5 ms·
Upvoted because as a work of art it's beautiful and as a product of technology it's neat to see that printing with quartz is possible. But it must be said that
by kibwen 2y ago
Upvoted because as a work of art it's beautiful and as a product of technology it's neat to see that printing with quartz is possible. But it must be said that the distinguishability of the pieces is lacking.
- aziaziazi 2y agoI thought the same in picture but in the article author says he used different texture (one smooth and one rippled) for both parties. I give I’m the benefit of the doubt because fine texture can appear very different in reality than photo. Edit: > For a game of chess to function effectively it’s crucial you clearly differentiate between both opposition pieces, and, the alternate spaces on which those pieces play. In a mono-material set such as this, a binary contrast between rippled and smooth surfaces (reflective of the contrasting states of sand) become the primary signifier of this difference.
- krisoft 2y agoI see the rippling and the smooth pieces, that one is ok. For me what is hard to distinguish are the individual pieces from each other within one colour. The knight from the bishop from the pawn, etc. It is possible to figure them out, but at least for me I can't see it at a glance. I have to think about it and compare them. (whereas with a more traditional set I see it immediately)
- oarsinsync 2y agoI think a standard set optimises for usability over aesthetics. I think this artwork optimises for aesthetics over usability. Both sets are aesthetically pleasing and usable, just to different degrees. I think that’s ok? I’ve seen many chess sets whose primary function was aesthetic rather than to be played. The thing with aesthetics is that it’s highly subjective.
- pdpi 2y agoInsofar as one of the defining characteristics of art is the constraints you impose upon yourself, one of the fundamental constraints of making an art piece out of something functional is that you should either preserve its usability, or break it in a way that makes a statement. This does neither. The concept is great, the board is absolutely beautiful, and, at first glance, the curve is aesthetically pleasing while not getting in the way of reading the board. Texture as the "colour" works great. The figures, though, just look like they ran out of steam, it's like the "horse drawing" meme. They're not evocative of chess pieces, they're not particularly evocative of sand structures either. They're just... there. They're pretty enough, I guess, but in a generic way. When you add to that that the photos have an impossible pawn formation, it kind of screams of "I don't actually care about the subject of my art piece".
- JustBreath 2y agoIt would certainly could serve as a fun challenge for experienced chess players. But I'm let down because my chess partner is a 9 year old who is still learning basic strategies.
- wongarsu 2y agoThe standard set optimizes for mass production. All pieces except the knight can be turned on a lathe, with minor post-processing to cut notches in the rook and bishop. Older chess sets like the Lewis Chessmen from the 1200s look substantially different, having both better aesthetics and usability than the currently popular set. Like having a bishop that is recognizable as a bishop, not a medium-height round thing with a notch in the top. If you don't want to imitate the standard chess set, improving on it isn't that difficult as long as you don't care about mass production from wood. This set somehow manages to be worse
- krisoft 2y ago> I think that’s ok? Oh yeah. That's a reasonable tradeoff. Just aziaziazi's comment made it sound like the only aspect where distinguisability matters is the colour. So I pointed out that I don't have a problem telling the sides apart, while have more of a problem distinguishing the piece's type. But as you say this is a decorative chess set, and in that regard I think it is a very sucesfull one.
- aziaziazi 2y agoOh got it now!
- thousand_nights 2y agoi was gifted a glass set once where black's pieces were matte glass and white's pieces were clear glass, so quite a striking texture difference it was still unplayable and more of a decoration
- bigstrat2003 2y agoI read that but I honestly can't see any difference in the photos they gave. You're right that it might be different in person.
- amelius 2y agoI guess you can get the same effect by just printing with good old PLA, and then dipping it into glue and then into sand.
- SystemOut 2y agoFuzzy skin finish might also get you pretty close along with a wood PLA. They can do both wall and top layer fuzzy skin now.
- stavros 2y agoYou don't need wood PLA, I have a Bambu matte ecru PLA and with fuzzy skin it looks almost exactly like this.
- HWR_14 2y agoThat's a great idea. Do you have any other ideas for finishing the other half of the pieces. Graphite seems too messy, and I'm not sure the different sands will look different enough. I imagine the details that currently (and insufficiently in my opinion) distinguish the colors would be obliterated.
- x_may 2y agoThere’s black sand! Volcanic sand from Iceland is perfectly black and would be a great way to distinguish them
- michaelmior 2y agoYou can also by any color of "sand" you like at your local craft/hobby shop.
- sparrish 2y agoGlue on silica carbide. It's usually darker colored and has a very aggressive texture (used for grips on pistol handles and skateboards among other things).
- 2y ago
- Vox_Leone 2y agoJust beautiful. We are experimenting with ceramic gelcasting lately[1]. It involves the use of a gel-based slurry, typically made by mixing ceramic powders (such as zirconia, alumina, or silicon carbide) with a liquid binder and a gelling agent in a 3D printed mold. It is a versatile manufacturing method used to create complex ceramic parts. Upon reading the article it occurred to me that the same method could be used to make those kinds of "dune core" pieces, with sand instead of ceramic powders. There must be a sand-binder-gelling solution formulation that can handle the task. [1]https://voxleone.com/2024/03/05/3d-printing-im-making-a-500c-ceramic-hot-end/ https://voxleone.com/2024/03/05/3d-printing-im-making-a-500c...
- johanneskanybal 2y agoI mean we all saw that but the entire text was about that they are very different because they feel different. Doubt you read it.
- knifie_spoonie 2y agoI think the parent commenter did read that and their concern is that tournament chess has a touch-move rule (if you touch a piece you have to move it). This set is certainly a cool art piece, but not particularly functional if a player has trouble distinguishing pieces visually. The queen looks like a slightly larger version of the bishop (or is that the knight?), I could see someone confusing them if they're sitting at different levels.
- jdietrich 2y agoNovelty sets like these are deeply unpleasant for regular chess players, because they interfere with normal pattern recognition. There's a huge difference between being able to tell the pieces apart and being able to read the board at a glance. It's like reading a book in bad handwriting instead of clear type - you can decode it with enough effort, but you can't read fluently or scan the text.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- dheera 2y agoMakes the game more interesting. As long as both sides are equally handicapped it’s fine.