|
Linux Assassin posted:If all you will be having to go on are 2d images then all you will actually be able to produce are 2d prints. This is not in and of itself a bad thing- but if your trying to produce 'instant dinosaur model, glue together bones and RARG' then I think you'll be pretty disappointed. If on the other hand you had say, a full CT scan of the bones in question, or a 3d model, then you could in fact produce a scaled version of the actual bone. I wanted to give an example of what I'm thinking. I have some more that give me an estimate of size and such for a lot of things, those are just quick images I grabbed. That's also why I asked the question before of how to take something 2D and modify it to 3D. Basically, if I have a range of images and other information about the parts, how can I modify a 2d image to become 3d for printing.
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2012 21:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 05:32 |
|
|
SublimeDelusions posted:I wanted to give an example of what I'm thinking. I have some more that give me an estimate of size and such for a lot of things, those are just quick images I grabbed. That's also why I asked the question before of how to take something 2D and modify it to 3D. Basically, if I have a range of images and other information about the parts, how can I modify a 2d image to become 3d for printing. You can't just run some magical program on it that will turn it to 3d. However if you have say layers of the image at some resolution (like say, a cross section every .2mm) then you should be able to feed those in series to the printer and produce your image. Otherwise what your looking at is importing the image into some sort of 3d design program, and 'fleshing' it out yourself, then printing it. Others have already posted the programs to look into if your just getting started.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2012 22:06
|
|
|
Modifying a single 2d image into a 3d model is really hard. You don't have enough information in 1 image such as thickness, any bends etc. You're better off finding a 3d model or making 1 from scratch, though there is a way, with a couple of 2d images to create a reasonable model. Create an "extrusion" with your first image on the top so it looks like you stacked 10,000 paper slices of the first image. Then take your second image (same object, same scale), figure out how it relates to the first image in terms of rotation etc, place this image on your extrusion & remove all parts of the model that don't match both images. Continue for as many images as you have, then use your judgement to neaten the image up. If anyone understood that, please supply images to explain as unfortunately I'm on a phone & will be for the foreseeable future.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2012 22:08
|
|
|
I understand what you both are saying, and those are both kinda the ideas I had. I'm not going to be finding any type of high res scans of any of these things, so a lot of it would have to be assembled from images from multiple views and relatively good drawings. I asked about how to convert it more in the sense of what do I need to do in order to go about modeling it in 3D from a 2D image, sort of how it was explained about having to wind up drawing it out myself. So I guess my questions have been pretty much answered. Now it's an issue of learning to use the software.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2012 22:16
|
|
|
SublimeDelusions posted:I understand what you both are saying, and those are both kinda the ideas I had. I'm not going to be finding any type of high res scans of any of these things, so a lot of it would have to be assembled from images from multiple views and relatively good drawings. If you have access to the specimens and can take photos from a bunch of angles, Autodesk's 123D Catch (separate from the normal 123D, formerly known as PhotoFly) can compute a 3D model from that: http://www.123dapp.com/catch/learn My own experiments with it have been a bit rough, but this model made by taking photos in a museum turned out very well: http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:14884
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2012 22:36
|
|
|
techknight posted:If you have access to the specimens and can take photos from a bunch of angles, Autodesk's 123D Catch (separate from the normal 123D, formerly known as PhotoFly) can compute a 3D model from that: http://www.123dapp.com/catch/learn That is absolutely bad rear end. Was anybody at the museum staring at you while you took 80 pictures from different angels? Haha, or does it not take that many photos?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2012 05:52
|
|
|
Rodney Chops posted:That is absolutely bad rear end. Was anybody at the museum staring at you while you took 80 pictures from different angels? Haha, or does it not take that many photos? It takes about that many photos. My best sets have been four rings of 18 images each. Less, and it seems to give a kinda not so great point cloud. More, and it takes forever to process.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2012 05:55
|
|
|
Rodney Chops posted:That is absolutely bad rear end. Was anybody at the museum staring at you while you took 80 pictures from different angels? Haha, or does it not take that many photos? Oh I didn't make that one, I just printed a copy of it. But I imagine the creator did get stared at quite a bit, as the museum in question is housed inside the former KGB building.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2012 07:27
|
|
|
Oh, gotcha. Its too bad most museums don't allow photography, otherwise that would be kind of a cool project for people with too much time. Go down to some art show, and re-create all of it as plastic miniatures. Haha.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2012 18:26
|
|
|
Rodney Chops posted:Oh, gotcha. Its too bad most museums don't allow photography, otherwise that would be kind of a cool project for people with too much time. Go down to some art show, and re-create all of it as plastic miniatures. Haha. Then put on your own 1:16 scale art show and charge full price for your pieces. It's art! It's Brilliant!
