Open material mode

[Kostbone]

Is there anyone here who already owns a purchased license for open material mode?

[MattRForerunner]

We have been using the OMM for a few months and having great success for the Form 4. We have been working with Loctite 3D Resins and having great success. The easiest way to use another company’s resin is finding ones that already have tested and validated their Resins for the Form 4(or Fuse) Loctite currently has 9 resins that are validated to run on the Form 4.

and we have been working with them to get even more validated.

Now if you are more knowledgeable about the Formlabs Resins and how they work you can also play around and get prints from resins that haven’t been tested on the machine as long as they are a 405 nm photopolymer resin.

Here are a few of the successful prints that I can share here:

Loctite Pro417

Loctite 3843 Blk

Loctite IND5714 GY

If anyone has any more questions about the successful use of the Open Material Mode from just playing around to printing parts for production jobs, feel free to reach out to me.

[verdugod]

Thanks for sharing your insights, @MattRForerunner !

[BotzenDesign]

I would like to run a $20 L resin in open mode. It would be good to start with some settings that someone has experience with rather than from scratch. Is there anyone with that kind of information that is willing to share some basic settings information. Or even how one would go about starting out??

[Mario_Martinez]

Anyone know id the OMM for Fuse series is transferable? Meaning that if I have a Fuse 1 but then I get a Fuse1+30W can I migrate my OMM license to the new machine?

[br4n_d0n]

I think it’s per device and stays with it, but someone from Formlabs could hopefully tell us some better news

[Mario_Martinez]

That would make sense if it was hardware related, but thinking that if you sell the machine it will increase the price by $10,000 and maybe the new user doesn’t want/need an OMM. The “benefit” is to experiment materials but in a country were you only have 2 FL resellers you cannot take advantage of the feature except from the fact you don’t need powder cards to keep the machine running

[Sophia_M]

Hi! Open Material Mode is a one-time lifetime license that’s valid for one specific printer, so it cannot be transferred to another printer. You can find detailed info on activation and use of OMM in our support articles.

[Kostbone]

It’s a shame that the fee for OMM (Open Material Mode) is so unrealistically high. Even with high printing volumes, the ROI (return on investment) is minimal. Formlabs has calculated this very carefully to keep customers locked in their closed ecosystem. It just saddens me that it’s all hidden behind corporate PR, claiming they “want customers to receive the highest level of comfort and service, avoid any issues with the printers, and prevent any hate or negative experiences.”

Because that’s simply not true. By purchasing OMM to open the system, I am waiving my warranty, so any subsequent damage is entirely my responsibility. They know this. The reason OMM is so expensive is that, just like desktop printers, the profit isn’t in the hardware—the real money is in the overpriced consumables. It’s the old Kodak business model: sell the camera cheap and make a fortune on the film and processing.

Formlabs makes far more money on the powder itself, which they’ve recently started delivering in terrible bags, completely ignoring customer feedback. Everyone loved the resealable containers. They did this solely for maximum profit. While the production cost difference for something as expensive as powder is minimal, I understand that given the volumes Formlabs orders from external suppliers, it adds up to a large number. That’s why they did it. However, it must be clear to everyone—including Formlabs employees—that handling these bags is much more difficult. Unfortunately, only the few of us who speak up are heard. Others let it slide, even if it bothers them. If you specifically asked users about this, they would confirm that the previous containers were better. The rest don’t even know that it used to be possible to buy powder in canisters.

Back to OMM. This nonsensical price is just a demonstration of how Formlabs holds its customers captive and refuses to let go. They would lose a lot of money if word got out that you can buy powder 3x cheaper and it works just fine. Even a price of 3,000–4,000 EUR would be high for a machine you’ve already paid for and own. It’s a ridiculous situation: you buy a machine, it’s yours, you can do whatever you want with it—drop it off a truck, hit it with a hammer, pour acid on it—but the moment you want to use it as you see fit (i.e., print with a different powder), you’re blocked. According to Formlabs, it’s so you “don’t damage it.” They know that’s a lie. They know you won’t damage it. On the contrary, you would find out that other powders work, and they would lose a substantial revenue stream.

