Quality question.

I have been reading about SLA printers (like I was reading about Laser printers while my old Panasonic 24 pin dot matrix was churning away circa 1990 (before that I had a Brother 9 pin and before that (about 1985) an Alpha Matrix thermal printer)) and I found this image
Is FFF (image on the left) still that horrible or is this just to demo the quality of the SLA process (on the right)? I thought we had improved over that quality and were approaching SLA quality though I doubt we will ever get that high of a resolution.

Higher rez of the image to see exactly what I am asking: [www.wired.com]

Quality can be a heck of a lot better than the picture on the left. Depends a lot on the printer and your patience though.

Check out the threads in the competition forum to see a bunch of prints from folks who have mostly dialed in their printers.

http://forums.reprap.org/read.php?282,139442 for example

---

www.Fablicator.com

Thank you.

Yet again another source trying to put this movement down by saying we need the more expensive model.

Did you look at the bigger picture? I mean I haven't seen one that ugly unless the print head was funky and it was a trial run.

The FFF one isn't that bad, it has a number of common problems that we commonly see here.
Certainly some of the more dialed in printers here would be a lot better but you'd still see the layers and something similar to the pattern on top.

Polygonhell Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The FFF one isn't that bad, it has a number of
> common problems that we commonly see here.
> Certainly some of the more dialed in printers here
> would be a lot better but you'd still see the
> layers and something similar to the pattern on
> top.
If that is the case (this is the worst I have seen) the public will never accept that with open arms. The one on the right you can see the slicing lines but is smooth and what we are accustomed to. The other one really looks like something that was vomited up, or as a sample to set the machine up right (I guess this is what you guys mean by dialing up).

edit: I mean there is no way I would pay 500-700 dollars for a machine and that is the quality I would get. Most I know I wouldn't show them that cause I don't wish to hurt this technology and movement.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/17/2012 12:01AM by Dark Alchemist.

Well, there is another way to look at it. The reason you always see these tiny parts being used to compare DIY to $$$ is that the small parts make you focus on the small details, rather than the object as a whole. The fact is that both types of printers can make whisltes till the cows come home, but the whistle on the left will cost 80% less, and no one will frown on you for printing frivilous things, whereas the whistle on the right will print fewer times, given the same ammount of filament purchased due to the protection mechanism built in to the cartridge, which will mark it empty even when there are several ounces of filament left.

I disagree the public will not/does not think the quality to be acceptable. I see lots of interest and excitement, even from my wife's friends, who can sometime be quite the snobs.

jcabrer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, there is another way to look at it. The
> reason you always see these tiny parts being used
> to compare DIY to $$$ is that the small parts make
> you focus on the small details, rather than the
> object as a whole. The fact is that both types of
> printers can make whisltes till the cows come
> home, but the whistle on the left will cost 80%
> less, and no one will frown on you for printing
> frivilous things, whereas the whistle on the right
> will print fewer times, given the same ammount of
> filament purchased due to the protection mechanism
> built in to the cartridge, which will mark it
> empty even when there are several ounces of
> filament left.
>
> I disagree the public will not/does not think the
> quality to be acceptable. I see lots of interest
> and excitement, even from my wife's friends, who
> can sometime be quite the snobs.

That is the novelty period but I was speaking about a time when everyone would have one of these, or lets put it a better way when everyone can have one of these for the Wal-Mart price. I mean just flash back to the first inkjet printers and mom/dad granny/grandad asked the salesman for a printer that could do photos. They were shown some really horrible prints (in comparison to today) and they bought it because the best they had was a 24 pin dot matrix. Suddenly they could do color but they didn't use them very much and most times the ink in them dried out (so many times I had people come into my store asking for ink because theirs had dried out). That is where this technology is at right now. People can/will buy it but after the newness wears off it will sit in a corner. Now when the next thing rolls out that costs 100 bucks and can dish out the quality on the right they will use that thing left and right just as they do now with ink jets that do photo realistic prints. They go looking for more ink not because it dried out but because they use them to death.

That $100 thing at Walmart will not be an FDM device anymore than an iPad is a thin Apple IIe. That little progression from novelty to common place has taken thirty years. I don't think we are going to see some giant leap that soon.

Ultimately (or maybe only on the way to something cooler), the devices produced will be fully integrated electronics, built from polymer inks (or garbage?) with various qualities that allow the formation of circuits, batteries, displays, and sensors, all in one. There are groups already working on this somewhere...

Well, look at the inkjet printers that I can walk down to Wal-Mart right now and pick up for $29.99-$49.99 that do photo realistic printing. The darn ink replacements cost more than that for them but 15 or 20 years ago do you think you would have seen printers like that for that low? I know I sure didn't and lets not forget the ALL-IN-ONE type printers that are high resolution b&w/color scanners (killed flatbed scanners), fax machines, and photorealistic printer with wi-fi (B/G/N)/usb connections for $99.00. Even 10 years ago I would not expect something as advanced as that in one package for such a cheap price.

So, the $100-$150 dollar Wal-Mart price machine can be done and I think will be done but only if corporations see profit in it not from us hackers and tinkerers.