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2012 00:57
|
|
|
edit: wrong place
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2012 07:27
|
|
|
peepsalot posted:Here, have a pic of some stubby screwdriver handles
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2012 08:36
|
|
|
Here is the ring I ordered! First, the design:  And second, the printed resin! (Sorry for poo poo iphone camera quality)  Everything turned out exactly as I had wanted  I'm doing this a bit different than normal so the next step is to make wax reproductions of the resin and then cast those in silver, and blacken the low points. Should look pretty cool when it's done
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2012 16:24
|
|
|
Cakefool posted:Modifying a single 2d image into a 3d model is really hard. You don't have enough information in 1 image such as thickness, any bends etc. You're better off finding a 3d model or making 1 from scratch, though there is a way, with a couple of 2d images to create a reasonable model. I forget what the function is called, but a bunch of parametric modeling software actually does this for you. You can create several planar shapes, and then have the program extrapolate the connections between them. I mean, it would not be great, because most of the time you are using it just to create something like an airfoil, instead of something crazy complicated like a skull.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2012 21:05
|
|
|
If anyone else is in Toronto, we're having this month's Toronto RepRap Users Group meetup at Site 3 tonight. All 3D printing fans welcome! Some notes and videos from last month's meetup at hacklab: http://hacklab.to/archives/toronto-reprap-users-meetup-3-great-success/
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2012 21:33
|
|
|
I am really tempted to get the MakerBot Replicator, but wish they would offer a kit version, do you guys think they will ofer a kit version after it has been out a bit. I want something to put together. Maybe I will order an ultimaker instead.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2012 21:40
|
|
|
mhsneon posted:I am really tempted to get the MakerBot Replicator, but wish they would offer a kit version, do you guys think they will ofer a kit version after it has been out a bit. I want something to put together. Maybe I will order an ultimaker instead. Stupid Ultimaker and their 4-6 week lead time  Still waiting for mine (only been 2 weeks lol) I follow the channel hossmachine on Youtube. The guy does lots of CNC stuff and recently started playing around with a RepRap. He definitely knows what he's doing when it comes to tweaking these things, but regardless he has achieved impressive results so far including taking some big steps toward dual extrusion and what not. I'm still happy with my decision to purchase an Ultimaker but considering what Hoss has achieved, I'd consider following in his footsteps rather than buy a Makerbot. (I may still do a RepRap just for fun using parts printed on my Ultimaker)
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2012 22:03
|
|
|
Claes Oldenburger posted:Here is the ring I ordered! Ooo... looks nice! 
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 10:48
|
|
|
kafkasgoldfish posted:Stupid Ultimaker and their 4-6 week lead time Totally still on the fence about that exact same choice. I'm kinda leaning towards attacking a rep-rap. I'm not an electronics junkie, but there seems to be alot of support for them. Inititally I was just going to get a makerbot, thinking a reprap would be too much messing around. The more I read, the more I'm finding you need to constantly fiddle with stuff regardless. So maybe its best to know it inside and out by building it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 15:02
|
|
|
Rodney Chops posted:Totally still on the fence about that exact same choice. I'm kinda leaning towards attacking a rep-rap. I'm not an electronics junkie, but there seems to be alot of support for them. Inititally I was just going to get a makerbot, thinking a reprap would be too much messing around. The more I read, the more I'm finding you need to constantly fiddle with stuff regardless. So maybe its best to know it inside and out by building it. One it's printing there's pretty much the same messing around with it. Fixing extrudes, keeping it calibrated and the like. A reprap has the additional option of messing around with different firmwares and host programs, where as makerbot has great support for one firmware. If you want a challenge you could put one of the alternative firmware on a makerbot though. The big area of additional fiddling around with the reprap isn't while it's printing, its if you decide to self source. You run around gathering plastic bits, a few dozen kinds of fasteners, pick one of around 3 electronics setups, one of 4 cold ends, and one of a whole bunch of hot ends. The advantage is that in the end you get a mildly more capable machine if you've done it right, or a much less expensive machine if you've done it right. You get to choose. If you're interested in a kit reprap, I recommend the Makergear prusa. It's pretty much the best mendel kit out there, and it's still 275 less than a makerbot. If you're not big into electronics, you may wish to put the extra 50 up for a soldered board though. On the other end of the scale, there's the H-1 which is a kit done by a plastic injection and cnc company. For 260 dollars you get a complete hardware kit, supply your own electronics (160 unassembled 200 all soldered up) for a grand total of $460. They also have the option to drive it with a cnc (mach3, emc2, etc) interpreter which is kinda weird and slightly cheaper. Useful to people who want to use their previous experience with a cnc host and have a parallel port. The Makerbot replicator, though, is still pretty much in a class by itself, except for a handful of individuals who have made one off dual head printers. It is pricy class of one though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 17:23
