4 ms·

The Crowd Loves 3D Printing

22 points by jheitzeb 14y ago

Laremere 14y ago
While the technology is coming and I can't wait when they're commonplace, I think it says something when the models shown next to printers aren't practical objects. Many people like these trinkets, but I'm waiting to see stuff which is more useful. This means right now the cost of a 3d printer is only really justified if you have an interest in them. They still need to prove their function before they become something like cars, where even those who have little interest and knowledge in them use them because they provide so much value.
- ejlowry 14y ago
  I agree, there are way too many tchotchkes on sites like Shapeways and Thingiverse, and way too few useful products. I wonder what the first "killer app" for 3D printers will be. That said, I think they are already practical for prototyping or DIY tinkering projects.
  - jamesmcbennett 14y ago
    I think digital-to-physical manufacturing is so much bigger than 3D printing. http://fabsie.com/blog/3d-printing-vs-3d-cutting/ http://fabsie.com/blog/3d-printing-vs-3d-cutting/ and that CNC routing (3D cutting) is likely to find killer apps far faster than 3D printing is capable.
    - tjoff 14y ago
      Not in the eye of the mere mortals. Those 3D-cutters are just something that exist somewhere in a factory, could just as well be a black box. Most couldn't care less, you can't own a 3D cutter, unless you are really dedicated. Anyone can own and tinker with a 3D-printer. Even the difference of being able to play or rent a 3D cutter at work or through some service, or iterating something at home that you've made yourself, where the only real cost to it is your time spent having fun, is game changing.
      - jamesmcbennett 14y ago
        If you restrict the debate to the maker movement and people at home owning machines, I completely agree that the average joe can't own a large 8x4 3D cutter and never will, yet they can own a basic small format 3D printer. But the average joe is unlikely to own a kiln either and unlikely to own any form of industrial pre+post-process. Disruptive manufacturing is my main interest as well as the new models of digital distribution. I believe the home will be an extremely limited means of production, but indeed a computer controlled plastic extruder (3D printer) will be an accessible technology many can own.
  - lotyrin 14y ago
    Anything useful to a wide audience simply gets manufactured in a more economical fashion. 3d printing is firmly about the long tail. I don't see how a "killer app" could make much sense.
    - jamesmcbennett 14y ago
      The killer app could be 'parametric' thereby needing digital-to-physical manufacturing such as 3D printing. For standard static items made in plastic, there are no signs what so ever that injection moulding will become redundant any time soon. In the case of normal printing, the desktop printer didn't kill the rotary printing press, (althought the internet digital press may). Desktop printers and rotary printing presses exist for different use cases. Printing notes to red mark or travel tickets vs. a glossy magazine/newspaer. The relationship is akin to 3D printing plastic / injection moulded plastic and will likely have different use cases.
- primitur 14y ago
  Spend some time here and get yourself enlightened: http://thingiverse.com http://thingiverse.com Its NOT just trinkets, but a lot of very, very useful stuff. What you're seeing is just the thin marketing veneer - a picture of Yoda makes a lot more sense to a newcomer than a picture of a planetary gear or some such thing ..
DaniFong 14y ago
I wish the 3D printing enthusiasts would spend some time learning about the fantastic capabilities we already have in making useful things. We have CNC mills and lathes and grinders and cast makers and mould makers, we have industrial robots and super spiffy warehouse robots, we have automatic measuring machines and moving machines, we even have pneumatic flying cranberry sorters, we have many, many amazing things. 3D printing isn't the first, and it still can't make good machine parts. I realize well enough that what some dismiss as toys may in decades to come be foundational to how we do things, but the point is that future isn't really here yet. To those who believe they can bring it faster, good luck and godspeed.
- phy6 14y ago
  Do you sincerely think those advancements are lost on common 3D printing enthusiasts? It's not that it's some magical piece of tech, it's that the freedom to make things is now in a form palatable to lifestyles of non machinists and 3D CAD enthusiasts. A mid grade consumer 3D printer may cost the same as a used Bridgeport with a CNC retrofit, but what good is that for the hobbyist in the city with no dedicated workshop space? The point is 3D printing is relatively clean, relatively inexpensive way to do fun, plastic prototypes designed on a computer. It's also very non-intrusive to the casual hobbyist's life, to the point it can be done in a 400sqft studio without pissing off a landlord.
  - DaniFong 14y ago
    You could be right but it sounds to me like you're back fitting a story. 3d printing has a much more convoluted history than that. It's not trumpeted as something for hobbyists to make fun plastic prototypes. It is being heralded as the future of manufacturing. There once was, and still is, hope for making actual useful components. 3d printed prosthetics. 3d printed casting moulds. 3d printed blood vessels and kidneys. 3d printed jaws. 3d printed mass customizations. 3d printed drones. 3d printed RepRaps. Clearly the tech press has been going mad for the stuff. But one shouldn't believe the hype: your makerbot cannot do any of that, and even the nifty flexing Objet printed business card I received (which must have cost $4 to make) broke after a few months -- I have a shard on my desk.

