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.

Really, I thought it was the other one. 3d printing is good for little stuff, but you really see the lack of detail in big stuff.

Poly Ranger wrote:
That didn't work for the music industry or the movie industry though. .

That's because the music and movie industries are dominated by groups who stubbornly resisted moving to new technology because they couldn't see any way to make money from it, rather than embracing it and accepting that some people will still pirate anyway but the majority will buy if a legit option is available and the prices are right.


It's worth pointing out that when desktop PC printers were first released, people predicted that they would spell the doom of the printing industry. And yet printed books have only just (comparitively) started to decline due to the growth of (not all illegally obtained) eBooks rather than because of everyone printing off the Lord of the Rings on their PC, and there are still plenty of companies out there offering specialised printing services... because no matter how much home-PC-ready technology advances, commercial machines are still better.

3D printing will be the same for quite some time. Yes, desktop units are coming down in price, and are getting better. Commercial machines will still be far superior. And by the time the gap has closed enough to not matter, smart companies will have figured out ways to profit from the new technology.

Loborocket wrote:

 ninjafiredragon wrote:
^^^ so which of the razorbacks weapons are fake? i cant tell and its bugging me

The lascanon one is the 3d print. :-)

Thought so.

 Agent_Tremolo wrote:
Yep, 3D printers have a bright future ahead. Internet piracy? Not so much.

Our generation has enjoyed a high degree of online freedom, but we're moving into an internet environment where controls are becoming tighter, and technical barriers are erected to limit what we can and can't do with our devices. Actually, a future dominated by the Itunes App Store strikes me as more likely than the post-capitalist free for all envisioned by the maker culture.

3D printing won't find the lawless environment p2p networks and CD copiers found in the 90-00s. By the time it becomes popular and affordable, industries affected by this technology would have plenty of time and resources to adapt.

Dont forget that while you are right that the internet is getting more and more sanctioned there are people already having solutions against that. Look at the well known torrent search site which is switching to hosting its website only via p2p among its users. This way they simply avoid the world wide web through clustering. Its not like the last word on internet freedom is already spoken.

Here's a video about 3D printing at the Consumer Electronics Show this year

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-25239606

This guy thinks that printing has taken off, I tend to agree with him. Even NASA are developing a 3d printer for the ISS to print out spare parts when they're needed so you don't need to keep all spares in stock.

With the new Makerbot Replicator Mini only costing $1375 / £840 it's becoming more and more affordable. Soon most people will know someone who has one.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11386_3-57617014-76/makerbot-ceo-replicator-mini-like-when-people-saw-first-iphone/

They way I see it going is that gamers will take their apocalypse sized models, superheavies and formations and 3d print them. Why spend that much money on one or two forgeworld models when you can buy the printer and then print as many as you like!
If GW went back to metal moulding [and ditch the bad job that is failcast] then they'll make the best quality miniatures again, but 3d printing will take over for large vehicles and superheavies.

I've even talked with a few friends, if 10 of us split the cost then it's very very affordable. Sure we couldn't use the models that we used in official tournaments or in the store, but we don't play there anyway. I'd still want to see the potential irl before I'd invest in it.

Last time I heard GW discuss this subject they replied with (Paraphrasing) "If we thought 3D printing was the future, we would be investing in it." Which concerns me greatly. I'm concerned that the massive rush of content we have seen as of late is out of desperation to sell as much product as possible before the mini bubble explodes. Sure the quality right now is inferior. In 5-10 years time however, I'd wager you won't be able to tell this difference from what we are using now & something 3d printed.

A very scary thought for those of us who have thousands of dollars invested in the hobby.

Games workshop is way ahead of the curve, theyve had STC's for quite a while.

Just read how Landraiders are constructed.

 insaniak wrote:

It's worth pointing out that when desktop PC printers were first released, people predicted that they would spell the doom of the printing industry. And yet printed books have only just (comparitively) started to decline due to the growth of (not all illegally obtained) eBooks rather than because of everyone printing off the Lord of the Rings on their PC, and there are still plenty of companies out there offering specialised printing services... because no matter how much home-PC-ready technology advances, commercial machines are still better.

