Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Refreshing to see someone who actually knows what he's talking about!

Refreshing to see someone who actually knows what he's talking about!

The narcissist in me is assuming you're referring to me - in which case Thanks!

The co-dependent in me is assuming you're referring to someone else - in which case I hate you. lol/jk

If 3D printing is going to be all the rage, why is GW still designing moulds? Wouldn't it be cheaper to be using 3D printing to produce their minis?

I asked the question, didn't see it answered if it was. How long does it take to print something? I guess, 3D printing will not be cost effective as moulds, for mass production.

Also, how soon does a 3D printer needs to be replaced? How about wear and tear? I know it doesn't use ink, but since I don't know anything about 3D printers, what does it use? Plastic? Is this cheap? I know when I needed to buy ink, it was just cheaper to buy a new printer.

What are the costs for a 3D printer, besides buying it?

There is a type of resin printer coming out soon that, IIRC, does very, very fine detail, but the materials for it are something like 150 bucks a liter.

 BaronIveagh wrote:
There is a type of resin printer coming out soon that, IIRC, does very, very fine detail, but the materials for it are something like 150 bucks a liter.

You're referring to UV reactive resin. You can build one for substantially less than an extruded plastic printer, and the quality is way better. It's what the B9 creator uses, among others.

chaos0xomega wrote:

Do you have a pic of the print? In any case, while there are a handfull of models available online (leman russ, dreadnought, rhino iirc), its not enough to build an army from, and they arent exact copies of the original, that Russ for example is missing all the rivets and tiny little fiddly bits found on the actual leman russ (although in some respects I do think it actually looks better).

Here are a couple of shots of this 3d printed L. Russ. I am not using the turret and turning it into a looted wagon. I think it works fine for this purpose.





I will just add as a footnote here I have been approached both in person and from folks online to buy the 3d files and the printed models themselves. So there is SOME kind of demand for 3d printed 40k stuff. I would expect to see this increase over time as printer get better and more 3d models are made available.

 Ouze wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:
There is a type of resin printer coming out soon that, IIRC, does very, very fine detail, but the materials for it are something like 150 bucks a liter.

You're referring to UV reactive resin. You can build one for substantially less than an extruded plastic printer, and the quality is way better. It's what the B9 creator uses, among others.

Was thinking of this, actually.

http://formlabs.com/products/our-printer

Loborocket wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

Do you have a pic of the print? In any case, while there are a handfull of models available online (leman russ, dreadnought, rhino iirc), its not enough to build an army from, and they arent exact copies of the original, that Russ for example is missing all the rivets and tiny little fiddly bits found on the actual leman russ (although in some respects I do think it actually looks better).

Here are a couple of shots of this 3d printed L. Russ. I am not using the turret and turning it into a looted wagon. I think it works fine for this purpose.





I will just add as a footnote here I have been approached both in person and from folks online to buy the 3d files and the printed models themselves. So there is SOME kind of demand for 3d printed 40k stuff. I would expect to see this increase over time as printer get better and more 3d models are made available.

That looks amazing. I would have absolutely no issue with you fielding that. It may be missing some of the fine details, but I highly doubt anyone would notice once its painted. As neat at it is, it also concerns me as I don't know how this could not impact GW profits in the next 5-10 years. As more & more 3d printers because mainstream & improved, the cost will decrease for public use. Meaning this will be a very plausible alternative to spending 1-2k for an army.

Davor wrote:
If 3D printing is going to be all the rage, why is GW still designing moulds? Wouldn't it be cheaper to be using 3D printing to produce their minis?

I asked the question, didn't see it answered if it was. How long does it take to print something? I guess, 3D printing will not be cost effective as moulds, for mass production.

It takes like 3 seconds to cast a mould. Printing that Russ probably took 3 hours. That's all that needs to be said.

More 3d printed stuff pics please. Sweet. Half my dice are from Shapeways lol.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

Davor wrote:
If 3D printing is going to be all the rage, why is GW still designing moulds? Wouldn't it be cheaper to be using 3D printing to produce their minis?

I asked the question, didn't see it answered if it was. How long does it take to print something? I guess, 3D printing will not be cost effective as moulds, for mass production.

It takes like 3 seconds to cast a mould. Printing that Russ probably took 3 hours. That's all that needs to be said.

For mass production a molded process is still the fastest and cheapest way to go. There is no way to really scale mass production via 3d printing.

