Alright Dakka !
I see 3D printing is becoming a recurring subject in many discussions and articles, and not only in war gaming forums.
As I see it the race has started, it's only a matter of time before decent 3D printers hit the consumer market.
As an avid war gamer, my first thoughts were about the future of GW and other model companies. ( Well after I got over the fact they are trying to print food )
What will happen to GW ? They currently have most of the market in there pocket, but I'm worried they might fail to adapt.
Another question pops to mind, would they make the hobby cheaper ? And in a way allow many new comers to flood the market, the pricing not being so steep ?
As for the hobby itself, I'm curious to see what direction it will take. More creativity seems the 1'st logical consequence. Anybody with a printer and a handle on 3D design can spawn a infinite number of models.
Anyway, I'm curious to see what others have to say on the topic, I for one am looking forwards to this.
I was thinking about this too - apparently there's a hobby website somewhere where people upload files for others to download free, containing all sorts of products they've made. If GW models were to be reproduced closely (without being illegally close, if you get what I mean) and uploaded around, miniatures companies will lose out big time.
Personally, I must admit that if 3D printers become the new household printer - I've heard these predictions several times - I will be creating my own squads through them. Not illegally, but as said earlier, in a similar style, like those companies who I can't quite remember the names of right now.
I've been looking at 3D printers for a while now. They're cool, but I really don't see them becoming a legitimate alternative to buying models in the same way that normal printers never became a legitimate alternative to buying books.
One thing I've noticed is that 3D printing anything tends to be slow, and the time increases with better resolution. I've sampled a few 3D printers and wouldn't use anything above 100 microns layer thickness, which excludes quite a few of the 'home' models out at the moment.
@xcasex... could you give some info? are you really looking at selling models made by a 3D printer? what models, and do you have estimates on cost per model and time per model?
Trasvi, Well yes. we're developing two games atm, and have some illustrators doing stellar stuff (yeah who wouldnt say something like that.) Anyway, our process looks like this: illustration -> zbrush -> adjustment in solidworks -> 3dprinter.
Currently we use a cupcake cnc for dinking around while waiting for the makerbot. The makerbot will enable us to construct the sprues to make mastermolds from.
industrialising of a process to create whole miniatures for packaging/distribution isnt cheap with a fused deposition / additive manufacturing printer. so we're not doing that.
However, our aim is to use a set of stereolithographic printers to produce our mini's down the road. (stereolitography like with the form1 actually uses resin, huzzah!)
the CPM with the form1 isnt prohibitive by the least since it uses resin but other factors add to the cost (electricity, leadtime, additional cost for packaging since we're not outsourcing it, but it'll be manageable) I'll ensure to revisit it when we have received ours
Commander Jimbob wrote: Personally, I must admit that if 3D printers become the new household printer - I've heard these predictions several times - I will be creating my own squads through them. Not illegally, but as said earlier, in a similar style, like those companies who I can't quite remember the names of right now.
I can't see it going that far. Really, how often does the average household actually need the services of a 3d printer (and the material and maintenance costs)? Unless the costs really crash, it's going to be more practical 99% of the time to just go down the shops and buy the items. Of course, the shop itself may switch to using printers to make these items, possibly a set-up where you bring in your blueprints and they make whatever you want and they charge you for it. But 3d printing in the home doesn't seem to have the immediate obvious benefits that other technologies have had.
As a side note, am I the only one who doesn't like the term "3d printer"? Just sounds too....functional. "Replicator" or "Fabricator" sounds a bit more interestingly futuristic.
Commander Jimbob wrote: Personally, I must admit that if 3D printers become the new household printer - I've heard these predictions several times - I will be creating my own squads through them. Not illegally, but as said earlier, in a similar style, like those companies who I can't quite remember the names of right now.
I can't see it going that far. Really, how often does the average household actually need the services of a 3d printer (and the material and maintenance costs)? Unless the costs really crash, it's going to be more practical 99% of the time to just go down the shops and buy the items.
Fair point, but wasn't that said about computers? I understand that it's not just the device itself you're buying, but the powder material too - but with technological advancements surely comes workarounds?
Commander Jimbob wrote: Fair point, but wasn't that said about computers? I understand that it's not just the device itself you're buying, but the powder material too - but with technological advancements surely comes workarounds?
Sometimes that happens, but it's not inevitable, it depends on the technology. Once computers were affordable, it was obvious why you might want to buy one. They let you enjoy completely new forms of entertainment and could automate a lot of work which had been tedious up to that point. And bear in mind that computers were around for quite some time before they became practical for home use.
If I get a 3d printer in my home.....no matter how good the machine becomes, what am I actually going to use it for? How often in my everyday life do I need a small object in a few specific materials making, and need it so urgently that I can't just go down the shops and get it? With miniatures, unless I'm making them en masse for selling, I think it's more likely that I'd just take a blueprint to a games store and use their machine, which is probably higher quality than a home model anyway. I think that business model's more likely than having a printer in every home, at least until the price comes way down.
Disney are already creating files for home 3D printable toys, if a large company like Disney are getting behind the technology it's when not if that it will happen. They also believe that the user is far more likely to use downloaded files to create products rather than create there own, this means that it's likely this sort of technology won't be rolled out until they figure out sufficient data security to trump piracy.
Plastics will hang on longer but those finecast models? Dead. You can now matter print with basic colour. Quick dip and spray and done. Already I have friends who have made 6mm wargames armies using work printers. They reckon they aren't that far away from being able to print injection moulds.
Check out something like shapeways.com and you will see a glimpse of what 3d printing might become. I think in the home you probably wont see a printer as it's not cost effective. Yet imagine an online repository full of designs (GW could have their own). You could browse through, find the models, weapons, tanks, or shouldr pads you like and they print them out and mail it to you! Miniature companies would stil be viable as they would have the best models at the nicest resolutions. Plus it would be cheaper for them as they could have 3d artists all over the world designing new minis for them. If GW (and frankly any other model company) doesn't catch on they'll be behind in a few years.
Sigvatr wrote: Piracy. No need to further elaborate on that, other than saying that it will happen...and GW kinda asks for it.
How are GW asking for their intellelectual property to be copied without permission?
They do not explicitely ask for it. They are more like..."provoking" piracy. Extremely high prices are a major reason for piracy and I guess we can agree on this being the case with GW.
I don't want to promote piracy, not at all, I'm just theory-crafting.
Sigvatr wrote: Piracy. No need to further elaborate on that, other than saying that it will happen...and GW kinda asks for it.
How are GW asking for their intellelectual property to be copied without permission?
They do not explicitely ask for it. They are more like..."provoking" piracy. Extremely high prices are a major reason for piracy and I guess we can agree on this being the case with GW.
I don't want to promote piracy, not at all, I'm just theory-crafting.
Extremely high prices are a nessesity of having high over-heads. Prices are going up everywhere.
Sigvatr wrote: Piracy. No need to further elaborate on that, other than saying that it will happen...and GW kinda asks for it.
How are GW asking for their intellelectual property to be copied without permission?
They do not explicitely ask for it. They are more like..."provoking" piracy. Extremely high prices are a major reason for piracy and I guess we can agree on this being the case with GW.
I don't want to promote piracy, not at all, I'm just theory-crafting.
Extremely high prices are a nessesity of having high over-heads. Prices are going up everywhere.
And GW is not even the most expensive. Model per model, PP is the same price and lots of models are more expensive. While it may standardize prices as printing eliminates molds and cast batches to spread prices around, I don't see it becoming drastically cheaper. The market bears the cost and everyone besides GW charges similar prices. I feel like 3D printing will reach a standard price once quality and materials work themselves out, but I don't see getting hundreds of space marines for 50cents a model.
Sigvatr wrote: Piracy. No need to further elaborate on that, other than saying that it will happen...and GW kinda asks for it.
How are GW asking for their intellelectual property to be copied without permission?
They do not explicitely ask for it. They are more like..."provoking" piracy. Extremely high prices are a major reason for piracy and I guess we can agree on this being the case with GW.
I don't want to promote piracy, not at all, I'm just theory-crafting.
Extremely high prices are a nessesity of having high over-heads. Prices are going up everywhere.
The thing with piracy though, is that it grows exponentially, the higher the prices for legit items are. Think back to when DVD's came out. The pirates didn't have the technology to copy em like they had with videotapes, so the studios started jacking up the price until you could find yourself paying £20+ for a new release. The pirates got on the case and soon were selling dvd's in pubs and workplaces for a pound a go. Because of that, the studios had to bring their prices back down to encourage folk to buy legit. It was the same with CD's once MP3's reared their pirate-friendly head. Blu Ray prices are coming down now because pirate technology has caught up. If and when 3d printing becomes commonplace and good enough for people to generate their own models, GW will have to bring their prices down, or go the way of places like virgin megastores, zavvi, HMV et all. You gets greedy, the customer gets creative.
Not saying it's right or anything, its just a fact of capitalist economics.
Sigvatr wrote: Piracy. No need to further elaborate on that, other than saying that it will happen...and GW kinda asks for it.
