Formlabs against the rest of the world or how capable is the Form 2

Formlabs against the rest of the world or how capable is the Form 2.

I have just come back from back to back meetings with Stratasys.
Stratasys is one of the leading 3D machine manufacturers. They build the most capable machines that are out on the market.
The most capable machines in terms of complexity, high detail and resolution, multiple colors, clear areas within the object, different materials all produced into one object at once would pretty much take this spot.
Before my meeting I put together a demanding test-file that would bring any machine to its limits. To make sure I am capable (my Form2) of producing this part I had my machine build it, maxing out the building Volume, which in the End gave the Model a hight of 6.25”.

The model came out flawlessly as to be expected and was my direct Reference Piece to anything and everything that was going to come my way.

The first meeting with Stratasys was in San Diego, CA and I was shown different types of models, parts and objects…
Polyjet Machines are the most capable machines.
I wanted my test piece to be done by a Polyjet Machine. Stratasys’ quote: $700!
While I always cry about Formlabs’ Resin prices, which are very high, the cost for my piece from my machine was $30 (I used 100 microns, the lowest resolution, clear resin). At the time Stratasys did not have my Part made but wanted to “feel out” what type of machine they offer would suit my needs.
Which brings me to different manufacturers I had contacted within the last months, 2 of them were Titan Robotics and Bigrep as we were also looking into decent filament systems. Now the word decent and Filament system is not always going together well. As most sport very mediocre to bad detail and surface quality.
I hear people tell me “Well, our machines are purpose built.” that’s a rather poor statement for a machine that costs as much as 2 new mid-size cars or more and can’t make my Test Part. That is nothing short of ridiculous.
While Bigrep $48,000 never came back with a quote for my test part Titan Robotics wanted over $1300 as their machine would need 50 hours to make it - my Form2 needed 12 hours. The Titan Robotics machine is an $80000+ machine. Yes it can make large parts, which can be very strong when using their carbon-fiber induced material but it can’t make my test part at a competitive price - I never got the part - obviously - and therefore have no reference in terms of surface and detail quality.
That’s where Stratasys comes back into play.
To be fair I need to add that my Form 2 could only make the Part at 6.25” hight the actual size was between 10” and 11”. If I were to have my machine build it original size I’d have to make it in multiple pieces, which is of course doable, easier as a matter of fact as I could rotate the different components into more favorable positions compared to tackling the entire piece. So essentially material cost would go up to about $60-$70 with the Form 2.
The purpose here was to see the capabilities of different machines compared to the Form2 so it (the test piece) had to be made in one run.
At the first Stratasys meeting I was given some parts that I thought to be Polyjet but in reality they were coming from their Filament Systems. The first filament part to come close to a good surface finish that I had ever seen. Quite good! Nice Detail as well. Of course my Part was much more demanding than what they showed me, so Stratasys agreed to have one of their Filament machines make my test part at original size. Material Cost $75.
After the first meeting I wasn’t too impressed as the Polyjet parts had all a slightly rough surface a bit like fine sandpaper or the “Sandstone” pieces that are popular with Shapeways and other companies that offer 3D manufacturing services. Not getting into detail here - “sandstone” objects are only for static display and have zero functional properties and limited detail capabilities.
What did impress me were the filament parts that came from their F Series machines.
The second meeting was up in Valencia, CA. That’s where the big show rooms are and all their flagship machines. This did impress me quite a bit. Amazing models and functional parts laid out on a huge table. Colorful, intricate and extremely functional parts. Large, small, detailed. However nothing as detailed as my test part. All those objetcts coming from machines made by one manufacturer.
The sad thing here was that they didn’t come through with making my test - they did but the operator did not use the highest resolution which was necessary and he also had used the wrong material as their filament materials yield different surface results. The part was a mess and the representative didn’t even want to show it to me. While I am sure their F series machines can come up with an acceptable representation of my model they did not when it counted and also the machine we are talking about starts at $20 000. Their mark up is insane as well, as I saw the spread sheet (probably unintentional by the rep). The filament cost is actually $45 and they are selling it for $220 the support material is not much cheaper if at all!
This is what gets me going but I’m pulling the brakes here. That shows us how much mark up there is.
I am sure we could get a much better price on all Formlabs’ resins while Formlabs would still make a good profit. Of course as long as people are buying it why change the prices…

To summarize:
The model that came from my $3500 + Shipping,Tax machine had the best detail and surface quality of all the objects I was able to compare it with. Machines from $20,000 all the way up to $300,000 were not capable of creating the same smooth surface and detail - Polyjet parts can be very smooth but they need to have an extra coating applied and I only saw that on a spherical object without fine details. Some of those filament parts were also very nice especially for filament but still failed to match the quality of the Form 2 result.
I need to stress here that the Stratasys machines are very good machines, and have beaten everything else I had in the line up, the Polyjet technology especially. However pricing of those systems is simply ridiculous.