22 points by jheitzeb 14y ago

While the technology is coming and I can't wait when they're commonplace, I think it says something when the models shown next to printers aren't practical objects. Many people like these trinkets, but I'm waiting to see stuff which is more useful. This means right now the cost of a 3d printer is only really justified if you have an interest in them. They still need to prove their function before they become something like cars, where even those who have little interest and knowledge in them use them because they provide so much value.

ejlowry 14y ago
I agree, there are way too many tchotchkes on sites like Shapeways and Thingiverse, and way too few useful products. I wonder what the first "killer app" for 3D printers will be. That said, I think they are already practical for prototyping or DIY tinkering projects.
- jamesmcbennett 14y ago
  I think digital-to-physical manufacturing is so much bigger than 3D printing. http://fabsie.com/blog/3d-printing-vs-3d-cutting/ http://fabsie.com/blog/3d-printing-vs-3d-cutting/ and that CNC routing (3D cutting) is likely to find killer apps far faster than 3D printing is capable.
  - tjoff 14y ago
    Not in the eye of the mere mortals. Those 3D-cutters are just something that exist somewhere in a factory, could just as well be a black box. Most couldn't care less, you can't own a 3D cutter, unless you are really dedicated. Anyone can own and tinker with a 3D-printer. Even the difference of being able to play or rent a 3D cutter at work or through some service, or iterating something at home that you've made yourself, where the only real cost to it is your time spent having fun, is game changing.
    - jamesmcbennett 14y ago
      If you restrict the debate to the maker movement and people at home owning machines, I completely agree that the average joe can't own a large 8x4 3D cutter and never will, yet they can own a basic small format 3D printer. But the average joe is unlikely to own a kiln either and unlikely to own any form of industrial pre+post-process. Disruptive manufacturing is my main interest as well as the new models of digital distribution. I believe the home will be an extremely limited means of production, but indeed a computer controlled plastic extruder (3D printer) will be an accessible technology many can own.
- lotyrin 14y ago
  Anything useful to a wide audience simply gets manufactured in a more economical fashion. 3d printing is firmly about the long tail. I don't see how a "killer app" could make much sense.
  - jamesmcbennett 14y ago
    The killer app could be 'parametric' thereby needing digital-to-physical manufacturing such as 3D printing. For standard static items made in plastic, there are no signs what so ever that injection moulding will become redundant any time soon. In the case of normal printing, the desktop printer didn't kill the rotary printing press, (althought the internet digital press may). Desktop printers and rotary printing presses exist for different use cases. Printing notes to red mark or travel tickets vs. a glossy magazine/newspaer. The relationship is akin to 3D printing plastic / injection moulded plastic and will likely have different use cases.
primitur 14y ago
Spend some time here and get yourself enlightened: http://thingiverse.com http://thingiverse.com Its NOT just trinkets, but a lot of very, very useful stuff. What you're seeing is just the thin marketing veneer - a picture of Yoda makes a lot more sense to a newcomer than a picture of a planetary gear or some such thing ..

DaniFong 14y ago

I wish the 3D printing enthusiasts would spend some time learning about the fantastic capabilities we already have in making useful things. We have CNC mills and lathes and grinders and cast makers and mould makers, we have industrial robots and super spiffy warehouse robots, we have automatic measuring machines and moving machines, we even have pneumatic flying cranberry sorters, we have many, many amazing things. 3D printing isn't the first, and it still can't make good machine parts. I realize well enough that what some dismiss as toys may in decades to come be foundational to how we do things, but the point is that future isn't really here yet. To those who believe they can bring it faster, good luck and godspeed.

phy6 14y ago
Do you sincerely think those advancements are lost on common 3D printing enthusiasts? It's not that it's some magical piece of tech, it's that the freedom to make things is now in a form palatable to lifestyles of non machinists and 3D CAD enthusiasts. A mid grade consumer 3D printer may cost the same as a used Bridgeport with a CNC retrofit, but what good is that for the hobbyist in the city with no dedicated workshop space? The point is 3D printing is relatively clean, relatively inexpensive way to do fun, plastic prototypes designed on a computer. It's also very non-intrusive to the casual hobbyist's life, to the point it can be done in a 400sqft studio without pissing off a landlord.
- DaniFong 14y ago
  You could be right but it sounds to me like you're back fitting a story. 3d printing has a much more convoluted history than that. It's not trumpeted as something for hobbyists to make fun plastic prototypes. It is being heralded as the future of manufacturing. There once was, and still is, hope for making actual useful components. 3d printed prosthetics. 3d printed casting moulds. 3d printed blood vessels and kidneys. 3d printed jaws. 3d printed mass customizations. 3d printed drones. 3d printed RepRaps. Clearly the tech press has been going mad for the stuff. But one shouldn't believe the hype: your makerbot cannot do any of that, and even the nifty flexing Objet printed business card I received (which must have cost $4 to make) broke after a few months -- I have a shard on my desk.