I've been hearing good things about Simplify3D (most of them on the 3D Printing Today Podcast which I should really record another segment for). But the price tag kinda kept me away until I decided to update to the latest version of MakerWare hoping all the little problems I've been dealing with would go away only to have MakerWare refuse to launch under any condition. And since my options were do no prints until Makerbot helps me or get another slicer I went with the option that would result in my being able to print again in this decade. I tried MatterControl before but didn't like it, and Christmas was good to my Etsy store, so I decided to take the plunge and get Simplify3D.
Simplify3D is good. It's not perfect and despite myself I'm still going to need to get MakerWare up and running for a while, but I think I'm going to be using S3D for the lion's share of my 3D model prep. It's slicing is so fast and it's preview mode is so light that EVERY print gets it and there's no reason it shouldn't. But the real reason I'm going to lean heavily on S3D in the future is right here:
Generally.
As I said there are a few things that MakerWare does better. The UI in MW is better. That's not critical but I hope over time S3D adopts a more object based layout and includes some keyboard shortcuts. Also it would be nice if S3D worked better at lower resolutions because when I'm doing slicing by remoting into my computer on my tablet some buttons fall off the bottom. But again, that's not critical. And I've noticed problems with S3D doing the thin walls of soap stamps making me getting MW back up and running very important.
What is critical is that Simplify3D is crap for dual extrusion printing and I need spurs. Spurs are something MakerWare does where it identifies areas that are too thin to get a perimeter line in and out of and instead fills that area with a single line thick wall. I used this accidentally when I printed some jumping game pegs and the result was amazing. I also use this when making soap stamps a lot. Most people who don't have access to spurs tend to sour grape them but they are critical to many things I do. And the strange thing is I've seen S3D in preview mode doing something suspiciously spur like when doing a fill layer.
I find it ironic that Simplify3D can get a better print out of my Makerbot printer than Makerbot can. I guess I'm grateful to Makerbot for doing such a bad job at what they do that they forced me to discover this.
I switched over to s3d during the holidays as well. Overall very positive experience but like you, I found some areas lacking. Posted a bit of pro\con over on my blog: http://www.akeric.com/blog/?p=2801
ReplyDeleteNot trying to promote, just thought you may find it interesting too ;)
Relevant content, not spammy? Promote away. You've got at least one new follower in me.
DeleteI find your write up spot on. Is it worth the money? In my case I wouldn't be able to print without it right now, so yeah. But if it weren't for Makerbot's mistake would I have experimented with it? Probably not. However now that I have I'm glad I have it.
Our biggest disappointment at work is its dual extruder support (like many people have found). It just easier to switch back to makeware for that :S I really hope they improve that area because if so, no lookin' back for me ;)
DeleteI mentioned that, but for me spurs are the bigger issue. It's hard to do soap stamps without them.
DeleteI actually do less dual extrusion than I'd like to. Partially because I haven't calibrated by dual extruders yet and their still off. But for the most part my second extruder is just a spare in case something happens so I can keep printing (for which it's worth it's weight in gold... well, in aluminum at least).
At work we do really complex prints with a lot of internal voids that need support, that's why we picked up the 2x. But honestly have yet to get satisfactory results out of it. Seems hardware, a *lot* of ringing on curved surfaces. We picked up s3d at work to see if it was the slicer, but it's not. I have a Rep1 at home with s3d as well and get much better print quality on the same models. Grr......
DeleteJoseph: Glad you found S3D. Run by me this spur thing again... I agree 100% on the small part deal. Scaling up/down helps on some projects. But still RepG does well when tiny for me. It's not a perfect software but it's got a dedicated team upgrading.
ReplyDeleteAkEric: spot on review and hit me first few months exactly. As I understand it more I find solutions.
"Spur" is the fancy term for "Single thickness wall." Most slicers won't do any less than a 2*nozzle thickness wall, and they get a little funny about the thicknesses between 2 and 4*nozzle thickness. For instance, if you have a .4mm nozzle (most of us do) you can't have thinner than a 0.8mm wall or the slicer will just give up, and if you do a 1mm wall it will probably leave a gap between the outside and inside wall. It's a bit annoying. Makerware, however, does not give up on walls thinner than 0.8mm and will actually do a single thickness wall. The peg jumping piece project I linked to above was accidentally 0.6mm wall. Most slicers won't slice it (the S3D preview is a funny little 'O" hovering above the build plate because it gave up on everything else). But Makerware printed it like a champ and it turned out great for it. I also use them on the lettering in soap stamps, some of those fonts get thin in places before getting thick again and I'd rather not have it leave gaps. I need spurs.
DeleteOk, got it. I've just called it ''single wall thickness''. I usually have ''minimum' tacked on to the phrase because I'm trying to get the designer/draftsman I print for to set a minimum and keep it. But hey, if MW can do a .04mm then I'll have to reload a version and explore the spur. There are times when I need a single wall that thin. Any particular MW version I should use? I'm running a Rep1 and 2 (with HBP)
Delete