Need For Speed Most Wanted 2005 Complete Profile

[Ozie Melzer]

Howto upload/change profile picture to be shown at Need For Speed Most Wanted? I tried to go this site: needforspeed.com/autolog in order to upload/change profile picture to be shown in billboards at Need For Speed Most Wanted 2012 but it gave me an error 404. Is there any other way to do this?

Hola! Me sumo a la mocin, sera algo hermoso que pudieran arreglar ese problema.

Si antes se poda ahora debe ser muy fcil arreglar esto.

En mi caso sera para mi hijo que es fantico del juego como supe serlo yo en su momento.

Pero mi hijo me sorprende porque ya juega mucho mejor que yo y tiene slo 8 aos.

El entendimiento que el juego le ha dado en otros aspectos de la vida es maravilloso.

Es lindo ver autos y que l los identifique gracias a ustedes.

El quiere ver su foto en los carteles, en el men. Quiere verse en la lista de los mas buscados.

Saludos! Qu estn bien. Gracias!

Hey there! It seems like you've hit a bit of a roadblock while trying to upload or change your profile picture for Need For Speed Most Wanted. The error 404 on needforspeed.com/autolog can be a bit frustrating, but worry not, there's an alternative route to customize your profile picture.

Remember to be patient and persistent, and hopefully, you'll be cruising with your customized profile picture in no time! If you've tried these steps and are still having issues, reaching out to the official support channels is your best bet. Safe driving!

First off I want to mention that this is not a gripe, but rather an observation and somewhat of a question. I have been observing the Slic3r MK3 profiles slowing down revision over revision while the MK2 profiles have remained consistently fast since the last firmware and introduction of linear advance. So I was slicing the identical object with slic3r 140.1 and noticed that under identical profiles, the MK2 estimated a time of about 20-30% less time to complete. This did prove out in the print job as well. I find this a bit confusing due to the addition of the rigid frame, enhanced drivers, and extruder bits. One would think that the speeds would be the other way around. I will state that they both print just fine for my purposes and I am hopeful that the team continues to drive any of the remaining extrusion gremlins out of the system. Perhaps this is the reason for the change, however, I would think that someone new to PRUSA or 3d printing would be a bit baffled watching the MK2S fly along while the MK3 tends to meander a bit.

Again I want to point out that I merely am interested in understanding the logic, and not complaining. I love all of my Prusa printers which now is a total of seven. 3 MK2Ss and 4 MK3s. One additional thought came to mind in this process regarding the MK2.5. Will it operate on the MK3 profile or more similar to the MK2s? If anyone has an idea, please let m know.

I have been observing the Slic3r MK3 profiles slowing down revision over revision while the MK2 profiles have remained consistently fast since the last firmware and introduction of linear advance. So I was slicing the identical object with slic3r 140.1 and noticed that under identical profiles, the MK2 estimated a time of about 20-30% less time to complete. This did prove out in the print job as well. I find this a bit confusing due to the addition of the rigid frame, enhanced drivers, and extruder bits. One would think that the speeds would be the other way around.

Obviously, the MK3 profile is focused on infill speed not perimeter speed, and the models I'm printing all heavily weighted towards perimeters, not infill due to using lots of thin walls. What I want to know is why the Mk3 profiles are set so much slower than the Mk2.5 when the Mk3 has better hardware than the Mk2.5?

I assume the reason is the "extrusion issue". Because so many people started to complain about not so good looking prints (with default settings) PR adjusted those.

The MK3 hardware itself is not really better in terms of print quality. It just allows you to print faster. Because everything else is still the same (heavy direct extruder head, same rods, same moving concept), the print speed decrease the print quality.

I assume the reason is the "extrusion issue". Because so many people started to complain about not so good looking prints (with default settings) PR adjusted those.

The MK3 hardware itself is not really better in terms of print quality. It just allows you to print faster. Because everything else is still the same (heavy direct extruder head, same rods, same moving concept), the print speed decrease the print quality.

I realize that there are some people loudly freaking out about the perceived imperfections of their prints, but that doesn't mean that the rest of us should be given short shrift on speed.

The default PR profile is not a holy grail for everybody. Actually I'm adjusting it all the time depending on the model I print (yes, speed as-well).

