Shapeways for all processes, either in the form of online checking as part of the upload process or an open source rule check deck that can be utilized in various programs to do the checks before upload. .You shouldn't have to buy a part or have someone else buy a part to flag a design or manufacture issue. There should also be a good way to appeal flagged rule checks to improve the rule check deck when possible or a way to permanently sign off on an error to allow manufacture with the error if the designer feels it is a non-issue. However having a decent rule check process right from the get-go would pre-empt many of these problems!

Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70507 is a reply to message #70438 ] Tue, 25 June 2013 21:47 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar PeregrineStudios  is currently offline PeregrineStudios
Messages: 326
Registered: September 2012
Go to my shop
Senior Member
Had a lovely couple of emails today that made very little sense. Rejections for new models (not old, already-printed ones, thankfully).

It's high time Shapeways began differentiating between a 'wall' and a 'detail'. The Stainless Steel page tells us that 3.0 mm is the minimum wall thickness for stainless steel; details can be smaller than that. Most of my models have small details and have printed fine several time. Today, however, two rejections:

index.php?t=getfile&id=35160&private=0

If those are 'walls' as opposed to 'details', I'll eat my beret.

What's more, the e-mail included this little gem:

"Increase wall thickness to at least 0.03" / 0.762mm in all areas."

So..... is it 3.0mm, or 0.762mm?

In any case, I have had plenty of models print successfully with similar designs and 'wall' (detail) thicknesses; what makes today's rejections different? Hell, my Forever ring has even thinner 'text' on it, and it prints just fine, and has done so probably over 20 - 25 times now!

In any event, it is absolutely impossible, given the design of the ring, to thicken any of these walls to the magnitude requested - more than tripling the thickness of each one, essentially ruining the design. There's no reason this shouldn't print. If the following can print:

http://shpws.me/mVZV
http://shpws.me/nwgx
http://shpws.me/nFfC
http://shpws.me/nBTX

ALL of which have detail-walls MUCH thinner than both 3.0mm and 0.762mm, then there is NO reason the above model cannot print.

[Updated on: Tue, 25 June 2013 21:52 UTC]

Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70512 is a reply to message #70507 ] Tue, 25 June 2013 23:45 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar dcyale  is currently offline dcyale
Messages: 138
Registered: February 2013
Go to my shop
Senior Member
I haven't tried stainless steel yet, but the data sheet says that embossed details require .1mm, or about .04". It looks like you fell in the same trap I did. Because you had models print previously, you designed based upon experience, not strict adherance to the material specifications.

It would be nice if Shapeways had communiated that they were going to be applying the design guidelines more strictly, instead of simply rejecting models.

The problem now is how do we have any confidence that models will print succesfully in the future. That is why I pay for a test print- I want to make sure it will print before offering a model for sale- to make sure I didn't mess it up, and I mess up a lot!

And your particular problem is that all the past ring designs you listed might be rejected in the future at any time if they don't adhere to the materials guidelines.
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70514 is a reply to message #62565 ] Wed, 26 June 2013 00:40 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar Youknowwho4eva  is currently offline Youknowwho4eva
Messages: 5729
Registered: September 2008
Go to my shop
Shapie Expert
I work here
The issue appears that your details are too tall. For it to be considered a detail, they must be no taller than they are thick. It appears yours are taller then than they are thick.


I learned a long time ago the wisest thing I can do is be on my own side, be an advocate for myself and others like me. -Maya Angelou
michael@shapeways.com Community Advocate
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70521 is a reply to message #70507 ] Wed, 26 June 2013 05:22 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar AmLachDesigns  is currently offline AmLachDesigns
Messages: 1360
Registered: September 2011
Go to my shop
Shapie Expert
PeregrineStudios wrote on Tue, 25 June 2013 21:47



"Increase wall thickness to at least 0.03" / 0.762mm in all areas."

So..... is it 3.0mm, or 0.762mm?

.


0.03" means 0.03 inches...

