Search Search  
Today's Messages (ON)  | Unanswered Messages (OFF)

Forum: Official Announcements
 Topic: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99643 is a reply to message #99524 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 00:02 UTC
avatar Silverbeam  is currently offline Silverbeam
Messages: 157
Registered: August 2009
Go to my shop
Senior Member
shapeways

Don't forget that there are actually TONS more models you are not taking into account because they are items placed into a single file.

so say a shop that does bigger one shell files, and then shops like me with LESS files but tons of shells don't equal out on how you should count it.

If you went by number of shells rather then number of files when you think about your "Price drop for majority of items" then it is entirely different.

I do agree that work should be taken into account, I think it's a bit too extreme.

If you truly believe that this is the best way to do it, then you should really sell the value of items that have jumped up in price. Will you put more time then you do now into orders with multiple files so their are less mistakes? will you make sure that items will be given better orientation when allowed? anything else to make the price jump on items seem worth it?


SEE ETSY SHOP: http://www.etsy.com/shop/Silverbeam
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99644 is a reply to message #99636 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 00:03 UTC
avatar AlanHudson  is currently offline AlanHudson
Messages: 144
Registered: March 2010
Go to my shop
Senior Member
I work here
If by linked objects you mean something like chainmail where 2 links are intertwined then yes. The intertwined parts are considered 1 part so you pay $1.50 fixed cost. The unlinked 2 parts would pay $1.50 per part. If your linking something together to reduce per-part costs then just use the smallest linkage you can to keep the shrinkwrap volume down.

henryseg wrote on Tue, 30 September 2014 23:49

Thanks Alan, that makes sense about shrink wrapping.

Again, is there any difference in the pricing structure between two linked objects and two unlinked objects?


Director 3D Tools
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99645 is a reply to message #99642 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 00:04 UTC
avatar PeregrineStudios  is currently offline PeregrineStudios
Messages: 318
Registered: September 2012
Go to my shop
Senior Member
My main hope here is that if Shapeways backpedals on the WSF pricing, it won't ALSO do so on the new Stainless Steel pricing. Luckily, it seems as though those two pricing models are NOT connected to one another, so that shouldn't be the case.

AlanHudson wrote on Wed, 01 October 2014 00:03

If by linked objects you mean something like chainmail where 2 links are intertwined then yes. The intertwined parts are considered 1 part so you pay $1.50 fixed cost. The unlinked 2 parts would pay $1.50 per part. If your linking something together to reduce per-part costs then just use the smallest linkage you can to keep the shrinkwrap volume down.

henryseg wrote on Tue, 30 September 2014 23:49

Thanks Alan, that makes sense about shrink wrapping.

Again, is there any difference in the pricing structure between two linked objects and two unlinked objects?




So the automatic pricing software is 'smart' enough to tell the difference between 'intertwined' models and unlinked models?

Colour me impressed.

[Updated on: Wed, 01 October 2014 00:05 UTC]

Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99646 is a reply to message #99614 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 00:06 UTC
avatar RayP1949  is currently offline RayP1949
Messages: 3
Registered: April 2014
Go to all my models
Junior Member
Shapeways

Here is an interesting costing issue.

Given that nosomosnada seems to be being penalised for the inside space of his model being too small to contain another print i.e. (<40mm) then how do you explain this:

The inside dimension of this fascia mount is 23mm x 23mm (not counting the rounded corners) but the cost breakup for WSF is as follows:

Labour $6:00
Material Volume: $0.46
Machine Space: $1.81

There doesn't seem to be any penalty for the small inside space, not that I am asking for one...

Also as can be seen from the screen grab this is not a complicated item, the unused powder will simply fall out, so where does the $6:00 labour charge come from?

[Updated on: Wed, 01 October 2014 02:22 UTC]

Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99648 is a reply to message #99640 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 00:09 UTC
avatar AlanHudson  is currently offline AlanHudson
Messages: 144
Registered: March 2010
Go to my shop
Senior Member
I work here
Empty space is wasted space for us. It's directly related to machine time. The less wasted space per tray the cheaper it is to produce items. Ie we can either pack one tray at 100% or 2 trays at 50%.

What if we called the metric "Packability". Ie we are computing how well your object interacts with other ones. A metric for packability would be density. The more dense your model the more packable it is. But this doesn't really account for whether you can actually pack things inside it. This shrinkwrap operation is trying to make a better packability metric then density.

javelin98 wrote on Tue, 30 September 2014 23:56

AlanHudson wrote on Tue, 30 September 2014 23:24

In the larger case we can pack objects inside your object so we are not charging you for the machine space. For the smaller version we can't so it fills it in.


So... you're charging us for empty space, as well as actual material used?

Seriously?

It might make more sense to charge for "machine time", than for some weird virtual shrink-wrapping operation. I could see that making some rational sense.



