So, the arguments presented here against having the function inside preform, is that the function is better suited for an external application, that adding it in Preform would be too cumbersome or add too much complexity.
In response to this I made a quick little video of the hollowing out function in ChituBox. Take a look at it, you decide how cumbersome it is, or if you think using an external app is still the way to go.
This image might be appropriate here:
If your meaning is chasing the impossible dream, then I don’t think so. It’s only a dream because of the the choice Formlabs is making. It’s not impossible.
So I’m kind of confused with preformed by the fault does it actually print everything solid completely? i’m assuming that if I wanna do anything differently I have to hollow it in zbrush or fusion 360 or a meshmixer.
Is there any reason to think for most sculptural objects like statues other than saving money on resin is it better to print them solid
It really depends on the size of the model. If the scale is rather small, printing solid is perfectly fine. I’ve printed many models solid, but they are relatively small. Also, if you need the structural strength for a practical model, then solid is the way to go.
But printing large scale models that are solid, has it’s drawbacks. The most obvious is the amount of resin it uses and the cost. The other is the large cross section size which would require a lot peeling force to separate from the PDMS layer during print.
But cost is the main concern to be sure. As an example the Thanos bust I used in the video above, if printed solid, would use 173.46ml of resin. Assuming $149/liter the cost to print that model would be $25.85.
That same bust printed hollow, would use only 46.89ml and cost $6.99. Quite a difference, eh?
Oh, and with proper vent holes, it would have much lower peel forces, resulting in a longer PDMS life
With form 3 and the newer “lfs” stuff are the peel forces as much of a concern now even if printing solid?
Maybe they don’t have the software manpower or programming skills to make a hollow option?
Maybe they think that the few dozen users who are complaining that the feature doesn’t exist aren’t worth the effort given the >10K other users who could care less? 
So are you just hollowinf in another app or just printing solid
I hollow as part of the design of my model, in the CAD software where I’m designing my model. If I need drain holes, I add them there, too, so I can hide them in areas they won’t be visible when the printed parts are assembled in to their final configuration.
Sometimes, for simpler objects, I’ll use MeshMixer for a quick-and-dirty hollow-out.
Hello Randy
You claim that most users don’t need this feature because out of thousands of users only a few request it. That may be, but here in this discussion you are the only one of the thousands who opposes a useful and time-saving additional function. I work mainly with zBrush and the hollow function there is not useful for 3D printing. The detour via Meshmixer is cumbersome and time consuming. Therefore I am absolutely in favor of a hollow function in Preform.
And as in any other forum, most registered users are only readers and occasionally visible in the forum. Just like in every forum mainly the bugs or problems of a product are discussed. If everything works the user is satisfied and writes nothing.
Ciao
I would like to state this again, I’m not necessarily for or against having this feature, but I do take issue with the fact that some people are being very biased about this and providing statements that are pure speculation because, to my knowledge, none of these people are Formlabs employees.
If you feel this is an unnecessary feature, that’s fine because you’re entitled to your opinion on the matter, but keep in mind the same can be said for those that feel it is needed. So, unless you have some insider information, please stop refuting every person’s post in here if they are for this feature. Keep in mind that this is a thread FOR a feature request, NOT a thread to shoot down ideas because they don’t align with your view point. @Randy_Cohen
There are others who’ve made the same argument I’ve made. However, I’d point out that these last two posts criticizing me, personally, are in response to a post I made where I simply answered another user’s question. It said nothing about whether or not the feature was “important”. And I quote:
I hollow as part of the design of my model, in the CAD software where I’m designing my model. If I need drain holes, I add them there, too, so I can hide them in areas they won’t be visible when the printed parts are assembled in to their final configuration.
Sometimes, for simpler objects, I’ll use MeshMixer for a quick-and-dirty hollow-out.
But since you’ve both poked me on this, I’ll reiterate my view - If a lot of Preform users were finding this feature to be critical to their workflow, they’d all be piling on to this thread (or the other one that’s running the same discussion) to complain about it not being there. A vocal few are insisting it’s mandatory. All I’m doing is pointing out that it isn’t all that important to me, or apparently, based on the lack of a groundswell of complaints, to most others.
IMO it comes down to one of two possibilities - either Formlabs doesn’t actually read their users comments or they also don’t see it as all that critical either. It’s hard to come up with another explanation but I’m open to any theories anyone else might care to offer since at this point it’s evident that FL isn’t going to comment one way or the other…
…or three, Formlabs was considering it, and according to earlier posts (3-4 years ago) they did, but at the time found that there is a vocal minority that is flat out against it, and thought to them selves: “as long they fight each other over it, we don’t have do do anything about it cause nothing will come out of it”.
Could that be it?
As long as we don’t show a united front, there will never be any movement on this. Maybe Randy is right, and there’s simply not enough of a demand for it (at the moment), but the same was true of other features like mirroring, which took a long time to be implemented.
I for one wasn’t criticizing…not my intent…it does occur to me its against their business model to let us save resin…lol i.e rule of Retail …mark up price on all the accessories!
Some forums allow users to create “Polls”. I don’t know if this one allows it. But if it did, that might be a good way to survey the userbase and get a clear consensus with actual “yes” and “no” votes…
Klaus,
I’m curious as to why you don’t find the “shell” function in zbrush useful.
I use it quite successfully in models large and small. It took a bit of experimenting with the dynabrush options and thickness, which is indeterminate, but I’m pretty happy with the results. Especially if I maintain the polygroups so that I can alter portions, if I need to be picky.
can you still get netfab basic? all i see is $$c$$$$ f*cking autodesk probably killed it …
Yes. Though it was a bit trickier than it used to be before Autodesk bought it. I don’t remember the particulars, just that I had to do some digging to find it.
I can only speak for myself and my wishes for an optimal workflow here. And that would be just like this: Model in zBrush; export as print file; import in Preform; find optimal placement (also of several parts); hollow out with desired wall thickness; make ventilation holes; create support structures; print.
Attached as an example is a screenshot of a model where exactly this workflow would be very helpful. And I have many parts to produce that are similarly complex.
Maybe someone from Formlabs will read this “wish list”.