Whether or not that equates to 0.762mm I cannot say as I avoid the Imperial system like the plague.
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70543 is a reply to message #70521 ] Wed, 26 June 2013 17:08 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar dcyale  is currently offline dcyale
Messages: 138
Registered: February 2013
Go to my shop
Senior Member
Just a follow up to my prior comments about intersectiong shells- although the order hasn't shipped yet, the ORDERS page indicates the models that had intersecting shells printed- so they weren't rejected.

It seems that adjacent shells, even when there is no space between them, will get a rejection. I will test further on my next order.
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70544 is a reply to message #70543 ] Wed, 26 June 2013 17:15 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar Youknowwho4eva  is currently offline Youknowwho4eva
Messages: 5729
Registered: September 2008
Go to my shop
Shapie Expert
I work here
Shells that sit face to face will cause issues with Meshmedic when you upload. Faces can not exist in the same space. the software will try to fix it, and most of the time it will not come out well.


I learned a long time ago the wisest thing I can do is be on my own side, be an advocate for myself and others like me. -Maya Angelou
michael@shapeways.com Community Advocate
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70547 is a reply to message #70544 ] Wed, 26 June 2013 17:50 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar dcyale  is currently offline dcyale
Messages: 138
Registered: February 2013
Go to my shop
Senior Member
when you say faces cannot exist in the same space, do you mean faces that intersect at an angle or faces that duplicate each other- well, at least for a portion of their area? I assume there is a term to define this, but I don't know it.

I think that one of my more recent rejections has a face of one shell in the same area as another. I don't think I designed it that way, but I had run it through netfab online and think it may have split it up into multiple shells. Hopefully that model is fully fixed. It is in production at this time.

The model that just printed has one portion of the model that is a seperate shell that I connected by locating it with a flat portion slightly inside another shell. Here is a picture from thje outside (yes, it's a minature port-a-pot):

http://www.dcyale.com/shapeways/ppot01.jpg

And here's a view that shows the inside of the main shell and the other shell protruding:

http://www.dcyale.com/shapeways/ppot02.jpg

This has worked in the past. Is it another issue that may lead to future rejections?
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70549 is a reply to message #70547 ] Wed, 26 June 2013 17:56 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar AmLachDesigns  is currently offline AmLachDesigns
Messages: 1360
Registered: September 2011
Go to my shop
Shapie Expert
Quote:

I assume there is a term to define this, but I don't know it.


I believe the term is non-manifold.

As long as your shells intersect you should be ok. The problems arise when the faces of two separate shells are in exactly the same plane at the same co-ordinates with no intersection. The same is true of edges, and for all I know individual vertices too.

[Updated on: Wed, 26 June 2013 17:57 UTC]

Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70563 is a reply to message #70549 ] Wed, 26 June 2013 22:26 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar stannum  is currently offline stannum
Messages: 1068
Registered: May 2009
Go to my shop
Shapie Expert
Coplanarity.
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70593 is a reply to message #62565 ] Thu, 27 June 2013 15:39 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar hunterseeker5  is currently offline hunterseeker5
Messages: 9
Registered: January 2012
Go to my shop
Junior Member
Wow, what do you know, it seems that I'm not even close to the only one who is becoming sincerely aggravated by inane model rejections.

So back at the end of February this was posted:
Youknowwho4eva wrote on Thu, 28 February 2013 14:52

I can tell you that we are progressing to a solution. I can't tell you when or what to expect. From what I have seen, it'll be up to your expectations and maybe even beyond.

Still waiting..... losing patience too.


What drew me to this thread today though? I got a model rejection for a too thin wire. The issue with that? The unsupported wire was just a sprue anyway, meant to convert something that would be rejected for being "multiple models" into something that can be printed as one unit, and blatantly didn't need to arrive intact. The killer? That wire met all Shapeways specs. (WSF 1.0mm unsupported wires). The rejection cited no actual specifications for what would be acceptable, nor provided citation to where such specs could be found. It was fully compliant with the specs found here:
http://www.shapeways.com/materials/strong-flexible-design-gu idelines

The model is private, so I'm not going to post the image showing it, but the wire was supported every ~3.5 centimeters.