Director 3D Tools
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99649 is a reply to message #99648 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 00:12 UTC
avatar Brian_Richardson  is currently offline Brian_Richardson
Messages: 50
Registered: February 2013
Go to my shop
Member
So basically this price change is in favor of small, dense objects, that in no way take advantage of what can be accomplished with 3d printing.

[Updated on: Wed, 01 October 2014 00:12 UTC]

Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99650 is a reply to message #99649 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 00:14 UTC
avatar Mid7night  is currently offline Mid7night
Messages: 29
Registered: July 2010
Go to my shop
Junior Member
Brian_Richardson wrote on Wed, 01 October 2014 00:12

So basically this price change is in favor of small, dense objects, that in no way take advantage of what can be accomplished with 3d printing.


NAILED IT.
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99651 is a reply to message #99595 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 00:18 UTC
avatar Themikepeng  is currently offline Themikepeng
Messages: 15
Registered: February 2013
Go to my shop
Junior Member
This is just unacceptable...
my models are almost all doubled and im gonna have to close my store if this sticks...
PETITION: https://www.change.org/p/shapeways-stop-raising-3d-printing- costs
god save us all...
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99652 is a reply to message #99644 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 00:18 UTC
avatar henryseg  is currently offline henryseg
Messages: 208
Registered: July 2008
Go to my shop
Senior Member
AlanHudson wrote on Wed, 01 October 2014 00:03

If by linked objects you mean something like chainmail where 2 links are intertwined then yes. The intertwined parts are considered 1 part so you pay $1.50 fixed cost. The unlinked 2 parts would pay $1.50 per part. If your linking something together to reduce per-part costs then just use the smallest linkage you can to keep the shrinkwrap volume down.


Thanks Alan, this seems to be working for my linked models (yes, like chainmail). Although one of my files has 11 unlinked parts, but is getting charged $4.50 for labor, so I guess it isn't perfect.
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99653 is a reply to message #99595 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 00:19 UTC
avatar Themikepeng  is currently offline Themikepeng
Messages: 15
Registered: February 2013
Go to my shop
Junior Member
this is just unacceptable...
my prices are almost all doubled...if this sticks, im gonna have to close my store
https://www.change.org/p/shapeways-stop-raising-3d-printing- costs
god save us all...
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99654 is a reply to message #99652 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 00:19 UTC
avatar Brian_Richardson  is currently offline Brian_Richardson
Messages: 50
Registered: February 2013
Go to my shop
Member
Was just about to make a petition myself.
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99655 is a reply to message #99649 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 00:20 UTC
avatar PeregrineStudios  is currently offline PeregrineStudios
Messages: 318
Registered: September 2012
Go to my shop
Senior Member
Brian_Richardson wrote on Wed, 01 October 2014 00:12

So basically this price change is in favor of small, dense objects, that in no way take advantage of what can be accomplished with 3d printing.


I hate to be like this, but if you want to push the limits of 'what can be accomplished with 3D printing', then buy your own printer. Shapeways IS a business and businesses NEED to make fiscally responsible decisions. I COULD charge my customers less for my products, which would certainly make them happy - and then my prices would fail to account for things like overhead, and my business would suffer because I was fiscally irresponsible.

Of course, you could argue that driving away this many current customers, albeit with a more realistic pricing model, is indeed very irresponsible. I'm just being devil's advocate :P
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99656 is a reply to message #99639 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 00:23 UTC
avatar AlanHudson  is currently offline AlanHudson
Messages: 144
Registered: March 2010
Go to my shop
Senior Member
I work here
Chatting with our production folks it sounds like loops are a better answer. Basically enclosing cages that don't add blemishes. I'm looking to see if I can find a public model that shows it off. We have a prototype that automatically calculates ones that we'll share soon as well. Think of it as a net that holds your objects into one space. The larger your objects the less larger the holes in the net can be and hence less cost for the net. See the attached image for an example.

index.php?t=getfile&id=72850&private=0

[quote title=Mid7night wrote on Tue, 30 September 2014 23:55]
AlanHudson wrote on Tue, 30 September 2014 23:37

I checked 2046066

Are you serious? SPRU a 3D-printed part? 3D-printing is supposed to get away from that kind of mentality. I can't think of a better way to take the technology BACKWARDS.

  • Attachment: net.png
    (Size: 104.73KB, Downloaded 667 time(s))


Director 3D Tools
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99658 is a reply to message #99655 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 00:25 UTC
avatar Brian_Richardson  is currently offline Brian_Richardson
Messages: 50
Registered: February 2013
Go to my shop
Member
I've looked into buying a printer, but thanks to the repressive patent system in the US, there are no SLS printers that cost less than a house, and most consumer printers are complete garbage, or have a tiny build area. Best I found was a Projet 160, and that's around $20,000.
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99659 is a reply to message #99524 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 00:26 UTC
avatar Themikepeng  is currently offline Themikepeng
Messages: 15
Registered: February 2013
Go to my shop
Junior Member
This is not fair for shopowners or customers, since my models are so undense to try to save costs, and now there is no way... everyone is losing money except for shapeways, and i won't even be able to sell my stuff without a markup... and BTW I am in the model railroad part of 3d printing and i think guys like us are hit the hardest with our models impossible to produce outside of 3d printing, but our models are the least dense and are already expensive even with our efforts to hollow stuff out... maybe ill just waste $1000 on my own 3d printer then
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99660 is a reply to message #99646 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 00:26 UTC
avatar AlanHudson  is currently offline AlanHudson
Messages: 144
Registered: March 2010
Go to my shop
Senior Member
I work here
The labor of $6 sounds like you have 4 separate parts in one file. But looking at the image it looks like one part to me. Can you send me the modelID of the part so I can check its accurate? If you copy the browser menubar when looking at a model it will tell me the id, something like this:

https://www.shapeways.com/model/upload-and-buy/2691711


RayP1949 wrote on Wed, 01 October 2014 00:06

Shapeways

Here is an interesting costing issue.

Given that nosomosnada seems to be being penalised for the inside space of his model being too small to contain another print i.e. (<40mm) then how do you explain this:

The inside dimension of this fascia mount is 23mm x 23mm (not counting the rounded corners) but the cost breakup for WSF is as follows:

Labour $6:00
Material Volume: $0.46
Machine Space: $1.81

There doesn't seem to be any penalty for the small inside space, not that I am asking for one...

Also as can be seen from the screen grab this is not a complicated item, the unused powder will simply fall out, so where does the $6:00 labour charge come from?




Director 3D Tools
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99661 is a reply to message #99638 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 00:27 UTC
avatar zyros  is currently offline zyros
Messages: 1
Registered: April 2012
Go to all my models
Junior Member
I'm really, really not an expert when it comes to determining costs, but I have a relatively large (body parts for a 1/6 scale human figure), multi-part (around 30 pieces) model that, with the new pricing, dropped from 180$ to 110$ to print. That said, I don't print in any of the affected materials, but I figured it was worth mentioning.
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99662 is a reply to message #99658 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 00:28 UTC
avatar PeregrineStudios  is currently offline PeregrineStudios
Messages: 318
Registered: September 2012
Go to my shop
Senior Member
Brian_Richardson wrote on Wed, 01 October 2014 00:25

I've looked into buying a printer, but thanks to the repressive patent system in the US, there are no SLS printers that cost less than a house, and most consumer printers are complete garbage, or have a tiny build area. Best I found was a Projet 160, and that's around $20,000.


I feel your pain. I've got a B9Creator, but of course it uses stereolithography - good for some uses, awful for others.

There are of course other 3D services out there, using the same or similar printers that Shapeways does. They're much less of an easy 'click and print' interface; ie, email them an .stl, get a quote, etc. but they are out there.


Themikepeng wrote on Wed, 01 October 2014 00:26

This is not fair for shopowners or customers, since my models are so undense to try to save costs, and now there is no way... everyone is losing money except for shapeways, and i won't even be able to sell my stuff without a markup... and BTW I am in the model railroad part of 3d printing and i think guys like us are hit the hardest with our models impossible to produce outside of 3d printing, but our models are the least dense and are already expensive even with our efforts to hollow stuff out... maybe ill just waste $1000 on my own 3d printer then


In fairness, if your models do very well, then it's not wasted at all. A one-time cost can always be amortized over however long you need it to, and - much as I like using Shapeways - it saves a LOT of money and a LOT of time and a LOT of stress in the long run by cutting out the middle man. I use Shapeways because Stainless Steel printers simply do not exist anywhere. If were producing miniatures like yours, I'd probably be using a stereolithography printer of my own.

[Updated on: Wed, 01 October 2014 00:31 UTC]

Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99663 is a reply to message #99659 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 00:28 UTC
avatar Themikepeng  is currently offline Themikepeng
Messages: 15
Registered: February 2013
Go to my shop
Junior Member
Themikepeng wrote on Wed, 01 October 2014 00:26

This is not fair for shopowners or customers, since my models are so undense to try to save costs, and now there is no way... everyone is losing money except for shapeways, and i won't even be able to sell my stuff without a markup... and BTW I am in the model railroad part of 3d printing and i think guys like us are hit the hardest with our models impossible to produce outside of 3d printing, but our models are the least dense and are already expensive even with our efforts to hollow stuff out... maybe ill just waste $1000 on my own 3d printer then

in a nutshell, this is the most unfair to those of us who make model railroad equipment since our stuff cannot be produced outside of 3d printing and our stuff NEEDS to be hollowed, and this price raise basically kills the model railroad community on shapeways
EDIT: and also because our stuff is ALMOST ALL in WSF material
EDIT: I guess I should give a bit of background info: I spent the whole summer designing miniature models that many of us bus lovers wanted, and I ended up with about 15 different models. In addition, I jeopardized my summer exam studies to devote hours to 3d modeling and give the community what they wanted. On top of that, I did some high-demand rapid transit models. Now i'm basically told that ALMOST ALL my stuff is unsellable just a month later. I don't see how anyone can call this fair, especially since there seems to be quite a scale model community on SW, who are probably designing similarly shaped models. The puzzle-designing community seems to be affected as well. If prices are returned, I will give millions of thanks.