I still think there is an opportunity here to alter or create a new way to market and sell miniatures (or anything for that matter). The 3d printing process can offer infinite customization options. A single "one of" type of object is basically the same cost as a run of thousands. This can fundamentally change the entire delivery chain of many things, not just miniatures. Very custom objects which previously prohibilitivily expensive is all of a sudden accessible to everyone at essentially the same price as mass produced objects. Money does not need to be spent on tooling, transportation, import/export fees, warehousing, distribution, inventory mgmt., shelf space, brick and mortar stores, etc... The economics of selling stuff is fundamentally changed.

This is the kind of thing GW (and other industries) need to begin thinking about as 3d printing/replication technologies advance in the near future. If you don't begin thinking about this now, then you will be caught flat footed because someone else IS thinking about this now and is thinking about a way to disrupt your business using this technology.

Just for the record I think the L. Russ. took about 18 hours to print.

Davor wrote:
If 3D printing is going to be all the rage, why is GW still designing moulds? Wouldn't it be cheaper to be using 3D printing to produce their minis?

I asked the question, didn't see it answered if it was. How long does it take to print something? I guess, 3D printing will not be cost effective as moulds, for mass production.

Also, how soon does a 3D printer needs to be replaced? How about wear and tear? I know it doesn't use ink, but since I don't know anything about 3D printers, what does it use? Plastic? Is this cheap? I know when I needed to buy ink, it was just cheaper to buy a new printer.

What are the costs for a 3D printer, besides buying it?

Given that *INDUSTRY* is pursuing advanced metal printing technologies and capabilities, I believe that the future of manufacturing actually lies in 3D printed molds (rather than the current methodology of taking a big chunk of metal and milling it to shape/size). The production time will probably be very similar, but the advantage is that you're not necessarily going to waste significant amounts of money in materials if you have to cut away large chunks of metal.

You're referring to UV reactive resin. You can build one for substantially less than an extruded plastic printer, and the quality is way better. It's what the B9 creator uses, among others.

You had me excited for a second, but it doesn't look like its capable of sub-50 micron levels of detail, which makes it largely useless to us as miniatures hobbyists for anything other than basic polygonal designs.

It takes like 3 seconds to cast a mould. Printing that Russ probably took 3 hours. That's all that needs to be said.

In defense of printing, having experimented with the dark arts of casting and molmaking... that gaks a pain in the ass.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

Davor wrote:
If 3D printing is going to be all the rage, why is GW still designing moulds? Wouldn't it be cheaper to be using 3D printing to produce their minis?

I asked the question, didn't see it answered if it was. How long does it take to print something? I guess, 3D printing will not be cost effective as moulds, for mass production.

It takes like 3 seconds to cast a mould. Printing that Russ probably took 3 hours. That's all that needs to be said.

That's hardly the last thing that needs to be said. Will a manufacturer that produces hundreds (or thousands..) of models a day switch over to use a 3D printer? No they won't. Why? because no matter how fast they get, shooting hot plastic into a mold and letting it cool is going to be far and away the fastest/cheapest option for mass producing items.

However, the costs of injection molding aren't really coming down and certainly aren't anywhere near the amount of money that a person who might want 30 marines would be interested in dealing with. On the other hand, a home user would be willing to buy a low cost (let's say $500) machine that could produce the items even if it takes 3 hours...

Putting it into perspective, if I can save money printing things on my own even if it takes a WEEK to get a full army printed up then I'm sold. I can't paint them that fast anyway.

Loborocket wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

Do you have a pic of the print? In any case, while there are a handfull of models available online (leman russ, dreadnought, rhino iirc), its not enough to build an army from, and they arent exact copies of the original, that Russ for example is missing all the rivets and tiny little fiddly bits found on the actual leman russ (although in some respects I do think it actually looks better).

Here are a couple of shots of this 3d printed L. Russ. I am not using the turret and turning it into a looted wagon. I think it works fine for this purpose.





I will just add as a footnote here I have been approached both in person and from folks online to buy the 3d files and the printed models themselves. So there is SOME kind of demand for 3d printed 40k stuff. I would expect to see this increase over time as printer get better and more 3d models are made available.

Actually, zoom in folks. The layers are plainly and easily visible.

3d printing is here, but it is going to be a long time before quality is afforadble. Why do long? Because physical technology does not advance as fast as electronics technology.

