I just saw that the Makerbot Replicator 2 is shipping, I was wondering if
it is time to just buy a 3D printer and make things or is all the time
building one worth it? I did want to make things with it after all;-)
Not to long ago if you wanted one you had to build it (or buy a $20K
Dimension).
Now I am not so sure.
I need a 3D printer buyers guide but one's I've come across are not current
enough.
Anybody that has a comment or can point me to useful info would be great.
On Saturday, October 13, 2012 6:01:03 AM UTC-4, Triggerdog wrote:
> I just saw that the Makerbot Replicator 2 is shipping, I was wondering if > it is time to just buy a 3D printer and make things or is all the time > building one worth it? I did want to make things with it after all;-)
> Not to long ago if you wanted one you had to build it (or buy a $20K > Dimension).
> Now I am not so sure.
> I need a 3D printer buyers guide but one's I've come across are not > current enough.
> Anybody that has a comment or can point me to useful info would be great.
On Saturday, October 13, 2012 6:01:03 AM UTC-4, Triggerdog wrote:
> I just saw that the Makerbot Replicator 2 is shipping, I was wondering if > it is time to just buy a 3D printer and make things or is all the time > building one worth it? I did want to make things with it after all;-)
> Not to long ago if you wanted one you had to build it (or buy a $20K > Dimension).
> Now I am not so sure.
> I need a 3D printer buyers guide but one's I've come across are not > current enough.
> Anybody that has a comment or can point me to useful info would be great.
On Saturday, October 13, 2012 6:01:03 AM UTC-4, Triggerdog wrote:
> I just saw that the Makerbot Replicator 2 is shipping, I was wondering if > it is time to just buy a 3D printer and make things or is all the time > building one worth it? I did want to make things with it after all;-)
> Not to long ago if you wanted one you had to build it (or buy a $20K > Dimension).
> Now I am not so sure.
> I need a 3D printer buyers guide but one's I've come across are not > current enough.
> Anybody that has a comment or can point me to useful info would be great.
An interesting couple of posts. The more recent of the posts incited me to
chime in differently than I originally intended to Specifically, I was
intending on simply putting out some quick thoughts on Make versus Buy. The
linked article regarding DRM on printable items got me a bit more fired up
on 3d printing from more of a philosophical standpoint.
For the simple answer of make versus buy, I do think that the price and
availability of assembled, ready to go 3d printers on the market today
really drive the need to ask the make versus buy question. At one end of
the spectrum, you have the SolidDoodle and some of the PrintRBot offerings
available in a ready to go configuration for under $500. On the other end
(of the consumer targeted machines) you have Makerbot Replicator, MakerGear
M2 and others in the $1800-$2500 range ready to go. It appears that the
higher end of the spectrum will get you dual head extrusion and speed over
the lower end machines. The higher end machines also seem to be comparable
to commercial machines with resolution and print quality.
Compare these machines to kit and diy options that are currently out there,
and it is no longer as simple as a dollar to dollar comparison. For
example, one can easily spend over $500 in parts for a Reprap Mendel and
still need to spend significant time assembling, adjusting, breaking and
fixing before an acceptable print comes out. Why not just fork over the
cash for a SolidDoodle which runs out of the box. Without getting into a
discussion of pros and cons of each machine, I think that a big part of the
question is whether you are more interested in the journey or the
destination.
For myself, the time spent getting the CT Hackerspace Mcwire repstrap up
and going was invaluable in teaching me about 3D printing. In the end the
speed of the machine made it practically useless however I know far more
than I would have learned just following along on the internet.
Incidentally, I really want to belt drive the X&Y axes on the CT
Hackerspace machine and make the thing worthwhile.
Flash forward to about 2 weeks ago when I purchased a fully assembled
Printrbot Jr at the Maker Faire. This machine was $399 (Special price for
MakerFaire) fully assembled. The fully assembled part was a bit of
mis-information as I still needed to instal the control board after
unpacking the machine. After some simple set-up and calibration, I am
printing some fairly decent objects. Overall, I am very happy to be able to
go from a need or idea to physical item very quickly with this machine. It
is, in my mind, a utilitarian machine. It is not an art piece machine.
Could I tweak and tweak to get better resolution and speed? I sure could.
For now however, I intend to take it for what it is and put it to work
making functional pieces upon need or whim. If I print something that I
absolutely need to be of higher quality, I can always send it off to
somebody else with a higher quality machine or a printing service. The
truth is that most of what I am interested in is more functional than
aesthetic. Don't get me wrong, I am happy with the quality of the prints,
they are just not currently on par with commercial machines or the upper
end of the consumer machine world.
If you are still reading, I will delve briefly into the philosophical end
of things. Amidst all of the discussion that ensued after it became clear
that Makerbot was going closed source with aspects of the Replicator 2, I
thought a lot about Open Source and what it meant to 3D printing becoming
accessible to the hobbyist and consumer.
My conclusion is that the community behind the reprap project, coupled with
an open source mentality did something really incredible with 3D printing.
The community collaboratively engineered a low cost version of a
device/technology that was otherwise quite expensive and very "closed". I
also believe that it still the open source community that is driving the
state of the art for low cost 3d printing forward; Not the producers of
ready to print machines. With that in mind, I sincerely do hope that the
availability of ready to print, closed technology, solutions does not, too
severely, dilute the pool of talent and the wealth of innovation that has
allowed low cost 3d printing to evolve so quickly.
On the other hand, perhaps what has happened with 3d printing represents a
new evolutionary model for innovation and the breaking down of the barriers
previously imposed by the capital based model for development of new
technologies. Perhaps the consumer grade 3D printer has passed the point of
diminishing returns for community development. Perhaps it is time to look
for the Next Big Closed Technology to make Open via community based open
source development.
If that is the case, then what is to become of low cost 3d printing? Will
the technology state of the art migrate back to corporate interests and
become more closed? I do believe that will be the case however I also
believe that if it does swing too far in the closed direction, there will
be a community that will open it back up. The most important thing is that
an open source community continues to thrive by pushing the boundaries of
technology through leveraging the collaboration and horsepower that can
only be practically achieved in an open model.
So, Make vs Buy? I believe that the time has come where if you are most
interested in printing objects to support your artistic or intellectual
pursuits, you should buy. If you are interested in becoming a 3d printing
expert and/or furthering the technology, at some point you must be building
a printer or improving upon a purchased printer.
> On Saturday, October 13, 2012 6:01:03 AM UTC-4, Triggerdog wrote:
>> I just saw that the Makerbot Replicator 2 is shipping, I was wondering
>> if it is time to just buy a 3D printer and make things or is all the time
>> building one worth it? I did want to make things with it after all;-)
>> Not to long ago if you wanted one you had to build it (or buy a $20K
>> Dimension).
>> Now I am not so sure.
>> I need a 3D printer buyers guide but one's I've come across are not
>> current enough.
>> Anybody that has a comment or can point me to useful info would be great.
> To post to this group, send email to CTHackerspace@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> CTHackerspace+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/CTHackerspace?hl=en.
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Jeff Myer <jm...@myermountain.com> wrote:
> An interesting couple of posts. The more recent of the posts incited me
> to chime in differently than I originally intended to Specifically, I was
> intending on simply putting out some quick thoughts on Make versus Buy. The
> linked article regarding DRM on printable items got me a bit more fired up
> on 3d printing from more of a philosophical standpoint.