Not to get into the apples and oranges deal, my comparison is strictly based on the Part result compared to the machine prices.
The Form 2 beat everything I saw in terms of detail and surface smoothness. If I am looking at machines with prices one can buy a brand new car for or even an entire house and they can’t compete with a $3500 machine in terms of detail and surface quality, seems more than pathetic!
At that kind of price there is no justification for not thriving to get the best surface and detail quality possible.
As I have seen Stratasys’ Filament machines (not the u-print that one is garbage!) they are capable of very nice finishes and detail, if used by someone who knows what he/she’s doing. Whoever goes for a “purpose built” machine needs to think twice.
There will be plenty people calling me out on the building size of a machine - while more building volume would need a larger machine therefore machine cost will be going up, is logical but having a $3500 machine build something an $80,000+ machine can’t is not logical, regardless of technology or and footprint.

After thoughts:
I have requested a sample part from the Fuse 1 but it looks like it’s still too deep in the development phase as this would also be a nice test-machine. Laser Sintering typically results in a rough surface, depending on the system’s layout that roughness is more or less. Steel and plastic parts coming off of those types of machines can be smoothed in a vibratory tub, which is a machine that’s filled with a water-solution and different types of abrasives, ranging from nut-shells to ceramic particles. The parts are thrown into the tub and the vibration will work the abrasives around the parts and slowly smooth out the surface some fine detail will get lost or diminish but it yields a decent result over all. Plastic parts made with Nylon type material will do quite well in a vibratory tub. Laser sintering won’t beat the detail and surface quality of the Form 2 but it still can get good detail if part scale is taken into account.

As for building large with the Form 2 the rather silly PR Stunt in New York showing a large “lens” with a cut-out heart in the center proves that the From 2 can build whatever one wants it to build…theoretically at least. While I would choose something better for a PR Stunt to really showcase what my system can do it for sure showed that a small footprint is not limited to its building volume .
The key is to show the detail capability and its surface capability within a large object, one needs to [lay out the machines strength! - as well as different materials in combination - a simple square shape like those parts that “lens” was made of hardly do that job. I am aware of some of the promo videos for different types of material…none of them particularly striking. As well as a set of simple ball point pens to promote the Form 2’s production capability does little to showcase its true capabilities.

Pricing of the 3D systems…The Form 2 is an expensive machine looking at it’s small footprint, simplicity and materials.
Comparing it to a real printer (inkjet) capable of printing canvasses the size of 42” in width we are looking at a machine that is pretty big at almost 6 feet in length, and 4 feet in height with many moving parts over a distance of 4 feet, complicated mechanisms, polished steel parts, an intricate and complicated print head for 9+ colors, which costs about the same as the Form 2, puts things back in perspective.
So even at the “low cost” of $3500 the Form 2 is not a cheap machine.
Machines that are capable of similar detail and surface, like the well known B9 Creator is quite a bit more expensive while sporting a smaller build volume making the Form 2 one of the least expensive machines (quality machines that is).

