| 3D printing companies [message #31626] Tue, 26 July 2011 23:50 UTC |
 |
|
We all know shapeways and there print quality but what about there competitors? What has your experiences been with other companies. There pros, cons, price, and print quality?
I am curious because I hate FUD but I want to print a few models with that kind of detail. Would also be nice to find a company that would do drop shipping for some special clients.
No one company will be perfect at everything so I would love to here your stories.
Follow me on twitter http://twitter.com/mctrivia or my blog at http://4ddice.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
| Re: 3D printing companies [message #31629 is a reply to message #31626 ] Wed, 27 July 2011 01:33 UTC |
 |
|
It's SUPER simple.. every other company I've asked for a quote has told me 10x the price. No exception.
Patience, Persistance, Politeness - the 3Ps will help us get us to Perfect Printed Products
|
|
|
| Re: 3D printing companies [message #31630 is a reply to message #31629 ] Wed, 27 July 2011 01:42 UTC |
|
|
ponoko gave me half the price. But there minimum wall thickness is 1mm instead of .7mm for WSF
Follow me on twitter http://twitter.com/mctrivia or my blog at http://4ddice.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
| Re: 3D printing companies [message #31631 is a reply to message #31630 ] Wed, 27 July 2011 02:33 UTC |
|
|
Hey mctrivia,
I am surprised they offered at half price?
Does that include shipping? Did you have to pay a monthly subscription?
Also have you tested the print quality? As they use a different 3D manufacturer to 3D print their equivalent to WSF the prints are not as finely detailed and the surface finish not as smooth, nor is it a crisp white.
Duann Scott, Designer Evangelist, Shapeways
|
|
|
| Re: 3D printing companies [message #31633 is a reply to message #31631 ] Wed, 27 July 2011 02:55 UTC |
|
|
I did not go into 2 much detail in my search since there minimum wall thickness of 1mm automatically excludes them from my use.
Follow me on twitter http://twitter.com/mctrivia or my blog at http://4ddice.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
| i.materialise [message #31673 is a reply to message #31626 ] Wed, 27 July 2011 20:27 UTC |
|
|
pro:
- significantly lower prices on certain models & materials (30-50% and more)
- better color match & finish on color (no ugly yellow wax)
- pretty flexible on minimum wall (have printed steel and color items with 1.5 mm wall thicknesses)
- working feedback loop when a design is difficult to produce (no "your order has been cancelled"... !!)
- ship to any customer address
con:
- significantly higher prices on other models & materials
- complex pricing, not easy to comprehend/predict (no simple $/cm3 scheme, need to check each model)
- free shipping only starts at 99$/€
- somewhat slower on order processing & deliveries
- no on-site gallery/shopping (can also be seen as a pro!)
Take a look at their new "Prime Gray" STL material, it may be something for you. I would believe they are not too strict on the 1mm wall. It appears to be cheap, too.
|
|
|
| Re: i.materialise [message #31683 is a reply to message #31673 ] Thu, 28 July 2011 02:26 UTC |
|
|
what is the equivalent to WSF on i.materialize? polymide?
as a comparison I uploaded D6 Grid Die 14-2
Polymide was E26.6
Stainless was E25 (shapeways won't print this in steel and my guess is they won't either)
Prime Grey was E2.36
I am not sure on the conversion but I sell my models for less then these prices. Shapeways does seem to be the winner in price range other then ponoko and they don't seem to have the quality.
In fact in my research the only place it looks like that competition could be is I could buy a wax printer with 19um accuracy for a reasonable price and make wax casts for those here interested in doing there own casting.
[Updated on: Thu, 28 July 2011 02:38 UTC]
Follow me on twitter http://twitter.com/mctrivia or my blog at http://4ddice.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
| Re: i.materialise [message #31685 is a reply to message #31683 ] Thu, 28 July 2011 03:35 UTC |
|
|
Not to promote a rival company, but has anyone tried printing something in Prime Gray through i.materialise? How does it compare with Shapeways materials - is it roughly equivalent to Transparent Detail or Frosted Detail in surface quality/detail? I ask because I uploaded a part and it came in about 30% cheaper than FD. However, this may be more than offset by shipping charges, I don't know.
|
|
|
| Re: i.materialise [message #31686 is a reply to message #31685 ] Thu, 28 July 2011 03:42 UTC |
|
|
Just so you know Primary Grey has no suport material. Which means you nee to be careful about overhangs.
Follow me on twitter http://twitter.com/mctrivia or my blog at http://4ddice.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
| Re: i.materialise [message #31687 is a reply to message #31686 ] Thu, 28 July 2011 04:32 UTC |
|
|
Sure? Prime Grey, being SLA, should use the same material as support, which means cleaning and probably rough surface in the zones where the support structure contacted the main object. Scratch the "should", their PDF says exactly that, and shows a dog built with the transparent material as demo.