[Updated on: Wed, 01 October 2014 00:37 UTC]

Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99664 is a reply to message #99639 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 00:30 UTC
avatar minimaker  is currently offline minimaker
Messages: 57
Registered: March 2010
Go to all my models
Member
Hello Shapeways,

Ugh, one week to redesign stuff. Bad timing as I'm about to start a fairly tough software training course and I don't really have the time for this. I do understand the basic idea behind the pricing but would have liked to have gotten more time to plan when to make changes.

Can you tell us more about wrapping as mentioned here? And how that affects the costs? That could perhaps helps some of the people here.
https://www.shapeways.com/tutorials/design-for-low-cost-3d-p rinting-sls-nylon?etId=21415293&utm_source=sw-email-0&am p;am p;utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20140930-make&ca=ema il&ct=20140930-make

The join form does not seem to work any more by the way. I just get a page that additional authorization is needed to use that form.

Best regards,
Ming-Hua

[Updated on: Wed, 01 October 2014 09:49 UTC]

Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99667 is a reply to message #99652 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 00:39 UTC
avatar AlanHudson  is currently offline AlanHudson
Messages: 144
Registered: March 2010
Go to my shop
Senior Member
I work here
It's possible for our routines to under count part count but it should never over count it. If anyone finds an instance of it over counting please tell me and we'll find out why and fix it.

henryseg wrote on Wed, 01 October 2014 00:18

AlanHudson wrote on Wed, 01 October 2014 00:03

If by linked objects you mean something like chainmail where 2 links are intertwined then yes. The intertwined parts are considered 1 part so you pay $1.50 fixed cost. The unlinked 2 parts would pay $1.50 per part. If your linking something together to reduce per-part costs then just use the smallest linkage you can to keep the shrinkwrap volume down.


Thanks Alan, this seems to be working for my linked models (yes, like chainmail). Although one of my files has 11 unlinked parts, but is getting charged $4.50 for labor, so I guess it isn't perfect.



Director 3D Tools
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99668 is a reply to message #99524 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 00:42 UTC
avatar MrNib  is currently offline MrNib
Messages: 533
Registered: November 2012
Go to my shop
Senior Member
I'm not sure things are being calculated properly with regards to gaps and packing efficiency. If I understand things correctly there should be a negative price impact for multiple parts in a file separated by less than 40mm because bounding box or something something something.

20x20x20mm cubes in WSF

https://images.shapeways.com/model/picture/190x153_2720901_6826405_1412121426.jpg
1 cube
$12.70
$5.97 Soon


https://images.shapeways.com/model/picture/190x153_2720905_6826418_1412121499.jpg
2 cubes separated by 1mm
$23.90
$11.94 Soon

https://images.shapeways.com/model/picture/190x153_2720930_6826586_1412122600.jpg
2 cubes separated by 20mm
$23.89
$11.94 Soon

https://images.shapeways.com/model/picture/190x153_2720907_6826430_1412121600.jpg
2 cubes separated by 41mm
$23.90
$11.94 Soon

https://images.shapeways.com/model/picture/190x153_2720912_6826435_1412121660.jpg
2 cubes separated by 81mm
$23.90
$11.94 Soon

Based on those numbers a designer has no incentive to pack multiple parts efficiently in their design file?
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99669 is a reply to message #99524 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 00:43 UTC
avatar nervoussystem  is currently offline nervoussystem
Messages: 101
Registered: July 2008
Go to my shop
Senior Member
It seems like when there are multiple parts in a file, the "machine volume" of each part is calculated separately. This leads to a much larger machine volume than is realistic in the case where parts nestle together.

Think for instance of a set of cups that sit inside one another. The machine volume should only be the size of the largest cup. However, it looks like you are calculating it as the sum of all the cups.

which makes no sense and discourages designers from making space conscious nesting of their parts.

I tested this by uploading a set of nesting rectangular cups. The reported machine volume is larger than the bounding box of my entire model!

[Updated on: Wed, 01 October 2014 14:02 UTC]


http://n-e-r-v-o-u-s.com
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99673 is a reply to message #99668 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 00:58 UTC
avatar AlanHudson  is currently offline AlanHudson
Messages: 144
Registered: March 2010
Go to my shop
Senior Member
I work here
We are splitting your upload into separate parts and then calculating the shrinkwrap of each. So when the parts are separated there is no incentive to pack them closely. Only if you are making a single combined part by wrapping them together or spruing would you want to pack them close.

MrNib wrote on Wed, 01 October 2014 00:42

I'm not sure things are being calculated properly with regards to gaps and packing efficiency. If I understand things correctly there should be a negative price impact for multiple parts in a file separated by less than 40mm because bounding box or something something something.