Taking the F170 Stratasys’ 10”x10”x10” (build Volume) Filament machine, starting at $19900 and measuring 64”x34”x28”. It has a heated chamber, which keeps temperature consistent and prevents parts from warping or peeling, we have our heated tank to keep resin temperature consistent in the Form 2. I’m using the F170 because it’s the least expensive machine in their line-up (that’s capable). It’s got a large drawer on the bottom that holds the filament reels, from there the filament is being fed to the dispense nozzle.
Formlabs FUSE 1 that has been in the making has a base price of $10,000 all the way up to $20,000. It’s got a bit more than half the build volume of the F170 at 6.5”x6.5”x12.5”.
The F170 can handle 3 different materials all pretty good in strength.
I’m sure the Fuse 1 eventually will be able to handle multiple materials at one point as well. Not having seen a sample part of the Fuse 1 yet it’s tough to say, which one of the 2 systems is superior in detail and surface capability. The Fuse 1 will have a big advantage and that’s NO SUPPORTS. While The F170 still needs supports but they are water soluble, meaning the part can be thrown in a tank that washes off all the supports.
The Fuse 1 is priced at $20,000 when buying the machine an extra build container and post production station is included ($10,000 the machine only).
The F170 is also priced at $20,000 but doesn’t come with the cleaning tank which is an extra $3500. Then Stratasys throws a whole bunch of useless services in at extra cost, few thousand dollars, like “INSTALLING” and “TRAINING” as if those machines need installation and training. They are simple and straight forward. The machine arrives, one reels it into place, plugs it in sets the filament, push go, that’s it. They do waive that if one asks them to, also a special warranty plan is in place — 100% useless unless the manufacturer doesn’t believe in its own machines…or simply a “clever” way of making money… So in essence the F170 will be more expensive it also uses up plastic trays where the parts are being built on (like our Form 2 vat, just much cheaper).
Stratasys’ F170 at a price of around $25,000 (cutting out all the useless garbage) is more expensive than the Fuse 1 but has almost twice the build volume…the question now, which one is more expensive to run and which one ends up being the more reliable machine with nicer detail capabilities…since we have not seen the Fuse 1 in the open yet. I am sure Formlabs will get this machine to work well maybe with some hiccups at the beginning but it will end up working well. Almost twice the build volume for the F170 is a big draw…

There is always a give and take when it comes to the different technologies - however what good is an $80,000+ machine when it can’t pull even with a $3500 machine in part quality…?

6 Likes

Its perfectly good for running a service bureau where clients are after the size.
Bu those costings make no sense for anyone who will not be running the machine 24 hours per day- and charging for every hour.

The issue with 3D printers is that they are still “rapid prototying” machines more than “production” machines… and how fine does a rough prototype NEED to be? I mean, sure, its aedthetically more pleasing for a more finished part- but most of the machine’s parts a mere iterative pre-ambles to injection mold tooling.

And then there are the machines aimed at truly functional parts… and THOSE are expensive partly because they will only sell a limited number of them, and partly because they are seeking to only to lower the $100,000 dollars plus costing of injection tooling… for EVERY design produced.

If you are selling the ability to do short run functional parts that AVOIDS the costs of hand fabrication and/or production tooling- then you price only has to be attractive by comparison to the cost of mass production tooling. If it costs half a million to build 1 rocket engine by traditional methods- then you wouldn’t even blink at paying 8 million for a machine that can print them at 300,000 each.

our dilemma is our needs. we want something that will print functional parts with good finish… but simply can not afford a printer priced for service bureaus or the high end high cost markets of aerospace and medicine.

$19k for a filament print that’s 10" cubed is ridiculous for folks who are not running the machine non stop-
For that price I can buy a larger volume CR 10s and finish the prints by hand- then go to silicone mold if I need to cast functional parts.

I’ve been doing 3D modeling for 20 years, professionally- been sending files to print or mill since 1998… and for all that time I never bought my own printer, simply because no one printer could handle the wide variety of prints I needed for the wide variety of projects we ran. In fact- in my ling career, I don’t think I have ever sent a file to the Same type of printer twice… because newer printers with better capabilities were always coming online.

I finally bought the Form 2 because it had become clear that SLA technology was not going to get appreciably finer, nor significantly more affordable. ( a similar printer for $800 less, but with less build volume is not an appreciable drop in costing. )
The Form 2 finally had the automated features that would make a printer running for 20 hours less of a chore, and it had arguably superior print quality, and materials choices to competing solutions.

Sure it would be nice to have a larger print volume- but the print volume is pretty much defined by the limitations of how much model weight you can HANG from the platform without it dropping off or distorting under its own semi-cured heft.
There is a kickstarter for a New ultrafast SLA printer that has a dramatically larger print volume… but they achieve this by building the part SIDEWAYS in a huge vat of resin and relying on the print having a slightly positive buoyancy to support the part during print.
It is predicted to cost around 8 grand- twice the Form 2… and that is certainly within reach of professionals like myself…
however- the resin tank takes several GALLONS of resin to run a print. And they won’t even offer a hint at how much it will cost to fill that tank.
Try to imagine the hassle of having to filter gallons of resin and always having to have the tank full just to print any part.

moreover- at that much resin- I am not even sure if the actual tank can be swapped for different tanks with different resins… if it it can be- how much cost is there in keeping several tanks of 4 gallons each…

and if it can’t be swapped, what is involved in draining that tank and cleaning it for a different type of resin?