How are GW asking for their intellelectual property to be copied without permission?
They do not explicitely ask for it. They are more like..."provoking" piracy. Extremely high prices are a major reason for piracy and I guess we can agree on this being the case with GW.
I don't want to promote piracy, not at all, I'm just theory-crafting.
Extremely high prices are a nessesity of having high over-heads. Prices are going up everywhere.
And GW is not even the most expensive. Model per model, PP is the same price and lots of models are more expensive. While it may standardize prices as printing eliminates molds and cast batches to spread prices around, I don't see it becoming drastically cheaper. The market bears the cost and everyone besides GW charges similar prices. I feel like 3D printing will reach a standard price once quality and materials work themselves out, but I don't see getting hundreds of space marines for 50cents a model.
a 1kg spool of abs filament is $48, a printed 28mm mini (hollow core) is roughly 3 grams (if not less). So you're right, it's more 0,10 than 0,50.
Sigvatr wrote: Piracy. No need to further elaborate on that, other than saying that it will happen...and GW kinda asks for it.
How are GW asking for their intellelectual property to be copied without permission?
They do not explicitely ask for it. They are more like..."provoking" piracy. Extremely high prices are a major reason for piracy and I guess we can agree on this being the case with GW.
I don't want to promote piracy, not at all, I'm just theory-crafting.
Extremely high prices are a nessesity of having high over-heads. Prices are going up everywhere.
And GW is not even the most expensive. Model per model, PP is the same price and lots of models are more expensive. While it may standardize prices as printing eliminates molds and cast batches to spread prices around, I don't see it becoming drastically cheaper. The market bears the cost and everyone besides GW charges similar prices. I feel like 3D printing will reach a standard price once quality and materials work themselves out, but I don't see getting hundreds of space marines for 50cents a model.
a 1kg spool of abs filament is $48, a printed 28mm mini (hollow core) is roughly 3 grams (if not less). So you're right, it's more 0,10 than 0,50.
And plastic is cheap. So what?
You have to off-set the machine cost for home 'pirates' and using 3rd party stores, will require a cost that covers materials, machine and wear and tear.
This also assumes companies and independent artists make 3D models for freeeeeeeee.
So I don't think GW have much to worry about *at the moment*.
I think if it did catch off, it would kill GW as we know it. Best case scenario, they go bankrupt and someone buys up the IP for cheap and releases rules/a few special models periodically, or maybe sells them pre-basecoated or with more transfers.
Worst case scenario the IP goes down with the ship and we never get a new ruleset, and the kids stop coming into it.
those are both 1-2nd gen fused deposition / additive manufacturing printers, repraps & cupcake cnc.
This is where we're at atm testify.
on top of this the stereolitographic printer by form1 produces this.
Out of resin.
and this is just two different 4th gen devices made affordable to the public, there's an even broader spectrum availible when it comes to industrial printers.
Sigvatr wrote: Piracy. No need to further elaborate on that, other than saying that it will happen...and GW kinda asks for it.
How are GW asking for their intellelectual property to be copied without permission?
They do not explicitely ask for it. They are more like..."provoking" piracy. Extremely high prices are a major reason for piracy and I guess we can agree on this being the case with GW.
I don't want to promote piracy, not at all, I'm just theory-crafting.
Extremely high prices are a nessesity of having high over-heads. Prices are going up everywhere.
And GW is not even the most expensive. Model per model, PP is the same price and lots of models are more expensive. While it may standardize prices as printing eliminates molds and cast batches to spread prices around, I don't see it becoming drastically cheaper. The market bears the cost and everyone besides GW charges similar prices. I feel like 3D printing will reach a standard price once quality and materials work themselves out, but I don't see getting hundreds of space marines for 50cents a model.
a 1kg spool of abs filament is $48, a printed 28mm mini (hollow core) is roughly 3 grams (if not less). So you're right, it's more 0,10 than 0,50.
And plastic is cheap. So what?
You have to off-set the machine cost for home 'pirates' and using 3rd party stores, will require a cost that covers materials, machine and wear and tear.
This also assumes companies and independent artists make 3D models for freeeeeeeee.
punch in "warhammer stl cad" into google. and peruse thingiverse and the bay's "physibles" category. yeah, it's already produced, today, for free. The way to offset this for companies is to sell premium sculpts at the current price and provide barebones, non-detailed stl files for sale at a cheap price. Or, we'll have the IPR gak we have from the media industry today. Me? I hope for the former and know what our strategy is.
Testify wrote: Of course none of those are of a quality approaching GW's plastics. Or anywhere close.
you realise that you're just spewing verbal diarrhea, quality of what plastics? you're a chemical engineer? if you are a chemical engineer, surely you realise that the filament used can be ordered to be practically anything.
anywhere close to.. that's 100 microns which means that the detail level is 0,1mm, a TENTH of a mm.
It's far beyond "good enough".
Testify wrote: Of course none of those are of a quality approaching GW's plastics. Or anywhere close.
you realise that you're just spewing verbal diarrhea, quality of what plastics? you're a chemical engineer? if you are a chemical engineer, surely you realise that the filament used can be ordered to be practically anything.
anywhere close to.. that's 100 microns which means that the detail level is 0,1mm, a TENTH of a mm.
It's far beyond "good enough".
Then why do those pictures look like gak?
I'm not a chemical engineer, but I'm one of those old fashioned types who judges based on evidence. The pictures you provided are no where close to GW quality.
I'm afraid I'm going to have to agree with Testify on this one. You can argue specs all day long but the actual proof will always be what comes out at the end of the process.
Testify wrote: Of course none of those are of a quality approaching GW's plastics. Or anywhere close.
you realise that you're just spewing verbal diarrhea, quality of what plastics? you're a chemical engineer? if you are a chemical engineer, surely you realise that the filament used can be ordered to be practically anything.
anywhere close to.. that's 100 microns which means that the detail level is 0,1mm, a TENTH of a mm.
It's far beyond "good enough".
Then why do those pictures look like gak?
I'm not a chemical engineer, but I'm one of those old fashioned types who judges based on evidence. The pictures you provided are no where close to GW quality.
What is demostrated in those pics is..
Thin detail and minimum tolerances, a sheet of paper level, is easily as good as anything GW has produced in that arena..and likely way to thin for gaming ..but still impressive.
Percision fitting of parts, for moving and hinged points (turrets, wheels ect ect )
And small detail and porportion control, on that very small figure, with some very good, abit soft details.
All in all you have alot of potential even now..next year this time who knows, but considering the pace they are improving at...Looks like I will be starting my 3D printer savings fund, I was saving for a fancy gaming table , but this may be better
All we will need is some easy to use rendering software, or scanning booths and the cottage miniature hobby craze will be on, I myself will be watching this development very closely.
Naturally Testify, you will want to prove your confirmation bias.
What is showing in those linked pictures I posted is level of detail, thi.. basically everything Soova... yeah that guy wrote.
now if we're arguing that the current GW models are more detailed? then yes. you're right, they're also sculpted by hand (from my understanding the only thing getting a cad treatment currently is vehicles) so apples meet oranges.
You need to be able to discern facts, i.e the potential of 3dprintery cornucopia vs. gw sculpted minis.
there's precisely nothing hindering anyone from producing anything more / as detailed as the gw sculpts.
but what you're really arguing is that since nobody is producing something as detailed as the gw sculpts that makes all 3d printed objects "am the suxx!!11!" which is foolish at best and plain ignorant at worst.
the question is, Can you do as detailed prints with a current-gen 3d printer today? the answer to that is a resounding, yes.
With any technology revolution just because the capability is there, and the imagination can easily go there, does not mean it will happen.
Fast forward 20 years and certainly this is a real threat to GW. Having said that again just because you produce a good product at a good price there is still a massive distribution challenge. Build it and they will come? I dont think so.
My guess is impact over the next 5 will be very finite.
marv335 wrote: It's easy to cast up with lead and white metal.
Anyone can do it easily and cheaply with minimal outlay plus it's easy to learn.
Now,
How many people do it?
I don't see 3D printing being any different.
A hardcore few will do it, but the vast majority will buy as normal.
If 3D printers print to the quality that they are alleged to, it would be very, very easy to make some cash on the side selling models to friends. It would spread from there.
As we've seen, it's no where near that good yet, so it's not.
Noone said that 3d printing is at GW's quality standard *yet*. It will be, however, in a few years, given the rapid evolution in quality we see nowadays.
And with all due respect, but the "everything becomes more expensive" argument is to be ignored - it is invalid given the increases GW has and, of course, the HUGE difference between producing cost and actual price.
3d printing will threaten GW in a few years (~5-10) and if they do not react, they go down...no point in buying a box of tactical marines for 90$ when you can produce a bunch of them for the same price. And while I could care less for the greedy bunch of player-hating Kirbies, I worry about smaller companies that will also suffer despite having fair prices.
Sigvatr wrote: I worry about smaller companies that will also suffer despite having fair prices.
I think this is the point here.
I don't think this new technology will harm GW, I think what it will do, is put the small bits companies and modification companies (such as Chapterhouse) out of business.