20x20x20mm cubes in WSF

https://images.shapeways.com/model/picture/190x153_2720901_6826405_1412121426.jpg
1 cube
$12.70
$5.97 Soon


https://images.shapeways.com/model/picture/190x153_2720905_6826418_1412121499.jpg
2 cubes separated by 1mm
$23.90
$11.94 Soon

https://images.shapeways.com/model/picture/190x153_2720930_6826586_1412122600.jpg
2 cubes separated by 20mm
$23.89
$11.94 Soon

https://images.shapeways.com/model/picture/190x153_2720907_6826430_1412121600.jpg
2 cubes separated by 41mm
$23.90
$11.94 Soon

https://images.shapeways.com/model/picture/190x153_2720912_6826435_1412121660.jpg
2 cubes separated by 81mm
$23.90
$11.94 Soon

Based on those numbers a designer has no incentive to pack multiple parts efficiently in their design file?


Director 3D Tools
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99674 is a reply to message #99673 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 01:01 UTC
avatar Mid7night  is currently offline Mid7night
Messages: 29
Registered: July 2010
Go to my shop
Junior Member
So a designer goes out of their way to pack their model efficiently, and you go out of your way to pull it apart and charge them as if it was a larger less efficient model?! Could this pricing method make any LESS sense?


AlanHudson wrote on Wed, 01 October 2014 00:58

We are splitting your upload into separate parts and then calculating the shrinkwrap of each. So when the parts are separated there is no incentive to pack them closely. Only if you are making a single combined part by wrapping them together or spruing would you want to pack them close.

MrNib wrote on Wed, 01 October 2014 00:42

I'm not sure things are being calculated properly with regards to gaps and packing efficiency. If I understand things correctly there should be a negative price impact for multiple parts in a file separated by less than 40mm because bounding box or something something something.

20x20x20mm cubes in WSF

https://images.shapeways.com/model/picture/190x153_2720901_6826405_1412121426.jpg
1 cube
$12.70
$5.97 Soon


https://images.shapeways.com/model/picture/190x153_2720905_6826418_1412121499.jpg
2 cubes separated by 1mm
$23.90
$11.94 Soon

https://images.shapeways.com/model/picture/190x153_2720930_6826586_1412122600.jpg
2 cubes separated by 20mm
$23.89
$11.94 Soon

https://images.shapeways.com/model/picture/190x153_2720907_6826430_1412121600.jpg
2 cubes separated by 41mm
$23.90
$11.94 Soon

https://images.shapeways.com/model/picture/190x153_2720912_6826435_1412121660.jpg
2 cubes separated by 81mm
$23.90
$11.94 Soon

Based on those numbers a designer has no incentive to pack multiple parts efficiently in their design file?



Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99675 is a reply to message #99669 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 01:05 UTC
avatar AlanHudson  is currently offline AlanHudson
Messages: 144
Registered: March 2010
Go to my shop
Senior Member
I work here
That does seem counter intuitive. Let me discuss with the team about maxing the volume out at the bounds of the uploaded object. We do split the parts, calculate the shrinkwrap and then sum the volumes. It's not certain that we will actually pack the tray with your parts nestled together, but it seems reasonable to me that we'd cap the machine volume cost to that as it is possible.

nervoussystem wrote on Wed, 01 October 2014 00:43

It seems like when there are multiple parts in a file, the "machine volume" of each part is calculated separately. This leads to a much larger machine volume than is realistic in the case where parts nestle together.

Think for instance of a set of cups that sit inside one another. The machine volume should only be the size of the largest cup. However, it looks like you are calculating it as the sum of all the cups.

which makes no sense and discourages designers from making space conscious nesting of their parts.

I tested this by uploading a set of nesting rectangular cups. The reported machine volume is larger than the bounding box of my entire model!


Director 3D Tools
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99676 is a reply to message #99656 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 01:05 UTC
avatar Mid7night  is currently offline Mid7night
Messages: 29
Registered: July 2010
Go to my shop
Junior Member
Also, this whole looping exercise seems like another waste of material, and it assumes that your model has holes to thread the loops through which may or may not be true. I remember a time when Shapeways actually told designers to STOP putting boxes around their models because it messed with their printing and pricing process. How is this different?


[quote title=AlanHudson wrote on Wed, 01 October 2014 00:23]Chatting with our production folks it sounds like loops are a better answer. Basically enclosing cages that don't add blemishes. I'm looking to see if I can find a public model that shows it off. We have a prototype that automatically calculates ones that we'll share soon as well. Think of it as a net that holds your objects into one space. The larger your objects the less larger the holes in the net can be and hence less cost for the net. See the attached image for an example.

index.php?t=getfile&id=72850&private=0

Mid7night wrote on Tue, 30 September 2014 23:55

AlanHudson wrote on Tue, 30 September 2014 23:37

I checked 2046066

Are you serious? SPRU a 3D-printed part? 3D-printing is supposed to get away from that kind of mentality. I can't think of a better way to take the technology BACKWARDS.



Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99677 is a reply to message #99667 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 01:06 UTC
avatar henryseg  is currently offline henryseg
Messages: 208
Registered: July 2008
Go to my shop
Senior Member
Are all calculations on existing models supposed to have been done already? I have some models without new prices, and "machine space" of 0.
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99678 is a reply to message #99524 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 01:07 UTC
avatar dcyale is currently online dcyale
Messages: 114
Registered: February 2013
Go to my shop
Senior Member
TO OTHER DESIGNERS: If you discover techniques to lower the cost, or minimize the increase in cost, of your models please share so we can pool out collective experience and try to figure out this new system.

TO SHAPEWAYS:

I have no problem if shapeways realized that it had to change pricing to reflects costs more accurately.

But I have a problem with a couple things-

Stop sounding like a bunch of US politicians around election time and somehow try to spin this as a benefit. It sounds like you have a bunch of talking points written by public opinion "experts" and marketing weenies. I see enough of this on TV with the upcoming elections.

You say the vast majority of models got cheaper. What about the cost of models that actually sold last month? Are you saying that the sales paid to shapeways for the sale of WSF material will decrease because of the new pricing structure? What if the old and new prices are compared for total WSF models sold last month? I bet that isn't a net decrease.

Be honest, charge what a model costs plus profit. Don't try to say you are doing it for your customer's benefit. I expect you to be a business and make a fair profit on what you make.

Second, one week to make the changes is not appropriate. I have several WSF models I can easily sprue together and scrunch up to minimize the bounding box. Most of my WSF models are sprued together already, but I guess I have to make them more dense as they are going up in price anyway. I'm happy to make the changes if it will help keep the costs down for my customers. But that takes time. To get them all modified and re-uploaded (and reset to unprinted status thank you very much) in a week is not possible. I have a real job and this is part time. A month would be more realistic.

Of course a little more information on the pricing would help, too. Now it seem like my best bet it to make the different sub-models within a WSF model as close as I can. Doesn't that just make it harder to clean, though? Doesn't that actually increase labor costs? I hate the idea of making the sub-models (if you don't understand what I mean by sub-model look at the screen shot) closer and tighter, and then finding out I somehow increased the price.

And I'm really missing the old mark up system where the designer could add the mark up amount, not the total price. Fixing all this is a real pain.

Dave Yale


index.php?t=getfile&id=72851&private=0

  • Attachment: chairs.jpg
    (Size: 71.97KB, Downloaded 483 time(s))

Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99679 is a reply to message #99678 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 01:13 UTC
avatar Themikepeng  is currently offline Themikepeng
Messages: 15
Registered: February 2013
Go to my shop
Junior Member
Im closing my shop PERIOD, this is too much for me, i spill my guts out making ho scale stuff for the community only to have SW raise them to an unsellable price a month later regardless of markup, i'm done with shapeways if this is how its gonna be, double the price of everything in my shop, maybe one day personal 3d printers will get affordable, BYE
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99680 is a reply to message #99677 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 01:19 UTC
avatar AlanHudson  is currently offline AlanHudson
Messages: 144
Registered: March 2010
Go to my shop
Senior Member
I work here
All models should of been processed. If you can send me the modelID of the models I can take a look at them.

henryseg wrote on Wed, 01 October 2014 01:06

Are all calculations on existing models supposed to have been done already? I have some models without new prices, and "machine space" of 0.


Director 3D Tools
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99681 is a reply to message #99675 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 01:20 UTC
avatar nervoussystem  is currently offline nervoussystem
Messages: 101
Registered: July 2008
Go to my shop
Senior Member
That example is only so extreme as to go over the bounding box to demonstrate the problem. The issue is if I design a part to intelligently use machine space by nesting together, the algorithm is undoing that work. It doesn't have to be calculating a volume over the bounding box to be charging for duplicated machine space, which seems wrong. The only way around that currently is to add a cage around the whole thing which will add both material and machine volume.


http://n-e-r-v-o-u-s.com
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99683 is a reply to message #99524 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 01:29 UTC
avatar Whystler  is currently offline Whystler
Messages: 570
Registered: September 2008
Go to my shop
Senior Member
Hey all ...

Staff can spin it however they like, but the truth is, many of my models in Strong/Flexible materials (and perhaps yours) are now significantly more expensive.

Every 3d printing medium will have its freedoms and its boundaries. As artists we can be excited about freedoms, but what actually sparks the most creativity is how we overcome our boundaries. In the case of the strong/flexible materials, we were given great strength and the ability to print quite fine , but also the boundary of higher pricing for large objects. Many of us rose to this challenge by making specific design choices to add open space to our models and yet still retain the integrity of design and purpose. This created a style, but this is not a negative thing. We see styles throughout history. You can pinpoint an item in time by it's style. Sometimes style was dictated by fashion, and other times by necessity. It was exciting to be a part of this "movement" in light lacey , even filigree designs. We were part of a group of artists exploring this medium and it's boundaries.