While a want the volume and the speed of that printer- I really don’t want to shoulder the costs and hassle of a large tank immersion cured SLA system.

Given the limitations imposed… the Form2 is a pretty ideal machine- both in is size and ease of operation, and especially so in its ability to swap resins readily and its economical use of costly resins in a shallow tank .

All in all, the best printer for the price.

that’s certainly why I bought it.

2 Likes

Yes service bureaus would not take my point here well and manufacturers alike - for sure - all that aside - my write up is not about comparing technologies, it is about a price that does not mirror the actual product.

One can get a Haas5 axis CNC machine that produces injection molds left and right and for the exact same price I can get a prototyping machine that produces prototypes with poor surface quality.
You being a professional in the field, knows what I am talking about here.
Different technologies for different tasks sure but they need to stay within a range that makes sense - financially. That range is being distorted by service bureaus and manufacturers alike and the oblivious consumer buys into it. “WE GOT THIS NEW…” nothing is new.
Yes 20 grand for a 10x10x10 is nuts (despite it being able to produce very good surface, detail and functional parts, capable of using 3 different types of strong plastics).

3D “printers” and there are very few of those that are actually true printers in technical terms, the Polyjet is one of them will eventually be a part of everyone’s life.
Machines that are able to build functional parts - which there are?
Some Filament systems that have induced fibers, like glass or carbon - have been around for quite some time I named 2 Manufacturers who have that ability. Some Laser Sintering systems. Laser sintering for metal is interesting as it saves quite a bit of material compared to CNC machining however every part will have to be finished on a milling machine, depending on part size and count that can get tricky cost wise, when thinking of using both machines to produce a complete part.

Stereolithography has been around since the 80s as we know. The machine you describe utilizes partial technology of the typical SLA system. Where the building platform moves down into the tank as the part is being built. A large resin tank is needed and as you suggested this is a problem as resin life cycles are limited and large quantities are expensive (again manufacturer prices vs actual price).
We also have laser point distortion as parts get larger which would eventually have to be countered to stop dimensional distortion on large parts.
You probably heard of the Carbon 3D system that machine is not very large but it truly is a new direction in SLA, as it can produce parts very fast, one can watch them “grow” out of the tank. That system also can produce a lot of highly functional materials, that are often 2 component systems that need post curing. All that with great surface quality. The downside you can’t buy that machine you basically “lease” it without ever seeing it in your manufacturing hall. At 40 grand a year - the basic plan is a 3 year lease. You won’t control the machine the manufacturer will make all your parts, which is absolutely terrible one wants to be in control of their own production.

About mold making - I take a part from the Form 2 (50 microns) spray a few layers of good primer and it’s ready for silicone, polyurethane molds. No extensive post production process due to bad surface quality sanding, possibly smoothing out with 2 component resin mixtures, add, sand, repeat, etc. The Form 2 again is ahead here - in the end I see that you agree as you yourself bought a Form 2, which reflects the over all essence and fundamental thought of my write up.
Thank you for that.

1 Like

the machine I referred to is faster than the carbon printer- and nearly eight times the volume of the Form 2.
It doesn’t have the platform move DOWN into the vat- but sideways… and actually supports the print thru flotation… Support structures are minimal and mostly just to keep the print contiguous and positioned relative to the exposure plate. and whereas the Carbon printer can not be purchased but only leased for $30,000 per year… this kickstarter printer from a company that has already fielded one ultrafast SLA printer with a Form 2 sized volume, is going to purchasable for 8 grand.

… IF they actually go to market.

I mean, the thing is big enough to print a helmet in one piece- and will reportedly do so in less than an hour.

Prints taking 3 hours on a Form 2 it will run in 8 minutes.

And trust me- I am tempted… it would be a fantastic machine to have… But its design ;eaves me doubtful it will have anywhere near the versatility of the Form 2- where switching resins takes a few minutes.
Their resin formulations will be limited to materials that have JUST RIGHT neutral buoyancy when cured.