This is the important point. People are pointing to home printing, but only in the last few years has it become possible for non printing businesses to produce anything of publishable quality at a reasonable price themselves in house. Until very recently anything you wanted of reasonable quality went to an external printer who had the tools and skill needed to make something you would want the public to see, unless you were a large enough company to justify a specialist printing department. Now we are just starting to see more and more companies produce high quality printed materials in-houes, but it is still not the norm.

For all the shouting about 3D printing I think we will see the same as normal printing. What people print at home will remain the equivalent of the 3 color ink jet to miniature makers offset lithography for a long time.

Poly Ranger wrote:
People claimed copied cds would be inferior, whether this is true or not, it made no difference. Now it won't start to have an effect until 3D printers are common place, and even then it will only be a gradual decline. But it will happen, not just in the minitures industry either.
When everybody has a 3D printer, there will be far more people with a large amount of experiance and skill with them. That alone will bring prices for templates down, some people will even do it for fun, like they do with program and mmorpeg design (I have a friend who created a parallel tibia so we could go hunting via LAN without spawning grounds being overcrowded for example.).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And he did that 8 years ago!!!

There is a huge gulf of difference between burning a CD and printing a physical object, that you are comparing the two implies to me that you don't really have any idea what you're talking about. Beyond that, yes, burned (audio/video) CD's are generally inferior unless its done via a lossless format. Granted, its not terribly difficult to do that, but you'd be surprised by the number of people out there who have no idea what they're doing. And no, having 3D printers does not mean everyone will have experience and skill with them. Chances are people will be paying other people for limited download rights off a website or something like that. Do you know how to 3D model or use CAD software? It's not something you really just 'learn'. I've been doing this stuff for over a decade now and I'm still learning and getting better at it. And I've seen those homebrewed mmorpg's/computer games... hate to break it to you, but they're generally gakky quality.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
We have this thread every week. No. Not now, not until we have actual replicators and post-scarcity socialism and stuff.

Sorry I hadn't seen this thread the entire time i've been on dakka. I must have been very unobservant.

Among other things

Of this quality? No. Give it a couple years, 3D printed materials will be indistinguishable from something professionally cast.

And still prohibitively expensive and inefficient for anything other than a one-off or master model.

It might be a while before we see people with 3d printers in their homes, but I can certainly see where it's possible to make models today for costs on par with buying them new from GW.

I just wanted to make clear the issue with this statement. "Buying them new from GW" aside from the fact that I don't know anyone that pays retail prices for GW (hell, I buy my stuff from China at 60% off retail value), the problem is that it's only really worth doing against GW's ridiculously high pricing, Warhammer 40K isn't the entire miniatures industry, not even by a longshot, there are far more non-40k gamers than there are 40k gamers out there, and a lot of those other games don't make it practical for 3D printing to be a real threat to them.

GW, just like most producers of small easily manufactured items, need to take notice and get in front of the coming changes.

No, they really don't.

GW needs to make files compatible with certain 3D printers then licenses users to print their own armies. Perhaps you spend $50 for a space marine template or $10 for a special character. This would be nearly 100% profit to GW as they wouldn't have to produce, package and ship those models. Meanwhile regular consumers would gladly pay to print their own.

NO!!! NONONONONONONONO!!! A MILLION TIMES NO! Are you kidding me? You think people would pay $50 for a file, most likely DRM'd to be a one-time use only thing, to then have to pay another $10-$15 in materials costs to print what is currently a $40 (retail, can be purchased for much less elsewhere) squad of tactical marines??? ARE YOU KIDDING ME!?? And thats assuming you HAVE your own printer, if you're utilizing a service, forgetaboutit, its another $50. Beyond that, its not 100% profit to GW. Truly skilled 3d artists command a pretty high salary in the video game and film industries. GW's designers are good, but they're still pretty much in the realm of amateur (which is why they still utilize a hybrid process between 3D and hand sculpting). For GW to go to an all digital model, they would basically just be shifting the production costs to the sculpting end. On top of that, due to the nature of 3D printing being decentralized and thus impossible to enforce quality control, GW would never go this direction, because too many people would go the 'el cheapo' route and show up with gakky miniatures. GW relies on (theoretically) high quality miniatures attracting people to their product, gakky 3d prints aren't going to do that.