> For the simple answer of make versus buy, I do think that the price and
> availability of assembled, ready to go 3d printers on the market today
> really drive the need to ask the make versus buy question. At one end of
> the spectrum, you have the SolidDoodle and some of the PrintRBot offerings
> available in a ready to go configuration for under $500. On the other end
> (of the consumer targeted machines) you have Makerbot Replicator, MakerGear
> M2 and others in the $1800-$2500 range ready to go. It appears that the
> higher end of the spectrum will get you dual head extrusion and speed over
> the lower end machines. The higher end machines also seem to be comparable
> to commercial machines with resolution and print quality.
> Compare these machines to kit and diy options that are currently out
> there, and it is no longer as simple as a dollar to dollar comparison. For
> example, one can easily spend over $500 in parts for a Reprap Mendel and
> still need to spend significant time assembling, adjusting, breaking and
> fixing before an acceptable print comes out. Why not just fork over the
> cash for a SolidDoodle which runs out of the box. Without getting into a
> discussion of pros and cons of each machine, I think that a big part of the
> question is whether you are more interested in the journey or the
> destination.
> For myself, the time spent getting the CT Hackerspace Mcwire repstrap up
> and going was invaluable in teaching me about 3D printing. In the end the
> speed of the machine made it practically useless however I know far more
> than I would have learned just following along on the internet.
> Incidentally, I really want to belt drive the X&Y axes on the CT
> Hackerspace machine and make the thing worthwhile.
> Flash forward to about 2 weeks ago when I purchased a fully assembled
> Printrbot Jr at the Maker Faire. This machine was $399 (Special price for
> MakerFaire) fully assembled. The fully assembled part was a bit of
> mis-information as I still needed to instal the control board after
> unpacking the machine. After some simple set-up and calibration, I am
> printing some fairly decent objects. Overall, I am very happy to be able to
> go from a need or idea to physical item very quickly with this machine. It
> is, in my mind, a utilitarian machine. It is not an art piece machine.
> Could I tweak and tweak to get better resolution and speed? I sure could.
> For now however, I intend to take it for what it is and put it to work
> making functional pieces upon need or whim. If I print something that I
> absolutely need to be of higher quality, I can always send it off to
> somebody else with a higher quality machine or a printing service. The
> truth is that most of what I am interested in is more functional than
> aesthetic. Don't get me wrong, I am happy with the quality of the prints,
> they are just not currently on par with commercial machines or the upper
> end of the consumer machine world.
> If you are still reading, I will delve briefly into the philosophical end
> of things. Amidst all of the discussion that ensued after it became clear
> that Makerbot was going closed source with aspects of the Replicator 2, I
> thought a lot about Open Source and what it meant to 3D printing becoming
> accessible to the hobbyist and consumer.
> My conclusion is that the community behind the reprap project, coupled
> with an open source mentality did something really incredible with 3D
> printing. The community collaboratively engineered a low cost version of a
> device/technology that was otherwise quite expensive and very "closed". I
> also believe that it still the open source community that is driving the
> state of the art for low cost 3d printing forward; Not the producers of
> ready to print machines. With that in mind, I sincerely do hope that the
> availability of ready to print, closed technology, solutions does not, too
> severely, dilute the pool of talent and the wealth of innovation that has
> allowed low cost 3d printing to evolve so quickly.
> On the other hand, perhaps what has happened with 3d printing represents a
> new evolutionary model for innovation and the breaking down of the barriers
> previously imposed by the capital based model for development of new
> technologies. Perhaps the consumer grade 3D printer has passed the point of
> diminishing returns for community development. Perhaps it is time to look
> for the Next Big Closed Technology to make Open via community based open
> source development.
> If that is the case, then what is to become of low cost 3d printing? Will
> the technology state of the art migrate back to corporate interests and
> become more closed? I do believe that will be the case however I also
> believe that if it does swing too far in the closed direction, there will
> be a community that will open it back up. The most important thing is that
> an open source community continues to thrive by pushing the boundaries of
> technology through leveraging the collaboration and horsepower that can
> only be practically achieved in an open model.
> So, Make vs Buy? I believe that the time has come where if you are most
> interested in printing objects to support your artistic or intellectual
> pursuits, you should buy. If you are interested in becoming a 3d printing
> expert and/or furthering the technology, at some point you must be building
> a printer or improving upon a purchased printer.
> Jeff
> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 8:18 AM, Triggerdog <trigger...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Saturday, October 13, 2012 6:01:03 AM UTC-4, Triggerdog wrote:
>>> I just saw that the Makerbot Replicator 2 is shipping, I was wondering
>>> if it is time to just buy a 3D printer and make things or is all the time
>>> building one worth it? I did want to make things with it after all;-)
>>> Not to long ago if you wanted one you had to build it (or buy a $20K
>>> Dimension).
>>> Now I am not so sure.
>>> I need a 3D printer buyers guide but one's I've come across are not
>>> current enough.
>>> Anybody that has a comment or can point me to useful info would be great.
>> To post to this group, send email to CTHackerspace@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> CTHackerspace+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/CTHackerspace?hl=en.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "CT Hackerspace" group.
> To post to this group, send email to CTHackerspace@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> CTHackerspace+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/CTHackerspace?hl=en.
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 8:36 PM, L C <trigger...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Looking at the Makerbot Replicator 2 specs but it is a PLA machine. Not
> for ABS?
> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Jeff Myer <jm...@myermountain.com> wrote:
>> An interesting couple of posts. The more recent of the posts incited me
>> to chime in differently than I originally intended to Specifically, I was
>> intending on simply putting out some quick thoughts on Make versus Buy. The
>> linked article regarding DRM on printable items got me a bit more fired up
>> on 3d printing from more of a philosophical standpoint.
>> For the simple answer of make versus buy, I do think that the price and
>> availability of assembled, ready to go 3d printers on the market today
>> really drive the need to ask the make versus buy question. At one end of
>> the spectrum, you have the SolidDoodle and some of the PrintRBot offerings
>> available in a ready to go configuration for under $500. On the other end
>> (of the consumer targeted machines) you have Makerbot Replicator, MakerGear
>> M2 and others in the $1800-$2500 range ready to go. It appears that the
>> higher end of the spectrum will get you dual head extrusion and speed over
>> the lower end machines. The higher end machines also seem to be comparable
>> to commercial machines with resolution and print quality.
>> Compare these machines to kit and diy options that are currently out
>> there, and it is no longer as simple as a dollar to dollar comparison. For
>> example, one can easily spend over $500 in parts for a Reprap Mendel and
>> still need to spend significant time assembling, adjusting, breaking and
>> fixing before an acceptable print comes out. Why not just fork over the
>> cash for a SolidDoodle which runs out of the box. Without getting into a
>> discussion of pros and cons of each machine, I think that a big part of the
>> question is whether you are more interested in the journey or the
>> destination.
>> For myself, the time spent getting the CT Hackerspace Mcwire repstrap up
>> and going was invaluable in teaching me about 3D printing. In the end the
>> speed of the machine made it practically useless however I know far more
>> than I would have learned just following along on the internet.
>> Incidentally, I really want to belt drive the X&Y axes on the CT
>> Hackerspace machine and make the thing worthwhile.