Shapeways offers no SLA tech currently. The similar materials are Polyamide (WSF, etc), Alumide, Multicolor (Sandstone), High detail resin (machines like White Detail, etc here but probably not the same exact resin), ABS (Grey robust), Silver and Stainless steel.
|
|
|
| Re: i.materialise [message #31688 is a reply to message #31687 ] Thu, 28 July 2011 06:05 UTC |
|
|
|
- please delete -
[Updated on: Mon, 01 August 2011 08:51 UTC]
Kind regards,
Mitchell Jetten
Customer Service Agent
Shapeways
|
|
|
| Re: i.materialise [message #31691 is a reply to message #31685 ] Thu, 28 July 2011 06:10 UTC |
|
|
|
I was wondering about the cheap price of this "Prime Gray" (Think, it's SLA!). I asked their support about layer thickness, the answer was the layer thickness is 0.5mm...
|
|
|
| Re: i.materialise [message #31692 is a reply to message #31691 ] Thu, 28 July 2011 06:20 UTC |
|
|
0.5mm... you will see a lot of stairstepping with that thickness
Greetings from the person that is traveling already for 1.5hours to the office
Kind regards,
Mitchell Jetten
Customer Service Agent
Shapeways
|
|
|
|
| Materials [message #31702 is a reply to message #31700 ] Thu, 28 July 2011 10:26 UTC |
|
|
Hey guys,
Let us know if this is the sort of material you are interested in?
Slight variations on what is already available?
Or would you prefer something totally different?
Duann Scott, Designer Evangelist, Shapeways
|
|
|
| Re: Materials [message #31707 is a reply to message #31702 ] Thu, 28 July 2011 10:42 UTC |
|
|
I'm not interested in this material, but I would like to see you guys offer Objet Connex service.
I don't know how you would go about allowing users to assign the different materials to the different objects in the build but being able to offer multiple materials in a single build would be attractive to a lot of people I would think.
for example:
[Updated on: Thu, 28 July 2011 10:44 UTC]
Philip Light
|
|
|
| Re: Materials [message #31708 is a reply to message #31707 ] Thu, 28 July 2011 10:57 UTC |
|
|
The Black, White and transparent detail we offer are all Objet materials.
We do not currently offer multi-material, as you mentioned the specification would be quite complex with the current file types.
Perhaps once AMF is adopted as a file option this would be easier to implement?
It is VERY cool technology.
Duann Scott, Designer Evangelist, Shapeways
|
|
|
| Re: Materials [message #31709 is a reply to message #31708 ] Thu, 28 July 2011 11:03 UTC |
|
|
Yep, AMF will be the answer once more apps support it. I imagine it will play nice with a web based service too since it's essentially xml based.
The imaterialise gray is the Somos Protogen material no?
Philip Light
|
|
|
| Re: Materials [message #31710 is a reply to message #31708 ] Thu, 28 July 2011 11:05 UTC |
|
|
multi material print could be easily described using multiple stl files zipped together and named by colour you want.
black 01.stl
red 01.stl
white01.stl
most cad software has the ability to make a model out of multiple files. And for models that already exist you can do boolions on a final product to take chunks out of the model to create the seperate parts.
Follow me on twitter http://twitter.com/mctrivia or my blog at http://4ddice.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
| Re: Materials [message #31721 is a reply to message #31710 ] Thu, 28 July 2011 15:23 UTC |
|
|
Having separate STL's for the materials is the current multi-material solution, but I don't like it at all because it prevents me from taking full advantage of the technology. It is also deceptive that they say 14 materials in a build. It's actually two, with different blending levels. Unfortunately you would need a different STL for each of the 14 materials if you wanted to make a gradient. If there were three material cartridges you might need around 200 STL files! Also, imagine the case where you want to make a skin of soft material over a hard shell. You have to make an STL with a wall thickness of a fraction of a mm on top of another one, perfectly smooth with no gaps. On a complicated shape you would quickly have millions of polygons.
Even when AMF is adopted we will still need the Objet machines to carry more than two materials, or else a separate machine would be needed for every combination to avoid the time, labor and waste involved in a material cartridge change. Why are they using those little cartridges, anyway?
There's a lot of work to be done, but man that action figure looks cool.
Aaron - 40westdesigns.com/blog
|
|
|
| Re: Materials [message #31722 is a reply to message #31710 ] Thu, 28 July 2011 15:29 UTC |
|
|
if your software handles booleans well...