The monks were ultimately put out of business by the printing press; if they had gone ahead and become typesetters then they could have kept with it for a few hundred more years... Old habits die hard though .

Apples to Oranges. Monks wrote books one at a time by hand. GW currently produces a good chunk of its minis using a mixed workflow process of 3d design and hand sculpting, and then industrially manufactures miniatures at a rate that no 3D printer will be capable of producing in the near future. If anything, by saying GW should go to 3D printing, you're saying that the typesetters should become monks.

Regarding quality. The pace of innovation in today's world is simply astounding. I can walk into about 3 local stores that sell 3D printers; meanwhile the number of 3D printing related kickstarters is just insane. You can bet that the quality level is going to go up in a very short amount of time and that prices will drop like a rock. I wouldn't estimate 10 years. Instead it's probably closer to 2; 3 at the most.

Sadly, most of those kickstarters really haven't delivered what they promised, and the printers you can buy in local stores are nowhere near what you need to print a 28mm miniature to a level that can compete with a traditional cast model. And I'd say 2-3 years is a hopelessly optimistic estimate from someone who doesn't have any familiarity with the industry.

This is the first time I have seen evidence of such good quality printing avaliable to the general public though.

Then you've been under a rock, that's hardly 'good quality' in fact its pretty much crap, especially considering the things that companies like Dreamforge games were producing almost a decade ago.

Lastly, If you think 3D printing not a big deal... remember this thread in 20 years time...

Yea... about 10 years ago someone told me 'a decade from now 3D printing will have changed the world' after I told him it wouldn't. Well looky here, 10 years later and I'm still right.

Question is, how long does it take to print something in 3D?

I thought a simple gun bits could take an hour or two to do.

It depends on size, shape, structure, etc. For something like a marine you're looking at a couple hours, for a squad considerably more.

10 years ago it would have taken me an hour with the processor of a huge desktop computer plugged into the internet to download a 118page pdf document. 3 weeks ago it took me a few seconds on a wireless device that is primarily designed for communication and also fits snuggly into my hand, whilst at half signal, to download the 118page cypher data slate.

Then you had a really poor internet connection a decade ago, considering that a 118 page pdf document is only a couple megabytes.

Not pulling your leg. The printer I used for these models cost about $2000. Material is next to nothing. I think the Thunderfire is abut $1.50 in plastic. As for my modeling skills I have worked as an Architect for 16 years so I do have CAD experience, but the skills I used to make these models could be learned in a week or less of study. The CAD models probably have 20 hours or so of work in them. Up close you can really tel a difference but on the table they look fine.

Don't be misleading, the things you printed are very simple geometrically speaking. Personally, I don't think there is much of a market for printed box shapes... then again GW's been selling people Rhinos for 2 decades now, so what do I know?

^^^ so which of the razorbacks weapons are fake? i cant tell and its bugging me

It's the one on the right, it (should be) really obvious, you can clearly see the printer marks on it, especially the bezeled/angled piece.

Now most people won't buy a printer that couldn't do those things

Y'know, I really gotta wonder what you are all going on about in regards to 2D printers. I only ever use one at work, and prior to that I used one at school. I personally have yet to find the need for a printer in my personal life which would warrant me going out and spending $150 on something that I would guess most people already have access to (via work/school)

3d printing is good for little stuff, but you really see the lack of detail in big stuff.

Wrong, other way around. Good for big stuff, cannot print little stuff. The 'lack of detail' you refer to is a result of people not putting the details in when they design a part.

They way I see it going is that gamers will take their apocalypse sized models, superheavies and formations and 3d print them. Why spend that much money on one or two forgeworld models when you can buy the printer and then print as many as you like!
If GW went back to metal moulding [and ditch the bad job that is failcast] then they'll make the best quality miniatures again, but 3d printing will take over for large vehicles and superheavies.