Now, due to pricing changes, any work within this genre is more expensive. And it's a HUGE body of work!! For those of us who made particularly impressive projects in this style, the price is significantly higher. For those of us who focussed in this style, myself included, we see price rises across the board.

Freedom of expression in art is not a plus. The best art in history come from the times where we had to improvise, or times where we were restricted in life. The best art comes from overcoming the boundaries.

Now ... things always change. We have to run with these pricing differences and mold ourselves with the times and decisions of those who have control of technology and government. We artists just keep rolling with the punches because we care more about creating and less about controlling others and gaining great wealth. This is our strength and our muse. We always have done this, and we always will. So this action of Shapeways is nothing new.

But what is scary and upsetting is "spin". This is not the novel 1984, Shapeways. Don't insult our intelligence by telling us that something is good when it is quite obviously not for so many of us. Give us the dirt, and an apology. Don't give us hype and misdirection. Realize that you have affected a great many creative projects negatively. And understand that *we understand* that an important interest of businesses like Shapeways is to farm creative people. And that while you might feel like you are supporting our body of work, we know that this is less important to you than the previous.

-T. Shawn Johnson (Whystler)

[Updated on: Wed, 01 October 2014 01:40 UTC]


Check out my website: http://tshawnjohnson.wordpress.com/
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99686 is a reply to message #99524 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 01:47 UTC
avatar stannum  is currently offline stannum
Messages: 981
Registered: May 2009
Go to my shop
Senior Member
A handful of questions:

1. Why sprues are frowned upon in the new desing rules?

Multiple tests have shown they can work, and do so with less than what is required for the loops and boxes. 1 mm square has been going fine here. Going bigger means more money, but also a problem of the mark left on the models. Tiny models with big contact points destroying detail or requiring extra clean up are pretty worthless. Scale models are about making things as accurate as possible. Some models have no area as big as needed anyway, and the design was not done small to save, but because that's is the reason for it, because other methods can't give you nice 1 mm wires that withstand use fine and look delicate (they aren't). In case of trying to leave a small mark, by reducing the size at the attach point, it means it could be rejected as too thin, if sticking with the 2 mm rule for loops. And the thickness in the rest of the sprue wins nothing anyway.

Automatic sprues is not going to help much... and it's funny you suggest it, when the song goes "no modification of your model" in the hallmarking issue. Never mind modification has been always there for metals, to let the molten metal flow models got modified at the contact points, even by just different cosmetic finish. After seeing poor orientation choices damaging the important parts of a model and giving smooth results in the non important, autosprues sounds like most horrorific horror movie possible.

2. Would there be a way to get discounted closed or nearly closed boxes? Or just pay at the 0.21-0.28 rate as any other model?

Implement orientation selection, but no cleaning, no rejects about details too thin so it could break at cleaning. Just get the cube out of the printer, put in a bag and to the cardboard box it goes.

3. Some updates ago a new section appeared under Sell > Getting Paid, at the bottom, with the following text:

"3. Submit Your Taxpayer Information: In the coming months, we'll begin collecting taxpayer information from all shop owners and this will be a required step in getting paid. Don't worry, we'll make sure you have plenty of heads up once the forms become available."

With which company branch and under what law is this going to take place? USA or NL? Depends on shop owner location? Will it be one week? One month? Because if it means people will have to look for accountants with international expertise and higher fees to take care of the burden, the following question becomes more important than just for the price increases / remodelling.

4. Is there a way to put a full shop on hold?

Yeah, to close it temporarily, so items stay, but no sales possible, no prices shown. I mean without going model by model and putting it "out of stock" or even out of view. Something fast and simple "we are closed, sorry, come back later" kind of thing. Other than the spreadsheet.
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99687 is a reply to message #99683 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 01:49 UTC
avatar Brian_Richardson  is currently offline Brian_Richardson
Messages: 50
Registered: February 2013
Go to my shop
Member
Whystler- That's great and all from an artist's point of view, but most of us are speaking in terms of businesses. And in most cases this is bad for business. So far 59 people agree enough to sign that petition. It's only been about an hour and a half.

https://www.change.org/p/shapeways-stop-raising-3d-printing- costs

[Updated on: Wed, 01 October 2014 01:50 UTC]

Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99689 is a reply to message #99687 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 02:06 UTC
avatar Whystler  is currently offline Whystler
Messages: 570
Registered: September 2008
Go to my shop
Senior Member
Brian...

You don't have an argument from me in terms of wishing the new pricing model wasn't happening.

I do have a couple for you though :)

Being in business and being an artist is not much different these days. So to make that distinction could be seen as elitist.

As a business man, however, you should be aware that Shapeways is not a democracy. They will do what they feel they need to do. Their biggest needs are not ours. Their biggest needs come from their expenses and certainly their investors. Their needs are based on survival. Changes like this don't happen when a business is doing well. The whole :"if it aint broke, don't fix it" situation would come into play otherwise. And threats of leaving aren't an issue. There are plenty of sheep where we came from.

