Hey, all -
I've now got more than a couple (read: "several") 3D print busts in my "someday" pile(s). I'm noticing a couple of common characteristics which differ from more traditional cast-resin busts
My point is that the damage risk, and the repair effort, for these situations seems to defeat the advantages of printing tiny details and weak structures as part of the main bust.
Do designers and manufacturers consider such things when creating a subject? Or am I just a whiny little B@$* who needs to just shut up and be grateful for the state of the art?
I've now got more than a couple (read: "several") 3D print busts in my "someday" pile(s). I'm noticing a couple of common characteristics which differ from more traditional cast-resin busts
- PRO: The detail is typically superb, and many of those fine details are printed in place on the bust. That keeps me from having to fiddle with, and glue-glop, multiple bits and pieces in the assembly thereof.
- CON: Many fine and thin details are created in place on the bust (yes, both a PRO and a CON). Among other things, painting those details, and the surrounding areas, can be more problematic. The level of feature integration also means that packaging and packing are increasingly important to prevent damage from handing and the rigors of postal transport. I recently received a shipment of three busts, one ea. two-piece and two each one-piece specimens. All three have delicate parts. Some delicate parts had gotten broken off from the 2-piecer and one of the 1-piece busts; the other 1-piece bust is holding a sword, which is significantly warped.
My point is that the damage risk, and the repair effort, for these situations seems to defeat the advantages of printing tiny details and weak structures as part of the main bust.
Do designers and manufacturers consider such things when creating a subject? Or am I just a whiny little B@$* who needs to just shut up and be grateful for the state of the art?