Well, a few problems... first is that printers have size limits, very few of the commercially available printers are capable of printing something the size of a baneblade in one go, and if they can, its probably not to a sufficient level of detail, and if it is, you can bet that you're still looking at a 5-6 figure price tag. Yes, the price will go down eventually, but it's still going to cost more (barring price hikes) to print a baneblade than it will to just buy one.The second is, where exactly do you propose to get a file to print a large vehicle? Are you able to model them yourself? Are you able to engineer them correctly for print, ensuring they are watertight, hollowed out properly, have a thick enough wall thickness to not fall apart, etc?

In 5-10 years time however, I'd wager you won't be able to tell this difference from what we are using now & something 3d printed.

Thats already the case today. The only telltale sign would be the material. The problem is that the printers that can do this (today) cost $100,000.00 or more, and take hours if not days to print something at a decent enough quality, and often times you still have to do some post-print cleanup (sand down striation lines, etc.), and the material costs for these printers are much higher than something like makerbot.

For all the shouting about 3D printing I think we will see the same as normal printing. What people print at home will remain the equivalent of the 3 color ink jet to miniature makers offset lithography for a long time.

Thank you for being the (seemingly) lone voice of reason.

Loborocket wrote:

 ninjafiredragon wrote:
^^^ so which of the razorbacks weapons are fake? i cant tell and its bugging me

The lascanon one is the 3d print. :-)

dam i thought it was the heavy bolter

chaos0xomega wrote:

Not pulling your leg. The printer I used for these models cost about $2000. Material is next to nothing. I think the Thunderfire is abut $1.50 in plastic. As for my modeling skills I have worked as an Architect for 16 years so I do have CAD experience, but the skills I used to make these models could be learned in a week or less of study. The CAD models probably have 20 hours or so of work in them. Up close you can really tel a difference but on the table they look fine.

Don't be misleading, the things you printed are very simple geometrically speaking. Personally, I don't think there is much of a market for printed box shapes... then again GW's been selling people Rhinos for 2 decades now, so what do I know?

^^^ so which of the razorbacks weapons are fake? i cant tell and its bugging me

It's the one on the right, it (should be) really obvious, you can clearly see the printer marks on it, especially the bezeled/angled piece.

BrotherVord wrote:

This sounds like what I hear right before every other tech step forward. 2d printers used to print good awful slow and people saw industrial printers that could make copies and print 20 pages a minute and said "the average consumer will never need those features. "

Now most people won't buy a printer that couldn't do those things

Those features aren't comparable. Paper printers of a level that would compare to what we expect from 3D printers are not what I'd call affordable for home use even today.

How does that quote go?

Dakka informed me that the automotive horseless carriage was just a passing fancy of the landed gentry. Never would they have the means to afford such a complex machine nor need to travel since the market is within walking distance. So I invested in over 1000 shares of the Brixton Horse and Buggy company for the incredible price of $8.50. Now I am ruined

Seriously though, if you honestly think something is ever too complex or expensive for the average person just think back a decade ago. I remember laughing at PDAs because they were so needlessly complex compared to a simple schedule book. Now every highschooler has an iPhone. Go back further and nobody honestly thought cars would have caught on. Home computers were thought to be an excess that nobody would have practical use for. The iPod was originally a joke to lots of people because it "had more space than realistically usable" and costed way more than a standard CD player, and look where Apple is now.

Don't make assumptions as to what the market will want/need because you will be regularly proven wrong.

ChaosOxomega:
The gulf between 3D printing and burning a CD might be huge, so was the gulf between creating a mixed tape (cassette) and burning a cd. Technology moves on. Oh and I used it as an analogy. Don't get stuck in the past.
Now you're right, about one thing, I may have read up extensively on 3D printers, but I have never seen one in 'the flesh' or used one (unless you count the machine which cut our boxes in Design Tech at school a decade ago) and the last time I used CAD was in Systems and Control 10 years ago. So I am inexperienced with them (but that doesn't nessessarily mean I totally don't know what I am talking about). I brought it up on Dakka to get feedback from people who had more experiance, so thank you for your response despite it being highly rude.
Oh and 10 years ago my village was one of the last areas in Britain to get broadband so we were on modem, so yes my internet was increadibly slow.
Do not misjudge the pace of technological advancement because it gets exponentially quicker year upon year.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
How does that quote go?

