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.

JWhex wrote:

 Orblivion wrote:

Imagine scanning GW models and tweaking them to your liking and then printing them.

I am sure it will come to this eventually. However, it is also quite clearly theft of intellectual property. No doubt there will be money to be made by lawyers over this issue.

I expect there will be a lot more of just plain old copying and quite a bit less of tweaking simply due to the CAD skills needed.

C'mon now. It's not theft, it's infringement. You aren't depriving GW of any concepts, ideas, or other sorts of intellectual property. You're infringing on their copyright. Now, I'm not suggesting that you infringe on a police officer and drop a deuce in his helmet, but unless you're running around causing severe brain trauma you aren't stealing ideas.

(And, yes, I'll use phrases such as 'I'm stealing that idea!' colloquially, but if we're having a serious discussion I try to be more careful with my choice of words.)

It will happen, but it will be a while.

perhaps a long while.

They key will be good designs...quality parts take quality designs (and materials many won't want to work wtih).

I already use 3d printed parts (shapeways, etc.) for custom bits....sure, once the 100 mircon printers get under $500, we will see that at home. But materials, strength and other concerns I think will limit it to dedicated hobbiests for at least the next 10 years or so.

Eventually, once it gets close, we will see materials and printers get extra taxes (like vcr's, sony mini discs, etc.) as the product providors try to push through legistation to offset home printing. Will they be successful? who knows.

So, executive summary - it will be a while.

I look forward to the day when GW goes crying that it's being legally screwed.

I doubt GW has evolved past the dial-up and fax machine phase of technology. They probably don't even know what 3d printers are.

GW and technology reminds me of that episode of Family Guy where Quagmire didn't know that the internet had porn on it. "The Internet, isn't that that thing nerds use?!"

 Harriticus wrote:
I doubt GW has evolved past the dial-up and fax machine phase of technology. They probably don't even know what 3d printers are.

GW and technology reminds me of that episode of Family Guy where Quagmire didn't know that the internet had porn on it. "The Internet, isn't that that thing nerds use?!"

I laughed pretty hard on this....

 Ravenous D wrote:
I look forward to the day when GW goes crying that it's being legally screwed.

Did someone from GW pee in your breakfast serial, just wondering about the source of your emotional distress?

Some of you guys need to go a through bad girlfriend or two and gain some perspective on things.

What is to expensive?

a formlab1 ca make gw quality for 4k.

I spent more than 2k in the LAST YEAR on miniatures.

I just bout a 100 dollar fing riptide, Ive been playing for 15 years, ILL BUY TWO OF THEM THINGS TOMORROW!!!

http://formlabs.com/

http://www.theverge.com/2013/1/12/3868090/formlabs-form-1-photos (some good photos of quality)

Currently, 3-D printers are barely capable of producing the quality of miniatures GW made when they first started up. You are basically setting your sculpting back 30+ years by using a 3-D printer.

Incorrect by a country mile. It's already been mentioned, but you can get pretty flipping close. I just had Shapeways print a zBrush sculpt for me that was about the size of a GW "Monstrous Creature" but had more detail. They nailed it. Perfectly. Some of the smaller sizes (like say a Space Marine), they start to struggle a little, but they are REALLY close:

http://www.shapeways.com/model/446658/stealth-ladies-revolvers.html?li=productBox-search

Whoever said it would be like setting sculpting back 30 years is completely ignorant of the reality of 3D printing. Completely. In the hands of a qualified digital sculptor, the 3D process already allows for (and guess what - GW IS using 3D sculpting) faster turn around and more iterations on a MORE detailed result. While most 3D printers can't quite manage the detail, they are only a year or three out from that. In total we are probably only about 5 years away from the (slightly less capable) 3D printers becoming priced at consumer levels.

What pretty much everyone always overlooks here is the input. You can't stand in front of a printer and say "Make me a Mortis Engine". It's not the Star Trek food computer. You have to have solid input which means understanding undercuts and draft lines if you're molding/casting the result. It means understanding how to make something water-tight and knowing your thicknesses and what the tolerances of your printer and substrate are. All of that is just on top of having the actual talent to be able to produce a good sculpt.

