3D printed Tanks

[Ballardian]

 I came across this guy's site whilst seaching for 3D model files (3dwargaming.com - it's another indication of how the technology is likely to become more & more important in the not too distant future.
  The two WWII tank files he's currently selling aren't bad at all - the Tiger I certainly has a few issues (early turret on late hull & running gear & the drive sprocket comes out too far), but the 43 model T34 is pretty good, with no glaring faults.
 There are a number of Laffers who're currently experimenting with 3D printing (Matakishi for one) - so how lolng before WG etc start selling us  digital files (& would that be a good thing)?

 
               
 

[carlos marighela]

I am currently printing stuff sent over the internet from Netherlands to Australia....

3D printed clogs? Windmills? Recreational drugs? The mind boggles.

The future may just be around the corner but the best use I've seen of the technology seems to be quickly turning out masters and proofs of concept by traditional manufacturers using high res machines. Rubicon are masters of this.

Those models look nice. They seem to have overcome two of the biggest turnoffs, the inability of cheap machines to deal with curved surfaces minus irritating steps and ridges and the grainy effect.

[Elbows]

We've discussed this in a couple thread...it basically boils down to:

1) Yes, this will continue to impact the industry in a huge way.
2) Don't plan on cheap, crisp printing in the avergae house-hold for 28mm or smaller miniatures too soon.

[Elbows]

And those things you stated last are what 90% of people buying simple 3D home printers can expect.  The majority of people will not be plunking down for $1000-1500+ machines anytime soon, let alone the really stellar $10K models.

[Wyrmalla]

Having just spent a day adding detail to a 3D printed E-100 I can say that its not there for every company. I've seen high end 3D printing (hell look up the 3D printed chocolate palaces), but the print times wind up costing the consumer an arm and a leg.

Besides home printer the way to go may be renting printer time from a commercial retailer. I can't speak for the rest of the world, but in the United States they have shops where the walls are just stacked 3D printers which you can rent time on them (presumably also paying for the materials - extra charges incurred for the better filament).

Ah, from personal experience with products from home users and small companies - keep some glass paper handy for the immediate future.

Watching Tested.com and their podcast kind of spoils me expectations for quality though (coincidentally said podcast I'm listening to has started talking about 3D printers. Weird). With how much they talk about them, the techniques and drop in price, seeing crap prints still is a bit disheartening.

[Westfalia Chris]

3d printing is going to be an important aspect of the modelling part of the hobby, so I don't see any reason to act or get agitated pre-emptively.

That said, the concept proposed by Scurv earlier of a kit line supplemented by 3d files to manufacture otherwise commercially unfeasible projects seems to be one of the most sensible business models I've come across for 3d printing. A gaming acquaintance of mine got one, and while he seems inappropriately intent on printing models that suffer terribly from situations due to their shape, I see so much potential in that and am seriously considering getting a printer myself.

[CompanyB]

Another aspect of this that will change is the creation of the actual files.  I'm getting a new laptop from Wacom for work, and it has a 3D scanner and camera built in.  Now, the scanner is not super high resolution, but it's good enough to capture a very good rendition of a co-workers face that I can then bring into Zbrush and rework onto a close approximation.  It's possible for me to do a walk around of a person and have a mesh I can then apply to a pre-existing 3D human model.

So if you want toy soldiers, you can now start with the faces of your family.  This isn't the future...I can do this right now.  Another fact is that most 3D software now comes with pre-built models you can modify.  In Zbrush, I can sculpt my own human from scratch, or I can construct a character from an infinite amount of parts I have on hand in the software.  Hands, noses, eyes, limbs, monster limbs, basically clothes.  I give companies like Rubicon a little grain of salt, as there are thousands of digital libraries of pre-existing models you can start from.  It doesn't take much effort for a good artist to put something together.  Just do a Pinterest search for Zbrush characters.  each one is printable in any size.  Also with Zbrush, I can now paint just about any model to a photo realistic standard.  So printing full color characters in high res is only a few months away.

We were literally able to take 3D scans of sea shells the other day with just a camera, import them into Zbrush, readjust the sculpt and have photorealistic versions of the shells in an game app as well as ready for printing in a few hours,

In five years, 3D worlds and models will also no longer use polygons.  You will literally be able to just use a regular camera, take several dozen photos, and have your software interpolate a full 3D model using point cloud technology. We do this on a weekly basis, creating a printable and viewable 3D models of our building or places around town from a 100+ photos.