I think we can use the music industry as a precedent. The shift over to software-based music from hardware-based has resulted in music companies selling the music data itself instead of a physical object. Should 3d printers become commonplace, we can expect wargaming companies to follow suit, selling the data used to make their models for a certain fee. GW, as the largest company of it's kind, would likely resist for as long as possible, but eventually would be forced to give in and adapt (or risk failure).
I genuinely don't think it's going to take ten or twenty years to get there - these days, everything is about the resolution - from Super HD TV's and retina displays, to the megapixel wars that camera manufacturers indulge in. ten years ago, it was a bit of a luxury to have any kind of capable printer in the home - ink was expensive, they were noisy, clattery things. These days, I have a colour laser printer that is pretty much silent, and is about £40 for enough toner to last well over a year. Just as printer tech has improved, I suspect that within the next couple of years, we'll start seeing these things replicating complex and useable products. Hell, looking at the gallery listed in the post above, they already are!
I noticed that the prints listed as examples of high quality didn't have the bubbles/random imperfections that the Finecast samples had.
It seems a much more consistent way to manufacture small quantities than to rely on resintypes where the skill/patience of the caster/mixer are at hand.
One angle that is being over looked here is the price of talent. Even now with the current ‘Alternative to GW mini/bitz market’, the gulf of quality between GW and the competition is huge.
A 3D printer needs a 3D model to print which needs a 3D artist to sculpt. Any 3D artist with talent will charge for their talent. As a few companies are doing now. The model will be mastered on a 3D printer to be used to make resin copies to be sold. No 3D artist with talent or company that sells miniatures would ever release the 3D model file for people to print at home.
I am sure there will be a flood of crappy substitutes made in sketchup like the red dreadnought we see above but the quality stuff will stay under lock and key. Imagine GW putting their master sculpts up for sale on Ebay or PirateBay. Just doesn’t happen.
Even if a talented person takes the long hours needed to make a great 3D file and uploaded it for everyone to down load for free (Just to give it to the man). That’s just one sculpt. The next one they plan to do, they will start asking themselves “Why am I doing this for free when I could be charging for it”…
Go online right now and try to find 3D models (3dtotal.com or something). You will immediately see a huge quality difference between the ones you have to buy and the free stuff.
I have a feeling the market may stay the same. It will just become bigger.
Having said all that. Add near future home 3D scanner to near future home 3D printer and BAM! Problem…
Keep in mind that the quality you presented is made by top tier 3d printers that are far from being affordable for small gaming groups, which means that it would solely be used by bigger companies that would have to fear GW's trigger-happy lawyers.
reaper with no name wrote: I think we can use the music industry as a precedent. The shift over to software-based music from hardware-based has resulted in music companies selling the music data itself instead of a physical object. Should 3d printers become commonplace, we can expect wargaming companies to follow suit, selling the data used to make their models for a certain fee. GW, as the largest company of it's kind, would likely resist for as long as possible, but eventually would be forced to give in and adapt (or risk failure).
I highly doubt that. GW would have to sell those schemes at outrageous prices in order to make the same or, as they always intend to do, more profit than they do now. Just imagine a small gaming group of 5 people with 1 3d printer. Let's assume everyone plays GK and thus everyone gets 10 paladins. That's 70€ for 2 boxes of terminators and in or group, that'd be about 350€ for all terminators...net profit for GW. Given that you can make infinite terminators from 1 sprue, a realistic price would be at least 500-700€....and no group's going to pay for that. What will happen? Piracy.
Furthermore, selling schemes would not work at all - just imagine another company with the schemes, producing the minis themselves, e.g. a box of terminators for 20€. What now?
I mean, the players would profit either way and I'd *love* to see GW taking a huge step back. They'd have to turn 180° in regard to their customer-policy, they'd have to make people like them again e.g. by having more gaming opportunities at store, fairer prices, etc. etc.
I am extremely curions on what the future might bring.
What would be cool, however, are custom minis and that's something GW could offer: let your customers choose their poses, details, etc. and charge an extra (GODDAMNIT GW NOT 300% EXTRA I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE THINKING!). I'd pay an extra e.g. for a squad of Necrons all in the very same static post, standing straight. That'd be awesome.
QFT!
also, that detailed enough for the naysayers?
There is no sense of scale to any of those. I think they're about a foot big.
So, no.
If you click on the "Click for details" section. They are about 6" high. Taking that into account. You can see they have the equivalent resolution of a current mini.
QFT!
also, that detailed enough for the naysayers?
There is no sense of scale to any of those. I think they're about a foot big.
So, no.
If you click on the "Click for details" section. They are about 6" high. Taking that into account. You can see they have the equivalent resolution of a current mini.
you realise you're arguing with a person who keeps insisting that reprap is current gen printers and that the makerbot2 prints are not detailed enough at 100 microns.
QFT!
also, that detailed enough for the naysayers?
There is no sense of scale to any of those. I think they're about a foot big.
So, no.
If you click on the "Click for details" section. They are about 6" high. Taking that into account. You can see they have the equivalent resolution of a current mini.
Keep in mind that you're talking to someone who isn't willing to discuss a matter, but rather wants to say "NAY" to everything except his own opinion.
vim_the_good wrote:
If you click on the "Click for details" section. They are about 6" high. Taking that into account. You can see they have the equivalent resolution of a current mini.
Good point. That looks pretty sweet.
xcasex wrote:
you realise you're arguing with a person who keeps insisting that reprap is current gen printers and that the makerbot2 prints are not detailed enough at 100 microns.
You mean I rely on evidence rather than what some random person on the internet tells me? Yeah.
Will 3d printers change the way small casting shops operate? Probably.
Will 3d printers change the way large companies in the industry operate? No.
Its all a matter of scale. If I'm only making a few hundred of something its probably cheaper to us a small machine, in this case a 3d printer. If I'm going to make 100,000 to millions of something then its going to be cheaper for me to setup industrial machinery, in this case injection molding.
Saying that a large company like GW is going to switch from Injection Molding machinery to 3d printers is like saying that 4 Over Inc is going to switch to inkjet printers.
While it may cost you $.10 in materials to print something on your 3d printer, it would cost a company fractions of a cent to make that same item using injection molding equipment.
The cost of most things simply is not tied that closely to raw material costs.
Catyrpelius wrote: Will 3d printers change the way small casting shops operate? Probably.
Will 3d printers change the way large companies in the industry operate? No.
Its all a matter of scale. If I'm only making a few hundred of something its probably cheaper to us a small machine, in this case a 3d printer. If I'm going to make 100,000 to millions of something then its going to be cheaper for me to setup industrial machinery, in this case injection molding.
Saying that a large company like GW is going to switch from Injection Molding machinery to 3d printers is like saying that 4 Over Inc is going to switch to inkjet printers.
While it may cost you $.10 in materials to print something on your 3d printer, it would cost a company fractions of a cent to make that same item using injection molding equipment.
The cost of most things simply is not tied that closely to raw material costs.
I'm pretty clued up on the whole area and have spoken to a lot of people about this in different fields thanks to dakka.
In the next 2-3 years the main patents that the large high-end 3d printing companies hold begin to expire en masse. That means much cheaper home 3D printers (like the form1) become available. The thing that stops resin printers right now is the patent on the best material meaning it costs megabucks per kilo. Note that the resin in question gives of bad fumes and needs ventilation during the printing process though, so still a few things to tweak before it is fully ready for home use. Form 1 is being sued for patent infringement right now so I think they will suffer some delays to their release.
Already, most gaming companies who do digital sculpts will get a 3D print done (30 microns resolution) for about $300 per model. The print is typically soft but perfect, and is then used for resin casting somewhere cheaper.
It costs GW about £0.15-0.20 per sprue to actually produce something in plastic from my very educated guess. Thats the raw plastic cost / running the machine cost, not the tooling and design cost.
The best 3D printers for home use that you can buy and have in your hands today top out around 100 microns. GW's best plastics can go down to 30 microns I believe (from talking to their in house 3D guys). Typical plastics (mantic, etc) peak at 100 microns or so. There are 3D scanners that cost about $3000 which are capable of scanning 28mm models without major errors and the minor errors can be cleaned up in software easily enough.
Already, printing terrain is fantastic at home, and you can download limitless buildings from google sketchup, convert them to STL and print them at 100 microns. All non-organic terrain is easy in 3D now. Vehicles will be next, and then infantry in a few years.
So in answer to the original poster, yes in 5 years things will be very interesting and challenging for those who dont adapt. 3D printers will be mass market as soon as there are some killer apps for general usage, and once it gets to the point where everyone knows someone who has a 3D printer, and those printers are capable of stable 30 micron resolution, there will be big challenges for things that are not priced competitively.
modeling in a computer is faster and allows for easier revisioning. You have far more precise control over volumes and small detail. You can then take your base model and very easily repose for variety. If you were to take the best GW sculptor against the best CG sculptor and they both sculpted the same character. The CG sculpt would win hands down on accuracy of volume and cleanness of detail.