The first response to my "WTF?" by Maartje was broadly unhelpful, having clearly not read my initial email, was probably formulaic, and conveniently listed the WSF specifications to which my model had complied. A follow-up requesting contact with someone who could actually provide insight into the issue, rather than just flog a keyboard, was promptly replied to stating the concern would be passed along to the engineer who rejected it.

So here is the thing. There used to be a "fix my model if it can't be printed" option, which I'm sure was time consuming, but addressed the issue of these byzantine and apparently secret specifications regarding why a model could be rejected. So I could go through and list all the solutions customers have been clamoring for (shapeways fix it themselves options, just print it anyway and we'll accept it imperfect, actually bothering to list the full set of specifications against which models are being judged, not rejecting already test printed models, offering a model rejection/acceptance submission system allowing models to be approved permanently and prior to getting money involved, offering the option for model corrections BEFORE rejecting them and permanently costing us a customer/causing public embarrassment, automatically notifying us prior to print spec shifts so models may be updated, allowing order holds to be placed for model updates, etc etc) but since ALL these suggestions have apparently been found unacceptable by Shapeways, could you possibly come up with some sort of solution that actually works? Clearly there will always be some level of rejections, but the current way they're implemented just doesn't work.

[Updated on: Thu, 27 June 2013 15:43 UTC]

Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70605 is a reply to message #70593 ] Thu, 27 June 2013 17:54 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar Youknowwho4eva  is currently offline Youknowwho4eva
Messages: 5729
Registered: September 2008
Go to my shop
Shapie Expert
I work here
hunterseeker5 wrote on Thu, 27 June 2013 15:39

So here is the thing. There used to be a "fix my model if it can't be printed" option


As far as this part, that was only for meshmedic to automatically try to fix files that might not be manifold or have other model issues. It didn't check thickness of your model.


I learned a long time ago the wisest thing I can do is be on my own side, be an advocate for myself and others like me. -Maya Angelou
michael@shapeways.com Community Advocate
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70608 is a reply to message #70605 ] Thu, 27 June 2013 18:14 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar hunterseeker5  is currently offline hunterseeker5
Messages: 9
Registered: January 2012
Go to my shop
Junior Member
Youknowwho4eva wrote on Thu, 27 June 2013 17:54

hunterseeker5 wrote on Thu, 27 June 2013 15:39

So here is the thing. There used to be a "fix my model if it can't be printed" option


As far as this part, that was only for meshmedic to automatically try to fix files that might not be manifold or have other model issues. It didn't check thickness of your model.



So, out of that ENTIRE post, and the larger string of complaints in this thread, your takeaway message is that really, the automated fixing feature, wasn't terribly helpful anyway. Nice. I can see that, as a company, you're really listening to your customers and working hard on resolving the major issues which are causing strife within the community which supports you. Rolling Eyes

BTW thanks for responding to my PM in exactly the way I've become accustomed: when pushed you eventually refer to something that has nothing to do with model rejection (in this case an obscure guideline regarding the potential of wall warpage which obviously isn't a problem for a sprue). Have you noticed that these "case by case" explanations tend not to be terribly satisfying, because they provide no reasonable way for a designer to forecast the next rejection?

If it were just a lone rejection, fine whatever I'll tweak the model and the world will keep turning, but its all the time and for ever increasingly contradictory reasons. And its on a whole different level when you reject an already test-printed model that a customer of ours orders. Last time I checked the rankings, I was in the top 100 sellers on Shapeways. Thats pretty ironic to me, because word has gotten around in the community I serve and people really don't want to order my products direct because they think that they'll end up only getting some of their order despite the models being test printed and photographed before being sold. So I have to go and inventory printed items before they'll really sell. That totally defeats the purpose of the Shapeways model. Likewise if I'm losing this many sales to model rejections, how badly must this be hurting other sellers and Shapeways' growth as a whole? And NOBODY is bothering to address this?

Am I alone in thinking this is nuts?