>> Flash forward to about 2 weeks ago when I purchased a fully assembled
>> Printrbot Jr at the Maker Faire. This machine was $399 (Special price for
>> MakerFaire) fully assembled. The fully assembled part was a bit of
>> mis-information as I still needed to instal the control board after
>> unpacking the machine. After some simple set-up and calibration, I am
>> printing some fairly decent objects. Overall, I am very happy to be able to
>> go from a need or idea to physical item very quickly with this machine. It
>> is, in my mind, a utilitarian machine. It is not an art piece machine.
>> Could I tweak and tweak to get better resolution and speed? I sure could.
>> For now however, I intend to take it for what it is and put it to work
>> making functional pieces upon need or whim. If I print something that I
>> absolutely need to be of higher quality, I can always send it off to
>> somebody else with a higher quality machine or a printing service. The
>> truth is that most of what I am interested in is more functional than
>> aesthetic. Don't get me wrong, I am happy with the quality of the prints,
>> they are just not currently on par with commercial machines or the upper
>> end of the consumer machine world.
>> If you are still reading, I will delve briefly into the philosophical end
>> of things. Amidst all of the discussion that ensued after it became clear
>> that Makerbot was going closed source with aspects of the Replicator 2, I
>> thought a lot about Open Source and what it meant to 3D printing becoming
>> accessible to the hobbyist and consumer.
>> My conclusion is that the community behind the reprap project, coupled
>> with an open source mentality did something really incredible with 3D
>> printing. The community collaboratively engineered a low cost version of a
>> device/technology that was otherwise quite expensive and very "closed". I
>> also believe that it still the open source community that is driving the
>> state of the art for low cost 3d printing forward; Not the producers of
>> ready to print machines. With that in mind, I sincerely do hope that the
>> availability of ready to print, closed technology, solutions does not, too
>> severely, dilute the pool of talent and the wealth of innovation that has
>> allowed low cost 3d printing to evolve so quickly.
>> On the other hand, perhaps what has happened with 3d printing represents
>> a new evolutionary model for innovation and the breaking down of the
>> barriers previously imposed by the capital based model for development of
>> new technologies. Perhaps the consumer grade 3D printer has passed the
>> point of diminishing returns for community development. Perhaps it is time
>> to look for the Next Big Closed Technology to make Open via community based
>> open source development.
>> If that is the case, then what is to become of low cost 3d printing?
>> Will the technology state of the art migrate back to corporate interests
>> and become more closed? I do believe that will be the case however I also
>> believe that if it does swing too far in the closed direction, there will
>> be a community that will open it back up. The most important thing is that
>> an open source community continues to thrive by pushing the boundaries of
>> technology through leveraging the collaboration and horsepower that can
>> only be practically achieved in an open model.
>> So, Make vs Buy? I believe that the time has come where if you are most
>> interested in printing objects to support your artistic or intellectual
>> pursuits, you should buy. If you are interested in becoming a 3d printing
>> expert and/or furthering the technology, at some point you must be building
>> a printer or improving upon a purchased printer.
>> Jeff
>> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 8:18 AM, Triggerdog <trigger...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Saturday, October 13, 2012 6:01:03 AM UTC-4, Triggerdog wrote:
>>>> I just saw that the Makerbot Replicator 2 is shipping, I was wondering
>>>> if it is time to just buy a 3D printer and make things or is all the time
>>>> building one worth it? I did want to make things with it after all;-)
>>>> Not to long ago if you wanted one you had to build it (or buy a $20K
>>>> Dimension).
>>>> Now I am not so sure.
>>>> I need a 3D printer buyers guide but one's I've come across are not
>>>> current enough.
>>>> Anybody that has a comment or can point me to useful info would be
>>>> great.
>>> To post to this group, send email to CTHackerspace@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> CTHackerspace+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/CTHackerspace?hl=en.
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "CT Hackerspace" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to CTHackerspace@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> CTHackerspace+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/CTHackerspace?hl=en.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "CT Hackerspace" group.
> To post to this group, send email to CTHackerspace@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> CTHackerspace+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/CTHackerspace?hl=en.
> This is a bit tough to get past for serious prototyping especially seeing
> that pla doest glue up well.
> I had not taken notice of that previously. Guess they have been keeping word
> of this this limitation low key.
> Jeff
> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 8:36 PM, L C <trigger...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Looking at the Makerbot Replicator 2 specs but it is a PLA machine. Not
>> for ABS?
>> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Jeff Myer <jm...@myermountain.com> wrote:
>>> An interesting couple of posts. The more recent of the posts incited me
>>> to chime in differently than I originally intended to Specifically, I was
>>> intending on simply putting out some quick thoughts on Make versus Buy. The
>>> linked article regarding DRM on printable items got me a bit more fired up
>>> on 3d printing from more of a philosophical standpoint.
>>> For the simple answer of make versus buy, I do think that the price and
>>> availability of assembled, ready to go 3d printers on the market today
>>> really drive the need to ask the make versus buy question. At one end of the
>>> spectrum, you have the SolidDoodle and some of the PrintRBot offerings
>>> available in a ready to go configuration for under $500. On the other end
>>> (of the consumer targeted machines) you have Makerbot Replicator, MakerGear
>>> M2 and others in the $1800-$2500 range ready to go. It appears that the
>>> higher end of the spectrum will get you dual head extrusion and speed over
>>> the lower end machines. The higher end machines also seem to be comparable
>>> to commercial machines with resolution and print quality.
>>> Compare these machines to kit and diy options that are currently out
>>> there, and it is no longer as simple as a dollar to dollar comparison. For
>>> example, one can easily spend over $500 in parts for a Reprap Mendel and
>>> still need to spend significant time assembling, adjusting, breaking and
>>> fixing before an acceptable print comes out. Why not just fork over the cash
>>> for a SolidDoodle which runs out of the box. Without getting into a
>>> discussion of pros and cons of each machine, I think that a big part of the
>>> question is whether you are more interested in the journey or the
>>> destination.
>>> For myself, the time spent getting the CT Hackerspace Mcwire repstrap up
>>> and going was invaluable in teaching me about 3D printing. In the end the
>>> speed of the machine made it practically useless however I know far more
>>> than I would have learned just following along on the internet.
>>> Incidentally, I really want to belt drive the X&Y axes on the CT Hackerspace
>>> machine and make the thing worthwhile.
>>> Flash forward to about 2 weeks ago when I purchased a fully assembled
>>> Printrbot Jr at the Maker Faire. This machine was $399 (Special price for
>>> MakerFaire) fully assembled. The fully assembled part was a bit of
>>> mis-information as I still needed to instal the control board after
>>> unpacking the machine. After some simple set-up and calibration, I am
>>> printing some fairly decent objects. Overall, I am very happy to be able to
>>> go from a need or idea to physical item very quickly with this machine. It
>>> is, in my mind, a utilitarian machine. It is not an art piece machine. Could
>>> I tweak and tweak to get better resolution and speed? I sure could. For now
>>> however, I intend to take it for what it is and put it to work making
>>> functional pieces upon need or whim. If I print something that I absolutely
>>> need to be of higher quality, I can always send it off to somebody else with
>>> a higher quality machine or a printing service. The truth is that most of
>>> what I am interested in is more functional than aesthetic. Don't get me
>>> wrong, I am happy with the quality of the prints, they are just not
>>> currently on par with commercial machines or the upper end of the consumer
>>> machine world.