This involves chemistry and physical processes ....yes, it will get better, but its still a ways off.

Check out shapeways or other 3d printing services for details on materials and prices and quality.

I am not slamming this guy for making his own stuff....and heck, orky stuff (which is ok to be rough) if fine for it. But want some high quality, and its very very expensive now to do anything large.

Once we get to a point where less than 100 microns is affordable, THEN we will have good quality. But that will be a bit...

You mean once less than 50 microns is affordable (that printer was probably already going at 50-100 microns), you really do want sub-25 microns for our uses (and as I pointed out in a previous post, thats a different technology entirely from what is being pursued for commercial grade consumer use).

 Iron_Captain wrote:
and what you get from a 3d printer is still inferior to the products GW makes.
.

This is very wrong as this year's CES proved that with an affordable 3D printer you can make vastly superior sculptures than GW ever made.

This is very wrong as this year's CES proved that with an affordable 3D printer you can make vastly superior sculptures than GW ever made.

LOL at "vastly superior". This is the issue with these discussions. Too much hyperbole, too many voices jumping all over the "hot new thing" without enough knowledge of it, too many people wanting to just burry GW for the sake of it ....

Look, I was there. I saw those models. Not only is that not an "apples to apples" comparison. It's not even an "apples to oranges" comparison. They are in a COMPLETELY different scale than what GW does and they STILL lacked the detail GW can get in MUCH smaller parts. Additionally, those models, while nice, lacked even the quality you would have gotten from a traditionally produced figure of the same scale. Additionally what you don't see is the clean-up needed to get them to "show-room" quality. Call me when someone produces a Coven Throne in the same scale as GW's with the same amount of detail.

EDIT:

I should add that it's very likely you will see someone get there at some point. But to pretend that you're going to get "Coven Throne" levels of complexity/detail in a machine that is available for home use, AFFORDABLE for home use and easy enough for home use that is also not going to be locked down in some way by DRM any time soon is just dreaming.

I think some people really don't understand how fast physical technology can change, especially in a greenfield market where you have a good amount of investor funding available.

Yes, there have been kickstarters to get some things going but those are small shops that put together proof of concept stuff with almost no funds. Now, think about what a company with a good sized warchest ($1m plus) can do. They exist, but you probably haven't heard from them yet as they've been working on the next wave of printers. It won't take 5 years; it probably won't even take another 2 for a reasonably priced, high quality device.

The fact that at least one company has managed to get their product packaged up and is currently selling them in a retail chain (office depot in the US), should tell you a lot. Combine that with the fact that a couple heavy hitters, like HP, have publicly stated that they have been working on 3D printers should also tell you a lot.

This isn't pie in the sky "vaporware"; it's here and only getting better at an incredibly fast rate.

The price point will be in the $350 to $600 range. That's already being established and is certainly within reach of a large number of households.

The real difference between the various offerings is going to come down to ease of use of associated software. While the long term viability of each company will boil down to what they do to protect designer IP.

Expect to hear more manufacturers raise a stink about their IP during 2014 and for groups to come together to create a common standard for it's protection. Also expect to see several companies change hands depending upon what part of the process they've managed to patent.

I think some people really don't understand how fast physical technology can change, especially in a greenfield market where you have a good amount of investor funding available.

Yes, there have been kickstarters to get some things going but those are small shops that put together proof of concept stuff with almost no funds. Now, think about what a company with a good sized warchest ($1m plus) can do. They exist, but you probably haven't heard from them yet as they've been working on the next wave of printers. It won't take 5 years; it probably won't even take another 2 for a reasonably priced, high quality device.

The fact that at least one company has managed to get their product packaged up and is currently selling them in a retail chain (office depot in the US), should tell you a lot. Combine that with the fact that a couple heavy hitters, like HP, have publicly stated that they have been working on 3D printers should also tell you a lot.

People act like this tech just popped up yesterday. It's been around for a number of years. While it's progressed faster than some other physical technologies, it still hasn't progressed as fast as many seem to think it has. I really feel that 2 years is way too optimistic for the kind of printer everyone here is expecting. I've seen the "next level of printers" and yeah, for easy affordable home use? 2 years is WAY too soon imo.