[Updated on: Thu, 27 June 2013 18:15 UTC]

Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70616 is a reply to message #70608 ] Thu, 27 June 2013 19:48 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar Youknowwho4eva  is currently offline Youknowwho4eva
Messages: 5729
Registered: September 2008
Go to my shop
Shapie Expert
I work here
hunterseeker5 wrote on Thu, 27 June 2013 18:14

So, out of that ENTIRE post, and the larger string of complaints in this thread, your takeaway message is that really, the automated fixing feature, wasn't terribly helpful anyway. Nice. I can see that, as a company, you're really listening to your customers and working hard on resolving the major issues which are causing strife within the community which supports you. Rolling Eyes


As you said I sent you a PM to try to help you with your issue. As you said your model is private so I didn't want to give out details that wouldn't make sense to those that don't see your model. I am not a company. I am the forums moderator. I help where I can. I relay information that I receive. And if need be, I clean up discussions that lead down the path of no longer being constructive. So if you'd like to continue to constructively add to the conversation please feel free to. As they say you will catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.


I learned a long time ago the wisest thing I can do is be on my own side, be an advocate for myself and others like me. -Maya Angelou
michael@shapeways.com Community Advocate
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70617 is a reply to message #70616 ] Thu, 27 June 2013 19:59 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar PeregrineStudios  is currently offline PeregrineStudios
Messages: 326
Registered: September 2012
Go to my shop
Senior Member
Woah, woah, woah, hang on now. I wasn't going to weight in on this little exchange, but seriously? That last remark? 'You will catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.' While I am all in favor of civility and manners on the forums, something needs to be made clear here: Shapeways is the service, and we as designers are both the customers providing it with money AND the inventors providing it with unique work. OUR job is not to 'catch' anything. I wholly sympathize with you - as you stated, you are just the forum moderator, nothing else, and this thread is dangerously close to spiraling out of control - but it needs to be understood clearly and without compromise that SHAPEWAYS is the problem here, not us, and that last remark is straying dangerously close to 'you ought to be grateful' territory.

The real problem here is that Shapeways is impenetrable. You say you're just the forum moderator - okay, so where are the full Shapeways staff? Why aren't they weighing in on this? How and where can we address these issues to them DIRECTLY? Without going through forums, without going through customer service reps. We can't. If you, in your capacity as forum moderator, cannot give specific and clear reasoning or answers, then we as designers MUST be able to speak to someone who CAN.
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70629 is a reply to message #62565 ] Thu, 27 June 2013 23:59 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar hunterseeker5  is currently offline hunterseeker5
Messages: 9
Registered: January 2012
Go to my shop
Junior Member
I mean I understand that you're just a forum moderator, and most of the customer service people I speak with are also extremely polite which I appreciate to a point but...... at some point you need to talk to someone who isn't "just a _____ person" you need someone to roll a few heads until the problems are actually addressed, not apologized for.


Why do you think my temper spilled over onto the Shapeways forums? Believe me, in my native forums, there aren't these great mysteries of what the Shapeways problems are, everyone pretty much knows that there is something seriously wrong with the way shapeways processes designs, and in turn runs their business. I couldn't tell you how many more sales I'd be making if there wasn't the general attitude that you may or may not get what you've ordered, you have to shout at someone to get a physical refund although can't just get your order corrected to what you wanted, AND it takes several weeks to show up. Yeah okay, the third one isn't going to be solved any time soon its a labor intensive process to run a store with no inventory, but the first two are problematic and could have been easily fixed.


So, and I've said this privately to the very polite, but regrettably powerless, Mr. Michael and I'll say it again here: we (the makers) have pitched endless ideas on how this problem could be, if not solved, at least significantly improved. Some of these would be just policy changes, some software changes, and some just attitude changes. ALL, at least all I'm aware of, have been soundly rejected or ignored. Hell look at this thread. We're here banging on Shapeways' door and we're getting a (not your fault sorry) paid talking head who can't do a damn thing other than relay information and work the forum tools, presumably gaging me if I become too cutting.

So lets all stop pretending for a moment that Shapeways doesn't have a clue whats going on. Clearly someone who handles money IS watching this thread, and hoping that if they don't say anything we'll all just shut up and go away. Here is the thing though: Shapeways just sent out an email recently stating they had made one of their funding hurdles. Fascinating then that this whole little business experiment is still suckling at the teet of VC money. How amused do you think they'd be if they saw that Shapeways was intentionally poisoning the community they're dependent on and trying to build? I'd bet not very. I know more than a few venture capitalists, and even if the numbers looked good, a bunch of pissed off end-line consumers would make them pretty queasy.

