@LaGi @wei_sheng_3139 hi guys, I’ve checked both your orders but was not able to find any issue. Could you maybe upload a screenshot of what you mean? Thanks and sorry for the hassle
Skip to main content
Once again it looks like some changes were made without anybody being informed. You guys really need to work on your communication!! Just checked my problematic orders, and it looks like the problem may have been resolved in the last few hours. Will definitely report back if the issue resurfaces. Either way, here’s to hoping for better communication from 3D Hubs admins… oh and some local support agents would be nice too. Sucks having to wait a full day (or multiple days/full weekends) for responses from the folks in Amsterdam. Just my extra 2 cents 
Cool, thanks. One feature I’d still like is to be able to offer “rush processing.” Right now, I just list my printers as multiples. Some with smaller lead-times but higher startup prices. Also, it is often confusing for people when I tack on fee for “parts cleanup.”
We should have “additional services.” Be a prompt at time of order.
Hi Filemon,
Is it possible to provide hooks into the back-end slicing engine that 3D Hubs uses for estimating product sliced-volumes?
I imagine it would require a bit of work, but if you were able to do this, we could enter in our default slicing parameters on our printer pages and at least have the 3D Hubs estimate come closer to our own individual estimates.
It would also be nice to have an option for support material generation estimates, either by a checkbox or an automatic guess by the slicer.
In any event, we’ve lost an important functionality when we are no longer allowed to enter in our own sliced volume into orders.
Thanks much
I agree with over 30+ order I am consistently getting volume underestimated on all of my orders to the point where I think 3Dhubs is doing it intentionally to make order go through and slip it by hubs. I have ALWAYS cross-checked it with several programs including Simplify3D and Netfabb and they’ve always underestimated the volume by maybe 20%. Its horrible in terms of business because customers get a price and then get disappointed when the new price comes through and understandably so. Why can’t we just get accurate volume measurements that we can adjust?
I agree with over 30+ order I am consistently getting volume underestimated on all of my orders to the point where I think 3Dhubs is doing it intentionally to make orders go through and slip it by hubs. I have ALWAYS cross-checked it with several programs including Simplify3D and Netfabb and they’ve always underestimated the volume by maybe 20%. Its horrible in terms of business because customers get a price and then get disappointed when the new price comes through and understandably so. Can’t we just get accurate volume measurements that we can adjust?
Jep, I can see your frustration. I’m taking this up with the dev guys and will report back shortly. It will take a bit to make adjustments. Please let me know if other issues arise
I would like to see a time-based option as well. I usually charge my non-3dhubs clients by the hour. This makes far more sense for me, since I am not all that fussed about the plastic content; some jobs use little plastic but take ages to print, especially if I am using a 0.15mm nozzle.
Hi, why we are still missing grams as price calculation. SLA, Poly printers they using grams not cm. material is sold in kg not meters? As you know 1cm of one material (glass) is different than other (Tango)
This is a great improvement- thank you!
What about pricing for support material? That seems like it would be difficult to determine but a useful feature nonetheless. I know i have lost jobs when i quoted the extra $ for support used.
same with pricing via time. Large prints, complex objects, extra tall prints can have a small surface or volume but take a long time to print due to z height thinking about this would be useful.
I imagine this would be really hard, but if 3hubs ran a web version of say cura or simplify that picked optimal orientation for object based on our submitted profiles inc support, infill etc then we could have option to dl the gcode in addition to stl . Obvs we all have our fine settings and preferred slicers but it could be interesting approach.
This sounds awesome! Fear that it’s a bit ahead of us indeed, but can’t hurt to look forward, right? 
It would be great having pricing details based on the print height. With DLP printers like B9Creator and Autodesk Ember the printing time only depends on layer thickness and the height of the print. For example, if you have to print a long and thin part that must be oriented vertical it would take a very long time with a minimal volume.
An xy resolution parameter could be interesting as well because limits a lot the number of parts that can be printed at once, but this can be configured only in a few printers like B9
I agree with those asking for a time-based pricing option. I once had a company contact me directly to print some objects that were fairly large. They wanted to supply their own materials for a reduced print cost. I did reduce the price for them, but through the experience I found that the biggest factor for me in price was time rather than materials.
I know that my own time isn’t really involved – particularly since I am using Octoprint to be able to upload and remotely start a print. However for large or fine detail models, a lot of time is necessary to complete a print which means my printer is kept from other uses for myself and from other customers.
Filemon,
I appreciate the effort you have put in to make things easier for the customer.
However, I cannot begin to express my disappointment that you have removed the single most important part of the ordering process. By removing our ability to enter the sliced volume of prints, you COMPLETELY nullify all the work we put into updating our printer pages!
Why have us modify our printers, resolutions, materials, startup costs, and other items, when we will just ignore all that and have to manually calculate the quote for the customer??
Again, you have removed a key functionality that I have relied on since I started printing for 3D Hubs back in January. My opinion of 3D Hubs has dropped considerably because you either fail to comprehend what’s involved here, or are just simply ignoring our feedback. I think you underestimate the importance of being able to enter sliced volumes into our orders.
Agreed. I always bill customers by weight of printed object, including supports. Filament is sold by the kilogram, so the only reasonable materials markup is weight-based.