I only gave you an idea why the default profile was changed in this direction. The "extrusion issue" got pretty famous. Almost every 3D printing Youtuber mentioned that. Maybe I'm wrong and it was completely different reason.

[...] I'd like some profiles for the Mk3 that are at least as fast as the Mk 2.5 with linear advance. Again, right now, the Mk3 is 20% slower than the Mk2.5 for the same parts. I've slowly realized that speeds relative to 3D printing are largely illusive. Linear speed is important if you are printing single, long features. The equivalent of the 1/4 mile drag strip. Otherwise, a lot of other factors come into play. What really matters is how much filament you can lay down in a given period of time. Layer height, extrusion width, speed, acceleration and jerk all figure into the actual time required to print a given amount of material. I get a lot more benefit out of printing using "slower" linear speeds with a larger nozzle that eliminates the need for an extra perimeter or two. My extruder may move slower, but my print will finish sooner. Before I'd worry too much about "advertised" 20% difference in speeds, try a timed benchmark and see what the differences really are. For smaller parts, it may not matter at all.

I look at it this way: If I'm printing detail parts, I'm likely to be using a 0.25mm nozzle and be more concerned about details, so expect to print slower. If I'm printing big functional parts, I'll reduce times significantly by using thicker, wider extrusions with a larger nozzle, and going slower is going to provide better layer adhesion. Factor in many filaments actually printing poorly at "high" speeds (most are Given all that, with higher acceleration and jerk settings, a Mk2.5 may well print faster if using the same materials and the same nozzle to print the same model, but it might not be all that much faster. I think it takes 15mm to come up to full speed using typical acceleration rates, so any length shorter than that will never hit your set speed. The extruder will spend typical spans accelerating and decelerating. In any case, you're using the E3D V6 extruder. You're only going to print as quickly as it can process material. With small nozzle sizes, you may get higher speeds. With a 0.40mm nozzle and 0.20mm layer heights, you're already pushing the limits at 120mm/s. The figurative speedometer on your Mk2.5 may read 140MPH, but you might have problems well before hitting that speed. (Replace with the volume knob being labeled 11 if you prefer.)

I think Prusa has had to decide on a limited number of supported configurations that they'll work with. If you are having problems, but can print using a conservative profile, they know it's likely slicer settings to blame, not hardware. They certainly don't stop you from adjusting settings to your heart's desire. You're also free to use other slicer software if it provides other features you're after. The presets just give you a known-good starting point. You can always increase those same settings for the Mk3 -- no reason not to have "fast draft" and "slow quality" settings -- and compare the difference in finish. If you're happy with the results, all is well.

Every car I've driven had a manual that provided all sorts of guidance on how to use turn signals, brake, accelerate and maintain it. That never stopped me from ignoring it when I felt the urge to go a bit faster. Guidelines are just that. They're changeable for a reason.

I think Prusa has had to decide on a limited number of supported configurations that they'll work with. If you are having problems, but can print using a conservative profile, they know it's likely slicer settings to blame, not hardware. They certainly don't stop you from adjusting settings to your heart's desire. You're also free to use other slicer software if it provides other features you're after. The presets just give you a known-good starting point. You can always increase those same settings for the Mk3 -- no reason not to have "fast draft" and "slow quality" settings -- and compare the difference in finish. If you're happy with the results, all is well.

Prusa Research has two types of customers now: hobbyists who want to tune their printer (eg: kit buyers) and users who want to print things without having to worry about the details of slicing profiles (eg: assembled printer buyers). I bought the kit(s), and am largely OK with tuning profiles. My comments are really reflective of the other type of user -- the one who isn't interested in tuning their printer; they just want it to run acceptably out of the box. That type of user is going to be disappointed if they are comparing the Mk2 with the Mk3, because their perception is going to be that for the same model, sliced with similar profiles, the Mk2 is much faster than the Mk3.

[...]Me, I'm just disappointed that the stock profiles that Prusa Research ships for their flagship printer have become increasingly slower from one release to another.

Well, it's interesting to be sure. I'm not actually disappointed. Prusa has gone all-in on Slic3r and it gets more powerful every day. They were heading in the direction of the "idiot light" style interface with PrusaControl, but instead seem to have shifted towards improving the "power user" tool both in terms of usability (the PC GUI being ported) and increased hardware settings and profile options.

3a8082e126