But for a one resin operation, it would be a huge improvement.

I expect Formlabs will also- one day soon- field a Form3 that will use the same rapid exposure technology to dramatically speed up prints.

However- I think you are wrong when you suggest that 3D printer will someday be a part of most folks lives.
While MOST folks eventually bought inkjet paper printers for their home office… the fact that you could buy a 7 color ultra high resolution photographic printer that could produce prints as good as the best film technology on archival quality paper did not result in wide adoption of those kinds of printers… they do a much better job than the $200 class of inkjets… and their prints are far more durable… but if anything, the sales of paper printers are in steady decline as folks realize they don’t really NEED to print things very often-

Similarly- the kind of 3D printer that might handle a wide variety of different materials in a single print will NEVER be cheap… they are complex and finicky by the very complexity of what they are trying to do- and frankly, the single material printers that can be made affordably, can not really produce much of anything truly useful in most people’s lives.
For several hundred dollars of printer and a whole roll of filament and a hundred hours learning how to work the thing, they get what? an iPhone case they could have bought in a more durable material for $18?

I think the hype of 3D printing is the failure to realize that people ALREADY HAVE a far better functional alternative to 3D printing… its called Amazon. You look thru the available products like folks into 3D printing look thru the available models for print… and you click on a button and the next day you HAVE the thing you wanted.

Very few will have the intelligence, plus the interest, plus the time to truly invest in learning how to DESIGN their own products. To solve the problems their designs might display and iterate improvements.

In short… i think most folks will realize that Product Designer is an entire Career they don’t have time to learn without being paid… and that the models that Are available online- those other folks both professional and amateur designed- that they could print on on their home printer are pretty useless. trinkets and tchotchies.

For that reason i expect 3D printing to be aimed at two markets, really- One being service bureaus and large corporate requirements in production and prototyping…

And the other being US GUYS- small businesses and professional designers who have a need for a more affordable but pro quality printer.

epson makes home paper printers you can buy for a couple hundred bucks.
But they also make artistic and photographic quality printers that run over $700- for the kind of photogrpahic or design professionals that NEED them- they cost more because the sell fewer of them.

The kind of 3D printers you and I want will ALWAYS cost more, because there are not that many of us and the costs of developing them must be amortized over a much smaller userbase.

The Form 2 hits a sweet spot in terms of affordability, print quality, and versatility that is perfect for small shop designers… but the hoi polloi will never see the value because they do not DO what we do with them.

Folks like us WANT what the Form 2 can do, and given our means, we want it bad enough to pay $4k for it.

1 Like

Let me take a closer look at that machine you’re referring to, it sounds like a lot we hear these days but is it actually going to hit the market. Is it actually going to hit just half of its expectations? As you said so too, not certain as of yet. The Fuse 1 has us also waiting I thought it would be out by now.

Inkjet machines - I happen to own a large format Giclee printer (a real printer) and as I referenced in my original write up that machine was as much as the small Form2 and is by far more complicated. Well it was a bit more it cost $3999 at the time I bought it.
It’s 6 feet wide and 4 feet tall and with all those complicated mechanisms, next to the Form2 puts everything in perspective, truly.

Yes, hard to say one could begin to theorize about 3d machines in people’s homes in the future - you mentioning Amazon, Shapeways etc that’s how it would work, just directly in your home. It would all be pre-made for the USER - so the user just hits something on his/her most likely smart device and the machine is being fed some pre-done model or whatever can be used. You’d have to refill the raw materials they will be frequently sent to you on a monthly basis so you don’t even have to keep track. The rest is done through a “hidden” service or/and pre-set functions, like a vending machine. You want a home made oreo cookies - throw in the ingredients and hit go the machine kicks out the ordered number. including your name on each cookie…you broke off a door handle - no problem, go to your smart device search for the exact same style hit go, the machine is being fed the correct model and kicks it out right in your garage. No going to actual stores anymore no ordering actual items online no worries about shipping time, shipments getting lost, wrong sizes shipped, etc. One just pays a fee for the model that’s being sent to the machine. Not that it actually will happen but it is possible. It’s tragic seeing stores go out of business one by one, big stores, like Toysrus now struggling to survive…
You want an action figure of your favorite character - just be sure all the raw materials are in the machine - pick your model and hit go…
100% agreed who is sitting down to learn to model complex or even simple objects for home use, or more complex like car parts body parts, engine parts etc. very few. Those, like yourself who happen to make a living doing exactly that and a few enthusiasts.
As for those photo-printers not having hit home - they had, have a serious competitor that has managed to enslave most of our modern world, it’s called smart-phone/device. That has not only bound the young but also older folks who use those devices and keep shooting pictures with those cameras that have become quite good. The modern Photo Album, your smart device. You probably remember when those “electronic” picture frames came out, basically a small LCD, Led screen with a frame around it that holds x-amount of photo files and plays them randomly or however you set the display mode…who needs prints.
So that really killed the home photo-printers. Imagine how cheap the desktop printers have become - with very nice print-quality. I am not a fan of multi-machines (printer, scanner etc in one) as quality will suffer, however those systems you can get for an “apple and an egg” as we say where I grew up - basically dirt cheap. We have a small desktop printer here that was $125 already 7 years ago, nobody takes care of it, it only runs on third party ink and just keeps going and going.