In theory, volume cost would be proportional to weight cost in objects printed at 100% infill, but unless you’re printing firearm parts, you probably don’t need 100% infill in most cases. Using lower infill parameters greatly complicates the calculation, because you have an outer shell that’s solid, enclosing an inner space that’s mostly hollow. Some slicers like Cura will tell you how many meters of filament the print will use, and estimate the filament weight in grams. These estimates are not always very accurate. For that reason, I generally provide a price estimate, print the object, weigh it, and then provide a precise price calculation for the customer, based on my setup fee (currently $10 per order) plus my price per gram.
On an unrelated note, I’ve discovered an annoying thing about the “3D print on demand” business. Most prospective customers don’t have a very firm grasp of what’s printable and what isn’t, because they don’t own a 3D printer and have generally never used one themselves. People try to get me to print objects that have insanely fine details (e.g. human eyelashes), or planes that have a thickness of zero. My general feeling is that 3D print on demand will become less of a thing as the cost of 3D printers continues to drop. Once anyone who wants a 3D printer owns one, the idea of paying someone else to print something will be seen as silly.
This updated version is confusing on the customer view for my hub. I have RepRap printers of different configurations (print area, nozzle size, etc.) set at different prices, I cannot even tell which printer is what on the customer’s view. Where can I put this information? I have looked at other hubs, and see each color is in it’s own block of information, make for a very long page and hard to follow.
@wei_sheng_3139 yes, it is understood. I guess 85% of the feedback on this thread comes down to that feature. So, we need to reconsider. The dev guys will have a look this week. Again, sorry for the inconvenience. Cheers!
Hi all!
We’ve taken your feedback and will update some core pricing features this week. Two changes I would like to highlight, because of the discussion on this thread:
- The possibility to adjust sliced volume on the order page will return (!)
- The reference models on your Hub profile will be fixed
Let me know if any questions remain.
Cheers
Hi all (@Silvester @Christianna_Tay @Aja @useemtasty @wei_sheng_3139 @MtmrtsN @LaGi),
We deployed the first update and I think most of the feedback on the page is now fixed. Yes! Please have a look and it would be great if you could let me know if it works for you now.
Cheers!
Hey @Flabou2! In order to do this you can use the Object volume. It should correspond linearly with the weight. You can check the density of your material with your supplier. Currently our catalog of materials doesn’t contain accurate information on these densities. As soon as it does we can start to supply this information for you.
Cheers!
Hey @meagan_mason_75, what factors would you need to have taken into account? Currently you are already able to take the amount of volume and amount of prints (first print, subsequent prints) into account for pricing. I understand these are only rough indicators of printing time but nonetheless helpful. Any suggestions for this would be taken into account, cheers!
Good morning there! How would I go about demoing these new features? I took a peek at the hub options and I don’t appear to have any new pricing options on my dropdown lists for filaments. I also don’t have any new orders currently to take a look at potential changes to the volumetric pricing.
i would like to see time, hours or minutes taken into account as a pricing strategy. i.e. large, tall prints take longer than prints that a large on the x and y but not the z.
so either a height surcharge beyond a certain point, an option to price by time, so X currency per hour / minute etc, or some effort made to educate customers that some types of prints will be expensive because of the time it takes to make them rather than the material cost which might be small.
I have just read all the thread and totally agree with lyratron and TypeR, and the guys in the end talking about considering the time required to print an order with FDM printers. (I am sorry guys, this will be a long comment.)
For 3DHubs, up to now, I have considered start-up price to be equivalent to 1 hour printing and the $/ cm3 to be $ / 1 gram weight of material to be used. This is to say I neglected the cm3 dimension and replace it with gram. I need not to know the density of the material. All I know is how much does it costs me per Kg or g. Suppliers do not provide density information.
In the end of September I commented on this issue to the support person asigned to me:
"…1. 3D Hubs quotes on a startup price per job. On the other hand, I cannot charge per job since I estimate a price per hour-machine (this is the number of minutes the printer will take to print the order) plus material used for the printout plus delivery conditions.
I am considering the startup price to be equivalent to one hour printing, then I add up to the price the fee related to the extra-time needed to finish the print. This is the startup fee times the number of hours (or minutes) required to print the object.
"…4. Also in 3D Hubs base quotaton, volumen of the object is considered. But, softwares like Cura, provide an accurate amount in grams of the material to be used. "
(If not accurate at least it gives a very good approximation. I have compared several times by weighing the printout.)
Popular slicers like Cura provide estimated information on time and amount of material to be used, this allows to easily estimate a price. I think estimating the price per job is very inconvenient since it does not consider the time required to complete the job. And, on the other hand, estimating the material cost per volume may give a good aproximation when you do not have slicer sofware at hand or when you are on the street and people ask you for a price. But if you have slicers that provide time and weight info, then why not to take adavantage of that?
In my opinion, Hubs (or Hubbers ?) should be free to fill out a simple form depending on the type of printer they use FDM, SLS, etc. In the CNC industry they charge for the time required to machine a piece. It should be the same with 3D printing. No need also for different quote for high quality printings since high quality printing always take much more (?) time to print. As a result, a high quality printing will be always more expensive. The same as with large printings.
About considering weight or volume for material cost, I think both options should be considered in the form. Not just volume. It will be hubber’s(?) decision to choose the method that better suits him/her.
Additional costs is another issue to talk about.
Make it simple.
Hi Filemon,
Thanks for making the recent changes to the ordering system and giving back the ability to enter sliced object volumes. I see some other great suggestions in this thread (especially the volume/time/mass options), but I’ve received my first order since the fixes and it’s workable for me now
Thanks again