So what'll it be Shapeways? Keep throwing pions at us, ignoring us, and figuring that all the little arrows stay green and pointed up, or are you actually going to show up and fix this?
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70636 is a reply to message #70629 ] Fri, 28 June 2013 02:52 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar Mechanoid  is currently offline Mechanoid
Messages: 120
Registered: October 2010
Go to my shop
Senior Member
I had an order completed Monday. But because someone in the production plant didn't take all the models to shipping. It sat there until I complained about it today. Now ShapeWays is over nighting my order via UPS. And that has got to cost them triple what the 5 day ground charge was. And for 2 days no one knew what was going on. They offered to refund the models they couldn't locate, But have yet to do even that. So I don't have the first clue whats in my order.

This is the type of stupidity that I and so many others are talking about. Rejection rates are off the scale. Orders held up and no one knows why, so they have to pay triple to get it to me on time. ShapeWays has people in the Service Team that know what they are doing. But that is mostly as a mouth piece to CALM the riots from the gates of avalon. ShapeWays is too busy worring about it's money issues, and not spending nearly enough time fixing the problems that are costing them money.

People used to order like it was going out of style. But since December when ShapeWays moved the production plant back in-house. And doubled down on their guidelines. The out going out of their way to find issues to reject models for. I don't know how you are suppost to put a Construction Fury together in one shell. Not at only 14mm wing tip to wing tip. When I have the Discovery One in my shop with 47 shells, and it sells all day long. My Spacer1999 Eagle set, has 170 shells over 4 pieces in the file. Yet it's one of the most successful models in the last few months. I'm attaching pic's of the Construction Furys.

index.php?t=getfile&id=35433&private=0

Now I'm not a designer, I and my friends paid to have these designs made. And these designs are very successful. Models from our shop are always on the top selling page for vehicles. But it seems that no matter how successful these models are. ShapeWays seems to be trying to destroy our customer base. People no longer trust that our models can be printed. I've had to go back in and repair many models, and still can't get them to print. It's driving us all up the wall.

And like "hunterseeker5" stated, no one at ShapeWays main staff seems to care. The Service Team give good lip service. But rarely do they seem to have the power to actually do anything about the stupidity of the home office. I'm tired of yelling at the Service Team, it's pointless. They have their hands tied with nearly everything. So I want to know, "WHERE IS SHAPEWAYS IN ALL OF THIS?" Are they hiding like Enron CEO's did before their company tanked and it cost everyone their jobs? Are they off on vacation, like congress? And why doesn't anyone from ShapeWays main staff actually weigh in on this thread?

ShapeWays best realize something. They are the printing machines. But it's the shop owners and designers that keep them in business. I ain't going to go brown nosing them to get things done. I did that for 2 yrs. Now where's my damm kiss?

The forum moderators are here just to try to keep it civil. Well I've been biting my tongue for some time now. If I had a phone number to call, I'd be on the phone everyday screaming. I know that I am about half a heartbeat away from having TheVerse shop closed, and being thrown off ShapeWays, and being banned. But someone better start listening. Mr. Denissen clearly stated;

"We as cs are seeing the frustration on designers and customers who get rejections of models and we also know that some design rules are strange or tricky."

The sad part is, it doesn't seem to bother anyone at the higher levels in ShapeWays about the GROWING frustration from designers and customers alike. Of that their design guidelines are becoming so strange and tricky, that is causing many people to just give up on 3D printing. If models that have sold many upon many times before, suddenly becomes REJECTED. Why should people order from ShapeWays.

I truely hope that someone at ShapeWays upper management is reading this thread. Just wish they had to guts to speak up, and talk to "US" directly. Instead of passing the buck to the Service Team. I'm sure those folks go home crying most days, from all the emails wanting to know WTF is going on.