I don’t know if you ever worked with the from 2 predecessor the form 1/1+ - if you have you know if you have not - you are lucky not having struggled through that system - quite remarkable how big of a difference one generation made in this case.

I’ll look into that kickstarter machine you’ve mentioned.

i never bought the Form 1 because it was a first iteration of the technology. ( same reason I didn’t buy the first iPhone. ) I’m not what anyone would call an early adopter… I don’t buy the first model year of anything, really.

I beta tested the very first 3D modeling app for a desktop computer back in 86… but other than renderings it was pretty useless for a guy who actually makes stuff. In 98 I moved into digital modeling as an adjunct to physical sculpting and fabrication because CNC technologies like waterjets and 5 and 7 axis mills were able to cut large scale models that from the bulk of my work… and SLA was just beginning to be good enough to compete with hand processes or to at least augment them.

Because the technology was evolving so rapidly, I could not bring myself to invest in any one printer- given that one week I would need a 12 foot tall mill, and the next week a jewelry print. So I relied on service bureaus.

when SLA patents finally ran out I was waiting for a company to make a machine sufficiently automated as to be less time consuming to get good result out of. Of the ones available- the Form 2 was the most mature- and such features as the autofilling, the more self dispensing cartridges, and the wiper arm to keep the resin mixed all more than offset the lower cost of other machines and their cheaper resins.

I don’t mind paying more for resin for a machine that actually does the job with less babysitting.
my time is worth more than the difference in costing.

I also wanted a machine from a company that had been around long enough to prove they might stay around… and to have been faced with enough problems that they had demonstrated an ability to overcome… so that pretty much leaves out brand new kickstarter companies that might be sunk by their first production quality snafu.

That larger, side printing super fast machine is tempting— but there is no way I would plunk down 8 grand for a brand new design. Maybe year two or three… after they have discovered what breaks under real world usage and iterated their fixes.

I Want new technology… sure- but its my living, so I NEED it to actually work.

And because I work in product development- I have intimate experience with how new products get re-worked because no engineer can foresee every possible complication of actual usage by masses of different people.

I bought an Audi with a Dual Shift Gearbox… the two clutch, two gear train transmission they pioneered…
but NOT the first year they had it available. As with most new things… Let them work out the kinks… and the next iteration will be vastly more reliable.

2 Likes

For sure - a step rational people take, never buy the first product of a company - I got the Form 1+ after it was redone with new laser and some other improved components so it was already the second generation system to the first form 1+ the form 1 not being sold anymore. At that time nobody knew about the Form 2, that was still over a year out.
As you say, often hard to foresee where things are going these days. No matter what type of field you’re in or what expertise you might bring to the table.
I learned in the printing field way back in the day - all hand made film-montages and print forms, reproduction cameras to separate photographs into 4 colors etc. A whole department with multiple people dedicated to that - these days it’s done by one person in a virtual environment. One push of a button the machine spits out a finished print form. All that has to be done is refilling chemicals…

I have a close friend from the old school days who is also a product designer as well as production-flow and manufacturing, everything that goes into it - he is fed up with service bureaus and has started to slowly buy machines that will do everything in-house. I can’t help him much living at the other side of the globe, so shipping parts back and forth wouldn’t be worth it, for most of his applications.

That sounds quite interesting - what field is your main work these days? Did you start out as a pattern, model and markette maker?

1 Like