Dakka informed me that the automotive horseless carriage was just a passing fancy of the landed gentry. Never would they have the means to afford such a complex machine nor need to travel since the market is within walking distance. So I invested in over 1000 shares of the Brixton Horse and Buggy company for the incredible price of $8.50. Now I am ruined

Seriously though, if you honestly think something is ever too complex or expensive for the average person just think back a decade ago. I remember laughing at PDAs because they were so needlessly complex compared to a simple schedule book. Now every highschooler has an iPhone. Go back further and nobody honestly thought cars would have caught on. Home computers were thought to be an excess that nobody would have practical use for. The iPod was originally a joke to lots of people because it "had more space than realistically usable" and costed way more than a standard CD player, and look where Apple is now.

Don't make assumptions as to what the market will want/need because you will be regularly proven wrong.

You seem to be misunderstanding a key point though 3D printers are not the same thing as 3D modeling software. While the printer may become progressively more usable, the software isn't being developed along the same lines, and 'professional' level software (besides being really expensive) isn't really getting any simpler to use. Yes, there is google sketchup and similar low-end stuff which will be useful for odds n ends, but as of yet I haven't seen anyone make something in sketchup that really impresses me or would really even come close to comparing to something like a GW miniature.

Do not misjudge the pace of technological advancement because it gets exponentially quicker year upon year.

Ehhh... not really, its actually fairly linear in the grand scheme of things, thats a different conversation though.

Linear? You having a laugh??? I don't even know where to begin with that comment!

You can begin by looking at actual measures, like the number of patents issued every year, etc. rather than things like computing power (which is increasing exponentially, unfortunately it seems that despite doubling our available processor power something like every 18 months, its still mostly just being used for porn).

We need a sticky RE: 3D printing threads. These are starting to get worse than the "Which army should I use" threads". Ugh.

Having worked in the 3D printing and Rapid Prototyping industry, my own thoughts are summed up in this thread:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/120/530548.page

TL;DR:

1. The quality of results with 3D printing (the hi-end "not yet available to the public kind) are pretty much there

2. Most (not all but MOST) of the people claiming this will put GW out of business (or at least severely hurt them) don't understand 3D printing OR business

3. There is still no cheaper easier way to create minis than recasting them. None. And yet that hasn't even put a dent in GW (or even lesser mini companies)

4. It will be a LONG LONG time before an in-home 3D printer gets to the point that the average person can use them reliably and easily enough to make them worth while (they will need to be "microwave-simple" AND "microwave-cheap" before they catch on wide-spread enough to worry anyone)

5. There are so many ways GW can and will monetize this that it's not going to be an issue

6. GW is already using some very advanced manufacturing and engineering processes. Adaptation in this area (despite what the internet would have you believe) will not be an issue for them

I do believe 3d printers will become a common household item in the next 10 years. I do think that as far as printing models for us hobbyists, it will mostly be special weapons and wargear we print off as opposed to entire units.

With the obvious exception of Titans. Going to be so many home made versions of those with custom rules it will be crazy. GW needs to make a rule system for making your own superheavies.

Just because you have a 3D printer doesnt mean you can make a tact squad...you need the files, which you either make yourself in autocad or solid works or whatever, which would take hours and hours and certainly not everyone is capable of doing, or

illegally obtain the files, which i dont believe are floating around anywhere, so you'd have to steal them from some GW factory, which is very, very illegal.

The 3D printer poses no threat to miniature companies unless their models 3D image files are available for torrenting online.

Tycho wrote:
We need a sticky RE: 3D printing threads. These are starting to get worse than the "Which army should I use" threads". Ugh.

