Thanks for everything (and to everyone) who’s been posted here! This is probably our longest thread and one of the most interest (and informative).
I wanted to toss in a few points into the mix — as well as close this thread off (see below for reasoning). It and all of the attached files will remain available.
To the concerns of those who’re worried that we’re not reading this thread, I assure you, we are. Probably too much :D. We’ve got other work to do! Not just myself, but folks from our engineering team, R&D, etc. We’re listening.
For those just visiting this thread, concerned about their own printer performance — please contact our support team. While there are genuine concerns being raised here, in all likelihood, the printing issues you may be seeing can be solved elsewhere.
@RocusHalbasch — our entire support team works extremely hard to make sure you, and everyone else, are successful. We can always improve, undoubtedly, but I know it hurts them (and everyone), to be so singled out and I’d appreciate it if we could keep it to a minimum here, in our forums at least. I know that they’re discussing the issues you’ve raised quite a bit. I know that you’re frustrated, but in the interest in keeping things cool, it’s a small thing to ask. You’ve been here for a long time — I’m not trying to dampen your voice, just asking you to consider the feelings of others. They’re trying hard. I promise you, and there may be other ways to let your feelings be known.
@EvanFoss — I don’t think anyone is dismissing anything here out of hand, here. As @CraigBroady notes in #41, these are some of the basic constraints that we operate with on the engineering & design side of things.
The artifacts you’re seeing in the various test prints are are a byproduct of some of challenges that we face, and we do our best to design around them.
To that end, I think it’s worth explaining a little bit about how we approach what we do. We’re working to build and support a remarkably powerful machine and make it available at a price point that allows for businesses of all kinds to get into 3D printing. I think we do it well, but it does mean we need to focus on what we do best. Do all prints come out uniformly spectacular at every orientation? Absolutely not. Does any resolution work for any model? Nope.
What our team focuses on is getting successful prints— that is, can you print your part successfully for your needs? To do so, we look at all of the tools are our disposal — orientation (and auto-orientation), layer height, build platform position, etc. The fantastic work done here highlights some of the challenges that we tackle—but doesn’t necessarily change that focus. I understand that’s frustrating for those of you looking for the perfect machine for all situations—and believe me—we want that too and we’re working towards it.
The group here are some of the smartest folks I’ve come across, and you guys have a deep knowledge of the machine (and how to make it better). I hope the above makes sense to you.
And of course, if you’re just not getting usable parts from your machine, I do encourage you to open up a ticket, and we’ll do the best that we can to get things fixed up.
I’m going to close this thread. It’s grown difficult to work with and covers many topics. I encourage you guys to keep the conversation going in more focused threads. The optics stuff has been fascinating. We’ve been discussing adding an ‘R&D’ section or something similar in the forums, which might be a better home for these discussions. Let me know if you’d like to see that!