I don't see any reason for a GW or PP to use 3D printing to make merchandise but the technology would certainly take the quality of the master mini to a new level while cutting production time.
Correct me if I am wrong here but. I get the feeling the senior sculptors at GW are old school, GS all the way. Maybe they are too busy or/and set in their ways to retrain to a satisfactory level. There is also the nostalgic element with sticking to actual GS sculpts. This is maybe why they will not/can't change as quickly as a smaller, younger operation.
Sigvatr wrote: Noone said that 3d printing is at GW's quality standard *yet*. It will be, however, in a few years, given the rapid evolution in quality we see nowadays.
And with all due respect, but the "everything becomes more expensive" argument is to be ignored - it is invalid given the increases GW has and, of course, the HUGE difference between producing cost and actual price.
3d printing will threaten GW in a few years (~5-10) and if they do not react, they go down...no point in buying a box of tactical marines for 90$ when you can produce a bunch of them for the same price. And while I could care less for the greedy bunch of player-hating Kirbies, I worry about smaller companies that will also suffer despite having fair prices.
You have some valid points there, but imo 3d printing has a very long way to go yet. First of all the printed models are very brittle to be handled in a game. Perhaps this will be improved over the years with new materials but I really dont think that we will see this evolution in home devices. At least not before 20+ years. Lets take for example classic printing 20 years ago, the only option for home brewed prints was xerox machines. Now we can print our own stuff to a very acceptable level, but still not good enough to completely match proffesional machines of the 80's. We can get very close, but considering the costs, if you dont want to print few pages, its still best to use a printing service.
Offcourse there is a future with 3d printing in wargames industry. But dont hope that its going to hit GW or any other company. Its going to hit the sculptors. All those talented people that keep alive a very special traditional art, are going to be replaced by computer artists, who are much more affordable and in abundance. The 3d printed prototype will be used to cast resin, or plastic minis. Nothing is going to change for thw public, there will just be a shift in production methods. You are still going to pay for the concept of the mini, for the production and raw materials, but the companies will cut serious expenses and unbalance the sculpting market to their advantage. Its the same story over and over.
You mentioned the DVD example. I have a better one. The CD's. When cds first came out ther was a universal frenzy about how great they sounded, how magical little undestructable media they were. Now its generally admitted that vinyl LP's on a proper sound system sound much better. Anyway the LP's had a much more complicated and expensive production method than CDs. One would assume that music would become cheaper to get. Wrong! It was much more expensive. Especially the first years of circulation, for the price of one CD you could get 2 LPs.
The companies pocketed the money of the cheaper production and a s if this wasnt enough the jacked the prices through clever marketing. Just to add to this commercial madness, LPs had a return from the dead as collectible, hipster tokens, which ironically are reffered as extremely HiFi media for sound connoisseurs.
vim_the_good wrote: modeling in a computer is faster and allows for easier revisioning. You have far more precise control over volumes and small detail. You can then take your base model and very easily repose for variety. If you were to take the best GW sculptor against the best CG sculptor and they both sculpted the same character. The CG sculpt would win hands down on accuracy of volume and cleanness of detail.
I don't see any reason for a GW or PP to use 3D printing to make merchandise but the technology would certainly take the quality of the master mini to a new level while cutting production time.
Correct me if I am wrong here but. I get the feeling the senior sculptors at GW are old school, GS all the way. Maybe they are too busy or/and set in their ways to retrain to a satisfactory level. There is also the nostalgic element with sticking to actual GS sculpts. This is maybe why they will not/can't change as quickly as a smaller, younger operation.
Cheers Vim
GW have 12-14 full time 3D people using freeform. I spoke to them about this in depth at games day. 50% of all new work is done entirely in 3D and all new sculpts are scanned and digitized before production. All frame layouts are done digitally instead of by pantographing now as well. GW has one of the largest digital sculpting teams in the world now.
vim_the_good wrote: If you click on the "Click for details" section. They are about 6" high. Taking that into account. You can see they have the equivalent resolution of a current mini.
Good point. That looks pretty sweet.
xcasex wrote: you realise you're arguing with a person who keeps insisting that reprap is current gen printers and that the makerbot2 prints are not detailed enough at 100 microns.
You mean I rely on evidence rather than what some random person on the internet tells me? Yeah.
Evidence, like say being told the resolution of a 3d printer and humptydumpting that fact due to whatever reason, or calling anything not aligning with your own confirmation bias wrong? yep. then i understand you.
Question for those who understand this technology, will the 3D printers be able to laser colour on at a similar level of perfection?
As mentioned above the 3D print looks totally different to the GW sculpts, i revise my earlier 20 year guestimate down. The sales and distribution challenge is still the one to crack.
vim_the_good wrote: modeling in a computer is faster and allows for easier revisioning. You have far more precise control over volumes and small detail. You can then take your base model and very easily repose for variety. If you were to take the best GW sculptor against the best CG sculptor and they both sculpted the same character. The CG sculpt would win hands down on accuracy of volume and cleanness of detail.
I don't see any reason for a GW or PP to use 3D printing to make merchandise but the technology would certainly take the quality of the master mini to a new level while cutting production time.
Correct me if I am wrong here but. I get the feeling the senior sculptors at GW are old school, GS all the way. Maybe they are too busy or/and set in their ways to retrain to a satisfactory level. There is also the nostalgic element with sticking to actual GS sculpts. This is maybe why they will not/can't change as quickly as a smaller, younger operation.
Cheers Vim
GW have 12-14 full time 3D people using freeform. I spoke to them about this in depth at games day. 50% of all new work is done entirely in 3D and all new sculpts are scanned and digitized before production. All frame layouts are done digitally instead of by pantographing now as well. GW has one of the largest digital sculpting teams in the world now.
Interesting. I knew they used 3D for the new vehicles. You can clearly see it on some. Why do they 3D scan the traditional sculpts? Is it to do with clean up?
vim_the_good wrote: modeling in a computer is faster and allows for easier revisioning. You have far more precise control over volumes and small detail. You can then take your base model and very easily repose for variety. If you were to take the best GW sculptor against the best CG sculptor and they both sculpted the same character. The CG sculpt would win hands down on accuracy of volume and cleanness of detail.
I don't see any reason for a GW or PP to use 3D printing to make merchandise but the technology would certainly take the quality of the master mini to a new level while cutting production time.
Correct me if I am wrong here but. I get the feeling the senior sculptors at GW are old school, GS all the way. Maybe they are too busy or/and set in their ways to retrain to a satisfactory level. There is also the nostalgic element with sticking to actual GS sculpts. This is maybe why they will not/can't change as quickly as a smaller, younger operation.
Cheers Vim
GW have 12-14 full time 3D people using freeform. I spoke to them about this in depth at games day. 50% of all new work is done entirely in 3D and all new sculpts are scanned and digitized before production. All frame layouts are done digitally instead of by pantographing now as well. GW has one of the largest digital sculpting teams in the world now.
Interesting. I knew they used 3D for the new vehicles. You can clearly see it on some. Why do they 3D scan the traditional sculpts? Is it to do with clean up?
Cheers Vim
I think it's more about arranging the layout of sprues and other production technical issues not about the sculpting process
I wonder if, once 3D printers are perfected, if we'll ever see a color 3D printer.
Now that's the day this terrible painter throws down some serious coin.
QFT!
also, that detailed enough for the naysayers?
There is no sense of scale to any of those. I think they're about a foot big.
So, no.
5x5x5 basically the same or a little bigger than a GW troll or 40mil by 40mil base miniature, the info is there if you cared to look.
Right now its actually really feasible to use in games like say Fantasy and 40k for you rank and file. 3d design is not actually necessary, you can scan objects in 3d with a projector and a web cam, detail of the scan is also not an issue, no matter what resolution the camera and the projector are simply sculpt it bigger to grasp detail easier and digitally scale it down. And no you DO NOT print the entire army, what you print 1 one or 2 masters and then 2 part mold them the old fashion way. This is exactly how most/best bit manufacturers out there operate.
Call me romantic/nostalgic/retromaniac but I dont like at all to see traditional sculptors being replaced by Asian cyborgs that work 24/7 and get paid in half eaten sanwiches...
lucasbuffalo wrote: I wonder if, once 3D printers are perfected, if we'll ever see a color 3D printer.
Now that's the day this terrible painter throws down some serious coin.
The Stranger wrote: Call me romantic/nostalgic/retromaniac but I dont like at all to see traditional sculptors being replaced by Asian cyborgs that work 24/7 and get paid in half eaten sanwiches...
1- One US dollar in the US is not worth One US dollar in China, to think that they get payed less dollars equivalent thus have lower life quality standards is incorrect.
2- They would not get replaced. Design still needs prototypes, if anything the later steps of production change, which i may add they are not involved in those today either.
Colour is possible with fused powder printers, which have patents expiring soon so should hopefully become cheap and widely available within 5 years. They have quite a bit of post-print cleanup and baking requirements, but can print in full colour. For example:
The Stranger wrote: Call me romantic/nostalgic/retromaniac but I dont like at all to see traditional sculptors being replaced by Asian cyborgs that work 24/7 and get paid in half eaten sanwiches...
