MYTH: 3D printers will never be able to print underwear
FACT: Wrong. Hard plastic underwear provides amazing protection and support
MYTH: 3D printers will never be able to print the Mona Lisa
FACT: Wrong again. Today you can download a 3D model for "rectangular hard plastic canvas" from the Internet, print it out using your Makerbot, and then paint the Mona Lisa on it
MYTH: 3D printers will never be able to print small, wobbly, leaky coffee cups that warp when hot beverages are poured into them, and that lacerate your lips when you attempt to drink from them
FACT: This is already possible on some of today's higher-end 3D printers
MYTH: 3D printers are useful in any way
FACT: It turns out this myth is true. Watching a 3D printer emit a hard plastic object in a color that nobody wants keeps nerds in a state of rapture that prevents them from engaging in more dangerous activities such as shooting heroin or starting actual businesses
I read this in the voice of an IBM mainframe sales person in about 1980, when confronted with an Apple II.
More seriously, today's 3D printers are mere toys compared to what a future atom-scale assembler could do. But they are clearly useful to some people and fun for other right now.
The Microcomputers of the '70s and '80s absolutely were toys back then too, by comparison with the bigger iron available at orders of magnitude higher prices. But they were useful, and they started us on the road to volume production that allows me to have a supercomputer in my pocket and a half-dozen supercomputer-class portable machines hanging around my home office. Not to mention all the audio gear I have built around processors ranging from a Z80 though modern microcontrollers to some very powerful DSPs.
Perhaps 3D printers are toys. But they are wonderful toys that will take us to interesting places.
You're wrong. If you step outside the narrow world of software for a minute and look at tangible product design, 3D printing is wonderfully useful. One benefit is that it allows you to develop functional prototypes without shelling out for evaluation tooling of injection molds. Second, it's faster. Third, it can produce structures that would be difficult or impossible to produce using conventional machining or casting methods.
While a little snarky, all these points are completely valid. Plastic has limitations, _physical_ limitations, that prevent its use in real mechanical parts. 3D printing is great for desk toys or rapid prototyping, but we will never be printing cars or printing computers like everyone implies.
Computer chips are complicated. Engines have to sustain miniature explosions thousands of times a second. Plastics have limitations, and people need to realize this before hyping 3D printing too far
I don't see the point in those "myths", as they appear to have been defined after the fact. Why not defining progress as what it is? I'd prefer a message like this:
"We're able to do X!"
What's the point of using the myth-variant of this message?
"We debunked the 'myth' that X is impossible!"
... especially if most of those "myths" actually were never stated before?
I don't really understand why people are so excited about 3D printers when CNC mills are cheaper, more precise, and work with any material from balsa wood to granite (including metals and plastics). (I also don't understand why 3D printers are a "revolution", when computerized production has been around for decades and everything you own had a CNC mill involved at some point in the production process.)
I've used a 3D printer before. It was fun and it didn't produce a mess, which was nice, but all I have to show for it is some ugly chunks of ABS that look kind of like a child just had some fun with very melty crayons. One time when I was 5, I made a snowman out of hot glue. That's still beyond the range of $1000 3D printers.
It looks like the assembly and finishing of a 3D printed group of parts was taken to a whole new level. I don't see any indication that a whole new level has been achieved in the 3D printing itself. Great finished product though.
"MakerBot Desktop 3D Printers can only make things up to a certain size." The printer did not make the horse head. The printer produced the parts (up to a certain size) and Mr. Wenman assembled and finished it. He made the horse head.
"...but they’re not, like, museum-quality great." Notwithstanding that the printer can't finish the pieces to make them "museum quality," there are striations on the horse head that come from how the plastic is stacked up. Not Museum Quality.
While this is a fine use of 3D printing, it's not a major advance like the article tries to make it.
Nicely done. I have considered doing these sorts of sectionals on my replicator. Still working on a nice 'low density' internalized structure (solid PLA/ABS is out of the question) which provides the necessary support and rigidity. My last attempt was intersecting triangles.