>>> If you are still reading, I will delve briefly into the philosophical end
>>> of things. Amidst all of the discussion that ensued after it became clear
>>> that Makerbot was going closed source with aspects of the Replicator 2, I
>>> thought a lot about Open Source and what it meant to 3D printing becoming
>>> accessible to the hobbyist and consumer.
>>> My conclusion is that the community behind the reprap project, coupled
>>> with an open source mentality did something really incredible with 3D
>>> printing. The community collaboratively engineered a low cost version of a
>>> device/technology that was otherwise quite expensive and very "closed". I
>>> also believe that it still the open source community that is driving the
>>> state of the art for low cost 3d printing forward; Not the producers of
>>> ready to print machines. With that in mind, I sincerely do hope that the
>>> availability of ready to print, closed technology, solutions does not, too
>>> severely, dilute the pool of talent and the wealth of innovation that has
>>> allowed low cost 3d printing to evolve so quickly.
>>> On the other hand, perhaps what has happened with 3d printing represents
>>> a new evolutionary model for innovation and the breaking down of the
>>> barriers previously imposed by the capital based model for development of
>>> new technologies. Perhaps the consumer grade 3D printer has passed the point
>>> of diminishing returns for community development. Perhaps it is time to look
>>> for the Next Big Closed Technology to make Open via community based open
>>> source development.
>>> If that is the case, then what is to become of low cost 3d printing?
>>> Will the technology state of the art migrate back to corporate interests and
>>> become more closed? I do believe that will be the case however I also
>>> believe that if it does swing too far in the closed direction, there will be
>>> a community that will open it back up. The most important thing is that an
>>> open source community continues to thrive by pushing the boundaries of
>>> technology through leveraging the collaboration and horsepower that can
>>> only be practically achieved in an open model.
>>> So, Make vs Buy? I believe that the time has come where if you are most
>>> interested in printing objects to support your artistic or intellectual
>>> pursuits, you should buy. If you are interested in becoming a 3d printing
>>> expert and/or furthering the technology, at some point you must be building
>>> a printer or improving upon a purchased printer.
>>> Jeff
>>> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 8:18 AM, Triggerdog <trigger...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> From Wikipedia a bit of info on the company "Intellectual Ventures"
>>>> Intellectual Ventures is a private company notable for being one of the
>>>> top-five owners of U.S. patents, as of 2011.[1] Its business model has a
>>>> focus on developing a large patent portfolio and licensing these patents to
>>>> companies. Publicly, it states that a major goal is to assist small
>>>> inventors against corporations. In practice, much of their revenue[citation
>>>> needed] comes from licensing patents from other corporations and then filing
>>>> lawsuits for infringement of patents, a controversial practice known as
>>>> patent trolling.
>>>> On Saturday, October 13, 2012 6:01:03 AM UTC-4, Triggerdog wrote:
>>>>> I just saw that the Makerbot Replicator 2 is shipping, I was wondering
>>>>> if it is time to just buy a 3D printer and make things or is all the time
>>>>> building one worth it? I did want to make things with it after all;-)
>>>>> Not to long ago if you wanted one you had to build it (or buy a $20K
>>>>> Dimension).
>>>>> Now I am not so sure.
>>>>> I need a 3D printer buyers guide but one's I've come across are not
>>>>> current enough.
>>>>> Anybody that has a comment or can point me to useful info would be
>>>>> great.
>>>> To post to this group, send email to CTHackerspace@googlegroups.com.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>>> CTHackerspace+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/CTHackerspace?hl=en.
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>>> "CT Hackerspace" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to CTHackerspace@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> CTHackerspace+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/CTHackerspace?hl=en.
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "CT Hackerspace" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to CTHackerspace@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> CTHackerspace+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/CTHackerspace?hl=en.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "CT Hackerspace" group.
> To post to this group, send email to
Thanks Bill, I had to reread the material a couple times on the PLA.
Just a guess but it must make it vastly easier to make a "consumer" machine.
Still the layer thickness spec of 100 microns (.0039") has me drooling. I
did read on the the makergear site that they did a Yoda build at 20
microns<%20%20http://www.makergear.com/blogs/frontpage/6591695-20-microns-i-am>.
I am inferring that the slicing program will slice however thin a layer
that you want, and that on the computer side the current tools will
generate machine paths for whatever you want, but that on the machine side
it may or may not perform?
I really like the idea of a 100 micron machine. Could it be that this is a
advantageous characteristic of the PLA material?
> > This is a bit tough to get past for serious prototyping especially seeing
> > that pla doest glue up well.
> > I had not taken notice of that previously. Guess they have been keeping
> word
> > of this this limitation low key.
> > Jeff
> > On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 8:36 PM, L C <trigger...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Looking at the Makerbot Replicator 2 specs but it is a PLA machine. Not
> >> for ABS?
> >> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Jeff Myer <jm...@myermountain.com>
> wrote:
> >>> An interesting couple of posts. The more recent of the posts incited
> me
> >>> to chime in differently than I originally intended to Specifically, I
> was
> >>> intending on simply putting out some quick thoughts on Make versus
> Buy. The
> >>> linked article regarding DRM on printable items got me a bit more
> fired up
> >>> on 3d printing from more of a philosophical standpoint.
> >>> For the simple answer of make versus buy, I do think that the price and
> >>> availability of assembled, ready to go 3d printers on the market today
> >>> really drive the need to ask the make versus buy question. At one end
> of the
> >>> spectrum, you have the SolidDoodle and some of the PrintRBot offerings
> >>> available in a ready to go configuration for under $500. On the other
> end
> >>> (of the consumer targeted machines) you have Makerbot Replicator,
> MakerGear
> >>> M2 and others in the $1800-$2500 range ready to go. It appears that
> the
> >>> higher end of the spectrum will get you dual head extrusion and speed
> over
> >>> the lower end machines. The higher end machines also seem to be
> comparable
> >>> to commercial machines with resolution and print quality.
> >>> Compare these machines to kit and diy options that are currently out
> >>> there, and it is no longer as simple as a dollar to dollar comparison.
> For
> >>> example, one can easily spend over $500 in parts for a Reprap Mendel
> and
> >>> still need to spend significant time assembling, adjusting, breaking
> and
> >>> fixing before an acceptable print comes out. Why not just fork over
> the cash
> >>> for a SolidDoodle which runs out of the box. Without getting into a
> >>> discussion of pros and cons of each machine, I think that a big part
> of the
> >>> question is whether you are more interested in the journey or the
> >>> destination.
> >>> For myself, the time spent getting the CT Hackerspace Mcwire repstrap
> up
> >>> and going was invaluable in teaching me about 3D printing. In the end
> the
> >>> speed of the machine made it practically useless however I know far
> more
> >>> than I would have learned just following along on the internet.
> >>> Incidentally, I really want to belt drive the X&Y axes on the CT
> Hackerspace
> >>> machine and make the thing worthwhile.