Yes, one company has gotten something to market. That said, LOTS of companies get new technologies to market and die out fairly quickly (along with their tech) soon after. That one company has gotten something to market is an interesting sign. But to pretend it's the herald of a new wave of tech? That's a little naive at this point. It certainly COULD be, but it's WAY too soon to tell for sure.

Also, heavy hitters like HP? Heavy hitters like Toyota have also mentioned working on flying cars. I know that's a bit out there, but my point is that companies will say they're working on just about anything. Rarely, if ever, do the things they say their R&D dept. is working on come to actual fruition. Again, it certainly could be that HP is going to turn out something incredible. But it's also not something you can hold up as a definitive sign.

This isn't pie in the sky "vaporware"; it's here and only getting better at an incredibly fast rate.

There's quite a bit more that has to happen here before the tech gets to the point we're talking about. Quite a bit more.

The price point will be in the $350 to $600 range. That's already being established and is certainly within reach of a large number of households.

Agreed on that. At least as far as the U.S. goes. I don't know what the threshold would be for other countries.

The real difference between the various offerings is going to come down to ease of use of associated software. While the long term viability of each company will boil down to what they do to protect designer IP.

Expect to hear more manufacturers raise a stink about their IP during 2014 and for groups to come together to create a common standard for it's protection. Also expect to see several companies change hands depending upon what part of the process they've managed to patent.

And these are the two things everyone else is missing. IP protection and software. Thus far there's not been enough of a demand for any of the high-end developers to change their paradigms and make the "dumbed down" software that would be needed for the average home user. Trust me, it's going to need to be almost exactly as easy as a microwave for most people before it catches on and making software that easy to use while keeping it powerful enough to accurately drive a 3D printer is going to be harder than making the printers.

In a generation or two the people who have lived their entire lives with smart phones and google won't need things dumbed down nearly so much (I don;t think so anyway), but then you still have the IP issues ...

This seems pertinent:

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/heroforge/customizable-3d-printed-tabletop-miniatures

... it's only a matter of time at this point.

This seems pertinent:

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/heroforge/customizable-3d-printed-tabletop-miniatures

... it's only a matter of time at this point.

The quality appears hit or miss (although a few of the examples are quite nice), you are limited to the design options they give you through their UI and unless I'm missing something, they aren't selling the printers. They are selling the service. There are already 3D printers like Shapeways who can do even better levels of detail with whatever models you supply them ...

EDIT:
I should add that when I say the quality is "hit or miss", my standard for comparison is the stuff GW has been putting out in recent years. The quality for everything on that page is going to be more than acceptable for the average gamer imo.

Hence "matter of time". This is not, overnight, going to replace GW... but give it a couple years and a couple small steps forward of technical evolution, and you can (theoretically) have an entirely custom-built army that all you need to do is paint (though they have printers that can do colors for you, too).

Yeah, I don't think anyone is arguing that the quality won't get there. It's the issue of all of the other factors converging, and doing so favorably that is in question. Again, you can actually have a printing service print your army right now. Provided the production manager is asleep at the wheel you can even get away with violating IP (I'm NOT condoning it btw - it's just something that's happening occasionally), AND the price really wouldn't be that bad when compared to buying the same army outright. Yet it's not hurting anyone at all.

Add to that how long it's going to take to get that quality of printer readily, easily, and affordably into a very large number of homes (because unless they make one that prints iCrap this is not going to be an item that the "mainstream" consumers needed to make it popular are going to buy any time soon) is what the trick is going to be. Now add in DRM, IP protection and probable attempts at various types of legal intervention by companies who are making money selling printing services to the same consumers the in-home printers would be targeted for and you're looking at quite a while before the "future" arrives. And when it does there's a much better chance it looks like an over-regulated "pay-for-play" version of Napster than the "everything is free and there are no rules" version everyone wants ...

Here is a scenario I could imagine:

Say someone (GW or someone else) purpose builds a character posing/customization type of software where a user can custom create their own minitatures. Giving them specific war grear, posing them in specific ways and then on-demand printing those miniatures. I think there is some money to be made on a setup like that.

You could create a community around the character customization by encouraging people to upload and share custom models. Credits to print could be given away for models uploaded and printed by other users. So those not artisticaly inclined or who don't want to learn the software can simply browse the models and then print. People who are interrested in customizing can make their own and upload hoping to get some credits for later or print out right away.

Something like this could be licensed or be done by GW itself to get away from IP issues. Printing done by a service could net higher quality because higher end (better than consumer grade printers we have been talking about) printers could be used.