You'd still need quite a bit of artistic talent to make hard plastic look good. But would I want a super expensive and buggy 3D printer for Christmas? Yes please!!!
Btw, has anyone used 123D Catch (or any 123D software)? From what I gleaned from Autodesk's TOS, you inevitably end up granting them a irrevocable license to use your 3D models however they please. Perhaps that's why 123D remains a "hobbyist" software suite. I still haven't heard of anyone who uses it professionally.
Like the printing resolution. Oh yeah, you can get rid of the ridges for a perfectly smooth model. They're called "interns". Bring your sandpaper and a dustmask! That being said, I'm glad that they're recognizing the ability to extend their product with good old fashioned hand skills, even if it isn't the greatest marketing pitch.
[+] [-] EvanMiller|13 years ago|reply
FACT: Wrong. Hard plastic underwear provides amazing protection and support
MYTH: 3D printers will never be able to print the Mona Lisa
FACT: Wrong again. Today you can download a 3D model for "rectangular hard plastic canvas" from the Internet, print it out using your Makerbot, and then paint the Mona Lisa on it
MYTH: 3D printers will never be able to print small, wobbly, leaky coffee cups that warp when hot beverages are poured into them, and that lacerate your lips when you attempt to drink from them
FACT: This is already possible on some of today's higher-end 3D printers
MYTH: 3D printers are useful in any way
FACT: It turns out this myth is true. Watching a 3D printer emit a hard plastic object in a color that nobody wants keeps nerds in a state of rapture that prevents them from engaging in more dangerous activities such as shooting heroin or starting actual businesses
[+] [-] jamesmcn|13 years ago|reply
More seriously, today's 3D printers are mere toys compared to what a future atom-scale assembler could do. But they are clearly useful to some people and fun for other right now.
The Microcomputers of the '70s and '80s absolutely were toys back then too, by comparison with the bigger iron available at orders of magnitude higher prices. But they were useful, and they started us on the road to volume production that allows me to have a supercomputer in my pocket and a half-dozen supercomputer-class portable machines hanging around my home office. Not to mention all the audio gear I have built around processors ranging from a Z80 though modern microcontrollers to some very powerful DSPs.
Perhaps 3D printers are toys. But they are wonderful toys that will take us to interesting places.
[+] [-] tomkinstinch|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] omegant|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] xxbondsxx|13 years ago|reply
Computer chips are complicated. Engines have to sustain miniature explosions thousands of times a second. Plastics have limitations, and people need to realize this before hyping 3D printing too far
[+] [-] regularfry|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vog|13 years ago|reply
"We're able to do X!"
What's the point of using the myth-variant of this message?
"We debunked the 'myth' that X is impossible!"
... especially if most of those "myths" actually were never stated before?
[+] [-] jrockway|13 years ago|reply
I've used a 3D printer before. It was fun and it didn't produce a mess, which was nice, but all I have to show for it is some ugly chunks of ABS that look kind of like a child just had some fun with very melty crayons. One time when I was 5, I made a snowman out of hot glue. That's still beyond the range of $1000 3D printers.
[+] [-] turoczy|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tisme|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] grannyg00se|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] delinka|13 years ago|reply
"...but they’re not, like, museum-quality great." Notwithstanding that the printer can't finish the pieces to make them "museum quality," there are striations on the horse head that come from how the plastic is stacked up. Not Museum Quality.
While this is a fine use of 3D printing, it's not a major advance like the article tries to make it.
[+] [-] ChuckMcM|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] joshuaheard|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] viviantan|13 years ago|reply
Btw, has anyone used 123D Catch (or any 123D software)? From what I gleaned from Autodesk's TOS, you inevitably end up granting them a irrevocable license to use your 3D models however they please. Perhaps that's why 123D remains a "hobbyist" software suite. I still haven't heard of anyone who uses it professionally.
[+] [-] nnnnni|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sliverstorm|13 years ago|reply
This awesome photo shows the 29 unfinished blocks of the horse head before Cosmo went to work fusing them
So, not busted after all?
[+] [-] evoxed|13 years ago|reply