Sinterit also has something like an open material mode, but at a much more reasonable price of 3,500 EUR. Raise and their new printer—which looks very similar to Formlabs but has better specs (being a newer model)—will likely offer something similar, I assume.

I am considering a new printer, and I really dislike this Formlabs business model. I’d rather look into Sinterit or, more likely, Raise, so I can test and experiment with new powders.

[MattRForerunner]

The Form 4 is only $875 for OMM they are trying to make money yes as any company would so its understandable that they charge more for OMM to cover some of the potential loss of Sales of their resins. The OMM fees usually are covered after one job so its not as hard of hit as you think.

[Mario_Martinez]

This adds up to my comment, because you are buying a software license, not a physical add on.

Denying a user to transfer the License to another equipment is like any software company denying a user to install his preferred CAD package to a new PC because it’s “linked to it”

Pointmaster did that(guess what?) dead company great software. But if you requested the transfer and it was validated they allowed it.

I even mentioned that the question is because I was considering to get another Fuse 1 but a new one, and even with that they still think a software license can’t be transferred. Same as Kostbone, I will need to migrate to another brand in the future TPM3D or Raise 3d, I will report back soon if the cheaper powder works fine.

[br4n_d0n]

@MattRForerunner

The Form 4 is only $875 for OMM they are trying to make money yes as any company would so its understandable that they charge more for OMM to cover some of the potential loss of Sales of their resins. The OMM fees usually are covered after one job so its not as hard of hit as you think.

This is a clear bias because that only works in “your” case. How do you know the profits of other users vs their costs?

[Kostbone]

Yes, it’s nice that the OMM price for the Form 4 is relatively ‘low,’ but look further up the line. For the Fuse 1, the price is nearly 14,000 EUR. That is beyond insane—it’s more than the launch price of the printer itself. This isn’t just a fee; it’s a strategic weapon.

Let’s break down why this is legally and ethically indefensible:

1. The “First Sale Doctrine” and the Lexmark Precedent This is a classic case of Vendor Lock-in disguised as ‘service.’ We have seen this before in the 2D printer industry (e.g., Lexmark Int’l, Inc. v. Static Control Components). The US Supreme Court and various EU courts have established that once a customer buys hardware, the manufacturer’s patent and control rights are ‘exhausted.’ Formlabs is effectively trying to sell me a ‘license to use my own property.’ You can’t tell a car owner they can only use your brand of fuel, and you shouldn’t be able to do it with 3D printers through software locks.

2. Violation of EU “Right to Repair” and Anti-Tying Laws New EU mandates (2024/2025) strictly forbid ‘technological tying’—the practice of forcing customers to buy consumables by artificially blocking third-party alternatives. Formlabs claims OMM is expensive to ‘protect’ the machine, but that argument collapses the moment they force us to waive the warranty to use it. If I take the risk and waive the warranty, any further financial barrier is purely an artificial obstacle designed to stifle competition. This is exactly what European antitrust regulators call an ‘Aftermarket Monopoly.’

3. The Mathematical Absurdity (SLS vs. SLA) The disparity between Form 4 and Fuse 1 pricing is a joke.

• On SLA (Resin): You pay a few thousand, and with cheaper resin, your ROI is hit in weeks.

• On SLS (Powder): With a 14,000 EUR fee and a price gap of ~60 EUR/kg between FL and quality 3rd party powder, I would have to print hundreds of kilograms just to break even on the ‘unlock fee.’ In the SLS world, where we deal with high refresh rates and material loss during post-processing, this fee makes competition mathematically impossible. It’s not a feature; it’s an embargo on our freedom to innovate.

It’s no wonder the community is starting to talk about class-action lawsuits. This ‘locked-in’ model is the sole reason I am moving to Sinterit or Raise. I want a partner that sells me a high-quality tool, not a jailer that charges me the price of a second machine just to open the door.