1- One US dollar in the US is not worth One US dollar in China, to think that they get payed less dollars equivalent thus have lower life quality standards is incorrect.
2- They would not get replaced. Design still needs prototypes, if anything the later steps of production change, which i may add they are not involved in those today either.
Actually they are been payed low wages for any standard and this happens because:
1 Labor rights is an unknown concept there
2 Hive mentality due to cultural background
Sculptors wont be replaced at once. At first they will become advisors, perhaps creative directors etc, untill the company management sees that el-cheepos or even talented young computer artists can do the same for less. Sorry but I think that all those traditional microsculptors are amazingly gifted persons and I would hate to see them not been able to earn their living. I would call it progress if the whole thing resulted to better and cheaper products, but we know that wont happen. The saved budget will end up in certain pockets.
which is basically a haptic pen/sculpting tool. Some of their older sculptors have been able to convert from traditional to digital already because of input devices like that.
The Stranger wrote: Call me romantic/nostalgic/retromaniac but I dont like at all to see traditional sculptors being replaced by Asian cyborgs that work 24/7 and get paid in half eaten sanwiches...
1- One US dollar in the US is not worth One US dollar in China, to think that they get payed less dollars equivalent thus have lower life quality standards is incorrect.
2- They would not get replaced. Design still needs prototypes, if anything the later steps of production change, which i may add they are not involved in those today either.
Actually they are been payed low wages for any standard and this happens because:
1 Labor rights is an unknown concept there
2 Hive mentality due to cultural background
Sculptors wont be replaced at once. At first they will become advisors, perhaps creative directors etc, untill the company management sees that el-cheepos or even talented young computer artists can do the same for less. Sorry but I think that all those traditional microsculptors are amazingly gifted persons and I would hate to see them not been able to earn their living. I would call it progress if the whole thing resulted to better and cheaper products, but we know that wont happen. The saved budget will end up in certain pockets.
1- Different cultures different laws, and again, when for $200 some one in China can pay the rent, groceries keep the lights and heat on and send their kids to school. Earning $300 in a 9 hour shift job is not really an issue for them, might be for the US workers but not them. You are trying to justify the US having a higher Dollar per man hour cost, by criticizing what you imagine are other countries life quality standards, while i agree in fringe cases, China is simply no longer one of them. The US opted to make its currency the reserve capital of the world, well other countries devaluating and loosing control of you currency is the price to pay. Further more, i would imagine that every country in the world who simply can not compete economically with the US will follow the monetary policy in China, its is the most tactically sound economic direction to take and i would only wish my own country got the head out of its $#"%$% and do it already.
2- I simply do not know how this relates to my second point. Artist are Artist, CAD or Sculp is only the medium, artist will retrain them selves with to use the new tools, just like programers learn new paradigms and languages.
The Stranger wrote: Call me romantic/nostalgic/retromaniac but I dont like at all to see traditional sculptors being replaced by Asian cyborgs that work 24/7 and get paid in half eaten sanwiches...
1- One US dollar in the US is not worth One US dollar in China, to think that they get payed less dollars equivalent thus have lower life quality standards is incorrect.
2- They would not get replaced. Design still needs prototypes, if anything the later steps of production change, which i may add they are not involved in those today either.
Actually they are been payed low wages for any standard and this happens because:
1 Labor rights is an unknown concept there
2 Hive mentality due to cultural background
Sculptors wont be replaced at once. At first they will become advisors, perhaps creative directors etc, untill the company management sees that el-cheepos or even talented young computer artists can do the same for less. Sorry but I think that all those traditional microsculptors are amazingly gifted persons and I would hate to see them not been able to earn their living. I would call it progress if the whole thing resulted to better and cheaper products, but we know that wont happen. The saved budget will end up in certain pockets.
1- Different cultures different laws, and again, when for $200 some one in China can pay the rent, groceries keep the lights and heat on and send their kids to school. Earning $300 in a 9 hour shift job is not really an issue for them, might be for the US workers but not them. You are trying to justify the US having a higher Dollar per man hour cost, by criticizing what you imagine are other countries life quality standards, while i agree in fringe cases, China is simply no longer one of them. The US opted to make its currency the reserve capital of the world, well other countries devaluating and loosing control of you currency is the price to pay. Further more, i would imagine that every country in the world who simply can not compete economically with the US will follow the monetary policy in China, its is the most tactically sound economic direction to take and i would only wish my own country got the head out of its $#"%$% and do it already.
2- I simply do not know how this relates to my second point. Artist are Artist, CAD or Sculp is only the medium, artist will retrain them selves with to use the new tools, just like programers learn new paradigms and languages.
1 Dear Lee, see the little flag? Im not American, Im Greek and i fully understand worldwide currency balance. I also am a designer and had to colaborate with Chinese. We only worried about chinese New Year Day. All the other dayswere an ongoing slave-party.
2 As someone that knows abit about art, offcourse computer arts are by any means ''arts'', but there is ''artist'' and there is ''program user''. The first creates, the second traces (Chasing Amy ).
The Stranger wrote: Call me romantic/nostalgic/retromaniac but I dont like at all to see traditional sculptors being replaced by Asian cyborgs that work 24/7 and get paid in half eaten sanwiches...
1- One US dollar in the US is not worth One US dollar in China, to think that they get payed less dollars equivalent thus have lower life quality standards is incorrect.
2- They would not get replaced. Design still needs prototypes, if anything the later steps of production change, which i may add they are not involved in those today either.
Actually they are been payed low wages for any standard and this happens because:
1 Labor rights is an unknown concept there
2 Hive mentality due to cultural background
Sculptors wont be replaced at once. At first they will become advisors, perhaps creative directors etc, untill the company management sees that el-cheepos or even talented young computer artists can do the same for less. Sorry but I think that all those traditional microsculptors are amazingly gifted persons and I would hate to see them not been able to earn their living. I would call it progress if the whole thing resulted to better and cheaper products, but we know that wont happen. The saved budget will end up in certain pockets.
1- Different cultures different laws, and again, when for $200 some one in China can pay the rent, groceries keep the lights and heat on and send their kids to school. Earning $300 in a 9 hour shift job is not really an issue for them, might be for the US workers but not them. You are trying to justify the US having a higher Dollar per man hour cost, by criticizing what you imagine are other countries life quality standards, while i agree in fringe cases, China is simply no longer one of them. The US opted to make its currency the reserve capital of the world, well other countries devaluating and loosing control of you currency is the price to pay. Further more, i would imagine that every country in the world who simply can not compete economically with the US will follow the monetary policy in China, its is the most tactically sound economic direction to take and i would only wish my own country got the head out of its $#"%$% and do it already.
2- I simply do not know how this relates to my second point. Artist are Artist, CAD or Sculp is only the medium, artist will retrain them selves with to use the new tools, just like programers learn new paradigms and languages.
1 Dear Lee, see the little flag? Im not American, Im Greek and i fully understand worldwide currency balance. I also am a designer and had to colaborate with Chinese. We only worried about chinese New Year Day. All the other dayswere an ongoing slave-party.
2 As someone that knows abit about art, offcourse computer arts are by any means ''arts'', but there is ''artist'' and there is ''program user''. The first creates, the second traces (Chasing Amy ).
1- Not lee not located in China either, not even on the same side of the Atlantic ocean. Granted you are not American thou you are making the exact same flawed argument, thus my assumption and since you pointed out, that little flag mine aint Chinese either. I am glad to be educated in economics by the a citizen of the only country that actively seeks the means to loose currency and international competitivity. Dont worry my own country has been there before, ill tell you what will happen you can PM me in say 24 to 48 months and tell me i was right. You will run austerity programs, lower wages, and destroy those labor rights you hold so dear, it will not work, you will increase poverty and still loose competitivity vs other countries INCLUDING but not only China, and the rest of Europe in particular Grate Britain and Germany and to a lesser extent Spain. After your local economy is all but nuked and Greece indebted for generations to come you will finally let the Euro go and start gaining some sort of competitivity. The economy will start to recover but its up hill from there.
2- Knowing how to paint in Photoshop means nothing, if you don't know color theory and composition, its the artist that knows this not the user. It is the artist that will know how to make the barroque imagery and design we love for 40k (thou they could really ease up a little on that) and not the user who might at best color it. There is a difference between coders and designers/programers, seems to me you problem that you dont want to adapt to the new technologies.
The Stranger wrote: Call me romantic/nostalgic/retromaniac but I dont like at all to see traditional sculptors being replaced by Asian cyborgs that work 24/7 and get paid in half eaten sanwiches...
1- One US dollar in the US is not worth One US dollar in China, to think that they get payed less dollars equivalent thus have lower life quality standards is incorrect.
2- They would not get replaced. Design still needs prototypes, if anything the later steps of production change, which i may add they are not involved in those today either.