> >>> Flash forward to about 2 weeks ago when I purchased a fully assembled
> >>> Printrbot Jr at the Maker Faire. This machine was $399 (Special price
> for
> >>> MakerFaire) fully assembled. The fully assembled part was a bit of
> >>> mis-information as I still needed to instal the control board after
> >>> unpacking the machine. After some simple set-up and calibration, I am
> >>> printing some fairly decent objects. Overall, I am very happy to be
> able to
> >>> go from a need or idea to physical item very quickly with this
> machine. It
> >>> is, in my mind, a utilitarian machine. It is not an art piece machine.
> Could
> >>> I tweak and tweak to get better resolution and speed? I sure could.
> For now
> >>> however, I intend to take it for what it is and put it to work making
> >>> functional pieces upon need or whim. If I print something that I
> absolutely
> >>> need to be of higher quality, I can always send it off to somebody
> else with
> >>> a higher quality machine or a printing service. The truth is that
> most of
> >>> what I am interested in is more functional than aesthetic. Don't get
> me
> >>> wrong, I am happy with the quality of the prints, they are just not
> >>> currently on par with commercial machines or the upper end of the
> consumer
> >>> machine world.
> >>> If you are still reading, I will delve briefly into the philosophical
> end
> >>> of things. Amidst all of the discussion that ensued after it became
> clear
> >>> that Makerbot was going closed source with aspects of the Replicator
> 2, I
> >>> thought a lot about Open Source and what it meant to 3D printing
> becoming
> >>> accessible to the hobbyist and consumer.
> >>> My conclusion is that the community behind the reprap project, coupled
> >>> with an open source mentality did something really incredible with 3D
> >>> printing. The community collaboratively engineered a low cost version
> of a
> >>> device/technology that was otherwise quite expensive and very
> "closed". I
> >>> also believe that it still the open source community that is driving
> the
> >>> state of the art for low cost 3d printing forward; Not the producers of
> >>> ready to print machines. With that in mind, I sincerely do hope that
> the
> >>> availability of ready to print, closed technology, solutions does
> not, too
> >>> severely, dilute the pool of talent and the wealth of innovation that
> has
> >>> allowed low cost 3d printing to evolve so quickly.
> >>> On the other hand, perhaps what has happened with 3d printing
> represents
> >>> a new evolutionary model for innovation and the breaking down of the
> >>> barriers previously imposed by the capital based model for development
> of
> >>> new technologies. Perhaps the consumer grade 3D printer has passed the
> point
> >>> of diminishing returns for community development. Perhaps it is time
> to look
> >>> for the Next Big Closed Technology to make Open via community based
> open
> >>> source development.
> >>> If that is the case, then what is to become of low cost 3d printing?
> >>> Will the technology state of the art migrate back to corporate
> interests and
> >>> become more closed? I do believe that will be the case however I also
> >>> believe that if it does swing too far in the closed direction, there
> will be
> >>> a community that will open it back up. The most important thing is
> that an
> >>> open source community continues to thrive by pushing the boundaries of
> >>> technology through leveraging the collaboration and horsepower that
> can
> >>> only be practically achieved in an open model.
> >>> So, Make vs Buy? I believe that the time has come where if you are most
> >>> interested in printing objects to support your artistic or intellectual
> >>> pursuits, you should buy. If you are interested in becoming a 3d
> printing
> >>> expert and/or furthering the technology, at some point you must be
> building
> >>> a printer or improving upon a purchased printer.
> >>> Jeff
> >>> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 8:18 AM, Triggerdog <trigger...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>> From Wikipedia a bit of info on the company "Intellectual Ventures"
> >>>> Intellectual Ventures is a private company notable for being one of
> the
> >>>> top-five owners of U.S. patents, as of 2011.[1] Its business model
> has a
> >>>> focus on developing a large patent portfolio and licensing these
> patents to
> >>>> companies. Publicly, it states that a major goal is to assist small
> >>>> inventors against corporations. In practice, much of their
> revenue[citation
> >>>> needed] comes from licensing patents from other corporations and then
> filing
> >>>> lawsuits for infringement of patents, a controversial practice known
> as
> >>>> patent trolling.
> >>>> On Saturday, October 13, 2012 6:01:03 AM UTC-4, Triggerdog wrote:
> >>>>> I just saw that the Makerbot Replicator 2 is shipping, I was
> wondering
> >>>>> if it is time to just buy a 3D printer and make things or is all the
> time
> >>>>> building one worth it? I did want to make things with it after
> all;-)
> >>>>> Not to long ago if you wanted one you had to build it (or buy a $20K
> >>>>> Dimension).
> >>>>> Now I am not so sure.
> >>>>> I need a 3D printer buyers guide but one's I've come across are not
> >>>>> current enough.
> >>>>> Anybody that has a comment or can point me to useful info would be
> >>>>> great.
> >>>>> Lee
> >>>> --
> >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> >>>> Groups "CT Hackerspace" group.
I had heard tell of the 20 Micron print on the Makergear but never bothered
to look around for images of the resulting print. I checked out the
Makergear site and found these
From my perspective, I think that there is probably a point of diminishing
return for layer thinness when it comes to practical proto-typing. For
artistic/aesthetic endeavours the thinner the better however. I don't know
what the layer thickness is that represents practical for most of my work
but I am reasonably sure that I don't need 20 micron layers.
If you are at all considering the M2, I recommend hopping on IRC at irc://
irc.freenode.net/makergearv2 and asking any questions you may have on
there. Rick (Owner of MakerGear) is generally on IRC and is really helpful.
On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 7:37 AM, L C <trigger...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Bill, I had to reread the material a couple times on the PLA.
> Just a guess but it must make it vastly easier to make a "consumer"
> machine.
> Still the layer thickness spec of 100 microns (.0039") has me drooling. I did read on the the makergear site that they did a Yoda build at 20
> microns. I am inferring that the slicing program will slice however thin
> a layer that you want, and that on the computer side the current tools will
> generate machine paths for whatever you want, but that on the machine side
> it may or may not perform?
> I really like the idea of a 100 micron machine. Could it be that this is
> a advantageous characteristic of the PLA material?
> Lee
> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 9:01 PM, William Saturno <wsatu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> I didn't even think about that possibility. Good catch, Lee.
>> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Jeff Myer <jm...@myermountain.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Lee,
>> > You are correct, Pla only. They are offering the following for abs:
>> > This is a bit tough to get past for serious prototyping especially
>> seeing
>> > that pla doest glue up well.
>> > I had not taken notice of that previously. Guess they have been keeping
>> word
>> > of this this limitation low key.
>> > Jeff
>> > On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 8:36 PM, L C <trigger...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> Looking at the Makerbot Replicator 2 specs but it is a PLA machine.
>> Not
>> >> for ABS?
>> >> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Jeff Myer <jm...@myermountain.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>> An interesting couple of posts. The more recent of the posts incited
>> me
>> >>> to chime in differently than I originally intended to Specifically, I
>> was
>> >>> intending on simply putting out some quick thoughts on Make versus
>> Buy. The
>> >>> linked article regarding DRM on printable items got me a bit more
>> fired up
>> >>> on 3d printing from more of a philosophical standpoint.