Having worked in the 3D printing and Rapid Prototyping industry, my own thoughts are summed up in this thread:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/120/530548.page

TL;DR:

1. The quality of results with 3D printing (the hi-end "not yet available to the public kind) are pretty much there

2. Most (not all but MOST) of the people claiming this will put GW out of business (or at least severely hurt them) don't understand 3D printing OR business

3. There is still no cheaper easier way to create minis than recasting them. None. And yet that hasn't even put a dent in GW (or even lesser mini companies)

4. It will be a LONG LONG time before an in-home 3D printer gets to the point that the average person can use them reliably and easily enough to make them worth while (they will need to be "microwave-simple" AND "microwave-cheap" before they catch on wide-spread enough to worry anyone)

5. There are so many ways GW can and will monetize this that it's not going to be an issue

6. GW is already using some very advanced manufacturing and engineering processes. Adaptation in this area (despite what the internet would have you believe) will not be an issue for them

This. Exalted, I wish I could exalt again and again and again.

With the obvious exception of Titans. Going to be so many home made versions of those with custom rules it will be crazy. GW needs to make a rule system for making your own superheavies.

Given the time, cost, and process involved with that, I really don't think thats going to be the case.

BTW, you guys are aware that 3D printing isn't a monolithic technology, right? There are actually about a half dozen (maybe more?) subtypes of 3D printers, with different properties etc. Most of the focus is on fused deposition modeling (FDM) type printers, and most of the focus on them is being used to make them faster and cheaper for use in manufacturing things that don't require anywhere near the 'resolution' or detail of a miniature. In other words, what I'm trying to say to you, is that the focus of the industry, at least for the time being, isn't on miniature hobbyists or even anything remotely comparable. Miniature hobbyists are not, for the time being, the future of the 3D printing industry, and very little is being done right now which is going to make 3D printing anywhere near viable for what you are talking about.

SLA (stereolythography) and DLP (digital light processing printers) are the technologies that you want for a 3D printer. They AREN'T the focus of the industry right now, because they are more expensive, more dangerous (the material they use is highly toxic until cured), slower, and are used only in specialist applications (like high resolution finely detailed models). While there have been some advances made for these type printers (Form 1 amongst others), they aren't the focus and not what anyone is really expecting to end up in everyones living room for the time being.

In other words, while 3D printing might become commonplace in 5+ years, it won't be in a form that miniature hobbyists will really be able to utilize to maximum effect (unless you like playing with crappy models that lack definition and detail), since the SLA/DLP type are only really being developed for 'enthusiasts' and industry (who can find use for sub-25 micron resolutions) whereas FDM is being developed for mass market (who don't have need for printing things smaller than 50-100 micron resolution). A 'cheap' SLA type printer right now costs about $2,000, and hits 25 microns in a very limited space, there is a slightly more advanced one available for about $5,000 that can (supposedly) get down to .1 micron (which is phenomenal), but again, none of the 'big names' are really pursuing that avenue, and the materials (aside from being highly toxic) are still something like $200/ounce or something ridiculous like that (and not going down) and they literally take forever to print anything.

 changerofways wrote:
...unless their models 3D image files are available for torrenting online.

There are some out there. This was modeled by someone who took measurements off the original model. I have printed it and it came out fairly decent. I am currently working on turning it into a looted wagon. I will post pics when done.

Loborocket wrote:

 changerofways wrote:
...unless their models 3D image files are available for torrenting online.

There are some out there. This was modeled by someone who took measurements off the original model. I have printed it and it came out fairly decent. I am currently working on turning it into a looted wagon. I will post pics when done.

Please share once its completed. I am very excited to see the results!

Loborocket wrote:

 changerofways wrote:
...unless their models 3D image files are available for torrenting online.

There are some out there. This was modeled by someone who took measurements off the original model. I have printed it and it came out fairly decent. I am currently working on turning it into a looted wagon. I will post pics when done.

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).