Samantha
@TheVerse


I.D.I.C. = Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70640 is a reply to message #70636 ] Fri, 28 June 2013 08:15 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar bartv  is currently offline bartv
Messages: 1668
Registered: December 2007
Go to my shop
Shapie Expert
Hi all,

thanks for your candid feedback in this thread. Yes, rejections are a major issue and we share your pain - they cause us a lot of extra work (and frustration), too. The topic is on our radar and rest assured that the right people ARE reading these messages. I'm talking with our Product people right now to learn what we can share about our future plans here, and you can expect an update from us later today.

Also, if you ever feel that you're having a hard time getting through to us, please reach out to me or Natalia. We're here to advocate you, and are actively championing your issues in our product development groups. You literally can't bother us enough with issues that make you unhappy!

Thanks,

Bart

[Updated on: Fri, 28 June 2013 08:16 UTC]


Community Manager Europe | Shapeways
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70641 is a reply to message #70640 ] Fri, 28 June 2013 09:09 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar Mechanoid  is currently offline Mechanoid
Messages: 120
Registered: October 2010
Go to my shop
Senior Member
Bartv,

Your future plans should be to stay in business. But your rejection rates are forcing customers and designers alike to bail. How are you going to stay in business, if people all but stop using your company?

December 2012, that's the date when ShapeWays rejection rates jumped clean off the scale. Models from everyone, that printed without complaint, now are total junk. Because you reject for things that in some cases don't make sense. Try this on for size. I wish I still had all the rejection emails that I responded too. Because in them, not once, but several times. Models you were rejecting for WSF guidelines. WERE ORDERED IN FUD!! I've even yelled at the Service Team about it. With NO clear answer ever being given. You got the Service Team so tied in what they can, and can't say or do. They are more like robots. And the emails sound like it too.

When a model gets rejected for multiple shells, it's like WTF. I have one real great selling models in my shop. Discovery One. It's got 47 shells. AND IT'S NEVER FAILED!! So what is this multiply shells issue about? The Service Team either can't say, or won't. I'm tired of yelling at them folks. They are only doing what ShapeWays has told them too do and say.

You tightened your guidelines up so much, it's like trying to get a marble thru a plugged up fire hose. It sounds like it should fit. BUT IT DON'T!. Are you trying to push everyone out? You trying to make everyone not trust ShapeWays?

Because that's what your doing. I have a model that I had designed last yr, It works, it works very well. OR DID! Until December 2012. You used to offer black dye for WSF, and it worked dead on every time. But someone at ShapeWays thought, "HEY I HAVE A GRAND IDEA, LET'S MAKE ALL DYE MATERIALS POLISHED, AND LET'S NOT TELL ANYONE ABOUT IT UNTIL THEY ORDER SOMETHING". Or atleast that's the impression I get about it. Now that model sits. Can't sell it now. It's been shut off by ShapeWays. I tried to reopen it. But all the materials have been blocked. You should have seen to nasty email I got on that rejection last week. I'm still trying to find something soft to sit on.

You've tighened up your guidelines to ridiculous extremes. I've lost so many sells as a result. And they tell me they won't reorder. That mean's you lost out too. My tiny markups don't add to much, but they do work in helping pay the people that work for ShapeWays. Please try to remember that.

Advice, relax some of your guidelines. Allow the printers to try and print models that used to print. And if you have to reject a model, be clear about what, and why. Because I've had a model rejected for thin wall issues, on a detail. Something supported by 3 actual walls. But your people simply refused to listen to me, and even stopped talking to me altogether on the subject. After telling me to please continue to email them my concerns. I had a model that was rejected, corrected file uploaded, rejected again, new corrected file uploaded, rejected again. Only this time I noticed something. the rejection pic's WERE FROM THE ORIGINAL FILE! And too boot, the first file, PRINTED IN WSF, but was rejected for FUD. And I have the model sitting on my desk to prove it. Funny thing is. I took that last updated corrected file, and uploaded it as a new model, and it's never been rejected since. And I didn't make a single change to that last file.

Doesn't sound very damm professional to me.

Bartv, if you can't tell, I'm pissed. And I'm a full blooded Bavarian, too boot. But I'm trying to hold my tongue.