>> >>> For the simple answer of make versus buy, I do think that the price
>> and
>> >>> availability of assembled, ready to go 3d printers on the market today
>> >>> really drive the need to ask the make versus buy question. At one end
>> of the
>> >>> spectrum, you have the SolidDoodle and some of the PrintRBot offerings
>> >>> available in a ready to go configuration for under $500. On the other
>> end
>> >>> (of the consumer targeted machines) you have Makerbot Replicator,
>> MakerGear
>> >>> M2 and others in the $1800-$2500 range ready to go. It appears that
>> the
>> >>> higher end of the spectrum will get you dual head extrusion and speed
>> over
>> >>> the lower end machines. The higher end machines also seem to be
>> comparable
>> >>> to commercial machines with resolution and print quality.
>> >>> Compare these machines to kit and diy options that are currently out
>> >>> there, and it is no longer as simple as a dollar to dollar
>> comparison. For
>> >>> example, one can easily spend over $500 in parts for a Reprap Mendel
>> and
>> >>> still need to spend significant time assembling, adjusting, breaking
>> and
>> >>> fixing before an acceptable print comes out. Why not just fork over
>> the cash
>> >>> for a SolidDoodle which runs out of the box. Without getting into a
>> >>> discussion of pros and cons of each machine, I think that a big part
>> of the
>> >>> question is whether you are more interested in the journey or the
>> >>> destination.
>> >>> For myself, the time spent getting the CT Hackerspace Mcwire repstrap
>> up
>> >>> and going was invaluable in teaching me about 3D printing. In the end
>> the
>> >>> speed of the machine made it practically useless however I know far
>> more
>> >>> than I would have learned just following along on the internet.
>> >>> Incidentally, I really want to belt drive the X&Y axes on the CT
>> Hackerspace
>> >>> machine and make the thing worthwhile.
>> >>> Flash forward to about 2 weeks ago when I purchased a fully assembled
>> >>> Printrbot Jr at the Maker Faire. This machine was $399 (Special
>> price for
>> >>> MakerFaire) fully assembled. The fully assembled part was a bit of
>> >>> mis-information as I still needed to instal the control board after
>> >>> unpacking the machine. After some simple set-up and calibration, I am
>> >>> printing some fairly decent objects. Overall, I am very happy to be
>> able to
>> >>> go from a need or idea to physical item very quickly with this
>> machine. It
>> >>> is, in my mind, a utilitarian machine. It is not an art piece
>> machine. Could
>> >>> I tweak and tweak to get better resolution and speed? I sure could.
>> For now
>> >>> however, I intend to take it for what it is and put it to work making
>> >>> functional pieces upon need or whim. If I print something that I
>> absolutely
>> >>> need to be of higher quality, I can always send it off to somebody
>> else with
>> >>> a higher quality machine or a printing service. The truth is that
>> most of
>> >>> what I am interested in is more functional than aesthetic. Don't get
>> me
>> >>> wrong, I am happy with the quality of the prints, they are just not
>> >>> currently on par with commercial machines or the upper end of the
>> consumer
>> >>> machine world.
>> >>> If you are still reading, I will delve briefly into the philosophical
>> end
>> >>> of things. Amidst all of the discussion that ensued after it became
>> clear
>> >>> that Makerbot was going closed source with aspects of the Replicator
>> 2, I
>> >>> thought a lot about Open Source and what it meant to 3D printing
>> becoming
>> >>> accessible to the hobbyist and consumer.
>> >>> My conclusion is that the community behind the reprap project, coupled
>> >>> with an open source mentality did something really incredible with 3D
>> >>> printing. The community collaboratively engineered a low cost version
>> of a
>> >>> device/technology that was otherwise quite expensive and very
>> "closed". I
>> >>> also believe that it still the open source community that is driving
>> the
>> >>> state of the art for low cost 3d printing forward; Not the producers
>> of
>> >>> ready to print machines. With that in mind, I sincerely do hope that
>> the
>> >>> availability of ready to print, closed technology, solutions does
>> not, too
>> >>> severely, dilute the pool of talent and the wealth of innovation that
>> has
>> >>> allowed low cost 3d printing to evolve so quickly.
>> >>> On the other hand, perhaps what has happened with 3d printing
>> represents
>> >>> a new evolutionary model for innovation and the breaking down of the
>> >>> barriers previously imposed by the capital based model for
>> development of
>> >>> new technologies. Perhaps the consumer grade 3D printer has passed
>> the point
>> >>> of diminishing returns for community development. Perhaps it is time
>> to look
>> >>> for the Next Big Closed Technology to make Open via community based
>> open
>> >>> source development.
>> >>> If that is the case, then what is to become of low cost 3d printing?
>> >>> Will the technology state of the art migrate back to corporate
>> interests and
>> >>> become more closed? I do believe that will be the case however I also
>> >>> believe that if it does swing too far in the closed direction, there
>> will be
>> >>> a community that will open it back up. The most important thing is
>> that an
>> >>> open source community continues to thrive by pushing the boundaries of
>> >>> technology through leveraging the collaboration and horsepower that
>> can
>> >>> only be practically achieved in an open model.
>> >>> So, Make vs Buy? I believe that the time has come where if you are
>> most
>> >>> interested in printing objects to support your artistic or
>> intellectual
>> >>> pursuits, you should buy. If you are interested in becoming a 3d
>> printing
>> >>> expert and/or furthering the technology, at some point you must be
>> building
>> >>> a printer or improving upon a purchased printer.
>> >>> Jeff
>> >>> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 8:18 AM, Triggerdog <trigger...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
how different is the quality of the junior that you bought at the Maker
Faire from the 1 you built and can you post a picture for quality reference?
On Oct 14, 2012 8:59 AM, "Jeff Myer" <jm...@myermountain.com> wrote:
> I had heard tell of the 20 Micron print on the Makergear but never
> bothered to look around for images of the resulting print. I checked out
> the Makergear site and found these
> From my perspective, I think that there is probably a point of diminishing
> return for layer thinness when it comes to practical proto-typing. For
> artistic/aesthetic endeavours the thinner the better however. I don't know
> what the layer thickness is that represents practical for most of my work
> but I am reasonably sure that I don't need 20 micron layers.
> If you are at all considering the M2, I recommend hopping on IRC at irc://
> irc.freenode.net/makergearv2 and asking any questions you may have on
> there. Rick (Owner of MakerGear) is generally on IRC and is really helpful.
> Hope this helps!
> Jeff
> On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 7:37 AM, L C <trigger...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Thanks Bill, I had to reread the material a couple times on the PLA.
>> Just a guess but it must make it vastly easier to make a "consumer"
>> machine.
>> Still the layer thickness spec of 100 microns (.0039") has me drooling. I did read on the the makergear site that they did a Yoda build at 20
>> microns. I am inferring that the slicing program will slice however
>> thin a layer that you want, and that on the computer side the current tools
>> will generate machine paths for whatever you want, but that on the machine
>> side it may or may not perform?
>> I really like the idea of a 100 micron machine. Could it be that this is
>> a advantageous characteristic of the PLA material?
>> Lee
>> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 9:01 PM, William Saturno <wsatu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> I didn't even think about that possibility. Good catch, Lee.
>>> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Jeff Myer <jm...@myermountain.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Lee,
>>> > You are correct, Pla only. They are offering the following for abs:
>>> > This is a bit tough to get past for serious prototyping especially
>>> seeing
>>> > that pla doest glue up well.
>>> > I had not taken notice of that previously. Guess they have been
>>> keeping word
>>> > of this this limitation low key.