[Redmist1122]

Printing a 3D model does bring hope to those vehicles and/or parts needed in which nobody makes in resin or in a plastic kit.  I use 1:48 scale model vehicles/armor in my WWII gaming.  The scale is very limited in option for those "other" vehicles, i.e. American M5 Stuart, M24 Chaffee, or even the Soviet BT-7, to name a few. I've done some pretty good good conversions with existing models.  I just keep crossing my fingers for someone to make those few models/vehicles in 1:48 scale.

I have bought a two 3D printed models through a chap on TMP.  They were ok, but required a lot of work to get the surface smooth and trying to replace the detail lost in the wheels, tracks and hatches of the sort.  I think I'm a pretty good modeller, so I can hide a lot of defects from the printing and re-create most of the hatches, but definitely not the wheel or tracks.

Its good to know, there is some "high end" products out there.  Hope to find someone who doesn't charge an arm and a leg.

[Paratrooper 42]

Hi, new to the forum and just looking to get back into WW2.

Just seen this thread and was wondering are those pictures of the 28mm tanks?

Until now I've discounted 3D printed vehicles as my experience of 3D printing so far is that the finish isn't very good unless you're prepared to spend lots of cash/time on the printer and the printing and I could probably buy all the vehicles I will ever need for less than the cost of a decent printer.

[Ballardian]

 As Scurv says, the art to getting good results from hobby printers seems to be in the way the models are optimised, we've all seen a lot of mediocre results displaying the typical scan line issue - that this chap's neatly avoided the problem is part of what caught my attention.
 He's running a KS for his files, & there are a good number of WWII vehicles there (.kickstarter.com/projects/847988960/3d-printable-tanks-historical-and-sci-fi?ref=328103&token=bffe1d6c) BUT I would hope that their accuracy leans more to the T34 than his Tiger I (which, as I mentioned, has a number of inaccuracies.

[Paratrooper 42]

they are 1/56 scale in the pics.

The reason they look so good compared to most 3d printed stuff is these models are optimized for printing. They have been cut up and orientated on the print bed in order to get the very best results from the tech.

The difference this step makes is staggering. Usually I cut up and orientate everything and get results that are as good as the above. Today I used a robot builder that you cant cut up the print with. With the exact same print settings I use to get amazing looking stuff, I could only deliver a very mediocre result due to the amount of supports needed and the poor orientation of most of the models parts.

This was on a $1400 printer too. Imagine what a low end one struggles with when the print is not cut up well!

You've just confirmed my original thoughts that 3D printing isn't good/cheap/accessible enough to consider as a viable alternative to proper models.

I doubt many wargamers would want to shell out $1400 on a printer to get mediocre results when they could buy lots of commercially available models with the same money.  Plus there would be the time needed to learn all the slicing techniques and fiddle with the printer to get it working.  Personally I'd rather spend that time improving my painting and modelling skills.

[chamberlain]

You've just confirmed my original thoughts that 3D printing isn't good/cheap/accessible enough to consider as a viable alternative to proper models.

I doubt many wargamers would want to shell out $1400 on a printer to get mediocre results when they could buy lots of commercially available models with the same money.  Plus there would be the time needed to learn all the slicing techniques and fiddle with the printer to get it working.  Personally I'd rather spend that time improving my painting and modelling skills.

If 3D printing interests someone *as it's own hobby* then it combines excellently with miniature wargaming.  If it's something you have to do to get to the hobby that you'd actually enjoy, then it can definitely fall short.  If the time spent making the printer work perfectly, learning the software and learning how cutting and positioning objects changes the final outcome is something that is enjoyable hobby time, then of course that being a barrier to other people can be inadvertently discounted.

People have a tendency to assume their own preferences and experiences are more universal than they are and that if 3d printers are accessible, easy to use and affordable in their experience, then it must be that way for most or even everyone else.