Actually they are been payed low wages for any standard and this happens because:
1 Labor rights is an unknown concept there
2 Hive mentality due to cultural background
Sculptors wont be replaced at once. At first they will become advisors, perhaps creative directors etc, untill the company management sees that el-cheepos or even talented young computer artists can do the same for less. Sorry but I think that all those traditional microsculptors are amazingly gifted persons and I would hate to see them not been able to earn their living. I would call it progress if the whole thing resulted to better and cheaper products, but we know that wont happen. The saved budget will end up in certain pockets.
1- Different cultures different laws, and again, when for $200 some one in China can pay the rent, groceries keep the lights and heat on and send their kids to school. Earning $300 in a 9 hour shift job is not really an issue for them, might be for the US workers but not them. You are trying to justify the US having a higher Dollar per man hour cost, by criticizing what you imagine are other countries life quality standards, while i agree in fringe cases, China is simply no longer one of them. The US opted to make its currency the reserve capital of the world, well other countries devaluating and loosing control of you currency is the price to pay. Further more, i would imagine that every country in the world who simply can not compete economically with the US will follow the monetary policy in China, its is the most tactically sound economic direction to take and i would only wish my own country got the head out of its $#"%$% and do it already.
2- I simply do not know how this relates to my second point. Artist are Artist, CAD or Sculp is only the medium, artist will retrain them selves with to use the new tools, just like programers learn new paradigms and languages.
1 Dear Lee, see the little flag? Im not American, Im Greek and i fully understand worldwide currency balance. I also am a designer and had to colaborate with Chinese. We only worried about chinese New Year Day. All the other dayswere an ongoing slave-party.
2 As someone that knows abit about art, offcourse computer arts are by any means ''arts'', but there is ''artist'' and there is ''program user''. The first creates, the second traces (Chasing Amy ).
1- Not lee not located in China either, not even on the same side of the Atlantic ocean. Granted you are not American thou you are making the exact same flawed argument, thus my assumption and since you pointed out, that little flag mine aint Chinese either. I am glad to be educated in economics by the a citizen of the only country that actively seeks the means to loose currency and international competitivity. Dont worry my own country has been there before, ill tell you what will happen you can PM me in say 24 to 48 months and tell me i was right. You will run austerity programs, lower wages, and destroy those labor rights you hold so dear, it will not work, you will increase poverty and still loose competitivity vs other countries INCLUDING but not only China, and the rest of Europe in particular Grate Britain and Germany and to a lesser extent Spain. After your local economy is all but nuked and Greece indebted for generations to come you will finally let the Euro go and start gaining some sort of competitivity. The economy will start to recover but its up hill from there.
2- Knowing how to paint in Photoshop means nothing, if you don't know color theory and composition, its the artist that knows this not the user. It is the artist that will know how to make the barroque imagery and design we love for 40k (thou they could really ease up a little on that) and not the user who might at best color it. There is a difference between coders and designers/programers, seems to me you problem that you dont want to adapt to the new technologies.
1 wow we have an analyst in da house. Your points may had some value if you were talking to one of the prime ministers or ministers of finance. Actually you were educated by a left voter not in economics but in labor and basic human rights which are absent in Asian bee hives, not just China
2 Since I know how to paint in traditional and digital media + I earn my living as graphic designer I wouldn't call me technophobic Exactly because I work in this field I can understand the fine balance between true artist and art-laborer so to speak. It's quite easy to hire a good concept artist and have some good users of software to translate his vision to a 3d object. From my part I consider micro sculpting a fascinating form of art to be lost because some management sharks prefer to pocket bigger profit margins.
I prefer guys like Aragorn Marks and JAG to continue to be able to provide for their families.
Testify wrote: Not sure about coloured models. Either they'd require an *insane* amount of detail, or would just be a base-coat that would be sprayed over anyway.
Yeah no, colored models dont make much sense to me either.
1 wow we have an analyst in da house. Your points may had some value if you were talking to one of the prime ministers or ministers of finance. Actually you were educated by a left voter not in economics but in labor and basic human rights which are absent in Asian bee hives, not just China
2 Since I know how to paint in traditional and digital media + I earn my living as graphic designer I wouldn't call me technophobic Exactly because I work in this field I can understand the fine balance between true artist and art-laborer so to speak. It's quite easy to hire a good concept artist and have some good users of software to translate his vision to a 3d object. From my part I consider micro sculpting a fascinating form of art to be lost because some management sharks prefer to pocket bigger profit margins.
I prefer guys like Aragorn Marks and JAG to continue to be able to provide for their families.
Sure boy, keep it up, lets see how much longer is Germany willing to bail you out.
Testify wrote: Not sure about coloured models. Either they'd require an *insane* amount of detail, or would just be a base-coat that would be sprayed over anyway.
Yeah no, colored models dont make much sense to me either.
1 wow we have an analyst in da house. Your points may had some value if you were talking to one of the prime ministers or ministers of finance. Actually you were educated by a left voter not in economics but in labor and basic human rights which are absent in Asian bee hives, not just China
2 Since I know how to paint in traditional and digital media + I earn my living as graphic designer I wouldn't call me technophobic Exactly because I work in this field I can understand the fine balance between true artist and art-laborer so to speak. It's quite easy to hire a good concept artist and have some good users of software to translate his vision to a 3d object. From my part I consider micro sculpting a fascinating form of art to be lost because some management sharks prefer to pocket bigger profit margins.
I prefer guys like Aragorn Marks and JAG to continue to be able to provide for their families.
Sure boy, keep it up, lets see how much longer is Germany willing to bail you out.
We are talking about the same Germany whose companies bribed leading politicians in order to sell overpriced communication and weapon systems? The same that owes some billions of war reparations and theft of all the state gold? Surely you can't mean the ones who capitalize this crisis and gain billions for the money they are borrowing. But anyway Lee I can't see what all of this have to do with our subject here, I mean except that you run out of arguments in supporting medieval slave states and cheep corporation practices that would lead talented people to unemployment office and an art form extinct.
A few things relating to my experience with 3D printers:
1) Plastic extrusion or powder-based won''t get to the same level of detail as stereolithography due to some fairly fundamental mechanical and material based limits.
2) The multi-coloured stuff that I've seen is powder based. If you've ever handled a finished product, it feels horrible. You can tell that it was made from powder. It won't take additional paint very well.
3) Having received a number of prints from shapeways, 100 microns is pretty decent, but still not a substitute for proper casts: striations still show up when inking or drybrushing.
4) 3D printing is slow, especially at the ridiculously high detail level (<= 100 microns) that we desire. It won't become a substitute for casting in production.
5) As much as I believe that we will use technology in fantastic new ways in the future, I can't imagine what uses an average middle-class family with 1.7 children will have for a home 3D printer on a regular basis. There are just so many aspects of timeliness, materials storage and usefulness, that I see it failing at many of the 'uses' suggested. In most cases that I can think of, it would be more efficient in tome money and space to buy a prefabricated item from a store. It might become a household item like a table-saw is a household item; yeah, a household could have one, but you're getting into fairly extreme territory. Although I would be happy to be proven wrong.
Trasvi wrote: A few things relating to my experience with 3D printers:
1) Plastic extrusion or powder-based won''t get to the same level of detail as stereolithography due to some fairly fundamental mechanical and material based limits.
2) The multi-coloured stuff that I've seen is powder based. If you've ever handled a finished product, it feels horrible. You can tell that it was made from powder. It won't take additional paint very well.
3) Having received a number of prints from shapeways, 100 microns is pretty decent, but still not a substitute for proper casts: striations still show up when inking or drybrushing.
4) 3D printing is slow, especially at the ridiculously high detail level (<= 100 microns) that we desire. It won't become a substitute for casting in production.
5) As much as I believe that we will use technology in fantastic new ways in the future, I can't imagine what uses an average middle-class family with 1.7 children will have for a home 3D printer on a regular basis. There are just so many aspects of timeliness, materials storage and usefulness, that I see it failing at many of the 'uses' suggested. In most cases that I can think of, it would be more efficient in tome money and space to buy a prefabricated item from a store. It might become a household item like a table-saw is a household item; yeah, a household could have one, but you're getting into fairly extreme territory. Although I would be happy to be proven wrong.
The idea is not to replace production right now, but replace the masters as well as securing you consistency on them, after all they might degrade but binary info stays inmutable.
Trasvi wrote: A few things relating to my experience with 3D printers:
1) Plastic extrusion or powder-based won''t get to the same level of detail as stereolithography due to some fairly fundamental mechanical and material based limits.
2) The multi-coloured stuff that I've seen is powder based. If you've ever handled a finished product, it feels horrible. You can tell that it was made from powder. It won't take additional paint very well.
3) Having received a number of prints from shapeways, 100 microns is pretty decent, but still not a substitute for proper casts: striations still show up when inking or drybrushing.
4) 3D printing is slow, especially at the ridiculously high detail level (<= 100 microns) that we desire. It won't become a substitute for casting in production.
5) As much as I believe that we will use technology in fantastic new ways in the future, I can't imagine what uses an average middle-class family with 1.7 children will have for a home 3D printer on a regular basis. There are just so many aspects of timeliness, materials storage and usefulness, that I see it failing at many of the 'uses' suggested. In most cases that I can think of, it would be more efficient in tome money and space to buy a prefabricated item from a store. It might become a household item like a table-saw is a household item; yeah, a household could have one, but you're getting into fairly extreme territory. Although I would be happy to be proven wrong.
