Bad prints out of brand New Form 3

I was just wondering if there has been any update recently to rectify the problems discussed in this thread. I’m interested in possibly purchasing the Form 3, but I can’t spend that kind of money if the printer has issues. Please somebody respond. Thanks a lot.

I’m still experiencing print quality that is inferior to the Form 2. For me, the main problem is significant overcuring on the build platform side. Extremely disappointing.

1 Like

Yes , that is also my greatest problem with the form 3

1 Like

I stopped using mine. This issue is not acceptable on a $3500 printer. I bought mine for scale model parts and figures and the resin waste and bad parts have totally turned me off the printer.

Maybe a few firmware and software upgrades will sort it out a year from now.

which printer do you use now??

Form3. I haven’t replaced it yet. Going with monochrome dlp, though.

Warping also a problem with flat parts. I would have had a disaster on my hands had I shipped out a bunch parts and they warped a few weeks later.

I would have had to replace all of these and pay the shipping. It would have been a bummer.

Hi folks,

Seiko Nishino just did an absolutely fantastic deep dive into LFS at the virtual user summit. Not sure if a video will be available but if so I suggest checking it out.

I asked about the surface artifact described in this thread, referring to the May 24 photo from @monk2002uk as an example:

I figured since they’ve made improvements via software / firmware, perhaps they’d characterized it to some extent and could offer some insights on what they’ve learned.

She first mentioned a few possible causes for layer shifts or “wobble” that they sometimes see in general, such as a loose build platform or inadequate support.

Then she mentioned a distinct type of artifact they apparently call a “flow artifact”. I think that’s a great name for it, as one user reported it went away when they surrounded a part with two concentric “shields” in an effort to influence resin flow. She wasn’t prepared at this time to get into more details about flow artifacts (which makes me think they’re still working to more fully understand and eliminate it). But I think she did seem to imply that supports might play a role (which I believe makes sense, seeing as I’ve noticed it more common on surfaces where supports contact the model).

Seiko, if you’re out there, I’d like to convey tremendous thanks for fielding my question (I kind of put her on the spot with it) and sharing to the extent you were able.


I made the flow shields - interesting to hear that its actually being looked at.

The bulb on the right was printed without my flow shields.

I tried single shields - double shields and even artificially forcing pieces to print high up so the build platform was not disrupting the resin as much. This all helped BUT there seems to be other issues creating the lines such as over curing with different opacities of resin.

Forcing PreForm to make tall supports by adding some geo where I want ground level.

1 Like

Hi all,
I would like to extend my gratitude to the folks in this thread (you know who you are) who have been diligently working on identifying and experimenting with solutions to the two issues of layer shift or “flow artifacts” and over-curing on the support side. I think eventually this can be resolved, because there is the will to resolve it.

A while back I found this video by VOG on YouTube:-

I know his style may be an acquired taste. When you watch the video you will see there are some undeniable similarities with his print quality and the resin company he was having issues with and the issues we are having with the Form 3 and the various resins available for it.

Another interesting point is that at 3:59 the print defects look extremely similar to what we are getting on the Form 3. Ok this is not surprising, you may say, but the solution he found was to use a complimentary product called ‘Sharpenizer’. Addition of this product solved the quality issues! Let me repeat that:- solved the quality issues!

I would very much like to hear what your opinions are on the information I present here and would especially welcome FormLabs to join this discussion. We are all motivated to achieve the best possible quality and performance for this printer.



Hey Ian,

Thanks for sharing! I took a look at the video you shared but I noticed something.
At 6:14, he shows the result with the ‘Sharpenizer’.
If you look at it closely though, one can easily tell that the part is already sanded and the host didn’t mention about that at all.
Of course I haven’t tried the additive myself, but the fact that the part is already half-way post-processed is a red flag for me.
And I would say, Form3 should work nicely without any additives in the first place.


Hey Steve,
Well spotted, I had not noticed that and I agree it is a red flag. I also agree that the Form 3 should work nicely in the first place.



Been reading this very long issue trying to see if I can resolve my random layer shifting, and noticed you always print with Full Rafts. Is there a benefit to using the Full rafts over the Mini Rafts other than ease of print bed removal? Cuz I’ve just been using Mini Rafts and utilize one of those “paint scraper razor blades” and all my prints just pop right off the bed with zero problems and I don’t waste extra resin just for a pry lip.
For taller models I will use Full rafts just for the added stability but anything under 60mm get Mini rafts

@BlackOpsToys, thanks for asking. I prefer full rafts for a couple reasons.

For the models I print, they are sold and shipped to customers still attached to the rafts, so full rafts are needed. This serves three important purposes: 1) the model is identified, 2) the raft and supports provide strength during shipping, and 3) less production effort required in removing rafts and surface prep keeps production times reasonable and lowers costs.

My customers frequently buy sets of very similar models, easily mistaken for one another, so having the name of the model on the raft is highly desirable.

Most of my designs are small and hollow with thin walls and fine, overhanging features and therefore are generally fragile. Their geometry is typically unsuitable for grabbing and twisting them off the raft as seen in the FL video. The models would likely be crushed or shattered if grabbed and twisted from the raft. I tried mini rafts on just a couple occasions. With mini rafts, I destroyed the models trying to get them off the build platform. Build platform adhesion is generally much higher on the Form 3 compared to the Form 2 posing more damage risk during removal.

Others may have a different experience and prefer mini rafts.

1 Like


Hey guys, been printing with the Form 3 with no big issues for 5 months now (about once every 2 weeks). My recent few prints have lines on them and they seem to be perpendicular to the build plate.

Any ideas as to what could have caused this?

If there are vertical lines on a print the first thing to look at is the optical window on the LPU. If the line persist after the optical wing is clean, then the problem will be with the film on the tray.

1 Like

Same issue here - I will look at the laser window when the current print finishes, this is an example of our issue:

Laser was clean, but the underside of the vat was pretty dirty - i’ve swapped out for Grey resin today in a brand new tank so i cant directly compare, however, no vertical imperfections, but i am now seeing some horizontal layer issues now :frowning: two steps forward… one step back.

Hi guys i have a form 3. It has wavy layer shifting. My idea is the resin tank. It must have a solid fixed resin tank. Not a wobbly flexible resin tank. My form 2 has much smoother finishing. Chinese cheap monochrome lcd printers have much better finishing than form 3. Hope they fix it

To add to what billb says, if your LPU surface is clean, one other place to look is your resin tray.

I have seen defects like this from little scratches in the build tray. One was an odd point defect. All my prints over that point had a 0.5mm hole running through them. Was difficult to miss, as the defect was just a scratched-up point on the build tray, so I had to fully drain and clean the tray to notice the defect.