Grrr. Blender 2.49... Bad Booleans! Bad, Bad Booleans!
Go to your room.
All I materialize materials are SLA. which means NO INTERLOCKS! that's my big reason for staying away...
That Prime Grey Is gorgeous, but that's gotta be enhanced by attentive nesting by the planner... poor rotation placement would REALLY ruin a print if you're relying on those smooth surfaces.
Thanks for listening,
-Lefty
www.shapeways.com/shops/lefty
|
|
|
| Re: Materials [message #31723 is a reply to message #31722 ] Thu, 28 July 2011 15:37 UTC |
|
|
@aeron203
- Objet used and defined the phrase "Digital Material" Liberally enough to make me comfortable with the context, but that's IMHO.
Oh, and the cartridge method is an artifact from the IBM XEROX days of business. It's more about generating a sustaining income from a large "one-time" sale.
The cartridge system means : proprietary material delivery
plus
modular design for "families" of products i.e. connex, eden, etc
plus
customer extension thru reorded.
It's old and predatory, but unfortunately it works in the american business enviroment, so it'll be tough to beat.
Thanks for listening,
-Lefty
www.shapeways.com/shops/lefty
|
|
|
| Re: 3D printing companies [message #31724 is a reply to message #31626 ] Thu, 28 July 2011 15:44 UTC |
|
|
|
Because of the FUD delay, I had to find an alternative source recently. There's a guy in PA that has helped us with every rush order lately. Small and personal business, unlike the other ones where you send them your files and wait hoping they got them and will come back with a quote. I usually chat with him on google chat, when I'm about to order, when I send him the files to be sure he can use them, and when they are shipping/shipped to see when I'm getting them. And the prices aren't terrible, still 2-5 times for the items I needed. http://www.printo3d.com/
[Updated on: Thu, 28 July 2011 15:45 UTC]
The Mad Moder
michael@shapeways.com
|
|
|
| Re: 3D printing companies [message #31728 is a reply to message #31724 ] Thu, 28 July 2011 16:02 UTC |
|
|
| Youknowwho4eva wrote on Thu, 28 July 2011 15:44 |
Because of the FUD delay, I had to find an alternative source recently. There's a guy in PA that has helped us with every rush order lately. Small and personal business, unlike the other ones where you send them your files and wait hoping they got them and will come back with a quote. I usually chat with him on google chat, when I'm about to order, when I send him the files to be sure he can use them, and when they are shipping/shipped to see when I'm getting them. And the prices aren't terrible, still 2-5 times for the items I needed. http://www.printo3d.com/
|
What machine(s?) are they using/offer? I'm in PA too but on the other side of the box.
Philip Light
|
|
|
| Re: 3D printing companies [message #31733 is a reply to message #31728 ] Thu, 28 July 2011 16:47 UTC |
|
|
| phildlight wrote on Thu, 28 July 2011 16:02 |
What machine(s?) are they using/offer? I'm in PA too but on the other side of the box.
|
He uses Dimension printers on site, and outsources many other materials.
The Mad Moder
michael@shapeways.com
|
|
|
| Re: Materials [message #31748 is a reply to message #31707 ] Thu, 28 July 2011 19:43 UTC |
|
|
|
I'm working on editor tools that allow you to specify a material per-voxel.(think 3D pixels) This would allow for the creation multiple material objects. I still need to wok out how best to export these files to a printer. We don't really have native voxel format to send to the printers. When I have some working prototypes I'll make an announcement.
[Updated on: Thu, 28 July 2011 19:49 UTC]
Director 3D Tools
|
|
|
|
| Re: 3D printing companies [message #31755 is a reply to message #31749 ] Thu, 28 July 2011 21:36 UTC |
|
|
Multiple materials.
YESSSSSSSSSSSS.
Duann Scott, Designer Evangelist, Shapeways
|
|
|
| Re: 3D printing companies [message #31757 is a reply to message #31755 ] Thu, 28 July 2011 21:52 UTC |
|
|
We need to start a discussion with the printer manufactures about how they would like multiple material files specified. Clearly the multiple STL route is not going to work very well. Not certain I really like the STL2 type spec someone sent around it seems more complicated then necessary. Basic question is what formats they will support in their software for the specification of multiple materials. I'll ask around at Siggraph and see if anyone has a good answer.
You could reuse a triangle based format and its material definition. Ie basically provide a mapping from 3D visual material to physical material. If the material is RED use rubber, if BLUE use metal etc.
Or you could just add a new PhysicalMaterial node to X3D/VRML/STL etc that would give the material. Still would need to separate out each shell into separate materials but at least it wouldn't be different files.