|
|
|
Aurium posted:
Thanks for putting that all together! I think I will forsure be going with one of the kits. I just don't have the experience/knowhow to be picking parts here and there and then troubleshooting them. Pre-soldered electronics is probably also a really good idea. I was actually looking at getting one of these: http://reprappro.com/Huxley For the simple fact that they are all together, and seem to have alot of support on their forums. The makergear mendal looks like a really good step up. There seems to be alot of really good reviews for it on the reprap forums. Plus, you have a bigger build area with a mendal over a huxley. I guess it would take up more desk room too. I've never seen or heard of the H1 before. It looks like they have a complete kit too. Why the heck are they so much cheaper I wonder. Its tempting for the pricepoint, but it looks like it wouldnt have the support the others do. I don't have any previous use with parallel port stuff. Maybe I'll just avoid it. http://shop.seemecnc.com/H-1-Complete-Kit-71599.htm Hmmm. Huxley or Mendal....
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 20:09
|
|
|
BFB printers also have dual (or tri) extrusion, but it'll cost you about 4K so I guess it's out of range compared to most other hobby printers. http://www.bitsfrombytes.com/usd/catalog/3dtouch I never understood the point of a huxley, it costs pretty much the same as a prusa, for less build volume.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 20:18
|
|
|
That huxley kit is pretty great too. It's a good buy. They have a blog post on it that shows some pretty good quality too. The reprap founder was involved in that particular one too. If you want a small printer it's hard to do better. The h1 is cheap because its made by a much larger preexisting company that did cnc machines, so they are already buying most of the parts needed for a reprap in bulk. They also do plastic injection molding, so they can also make the plastic parts very cheaply. The complete h1 kit is only if you want to do the cnc parallel port controls. Otherwise, you can just put one of the standard reprap electronics (that they don't sell) on the hardware kit and run it like any other reprap.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 20:41
|
|
|
One of the RepRap meetup attendees yesterday brought their large-size Prusa to the shop: (The actual build platform is the normal size, so he's currently only benefiting from the extra height.)
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 04:35
|
|
|
Hmmm. Did he make a bigger one for a specific reason, or just for something to do? Does he print things that high without the object falling over? Pretty spiffy though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2012 18:37
|
|
|
Any benefit to running all 6 endstops on RAMPS? I can get endstops cheap as hell.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2012 05:42
|
|
|
insta posted:Any benefit to running all 6 endstops on RAMPS? I can get endstops cheap as hell. I'd like to know this too. Also - what's the benefit of opto endstops over microswitches?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2012 12:06
|
|
|
insta posted:Any benefit to running all 6 endstops on RAMPS? I can get endstops cheap as hell. They keep your machine from potentially damaging itself if some kind of erroneous gcode tries sending it outside the limits. The faster and bigger the machine gets, the more likely you are to want to have them. ReelBigLizard posted:I'd like to know this too. Also - what's the benefit of opto endstops over microswitches? They can be more repeatable than a mechanical switch. Mechanical switches also technically have a limited lifetime but I don't think that is really an issue. However, a lot of people are moving away from optos because of the trouble they have with ambient light interfering with their function. Use mechanical switches first, if you find they are not repeatable enough, just go straight to Hall effect sensors. They use magnets and are extremely accurate and reliable.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2012 12:50
|
|
|
You can set software limits, so the machine won't go, say, 195mm from where it homed, or whatever you measure your limits to be. Since you only need to measure this out once and set it in firmware, max endstops are limted usefulness and just add unnecessary complexity/wiring in mty opinion.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2012 18:02
|
|
|