Some have said "Well then I'll just go to a service like Turbo Squid." Good luck with that. It's rare to find a model on that service that works for a basic animation. Let alone an actual print. Others have said "I'll get a 3D scanner too". Despite having been out longer than 3d printers, 3D scanners are still a ways off from being affordable at the consumer level and even the high-end ones produce results that need to be cleaned up in a 3D program.

TL;DR

The cost and quality of 3D printers are the absolute least of the problems to solve in making something that's going to compete with GW.

JWhex wrote:

 Ravenous D wrote:
I look forward to the day when GW goes crying that it's being legally screwed.

Did someone from GW pee in your breakfast serial, just wondering about the source of your emotional distress?

Some of you guys need to go a through bad girlfriend or two and gain some perspective on things.

Add and then read it again.

My statement is in regards to just how sue happy GW has been over things they really shouldn't be suing for, and I personally would find it satisfying if GW felt they were being legally screwed over for a change.

ITs like the idea that when the video camera came out, everyone could make a movie!

Only...they couldn't, because 99/100 films not made by a professional company, turn out craptastic

Same will go with this, unless people use 3d printers to quite literally "Pirate" the 3d design's of GW models, they will look like ameteuristic and rather bad models, 99 times out of 100

90% off my IG mecha army is maid in a 3d printer...it didn't just give me more money for troops but it also gave me the opportunity to convert them and make them look cooler then the original ones .If any one is interested i can link the blue prints and the 3d printer program ...just send a message and i will fix it .

BTW yes they make pretty decent looking models but nothing can compare to resin cast miniatures or finecast miniatures from GW or other big company's out their

I can actually predict that GW will adapt to the 3d printing trend:

When 3d printing actually becomes economical (somewhat), their design team could transfer from model design with the paper medium to a digital medium, and can make the specialty lines in CAD specs for the masses to make their own of the specialty models. They will charge someone if someone wants to get the design, or can have GW print it out (if they decided to get a 3d printer themselves).

Along the lines of: GW can make CAD designs for unprofitable models and have us pay the money for making the models, but GW makes money on people buying the designs...or they could use 3d printing to make models on demand, and charge for it.

 ace101 wrote:
I can actually predict that GW will adapt to the 3d printing trend:

They will adapt as well as they have adapted to the internet, social networking, customer appreciation and world trade

3d printers are this century's automobile,

just watch

Tycho wrote:

What pretty much everyone always overlooks here is the input. You can't stand in front of a printer and say "Make me a Mortis Engine". It's not the Star Trek food computer. You have to have solid input which means understanding undercuts and draft lines if you're molding/casting the result. It means understanding how to make something water-tight and knowing your thicknesses and what the tolerances of your printer and substrate are. All of that is just on top of having the actual talent to be able to produce a good sculpt.

Some have said "Well then I'll just go to a service like Turbo Squid." Good luck with that. It's rare to find a model on that service that works for a basic animation. Let alone an actual print. Others have said "I'll get a 3D scanner too". Despite having been out longer than 3d printers, 3D scanners are still a ways off from being affordable at the consumer level and even the high-end ones produce results that need to be cleaned up in a 3D program.

This and this again. I dabble in 3D modeling, and while I find it fairly easy to do hard bodies like buildings, vehicles, and objects (depending on complexity of curves, obviously), soft bodies like people and clothing are bloody hard. People will probably start printing their own bits, which already has a 3rd party market, long before they start printing their own troops.

Also, on the Turbo Squid comment, I agree -- to use a Turbo Squid model in your own stuff you're either paying boatloads for it to work properly and look good, or you're spending time touching it up and adjusting it to fit your own project (especially where polycount is an issue, but it generally isn't in 3D printing), which requires some of the knowledge to build the 3D models in the first place.

Finally, I'm glad you didn't mention cost of software to model in -- yes, Maya, Z-brush, Mudbox, etc. are expensive, but Google SketchUp, Blender, and Sculptris are free-fifty-free, and can produce print-quality models.