Director 3D Tools
|
|
|
|
| Re: 3D printing companies [message #31761 is a reply to message #31758 ] Thu, 28 July 2011 22:22 UTC |
|
|
thanks that was the format I reviewed named "stl2".
There are a few things I don't like about it:
The addition of the curved triangles makes it much harder to implement. Its a feature I haven't seen in any other fileformats and feel unnecessary. Having to implement that will slow its adoption.
Having textures being only inline instead of being able to reference an external file/url is annoying. Basically we'd have to convert all textures provided with the content into this bloated form. Why not just use .zip packaging with local references.
Formulas are kinda cool pixel/vertex shader type functionality. But again its overly complex for what I feel is needed. If shaders are desired why not use a standard already like GLSL that it accelerated by 3D hardware for viewing. As it stands if this language doesn't map well to shader operations in both OpenGL and DirectX then it won't render well at all for 3D viewers.
If those features where removed or profiled to a higher support level then I could see implementing it.
Director 3D Tools
|
|
|
| Re: 3D printing companies [message #31763 is a reply to message #31626 ] Thu, 28 July 2011 22:51 UTC |
|
|
|
I have to say I've signed up with other similar companies, but their websites are never as simple and reliable as shapeways, so I rarely use them. The upload and viewing is quick and informative. As long as they get this backlog in order, I can't see me needing to use anybody else in future.
|
|
|
| Re: 3D printing companies [message #31783 is a reply to message #31761 ] Fri, 29 July 2011 07:25 UTC |
|
|
Curved triangles was the main thing that had me excited about stl2. Most of the stuff I do is very curvy, and I'm always running up against triangle count limits.
For the future of 3d on the web, something like curved triangles seems very important as well: unless bandwidth increases by large amounts, sitting through download of a 3d file is going to be an annoyance for anyone viewing 3d on the web. With curved triangles, the file sizes can be much much smaller.
|
|
|
| Re: 3D printing companies [message #31802 is a reply to message #31783 ] Fri, 29 July 2011 16:12 UTC |
|
|
My concern is that this concept has not appeared in any 3d fileformats I've seen before. That means it will not be adopted quickly. It might be the best way to handle the problem. But it isn't going to get adopted quickly. I've been through the creation of VRML,X3D and COLLADA so I've familiar with the adoption curves. The easier a format is the faster and more adoption rate it gets. There is a reason that STL is popular for 3D printing, its dead simple to implement.
I expect that we can get triangle counts up reasonably quickly. Or we may goto a voxel(3D pixel) format. As we get closer to one triangle per voxel it will be cheaper to just deal with voxels.
How many triangles are your models coming out right now and what modeling package do you use?
Director 3D Tools
|
|
|
| Re: 3D printing companies [message #31810 is a reply to message #31802 ] Fri, 29 July 2011 19:03 UTC |
|
|
i agree. stl is nice. It is so simple I have writen my own software to read, write and manipulate the files.
Follow me on twitter http://twitter.com/mctrivia or my blog at http://4ddice.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
| Re: 3D printing companies [message #31817 is a reply to message #31810 ] Fri, 29 July 2011 19:40 UTC |
|
|
It is a tradeoff. Because STL doesn't support an indexing mode the files are larger then they need to be. But then again they just work which is nice.
Director 3D Tools
|
|
|
| Re: 3D printing companies [message #31819 is a reply to message #31817 ] Fri, 29 July 2011 19:58 UTC |
|
|
Just indexing would cut down to 10 to 40% of current file size. For this reason I index all files while loading into ram. Drastically cuts down ram usage a well as the number of points I need to alter per transform. A stl 1.5 with this feature would be nice.
Follow me on twitter http://twitter.com/mctrivia or my blog at http://4ddice.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
| Re: 3D printing companies [message #31820 is a reply to message #31819 ] Fri, 29 July 2011 20:13 UTC |
|
|
Internally we use the X3D file format. We use the Interchange profile which is a very small slice of the specification made for geometry interchange. Still more to implement then STL but since I wrote part of that spec I'm more familiar with it.
We do the same operation, we index the incoming STL to reduce memory and processing time.
Director 3D Tools
|
|
|
| Re: 3D printing companies [message #31844 is a reply to message #31626 ] Sat, 30 July 2011 05:25 UTC |
|
|
I'd like to see an improvement in Steel wall thickness allowance... iMaterialise is better in this area, but Shapeways has a far better web presence and model selection.
Specifically, my most recent co-creator idea would be something like http://shpws.me/2LqA - but at the moment Silver is a bit overkill for a vanity house key.
Oh well, the technology is improving every day. We'll get there soon enough!
|
|
|
|
Search
.