Until something goes wrong and you smash the head into the side or burn up your drive motor or something. These are quite a bit lower power and less expensive than the big CNCs I've worked with, so maybe it doesn't matter so much. But the mechanical limits are are there for a reason.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2012 18:12
|
|
|
peepsalot posted:You can set software limits, so the machine won't go, say, 195mm from where it homed, or whatever you measure your limits to be. Since you only need to measure this out once and set it in firmware, max endstops are limted usefulness and just add unnecessary complexity/wiring in mty opinion. Complexity be damned. Failsafes are the correct way to do it. Never rely on a single avenue of safety.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2012 18:21
|
|
|
peepsalot posted:You can set software limits, so the machine won't go, say, 195mm from where it homed, or whatever you measure your limits to be. Since you only need to measure this out once and set it in firmware, max endstops are limted usefulness and just add unnecessary complexity/wiring in mty opinion. I heard the Titanic was unsinkable too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2012 19:37
|
|
|
Nema 17 motors aren't really strong enough to do any significant damage except on a lower z crash where you will crack your bed or bust your hotend(and the lower Z is where you would already have an endstop if you use only 3). For X and Y i have bumped on the edges of the frame countless times (too lazy to accurately set soft Max stops for the longest time) and it really doesn't hurt anything. Maybe going past Max z could maybe bend your X axis smooth rods a bit if you really go overboard. I just put a big red button and rely on my cat like reflexes to slap it silly when things go wrong. It's more exciting that way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2012 20:43
|
|
|
Edit: Nevermind, it's back up at a new url: http://3dhomemade.blogspot.ca/2012/03/kit-update.html Basically, Junior Veloso's resin printer is pretty expensive in full form, but partial kits could be $600. Snackmar fucked around with this message at 09:42 on Mar 30, 2012 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2012 09:33
|
|
|
techknight posted:Edit: Interesting...but i guess not totally unexpected. Even buying the kit from him still means you need to source a ton of parts from other places for the same cost as a full kit parts like the frame, motor and projector. Or so I would think? This does open up possibilities for people to create cheaper frames though...
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2012 13:12
|
|
|
If you are interested in something that might be a little less expensive(especially the resin) keep an eye on the Lemon Curry project. It is open source and will be using slic3r, I believe. They are sourcing projectors from China that are ready to go for resin based printing. From what I have seen from the author on IRC, the prices seem way better than even Junior's "basic" product.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2012 13:40
|
|
|
The frame for a dlp printer can be a lot simpler than that pictured but this is getting really interesting. What do you need for these things - is this a complete list? Vat, resin, projector with source matched to the resin, frame, Z-axis, platform, controller electronics, software.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2012 22:38
|
|
|
I'm looking at the prices posted up for Veloso's printer and I'm shocked. They are well beyond what I would call "a little expensive"... Not to mention you can't even see an itemized BOM without paying $160. Lame. Maybe I will follow Lemon Curry instead.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2012 15:52
|
|
|
My Rhythmic Crotch posted:I'm looking at the prices posted up for Veloso's printer and I'm shocked. They are well beyond what I would call "a little expensive"... Not to mention you can't even see an itemized BOM without paying $160. Lame. Maybe I will follow Lemon Curry instead. I feel the saaaaaame way. That or someone will buy the BOM and tweak so they can release it as open source. I just cant believe this: 1) Software and controller board. 2) All necessary motors for the printer 3) The linear actuators 4) Power supply for the controller board and motors 5) Building tray 6) Building head (area that the object is build) costs $2000. Especially from what i've seen of these printers and it only seems they actually need to move in Y. I thought maybe the precision is what makes it so expensive, but ultimakers do that on 3 axis and they dont cost 6 grand  Mind you I am certainly no engineer so I could be way off base here. ninja edit: And after indiegogo that's going to cost 2700 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2012 16:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 05:32 |
|
|
Claes Oldenburger posted:I feel the saaaaaame way. That or someone will buy the BOM and tweak so they can release it as open source. I just cant believe this: moment as well. I think the entire thing is bullshit. The $2700 doesn't include a projector. At this point I'm just considering it a scam or a joke.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2012 16:56
|
|