Is there an article on 3d printing yet on Dakka? Sounds like that would make sense, as this question comes up every month or two an there's a lot of rehashing of the same points...
I've been considering getting some files together and opening up a section of the wiki/articles system to be tied around 3D printing in wargaming. I dont have time at the moment as I'm working on a load of other cool tweaks and features, but if someone was interested in taking the helm that I'd assist.
Just throwing in my .02 cents, as someone that had these ideas about a decade ago, who has researched this stuff, and has worked with this stuff extensively: I don't really see this upending GW. What it will do IMO is continue the trend of small "garage kit" companies putting out increasingly more impressive and more detailed work. Mass production and someone actually challenging GW? No. 3D printing is too time consuming and too expensive. In all honesty (unless GW continues to increase prices), it would be more expensive to print yourself a squad of infantry than it would be to just go out and buy a unit (especially at the standard 20% discount available online).
At the end of the day, plastic injection molding will remain the best means of production (barring a sudden breakthrough in technology) and the barrier through which any potential GW competitior must break through in order to be successful or really impact GW. 3D printers will only really give Forgeworld a run for their money... but even then, my money is on Chinese recasters being a bigger threat.
YELLOWBLADES wrote: Hopefully it will get cheaper, if these printers are there why does GW keep on hiking prices?
tl;dr from above: 3d printers are much slower than GW's way of producing stuff.
Thus 3d printers will be interesting for gaming groups who make their own miniatures (or rather copies) instead of huge companies.
Then again, if GW keeps raising the prices like this, buying a 3d printer might be cheap for one person already...
It actually is, guerrilla warfare stile, grab a 3d design or make one yourself for torsos and legs, like the 6 ed minis used to come (god those empire troopers were so easy to paint), get them printed and make cheap molds. You only spare arms and heads. Works wonders with scaven.
The Stranger wrote: Call me romantic/nostalgic/retromaniac but I dont like at all to see traditional sculptors being replaced by Asian cyborgs that work 24/7 and get paid in half eaten sanwiches...
1- One US dollar in the US is not worth One US dollar in China, to think that they get payed less dollars equivalent thus have lower life quality standards is incorrect.
2- They would not get replaced. Design still needs prototypes, if anything the later steps of production change, which i may add they are not involved in those today either.
Actually they are been payed low wages for any standard and this happens because:
1 Labor rights is an unknown concept there
2 Hive mentality due to cultural background
Sculptors wont be replaced at once. At first they will become advisors, perhaps creative directors etc, untill the company management sees that el-cheepos or even talented young computer artists can do the same for less. Sorry but I think that all those traditional microsculptors are amazingly gifted persons and I would hate to see them not been able to earn their living. I would call it progress if the whole thing resulted to better and cheaper products, but we know that wont happen. The saved budget will end up in certain pockets.
1- Different cultures different laws, and again, when for $200 some one in China can pay the rent, groceries keep the lights and heat on and send their kids to school. Earning $300 in a 9 hour shift job is not really an issue for them, might be for the US workers but not them. You are trying to justify the US having a higher Dollar per man hour cost, by criticizing what you imagine are other countries life quality standards, while i agree in fringe cases, China is simply no longer one of them. The US opted to make its currency the reserve capital of the world, well other countries devaluating and loosing control of you currency is the price to pay. Further more, i would imagine that every country in the world who simply can not compete economically with the US will follow the monetary policy in China, its is the most tactically sound economic direction to take and i would only wish my own country got the head out of its $#"%$% and do it already.
2- I simply do not know how this relates to my second point. Artist are Artist, CAD or Sculp is only the medium, artist will retrain them selves with to use the new tools, just like programers learn new paradigms and languages.
1 Dear Lee, see the little flag? Im not American, Im Greek and i fully understand worldwide currency balance. I also am a designer and had to colaborate with Chinese. We only worried about chinese New Year Day. All the other dayswere an ongoing slave-party.
2 As someone that knows abit about art, offcourse computer arts are by any means ''arts'', but there is ''artist'' and there is ''program user''. The first creates, the second traces (Chasing Amy ).
On point 2 my friends that went to San Francisco Academy of Art would disagree. As art majors, I think they also say they know something about art.
my lovely gal surprised my this past friday by ordering me a an ecksbot 3d printer as a surprise to me!
I realize this won't do 40k level detail, but is capable of doing armatures/hulls/weapons that I could sculpt onto, THEN cast masters from? (talking about doing my own custom turrets/tracks etc)
I realize it's not the BEST for 40k stuff, but figured I would post here to see if anyone has any ideas on what I could achieve with it.
Those models look great because there was significant post printing work done on them. Aka, sanding and filing. If you get frustrated at mold lines on a model, stay away from 3D prints. Per the moddler.com's own page:
Our process is very fast, especially when compared to traditional clay sculpting. Smaller models can be printed in a few hours. Large models can be printed in a day. Cleanup can take a few hours or a few days depending on model complexity. Most models can be turned around in 24 hours.
Also for Color 3D prints, those have been around for years. www.figureprints.com was the first major commercial one I knew of and cashed in on the WoW craze. Made it to Blizzcon 3-4 years ago and they were handing out key chains as samples. They felt like medium grit sand paper. Worse, the colors don't stay. Found that keychain this summer when moving, colors had bleached out considerably.
With the Form1 kickstarter, thought that the mass market 3D printing day of reckoning had come. At least until 3DSystems sued them for patent infringement. The patent they are pointing has another 5 years on it in the US. With how messed up the US patent system is these days, I don't see high detail mass market printers coming out till the end of the decade :(
silent25 wrote: With how messed up the US patent system is these days, I don't see high detail mass market printers coming out till the end of the decade :(
The resolution is quite high, and unlike a lot of the different methods to do 3D printing - their particular method is stupid simple with very few moving parts and components that you can probably get replacements for locally.
silent25 wrote: With how messed up the US patent system is these days, I don't see high detail mass market printers coming out till the end of the decade :(
The resolution is quite high, and unlike a lot of the different methods to do 3D printing - their particular method is stupid simple with very few moving parts and components that you can probably get replacements for locally.
That one didn't have as high a resolution as the Form1. That had a minimum resolution 50 micron, form1 had 25 micron. A number of pictures being tossed around are from the Form1 kickstarter. Plus, I was referring to cheaper units being held up because of patents, old patents, not technology or cost of manufacturing.
I agree but we both know it's not too hard to find a pirated codex or whatever you want on the tinternet
Big difference between creating a 3D model and cutting off the binding of a codex and running through the multifeed of the copier at work. The freeloaders of the world will require a lot more effort from those that make this material available.
silent25 wrote: With how messed up the US patent system is these days, I don't see high detail mass market printers coming out till the end of the decade :(
The resolution is quite high, and unlike a lot of the different methods to do 3D printing - their particular method is stupid simple with very few moving parts and components that you can probably get replacements for locally.
That one didn't have as high a resolution as the Form1. That had a minimum resolution 50 micron, form1 had 25 micron. A number of pictures being tossed around are from the Form1 kickstarter. Plus, I was referring to cheaper units being held up because of patents, old patents, not technology or cost of manufacturing.
That is the beauty of its simplicity though - you could quite reasonably increase the resolution of it beyond the current specifications. The Z limit would be whatever the viscosity of the liquid resin requires - which based on some quick calculations would be 5 microns. The X-Y limit is based on the projected image. I have taken a look at a few different high resolution projectors which should allow for roughly 10 micron X-Y resolution.
Once I clear some other things off my plate, I plan on picking up a B9 or two in order to see how far the theory can be pushed.
silent25 wrote: With how messed up the US patent system is these days, I don't see high detail mass market printers coming out till the end of the decade :(
The resolution is quite high, and unlike a lot of the different methods to do 3D printing - their particular method is stupid simple with very few moving parts and components that you can probably get replacements for locally.
That one didn't have as high a resolution as the Form1. That had a minimum resolution 50 micron, form1 had 25 micron. A number of pictures being tossed around are from the Form1 kickstarter. Plus, I was referring to cheaper units being held up because of patents, old patents, not technology or cost of manufacturing.
That is the beauty of its simplicity though - you could quite reasonably increase the resolution of it beyond the current specifications. The Z limit would be whatever the viscosity of the liquid resin requires - which based on some quick calculations would be 5 microns. The X-Y limit is based on the projected image. I have taken a look at a few different high resolution projectors which should allow for roughly 10 micron X-Y resolution.
Once I clear some other things off my plate, I plan on picking up a B9 or two in order to see how far the theory can be pushed.
Uh, that b9creator printer is making my head spin, the .. seriously. the engineering that went into it is so way ahead of everything else, no blackboxing, KISS-philosophy (yeah, I know I for one would never ever have gotten the idea to use a DLP for that purpose haha) and well.. Resin is cheap.
See through pan which holds a UV cured resin. Projector under the pan. Simple stepping motor to raise the work platform up out of the pan.