>>> > Jeff
>>> > On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 8:36 PM, L C <trigger...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> Looking at the Makerbot Replicator 2 specs but it is a PLA machine.
>>> Not
>>> >> for ABS?
>>> >> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Jeff Myer <jm...@myermountain.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>> An interesting couple of posts. The more recent of the posts
>>> incited me
>>> >>> to chime in differently than I originally intended to Specifically,
>>> I was
>>> >>> intending on simply putting out some quick thoughts on Make versus
>>> Buy. The
>>> >>> linked article regarding DRM on printable items got me a bit more
>>> fired up
>>> >>> on 3d printing from more of a philosophical standpoint.
>>> >>> For the simple answer of make versus buy, I do think that the price
>>> and
>>> >>> availability of assembled, ready to go 3d printers on the market
>>> today
>>> >>> really drive the need to ask the make versus buy question. At one
>>> end of the
>>> >>> spectrum, you have the SolidDoodle and some of the PrintRBot
>>> offerings
>>> >>> available in a ready to go configuration for under $500. On the
>>> other end
>>> >>> (of the consumer targeted machines) you have Makerbot Replicator,
>>> MakerGear
>>> >>> M2 and others in the $1800-$2500 range ready to go. It appears that
>>> the
>>> >>> higher end of the spectrum will get you dual head extrusion and
>>> speed over
>>> >>> the lower end machines. The higher end machines also seem to be
>>> comparable
>>> >>> to commercial machines with resolution and print quality.
>>> >>> Compare these machines to kit and diy options that are currently out
>>> >>> there, and it is no longer as simple as a dollar to dollar
>>> comparison. For
>>> >>> example, one can easily spend over $500 in parts for a Reprap Mendel
>>> and
>>> >>> still need to spend significant time assembling, adjusting, breaking
>>> and
>>> >>> fixing before an acceptable print comes out. Why not just fork over
>>> the cash
>>> >>> for a SolidDoodle which runs out of the box. Without getting into a
>>> >>> discussion of pros and cons of each machine, I think that a big part
>>> of the
>>> >>> question is whether you are more interested in the journey or the
>>> >>> destination.
>>> >>> For myself, the time spent getting the CT Hackerspace Mcwire
>>> repstrap up
>>> >>> and going was invaluable in teaching me about 3D printing. In the
>>> end the
>>> >>> speed of the machine made it practically useless however I know far
>>> more
>>> >>> than I would have learned just following along on the internet.
>>> >>> Incidentally, I really want to belt drive the X&Y axes on the CT
>>> Hackerspace
>>> >>> machine and make the thing worthwhile.
>>> >>> Flash forward to about 2 weeks ago when I purchased a fully assembled
>>> >>> Printrbot Jr at the Maker Faire. This machine was $399 (Special
>>> price for
>>> >>> MakerFaire) fully assembled. The fully assembled part was a bit of
>>> >>> mis-information as I still needed to instal the control board after
>>> >>> unpacking the machine. After some simple set-up and calibration, I am
>>> >>> printing some fairly decent objects. Overall, I am very happy to be
>>> able to
>>> >>> go from a need or idea to physical item very quickly with this
>>> machine. It
>>> >>> is, in my mind, a utilitarian machine. It is not an art piece
>>> machine. Could
>>> >>> I tweak and tweak to get better resolution and speed? I sure could.
>>> For now
>>> >>> however, I intend to take it for what it is and put it to work making
>>> >>> functional pieces upon need or whim. If I print something that I
>>> absolutely
>>> >>> need to be of higher quality, I can always send it off to somebody
>>> else with
>>> >>> a higher quality machine or a printing service. The truth is that
>>> most of
>>> >>> what I am interested in is more functional than aesthetic. Don't
>>> get me
>>> >>> wrong, I am happy with the quality of the prints, they are just not
>>> >>> currently on par with commercial machines or the upper end of the
>>> consumer
>>> >>> machine world.
>>> >>> If you are still reading, I will delve briefly into the
>>> philosophical end
>>> >>> of things. Amidst all of the discussion that ensued after it became
>>> clear
>>> >>> that Makerbot was going closed source with aspects of the Replicator
>>> 2, I
>>> >>> thought a lot about Open Source and what it meant to 3D printing
>>> becoming
>>> >>> accessible to the hobbyist and consumer.
>>> >>> My conclusion is that the community behind the reprap project,
>>> coupled
>>> >>> with an open source mentality did something really incredible with 3D
>>> >>> printing. The community collaboratively engineered a low cost
>>> version of a
>>> >>> device/technology that was otherwise quite expensive and very
>>> "closed". I
>>> >>> also believe that it still the open source community that is driving
>>> the
>>> >>> state of the art for low cost 3d printing forward; Not the producers
>>> of
>>> >>> ready to print machines. With that in mind, I sincerely do hope that
>>> the
>>> >>> availability of ready to print, closed technology, solutions does
>>> not, too
>>> >>> severely, dilute the pool of talent and the wealth of innovation
>>> that has
>>> >>> allowed low cost 3d printing to evolve so quickly.
>>> >>> On the other hand, perhaps what has happened with 3d printing
>>> represents
>>> >>> a new evolutionary model for innovation and the breaking down of the
>>> >>> barriers previously imposed by the capital based model for
>>> development of
>>> >>> new technologies. Perhaps the consumer grade 3D printer has passed
>>> the point
>>> >>> of diminishing returns for community development. Perhaps it is time
>>> to look
>>> >>> for the Next Big Closed Technology to make Open via community based
>>> open
>>> >>> source development.
>>> >>> If that is the case, then what is to become of low cost 3d printing?
>>> >>> Will the technology state of the art migrate back to corporate
>>> interests and
>>> >>> become more closed? I do believe that will be the case however I
>>> also
>>> >>> believe that if it does swing too far in the closed direction, there
>>> will be
>>> >>> a community that will open it back up. The most important thing is
>>> that an
>>> >>> open source community continues to thrive by pushing the boundaries
>>> of
>>> >>> technology through leveraging the collaboration and horsepower that
>>> can
>>> >>> only be practically achieved in an open model.
>>> >>> So, Make vs Buy? I believe that the time has come where if you are
>>> most
>>> >>> interested in printing objects to support your artistic or
>>> intellectual
>>> >>> pursuits, you should buy. If you are interested in becoming a 3d
>>> printing
>>> >>> expert and/or furthering the technology, at some point you must be
>>> building
>>> >>> a printer
On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Jeff Myer <jm...@myermountain.com> wrote:
> Lee,
> I had heard tell of the 20 Micron print on the Makergear but never
> bothered to look around for images of the resulting print. I checked out
> the Makergear site and found these
> From my perspective, I think that there is probably a point of diminishing
> return for layer thinness when it comes to practical proto-typing. For
> artistic/aesthetic endeavours the thinner the better however. I don't know
> what the layer thickness is that represents practical for most of my work
> but I am reasonably sure that I don't need 20 micron layers.
> If you are at all considering the M2, I recommend hopping on IRC at irc://
> irc.freenode.net/makergearv2 and asking any questions you may have on
> there. Rick (Owner of MakerGear) is generally on IRC and is really helpful.
> Hope this helps!
> Jeff
> On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 7:37 AM, L C <trigger...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Thanks Bill, I had to reread the material a couple times on the PLA.