Lets see if you or anyone else, NOT IN THE SERVICE TEAM, has the guts to explain all that to me. And I ain't the only one ShapeWays needs to be talking too either. This thread is loaded with designers and shop owners that are at witts end over it all.

Samantha
@TheVerse


I.D.I.C. = Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70657 is a reply to message #70641 ] Fri, 28 June 2013 15:16 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar chaos241  is currently offline chaos241
Messages: 1
Registered: March 2012
Go to my shop
Junior Member
I've had models rejected that were right at the minimums of the materials with new thicknesses that WERE NOWHERE TO BE FOUND.....they were made up tolerances. I've also had issues with models being printed and working perfectly when all of a sudden all sales of that model are rejected.....WHY? Because someone found a "error" which wasn't causing any issues whatsoever in my model.

The best was a model that came back rejected because it was three bodies but in reality someone screwed up and it was still a .stl file that was one model that I made.....I mean I had been printing it for MONTHS before this came up. It seems kinda pointless to run a check each time its printed. I would only check it the first time and if it passes print it and never check it again.

The other thing that really makes me mad is when I receive part of my model and part of someone else's but not the rest of mine. Are you really rushing production that much that you can't make sure all of my stuff makes it in the same bag?


The last thing that makes no sense..... what constitutes a "wall" vs. a "wire" and what length defines a "supported" wire vs. a "free wire"....I mean seriously who thought up all these terms then gave no definition and assumes the modelers can figure everything out.......
http://www.shapeways.com/materials/strong-flexible-design-gu idelines

Basically all a lot of us want is for our models to be approved. I know my models all fall within tolerances but someone magically decides that it isn't.. Then we call and argue with you and OH it will print......The best rejection I've had in a while is that your automated check reject a 1.5 in diam by 1 in model for being too large in WSF..........
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70658 is a reply to message #70641 ] Fri, 28 June 2013 15:16 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar uncommented  is currently offline uncommented
Messages: 9
Registered: December 2011
Go to my shop
Junior Member
Has anyone here ever used Sculpteo? Their upload and preview process seems a lot more user-friendly (and I'm currently ordering a few prints through them to test their quality) - maybe the Shapeways team should take a few pointers from them.

[Updated on: Fri, 28 June 2013 15:36 UTC] by Moderator

Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70661 is a reply to message #70657 ] Fri, 28 June 2013 16:29 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar GADesign  is currently offline GADesign
Messages: 100
Registered: January 2012
Go to my shop
Senior Member
I work at a high tech production facility with ( World Class Manufacturing / 9001 iso ) certification and still many mistakes happen. Murphy's law applies on everything, we are all humans (I've even seen robots getting confused)

I've had my deal of non/misprints and they've always handled it in a correct way by reprinting the product free of charge or refunding the costs. I believe that Shapeways does everything in their power to correct faults and mistakes and make sure they don't happen again in the future but on such a large scale they operate these days it's impossible to change things in a day/week/month.

Not all the problems that occure are Shapeways fault, imagine if they were negative towards us designers when we've designed a non-printable model that we've put up for sale Crying or Very Sad

Remember that shapeways together with the designers are making this all possible, they are not more important than us and vice versa.
There are plenty of other services and designers in this world and none of them are perfect.


If it doesn't look good it's not designed by us.
Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70665 is a reply to message #70661 ] Fri, 28 June 2013 17:42 UTC Go to previous messageGo to next message
avatar hunterseeker5  is currently offline hunterseeker5
Messages: 9
Registered: January 2012
Go to my shop
Junior Member
GADesign wrote on Fri, 28 June 2013 16:29

I work at a high tech production facility with ( World Class Manufacturing / 9001 iso ) certification and still many mistakes happen. Murphy's law applies on everything, we are all humans (I've even seen robots getting confused)

I've had my deal of non/misprints and they've always handled it in a correct way by reprinting the product free of charge or refunding the costs. I believe that Shapeways does everything in their power to correct faults and mistakes and make sure they don't happen again in the future but on such a large scale they operate these days it's impossible to change things in a day/week/month.