I think somethign like this could be just about achieved today and I think there is probably some profit in it as well. If not now it will be soon.

Here is a scenario I could imagine:

Yeah. Agreed. I think that's a much more likely scenario than a lot of the other proposals in this thread.

Tycho wrote:
Yeah, I don't think anyone is arguing that the quality won't get there. It's the issue of all of the other factors converging, and doing so favorably that is in question. Again, you can actually have a printing service print your army right now. Provided the production manager is asleep at the wheel you can even get away with violating IP (I'm NOT condoning it btw - it's just something that's happening occasionally), AND the price really wouldn't be that bad when compared to buying the same army outright. Yet it's not hurting anyone at all.

Add to that how long it's going to take to get that quality of printer readily, easily, and affordably into a very large number of homes (because unless they make one that prints iCrap this is not going to be an item that the "mainstream" consumers needed to make it popular are going to buy any time soon) is what the trick is going to be. Now add in DRM, IP protection and probable attempts at various types of legal intervention by companies who are making money selling printing services to the same consumers the in-home printers would be targeted for and you're looking at quite a while before the "future" arrives. And when it does there's a much better chance it looks like an over-regulated "pay-for-play" version of Napster than the "everything is free and there are no rules" version everyone wants ...

I think that, once a desktop 3D printer comes along that can get the details done "close enough" to FW/GW, there will be someone who creates a program (or series of programs) that allows the mix-and-match idea that I mentioned previously (and that is evidenced in the KS thing I linked).

Sure, we're a few years away from that being a potential reality, but the fact is that this KS indicates that it's possible, and with that proof, well, that's all some people need to see if they can kitbash something together as a proof-of-concept, and from there build it into an actual application.

Shoot, look at the guys who set up the Nexus network for video game mods. They figured out how to build an application to manage all your mods for a broad range of games, that can download, update, install, organize and troubleshoot mods for all manner of PC games. And they do this virtually for free.

I really think the scenario Loborocket put forth is the more likely (by far). What you describe IS certainly possible. I just don't think it's going to happen like that. The issue with your video game example is the part where you say "for free". A lot of people do that type of thing for fun as a hobby and a lot of people also do it as a way to build their portfolios and work experience in order to land games jobs. The point is it costs next to nothing to do simple game mods. Depending on what you use, even the more complex mods don't cost a lot of money. 3D printers are expensive to make. Even when the price for the higher end models comes down, they still won't be free to make. If the people making the printers are getting paid, the people making the software (which will arguably be a more complex task) sure as hell aren't going to volunteer their time ...

Oh these people won't be making the printers, they'll just be making the software that lets Jimmy and Janey Average make use of their own 3D printer in an easy, user-friendly manner.

They'll be the ones building an individual sculpt (like the people who do armor and weapon mods for Skyrim, for example) and letting other people download and use it, while others work on the "nuts and bolts" of the program that lets the end-user take that mod-file and plug it into their 3D Printer and get something kickass out of it... or blend it with other files from other creators to make something semi-unique.

Oh these people won't be making the printers, they'll just be making the software that lets Jimmy and Janey Average make use of their own 3D printer in an easy, user-friendly manner.

They'll be the ones building an individual sculpt (like the people who do armor and weapon mods for Skyrim, for example) and letting other people download and use it, while others work on the "nuts and bolts" of the program that lets the end-user take that mod-file and plug it into their 3D Printer and get something kickass out of it... or blend it with other files from other creators to make something semi-unique.

I get that you were being soft-ware specific there. From the comment above though, I'm a little unclear as to whether you mean these people will be making the software to run the printers, whether you mean they will be content makers (producing just the 3D models) or some combination thereof.

If you are referring to the software that actually runs the machines, no. Just no. That software is going to come bundled with the printers and the people who coded it are getting paid.

If you mean content providers - yeah. Good luck with that. Did you see my comment earlier about how well services like that are currently working? I can't see that situation getting any better ...
Again, comparing it to modding for games just isn't an apples to apples comparison.

FYI

I've put some pictures of 3D printed stuff for Epic in Taccom.

It starts with some "Stalkers" and on the later pages drop pods and space marines.

The stuff is printed at home with a B)Creator- all models are created from the ground up.

http://www.taccmd.tacticalwargames.net/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=26528

One of the images :



Regards
Stephan