>> Just a guess but it must make it vastly easier to make a "consumer"
>> machine.
>> Still the layer thickness spec of 100 microns (.0039") has me drooling. I did read on the the makergear site that they did a Yoda build at 20
>> microns. I am inferring that the slicing program will slice however
>> thin a layer that you want, and that on the computer side the current tools
>> will generate machine paths for whatever you want, but that on the machine
>> side it may or may not perform?
>> I really like the idea of a 100 micron machine. Could it be that this is
>> a advantageous characteristic of the PLA material?
>> Lee
>> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 9:01 PM, William Saturno <wsatu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> I didn't even think about that possibility. Good catch, Lee.
>>> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Jeff Myer <jm...@myermountain.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Lee,
>>> > You are correct, Pla only. They are offering the following for abs:
>>> > This is a bit tough to get past for serious prototyping especially
>>> seeing
>>> > that pla doest glue up well.
>>> > I had not taken notice of that previously. Guess they have been
>>> keeping word
>>> > of this this limitation low key.
>>> > Jeff
>>> > On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 8:36 PM, L C <trigger...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> Looking at the Makerbot Replicator 2 specs but it is a PLA machine.
>>> Not
>>> >> for ABS?
>>> >> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Jeff Myer <jm...@myermountain.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>> An interesting couple of posts. The more recent of the posts
>>> incited me
>>> >>> to chime in differently than I originally intended to Specifically,
>>> I was
>>> >>> intending on simply putting out some quick thoughts on Make versus
>>> Buy. The
>>> >>> linked article regarding DRM on printable items got me a bit more
>>> fired up
>>> >>> on 3d printing from more of a philosophical standpoint.
>>> >>> For the simple answer of make versus buy, I do think that the price
>>> and
>>> >>> availability of assembled, ready to go 3d printers on the market
>>> today
>>> >>> really drive the need to ask the make versus buy question. At one
>>> end of the
>>> >>> spectrum, you have the SolidDoodle and some of the PrintRBot
>>> offerings
>>> >>> available in a ready to go configuration for under $500. On the
>>> other end
>>> >>> (of the consumer targeted machines) you have Makerbot Replicator,
>>> MakerGear
>>> >>> M2 and others in the $1800-$2500 range ready to go. It appears that
>>> the
>>> >>> higher end of the spectrum will get you dual head extrusion and
>>> speed over
>>> >>> the lower end machines. The higher end machines also seem to be
>>> comparable
>>> >>> to commercial machines with resolution and print quality.
>>> >>> Compare these machines to kit and diy options that are currently out
>>> >>> there, and it is no longer as simple as a dollar to dollar
>>> comparison. For
>>> >>> example, one can easily spend over $500 in parts for a Reprap Mendel
>>> and
>>> >>> still need to spend significant time assembling, adjusting, breaking
>>> and
>>> >>> fixing before an acceptable print comes out. Why not just fork over
>>> the cash
>>> >>> for a SolidDoodle which runs out of the box. Without getting into a
>>> >>> discussion of pros and cons of each machine, I think that a big part
>>> of the
>>> >>> question is whether you are more interested in the journey or the
>>> >>> destination.
>>> >>> For myself, the time spent getting the CT Hackerspace Mcwire
>>> repstrap up
>>> >>> and going was invaluable in teaching me about 3D printing. In the
>>> end the
>>> >>> speed of the machine made it practically useless however I know far
>>> more
>>> >>> than I would have learned just following along on the internet.
>>> >>> Incidentally, I really want to belt drive the X&Y axes on the CT
>>> Hackerspace
>>> >>> machine and make the thing worthwhile.
>>> >>> Flash forward to about 2 weeks ago when I purchased a fully assembled
>>> >>> Printrbot Jr at the Maker Faire. This machine was $399 (Special
>>> price for
>>> >>> MakerFaire) fully assembled. The fully assembled part was a bit of
>>> >>> mis-information as I still needed to instal the control board after
>>> >>> unpacking the machine. After some simple set-up and calibration, I am
>>> >>> printing some fairly decent objects. Overall, I am very happy to be
>>> able to
>>> >>> go from a need or idea to physical item very quickly with this
>>> machine. It
>>> >>> is, in my mind, a utilitarian machine. It is not an art piece
>>> machine. Could
>>> >>> I tweak and tweak to get better resolution and speed? I sure could.
>>> For now
>>> >>> however, I intend to take it for what it is and put it to work making
>>> >>> functional pieces upon need or whim. If I print something that I
>>> absolutely
>>> >>> need to be of higher quality, I can always send it off to somebody
>>> else with
>>> >>> a higher quality machine or a printing service. The truth is that
>>> most of
>>> >>> what I am interested in is more functional than aesthetic. Don't
>>> get me
>>> >>> wrong, I am happy with the quality of the prints, they are just not
>>> >>> currently on par with commercial machines or the upper end of the
>>> consumer
>>> >>> machine world.
>>> >>> If you are still reading, I will delve briefly into the
>>> philosophical end
>>> >>> of things. Amidst all of the discussion that ensued after it became
>>> clear
>>> >>> that Makerbot was going closed source with aspects of the Replicator
>>> 2, I
>>> >>> thought a lot about Open Source and what it meant to 3D printing
>>> becoming
>>> >>> accessible to the hobbyist and consumer.
>>> >>> My conclusion is that the community behind the reprap project,
>>> coupled
>>> >>> with an open source mentality did something really incredible with 3D
>>> >>> printing. The community collaboratively engineered a low cost
>>> version of a
>>> >>> device/technology that was otherwise quite expensive and very
>>> "closed". I
>>> >>> also believe that it still the open source community that is driving
>>> the
>>> >>> state of the art for low cost 3d printing forward; Not the producers
>>> of
>>> >>> ready to print machines. With that in mind, I sincerely do hope that
>>> the
>>> >>> availability of ready to print, closed technology, solutions does
>>> not, too
>>> >>> severely, dilute the pool of talent and the wealth of innovation
>>> that has
>>> >>> allowed low cost 3d printing to evolve so quickly.
>>> >>> On the other hand, perhaps what has happened with 3d printing
>>> represents
>>> >>> a new evolutionary model for innovation and the breaking down of the
>>> >>> barriers previously imposed by the capital based model for
>>> development of
>>> >>> new technologies. Perhaps the consumer grade 3D printer has passed
>>> the point
>>> >>> of diminishing returns for community development. Perhaps it is time
>>> to look
>>> >>> for the Next Big Closed Technology to make Open via community based
>>> open
>>> >>> source development.
>>> >>> If that is the case, then what is to become of low cost 3d printing?
>>> >>> Will the technology state of the art migrate back to corporate
>>> interests and
>>> >>> become more closed? I do believe that will be the case however I
>>> also
>>> >>> believe that if it does swing too far in the closed direction, there
>>> will be
>>> >>> a community that will open it back up. The most important thing is
>>> that an
>>> >>> open source community continues to thrive by pushing the boundaries
>>> of
>>> >>> technology through leveraging the collaboration and horsepower that
>>> can
>>> >>> only be practically achieved in an open model.
>>> >>> So, Make vs Buy? I believe that the time has come where if you are
>>> most
>>> >>> interested in printing objects to support your artistic or
>>> intellectual
>>> >>> pursuits,