Not all the problems that occure are Shapeways fault, imagine if they were negative towards us designers when we've designed a non-printable model that we've put up for sale Crying or Very Sad

Remember that shapeways together with the designers are making this all possible, they are not more important than us and vice versa.
There are plenty of other services and designers in this world and none of them are perfect.





This counter-argument fails to address, or perhaps more appropriately ignores, some of the larger complaints:

1) We apparently don't have access to the full specs and definitions that the model screeners are working off of, so really we're fumbling around in the dark trying to guess whether or not something will print. Just as an example, what added height/width ratio converts something from a wire to a wall? What span length and grounding convert a supported wire from an unsupported wire?

2) Why can't we address issues before they cause irreparable harm and loss of face, not to mention finances, to customers?

3) Most of us test print and photograph models prior to selling them to assure printability. After doing this, try explaining to a customer why their order was screwed up for them.

4) Why when a "mistake" happens, why do we get a runaround from the CS people who are either unable or unwilling to fix it?

So I'm not entirely sure if you actually read through our grievances, or are just shilling for shapeways, but really your apologist statements fail to really see the issue thats actually being taken. I think all of us here are used to dealing with people, where mistakes can and do happen, but even if it were only that nobody should be accepting of your mistakes if you can't accept your own mistakes eg. model rejected based on something which was explicitly stated to be allowed (like multiple shells in SLS nylon) and when complaining for a correction you're politely told to go pound sand. Nobody is going to have sympathy for your "mistake" in that instance.

[Updated on: Fri, 28 June 2013 17:43 UTC]

Re: Preventing Rejections [message #70672 is a reply to message #70665 ] Fri, 28 June 2013 18:31 UTC Go to previous messageGo to previous message
avatar PeregrineStudios  is currently offline PeregrineStudios
Messages: 326
Registered: September 2012
Go to my shop
Senior Member
Hang on, now, hunterseeker. You have your complaints, and that's fine, and I'm with you to some degree, but slow down. There's a very big difference between complaining to Shapeways about issues that need attention, and actively accusing your fellow designers of shilling for Shapeways or being Shapeways apologists if they state that they have much fewer complaints. Let's have a little more respect in here.

bartv wrote on Fri, 28 June 2013 08:15

Hi all,

thanks for your candid feedback in this thread. Yes, rejections are a major issue and we share your pain - they cause us a lot of extra work (and frustration), too. The topic is on our radar and rest assured that the right people ARE reading these messages. I'm talking with our Product people right now to learn what we can share about our future plans here, and you can expect an update from us later today.

Also, if you ever feel that you're having a hard time getting through to us, please reach out to me or Natalia. We're here to advocate you, and are actively championing your issues in our product development groups. You literally can't bother us enough with issues that make you unhappy!

Thanks,

Bart


Thank you for weighing in here, Bart. I look forward to these updates that you can provide.

I DO have to mention one thing, though - eventually, the lip service will need concrete advances to back it up. There are quite a few issues that we've been told over and over - by you, by Natalia, by anyone - that are 'being looked at'. Now, many of those issues are aging rapidly, several months by my count, and still all we've heard is 'being looked at'. I think it may be time to open the doors and let us see EVERYTHING. What are you looking at? How? Why is it feasible, or not? What meetings have you had and with who? What companies or contractors have you contacted? This isn't specific to this thread, but for all issues that will apparently take several months to resolve. We as designers are not just 'customers' - we're a part of the structure of Shapeways, and we NEED to be kept in the loop - at any and all junctures, if I had my way. It's not enough to know that something is 'being looked at'. We need to know how, when, why, by who, and how frequently, and we need to know AS it happens so that we can keep the faith that these issues are being legitimately and fully looked over.

[Updated on: Fri, 28 June 2013 18:39 UTC]


Pages (15): [ «    1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15    »] 
   
Previous Topic:Suggestion for Shapeways
Next Topic:Add this 3D software to the 3D software list

Logo

Hello.

We're sorry to inform you that we no longer support this browser and can't confirm that everything will work as expected. For the best Shapeways experience, please use one of the following browsers:

Click anywhere outside this window to continue.