You are naïve if you think a petition will bully Shapeways into changing a decision that is fuelled by those needs. I have some experience in this area as I've seen it attempted probably a dozen times in forums where the business's model uses creative makers as a market.

You might consider that they feel volume pricing it isn't a good enough business model for them to stay in business. Is this true Shapeways?

-T. Shawn Johnson (Whystler)

[Updated on: Wed, 01 October 2014 02:10 UTC]


Check out my website: http://tshawnjohnson.wordpress.com/
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99690 is a reply to message #99681 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 02:08 UTC
avatar AlanHudson  is currently offline AlanHudson
Messages: 144
Registered: March 2010
Go to my shop
Senior Member
I work here
There is some tension around how we must orient all parts to maximize the print quality. One of the biggest ways in which we ensure your parts print consistently and with high quality is to have an expert planner orient each part individually. If your parts are nested together, we can't orient each, and part quality is sacrificed. Knowing this, if you're willing to give up that quality, then you just need to make the nested parts into a bundle. Putting a loop through holes in the parts, or wrapped them in a wire X (think bundle of sticks) in line with our looping guidelines will let us treat them all as a single part, saving you on labor and machine space.


nervoussystem wrote on Wed, 01 October 2014 01:20

That example is only so extreme as to go over the bounding box to demonstrate the problem. The issue is if I design a part to intelligently use machine space by nesting together, the algorithm is undoing that work. It doesn't have to be calculating a volume over the bounding box to be charging for duplicated machine space, which seems wrong. The only way around that currently is to add a cage around the whole thing which will add both material and machine volume.


Director 3D Tools
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99692 is a reply to message #99524 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 02:20 UTC
avatar MichaelAtOz is currently online MichaelAtOz
Messages: 11
Registered: April 2010
Go to all my models
Junior Member
Was to 40mm gap arbitrary?
There seem to be many small model in the 20-30mm range. And even more if they were not sprued.
Intermediate designs which are mostly hollow, like mine with tubes ID 28mm & 35mm which could hold smaller items easily.
BUT now there is more incentive for people to sprue small items together so they can't fit in such hollows.
Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99693 is a reply to message #99669 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 02:24 UTC
avatar MrNib  is currently offline MrNib
Messages: 533
Registered: November 2012
Go to my shop
Senior Member
nervoussystem wrote on Wed, 01 October 2014 00:43

It seems like when there are multiple parts in a file, the "machine volume" of each part is calculated separately. This leads to a much larger machine volume than is realistic in the case where parts nestle together.

Think for instance of a set of cups that sit inside one another. The machine volume should only be the size of the largest cup. However, it looks like you are calculating it as the sum of all the cups.

which makes no sense and discourages designers from making space conscious nesting of their parts.

I tested this by uploading a set of nesting rectangular cups. The reported machine volume is larger than the bounding box of my entire model!


I agree. This

https://images2.sw-cdn.net/model/picture/625x465_1151675_1068424_1389467092.jpg

ends up costing the same as this

index.php?t=getfile&id=72857&private=0

And I don't get any credit for cramming my lid into that smaller space and I don't get any credit for other people's designs that might fit in there either. Apparently the only thing I could do to reduce the $2.30 price increase is to sprue the two parts together in such a way that the customer would be able to easily separate them; which is so 1970's as when I used to put Monogram airplane and car kits together. I don't have any good, positive thoughts at the moment about your new pricing methodologies. I think Shapeways needs a few more corporate meetings of the minds before implementing this mess.

Re: Repricing Strong & Flexible Plastic and Steel [message #99694 is a reply to message #99524 ] Wed, 01 October 2014 02:28 UTC
avatar dcyale is currently online dcyale
Messages: 114
Registered: February 2013
Go to my shop
Senior Member
I did a small experiment on a set of 1/87 scale tables- just three tables sprued together. Here is the original:

index.php?t=getfile&id=72858&private=0



I took the original table model, removed the built in sprue, and tried to get it "Close Packed" which is what I'm calling an new step in my design process. Here are the results:



index.php?t=getfile&id=72859&private=0



The density went from just under 9% to just over 14%. So a little extra work would have saved 3 cents under the old pricing model, but saves 44 cents under the new process. It only goes up 6 cents. I can live with that on this type of model, but I can't fix everything in 1 week.

Obviously this model is inexpensive and 44 cents isn't much, but it shows the concept, especially when you consider 44 cents as a percentage of the total cost. Hopefully this will be possible with some of my more expensive models, like this one:

index.php?t=getfile&id=72860&private=0

Dave Yale

  • Attachment: RT original.jpg
    (Size: 54.11KB, Downloaded 689 time(s))

  • Attachment: RT CP.jpg
    (Size: 70.07KB, Downloaded 691 time(s))

  • Attachment: S BS.jpg
    (Size: 79.99KB, Downloaded 686 time(s))

Pages (7): [1  2  3  4  5  6  7    »]

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.