You seem to be misunderstanding a key point though 3D printers are not the same thing as 3D modeling software. While the printer may become progressively more usable, the software isn't being developed along the same lines, and 'professional' level software (besides being really expensive) isn't really getting any simpler to use. Yes, there is google sketchup and similar low-end stuff which will be useful for odds n ends, but as of yet I haven't seen anyone make something in sketchup that really impresses me or would really even come close to comparing to something like a GW miniature.

You are so stuck in the "now" it is funny. 3D modelling software continually improves, and gets continually easier for users to create with. It is inevitable that 3D design software will become a near-standard hobbyist's tool, unless 3D printers are replaced with some greater technology before then.

Imagine an application like DAZ Studio combined with a 3D printer. With user-created content, the basic enduser could benefit from the work of others by using pre-created modules to assemble the 3D model of a desired figure. This would include all the detailed bits, modeled wargear, pose, armor pattern, everything.

He then hits "print" and it's done. He can, should he desire, create an entire army of these soldiers (or vehicles or weapons or whatever), or he can save the file format and use it as simply one pose of soldiers, and then assemble others with the bits and pieces of these modular design models that he's acquired.

While there's an initial investment in the software and the printer, after that point? He's got SM (or IG, Eldar, whatever) armies for ever. He just needs to provide the raw materials for the printer. He can even mix-and-match, adding Eldar helmets to Space Marine bodies, boltguns to IG soldiers, all kinds of things.

... and after the initial investment? That's it. It's now just the cost of supplies.

Actual model is on the workbench at home right now being converted into a looted wagon. I will post a pic later this evening. Yes there are plenty of details left off, BUT it is a reasonable alternative. Not so far out there that everyone would be off put by it. It is actually pretty close and the differences might not be discernable from 3 feet away. Whatever floats your boat. I have access to a printer, so I only pay for the consumables. I am going to give it a go for lots of stuff. It is for sure the cutting edge, but I think to dismiss outright is a mistake.

 Psienesis wrote:

You seem to be misunderstanding a key point though 3D printers are not the same thing as 3D modeling software. While the printer may become progressively more usable, the software isn't being developed along the same lines, and 'professional' level software (besides being really expensive) isn't really getting any simpler to use. Yes, there is google sketchup and similar low-end stuff which will be useful for odds n ends, but as of yet I haven't seen anyone make something in sketchup that really impresses me or would really even come close to comparing to something like a GW miniature.

You are so stuck in the "now" it is funny. 3D modelling software continually improves, and gets continually easier for users to create with. It is inevitable that 3D design software will become a near-standard hobbyist's tool, unless 3D printers are replaced with some greater technology before then.

Imagine an application like DAZ Studio combined with a 3D printer. With user-created content, the basic enduser could benefit from the work of others by using pre-created modules to assemble the 3D model of a desired figure. This would include all the detailed bits, modeled wargear, pose, armor pattern, everything.

He then hits "print" and it's done. He can, should he desire, create an entire army of these soldiers (or vehicles or weapons or whatever), or he can save the file format and use it as simply one pose of soldiers, and then assemble others with the bits and pieces of these modular design models that he's acquired.

While there's an initial investment in the software and the printer, after that point? He's got SM (or IG, Eldar, whatever) armies for ever. He just needs to provide the raw materials for the printer. He can even mix-and-match, adding Eldar helmets to Space Marine bodies, boltguns to IG soldiers, all kinds of things.

... and after the initial investment? That's it. It's now just the cost of supplies.

You call it 'stuck in the now', I call it having actual experience with the technology and the industry for over a decade, having first hand experience with the advances in said industry over that period of time, and knowing what the focus in that industry is currently on. What you describe is not where the technology is headed, sorry. I have been waiting for something like what you described for the better part of that timeframe, and it has yet to materialize. Rigging a model for pose (and then being able to repose it without issue in regards to the clothing and equipment associated with it) is still one of the most difficult things you can do with a 3D model, and still commands big $$$ in the film and video game industry if you know how to do it at all well.


BTW, while it is possible to print models produced in DAZ studio, it is by no means easy, nor is it supported natively. It actually requires a lot of cross-flow involving other (more expensive) software for said model to be ready for print, let alone be ready for a repose without repeating the process again.