The time constraints on most miniature wargamers that I know (from their jobs, family commitments, etc.,) leave only so much time for hobbying.  And I think most would actually rather spend it working on miniatures or playing wargames then learning how to pull up a design in some software and make changes to optimize it.  Or diagnosing a filament leak or adjusting settings to stop stringing on a particular piece.  Or even simple things like cleaning out a resin tank on an SLA printer.

I love 3d printers.  I think they can do great things.  I enjoyed building one from parts.  I've done tech support for 3d printing for educational settings.  Of all my gaming buddies, I think one... maybe two would actually enjoy the process of owing and operating the printer themselves while the vast majority of people i've met would be much happier not spending time on that.

In a given group of gamers, there doesn't need to be universal appeal for the entire group to benefit.  It doesn't need to be universally accessible, affordable, etc.,.

[chamberlain]

what I said got taken completely out of context there as well. The original question is why does this tank look so nice. The answer was orientation. A printer costing a gazillion dollars will still do an average looking print if every single factor of the print is done without any effort put in to orientate the model. Orientation is part of the 3d printing process.

Absolutely.

I actually think it's fair though, for people to talk themselves out of 3d printing.  It really isn't for everyone and especially not for someone who doesn't want to bother thinking about orienting parts.  it's a basic part of the process.

Oh the complex 'slicing techniques' essentially are 1. draw a line 2. Press the split solid button 3. flat face to print bed. 4. Super nice looking print. Not rocket science really.

I actually think that simple process described that way is another good test whether 3d printing is for a given person.  I actually send people who express interest to me a video about some 3d printing thing.  Even something really simple:



There are many people who after watching that will be like "no thanks."

My opinion that 3d printing is not suitable for 90%+ of the people out there is probably a result of doing tech support and seeing what happens when just anyone and everyone can have access to a given printer.  I've come to realizing that even in populations where you'd expect a higher affinity for technical things like in geeky circles, programmers, gamers, crafters/hobbyists, and even graphic designers and people who do CAD for a living, there actually really isn't all that of an increase in the number of people who will actually learn what needs to be learned and do what needs to be done.

I think we've discussed this in the past, but I think a useful analogue are paper printers.  The vast majority of the people out there have no capability or interest in doing even simple things like removing a jammed piece of paper.  In an office, they call IT.  They could just open the panel, and pull a release/cartridge/whatever, and slide the paper right out.  And the first time their home printers make streaks or spotting, they don't bother cleaning the print head or changing the cartridge (many cartridges have the print head right on them), they just buy a new printer.

Now give them access to a 3d printer.

The other side of this is that there *are* people for whom 3d printing will be enjoyable, accessible, affordable and for whom the results will be excellent.  And people can spend less time with certain approaches.

[Cubs]

I'm going to get a printer one day, I just know I am. I haven't got one so far because I'm almost totally technologically incompetent and for the sort of quality I'd want to keep, the initial costs would be just way too much for my meagre budget. But I can see that printers have already changed the hobby hugely for a lot of people and technology like this doesn't just fade away; it progresses year on year getting better and more affordable and looking at these sorts of results is even more encouraging. I remember Going to a place down the road about 10-15 years ago, who were doing 3d printing for industrial plastic prototypes (vacuum cleaner parts, kettle bodies, etc..) using massive machines the size of an old photo booth. Seeing how far things have progressed in such a short space of time is a bit scary.

[chamberlain]

Something to remember:  There may already be someone with a great printer near you who will print for a very low cost.

Here's a local guy reviewing some purchasable 3d files after he sent them to a local printing hub.



My take on the industry in general is that there is that miniature wargaming is a totally perfect place to apply 3d printing technology.  And 3d printing is going to have a growing impact going forward.

And that's without mass adoption of 3d printing.  It only takes a small minority of a gaming community adopting 3d printing to change things massively.  Laser cutters have already totally changed accessories and now there are all sorts of regional token and terrain providers and loads of people who just operate on a break even basis selling to friends and local event organizers.

Removing the appearance of layers through creative orientation at the design stage is actually going to be increasingly important.  In my iterations of some 10mm infantry I'm going multi part with as large of parts as I can get away with while still not having the layer lines being in any direction your brain expects them to be.    I'm trying to make it work with PETG (so the tiny figures will be really strong) and have had to adjust various settings related to travel speeds and retraction (including setting the printer to have different travel speeds for different parts of the print), but I'm getting there.