Flash an image, move up, flash an image, move up...repeat until the object is complete. No lasers to focus, no complicated XYZ movements, no vector conversions. It cures an entire level in a single go.
Granted, there are some limitations to the design - but they are the same limitations which you tend to find on all the other methods of 3D printing (support struts and what not).
See through pan which holds a UV cured resin. Projector under the pan. Simple stepping motor to raise the work platform up out of the pan.
Flash an image, move up, flash an image, move up...repeat until the object is complete. No lasers to focus, no complicated XYZ movements, no vector conversions. It cures an entire level in a single go.
Granted, there are some limitations to the design - but they are the same limitations which you tend to find on all the other methods of 3D printing (support struts and what not).
yeah pretty much. makes the reprap design seem overengineered
Some interesting stats from that B9 Creator:
10c per gram for resin
and ~10-20mm per hour per print. Speed depends on z resolution only, not on amount of material used per layer.
The changes to the print area as you increase resolution means that for this printer, you'd be struggling to print more than one space-marine sized model at a time (2" x 1.5" print area). Taking >3 hours per print at high resolution, plus time for washing and cleanup (cleanup shown using isopropyl alcohol). Weight of a plastic marine is ~2 grams plus supports, so lets say 30c per print.
It is actually 8.4 cents per gram (plus shipping). That ends up being roughly 9.5 cents per cubic centimeter. When you figure that a miniature is around 1-2 cubic centimeters...that isn't bad at all.
An Objet24 prints at roughly 17 mm per hour at 50% area per layer as well - and its speed is based both on the Z resolution and the area of each layer that needs to be cured.
With the B9 - the build speed isn't actually a linear progression. If you double the Z resolution, you don't double the build time. Each layer is cured with UV light from the projected image. Thinner layers actually cure faster than thick layers - though you will have more of them.
The size is small - but large enough for what I would be doing. Most things I would be printing would be one at a time. Anything that I need more than that - I would print...clean...cast.
Remember - the 2-3 hours to print isn't time that you will spend with it. I'd likely use it like I do a couple of my other automated tools. Load up a job, hit go, go mow the lawn or do something else. Come back in a couple of hours and see what happened.
silent25 wrote: With how messed up the US patent system is these days, I don't see high detail mass market printers coming out till the end of the decade :(
The resolution is quite high, and unlike a lot of the different methods to do 3D printing - their particular method is stupid simple with very few moving parts and components that you can probably get replacements for locally.
That one didn't have as high a resolution as the Form1. That had a minimum resolution 50 micron, form1 had 25 micron. A number of pictures being tossed around are from the Form1 kickstarter. Plus, I was referring to cheaper units being held up because of patents, old patents, not technology or cost of manufacturing.
That is the beauty of its simplicity though - you could quite reasonably increase the resolution of it beyond the current specifications. The Z limit would be whatever the viscosity of the liquid resin requires - which based on some quick calculations would be 5 microns. The X-Y limit is based on the projected image. I have taken a look at a few different high resolution projectors which should allow for roughly 10 micron X-Y resolution.
Once I clear some other things off my plate, I plan on picking up a B9 or two in order to see how far the theory can be pushed.
I stand corrected then. I had seen that kickstarter previously, but the displayed images still seemed pretty jagged in layering. Checking out some of the pictures in the forum, the stuff looks better.
The layers are still noticeable though. Would like to see figs with the minimum setting.
About the only printers that I have seen which do not have noticeable (to the naked eye) layering have been some of the higher end wax printers which are used by custom jewelers. The rest of them have layers which you can see and will need cleaning up.
That being the case - cleaning up a 10 micron layer or a 20 micron layer...both require comparable amounts of effort. The only ones which really have been a bigger pain to clean up are the ones like Makerbot which print with filaments.
Granted over 100 microns becomes a PITA again as the amount of clean up needed often removes any surface detailing which might have been part of the model. Also, once you get down below 5 microns - you can often clean up simply by coating the model with a product like Mr. Surfacer 500.
What are some of the 3d Printers being used for companies already in the 3D master/printing business. For example, Raging Heroes and some of the bit makers do a great job of moving from 3D sculpt to 3D master and then to production resin/metal.
Some of the more common ones used are those by Objet. Pricey, and the resin they spit out is really soft, but great detail and perfect for casting in resin or metal.
First things first, 3d printing (especially home printers) cannot yet approach the level of detail that GW can achieve with injection molding. Nobody is debating that. But there is a significant corner of the market for people who enjoy the gaming side of 40k more than the modeling side. Hence the uncounted legions of the Grey Marines. currently 3d printing is sufficient for those of us who like the tactics and game play and who really don't care if they ever get a golden demon. A few years ago I got a beta printrbot jr. for $250. since then I've been able to produce minis everywhere from lousy to decent quality through home additions to the printer. Recently I made a dark angels force.
and no, the detail on these isn't great, (I'm not a great painter anyway) but for most people it is acceptable.
So, in summary I don't think printing will be any threat to the "elite" market GW wants to tailor to ($25 for a 55 point mini. Really gw? centurions suck anyway) but I do think it will make the hobby more accessible to the more traditional "wargamers".
Wow, impressive to see a whole printed army painted up for once. Certainly shows that we have reached the point where this is a sustainable option. Where did you get the 3D sculpts from for the centurions if you dont mind me asking?
While it seems novel, one thing that his post is blatant IP theft.
I can appreciate wanting to play for less cost, but you do have to realize that game companies need to sell something to keep making those games that you enjoy. Something being more accessible isn't the same as being sustainable.
I hope that you at least bought the rulebook.
It may seem like GW is some big evil thing that it's okay to rip off, the reality of it is that you aren't entitled to play anything from them even if you don't like their business practices. After all, it cost money to hire artists to design the models that you're using the look of. The writing for guys like Dark Angels also costs money.
What's worse, using this to essentially play without paying for other games that could use the money more than GW.
The worst thing is if you go to a game store or local club event at a store expecting to get table space to play on, when you did nothing to support the store or community with.
There will be some way in the future for companies to use 3D printing to fund new model designs and games, but if you really want to play something and pay less to do it, consider just playing other games with cheaper costs. Because right now, you're not helping this 3D printing revolution forward, you're just using it to bypass legitimate business.
Huh. Touchy subject. Yes. I bought the rule book, all of them actually. I've been playing since the rogue trader days. I've been proudly supporting this hobby since the before landraiders cost $10 and came two in a box. I rembember bug hunts. When gw released the first Tyranids book but had no models. I have seen this hobby grow from a bunch of nerds using Avalon hill models and army men for imperial guard to the insanely overpriced system it is today.
I know this game. And it can survive having more players. It can survive an inevitable change in technology.
And as far as IP goes, technically GW has no legal prescient to enforce any IP violations with more than a 6% structure deviation. (It's the only law that kept Ridley Scott from putting them out of business a decade ago.)
And a point about people who are devoted enough buy a 3d printer in order to design, make, build and paint their own minis. There is no way in HELL we are NOT supporting our local gaming store.
You're using this tech as a stopgap in your own addiction to help further a system that should have collapsed under its own weight and sent people to other games.
And just because you played during rogue trader days doesn't really entitle you to the newer models, because real money and time was spent making the newer, better looking models.
I mean, there is a reason why you're not still using your older models or the older crappy artwork.
As far as IP goes, sure, there may be no legal recourse in this matter. But let's be honest here, those are Dark Angel copies that you're paying a thing to the people who actually created them.
Eventually, there will be a way that the people who make these games to properly profit, and gamers to benefit from the tech to create a miniature utopia, but using it in this way right now doesn't help anyone, not even yourself, in the long run.
Kinda missing the point. Nothing entitles me to the new models. I don't WANT the newer models. That's why I designed, programmed, and built MY OWN models.
Yes, someone designed dark angels first. I bought them. I bought three different editions for rules about them I have fully patronized games workshop to for a long time. That's what I meant by my long time appreciation of GW products.
I no longer think much of their new lineup, so I'm making models, from MY computer, on MY printer for MY use. I appreciate their time and effort and have payed for it for years, but no longer see the need to do so. If it makes you feel any better, think of it as scratchbuilt. You know, the thing the hobby was built on.
Wait, you're on dakkadakka and you want gw to collapse? Odd.
The detail is definitely there for 3D Printing to be better than what game companies produce. A lot of masters are created from 3D printed. The issue isn't detail but the type of printer and process being used.
The difference between something printed from a Makerbot vs something printed from a production printer is about $100,000+. There is also a higher cost in the materials that is used when you compare Makerbot PLA to say resin or other higher temperature plastic. Depending on if the printer DLP or SLA, and if it is a dissolvable support structure, there will be cleanup needed on it. The cheaper you go, the more cleanup you have to do. The more expensive you go, the least cleanup and prep you need with the miniature.
Although 3D printing can bring some great new things to war gaming. I see it being more beneficial with terrain before it is with miniatures. You can do it with miniatures, but no one really wants to pay $40-75 for a production miniature, when you can buy them for cheaper.