You are so stuck in the "now" it is funny. 3D modelling software continually improves, and gets continually easier for users to create with. It is inevitable that 3D design software will become a near-standard hobbyist's tool, unless 3D printers are replaced with some greater technology before then.

In fact, it does NOT. I use it every day. Both CAD style DCC programs as well as Entertainment design programs. The software is actually getting MORE complex and MORE convoluted every year. There are minor exceptions to this as things like C4D isn't TOO bad but then it's also not quite what you would need for 3D printing either. An evolution needs to happen before the software gets to the point you're mentioning. It IS possible for it to get there, but it will take a while which is why I said earlier that it will take longer than people think for these to enter wide-spread home use.

Imagine an application like DAZ Studio combined with a 3D printer. With user-created content, the basic enduser could benefit from the work of others by using pre-created modules to assemble the 3D model of a desired figure. This would include all the detailed bits, modeled wargear, pose, armor pattern, everything.

I can certainly understand the point you're driving at but here's my standard DAZ Studio response as it illustrates a lot of the current issues (which are significant):

"That's really not a solution. You're going to hit several hundred dollars by the time you're done kitting out ONE model. On top of that, the DAZ products aren't even good for their intended purpose (simple, home made animations done by beginners/hobbyists). It might *look* like a reasonable solution if you don't have a lot of experience with this sort of thing, but you're going to get very frustrated very quickly when you get errors like "model not water tight", "incorrect edge thickness", "improperly terminating edge loops" or my personal favorite "vertex normals inverted. Terminating program" right before the the model implodes on itself and your software crashes."

He then hits "print" and it's done. He can, should he desire, create an entire army of these soldiers (or vehicles or weapons or whatever), or he can save the file format and use it as simply one pose of soldiers, and then assemble others with the bits and pieces of these modular design models that he's acquired.

I think one thing you're going to see (because we are WAY MORE THAN 10 years away from machines that produce models that need no clean up) is a lot of really crappy looking models if/when 3D printing becomes that wide spread. I don't think a lot of people are going to bother with the clean up and given how many people will currently refuse to play anyone using unpainted models, I can just imagine the response to stair-stepped/parting line models (and yeah, I know "parting line" is a mold making term, but FDM machines apply material in layers and this tends to leave a similar kind of imperfection at times).

While there's an initial investment in the software and the printer, after that point? He's got SM (or IG, Eldar, whatever) armies for ever. He just needs to provide the raw materials for the printer. He can even mix-and-match, adding Eldar helmets to Space Marine bodies, boltguns to IG soldiers, all kinds of things.

After software/printer? The cost varies but is still WAY more than some elmers glue, resin, a bucket and the mold compound of your choice. Again, there is no cheaper, faster, easier way than to produce minis than this and it has barely been a dent in GW's bottom line. A more expensive, more difficult to use, less accessible method that GW themselves will be able to monetize/utilize MUCH better than the average hobbyist is not likely to hurt them either.

This is all not to mention what the I.P., copyright and patent police will do to 3D printing if/when it becomes that widely available. I can see things like security locks being placed on them so that you have to check your models in with a "I.P. protection service" before they will print or even simply being locked into only being able to use source material that you need to purchase from a pre-approved website etc.

Tycho wrote:

You are so stuck in the "now" it is funny. 3D modelling software continually improves, and gets continually easier for users to create with. It is inevitable that 3D design software will become a near-standard hobbyist's tool, unless 3D printers are replaced with some greater technology before then.

The software is actually getting MORE complex and MORE convoluted every year.

Oh thank god, sometimes I worried that it was just me that thought so lol

Oh thank god, sometimes I worried that it was just me that thought so lol

lol nope. There's a reason places like Dreamworks and Pixar have a surprisingly high TD to artist ratio. Not to mention on the engineering/product design side places tend to have to have at least one "Tech Lead" per department (I recently heard #'s as high as one tech lead for every five people) just to keep these "simple" 3D programs up and running correctly.