I just took a look at my hub and even though people have been talking about it I was still surprised to find materials missing. Printers aren’t listed any more for customers to pick a price range and the list goes on.
How do I know now what pricing the hub is using? I have several levels depending on the printer etc. but I don’t see where the customer has a choice anymore.
Also their print analyzer is a complete joke. I loaded a part to test and it said it was unprintable by FDM and you need to select another method. This is giving the customer false info or basically lying to them so they will pick a more expensive service. The part I loaded pints with no issues and has no problems.
If 3dhubs doesn’t want to deal with FDM anymore then just shut it down otherwise ENOUGH of the BS of screwing with our setups and making it near impossible for the customer to get what they want.
1 Like
Hi @wirlybird
Thanks for sharing your concerns.
I want highlight three areas highlighted in your post which I think is the core of what is discussed.
Hub Information: Currently when Prototyping Plastics is selected it groups together the main FDM plastics into one group (the top 5 materials based on order information), a customer can then explore the materials further and microns available once the hub is clicked on. If a custom is looking for something specific like bronzefill, they can also use the more filters section to get that specific material, and only hubs with that material will be displayed.
Print Analyzer: The print analyzer is still in Beta, so your feedback is needed to make it work to the best of it’s ability. Is it possible for you to share the file in question? One important thing to highlight is that the parameters set for accuracy are based on a standard given to all hubs across the platform, of course I appreciate there are many talented hubs such as yourself which can produce prints outside of these boundaries but this was done in order to manage customer expectations across the platform. The biggest complaint we receive is about print quality, these guidelines are there for us and hubs/customers to use during disputes about prints provided.
FDM on 3D Hubs: We continue and will continue to promote FDM to our customers, every single major marketing channel we have we feature FDM extensively, as an example we sent an email to 120,000 customers recently on using FDM technology and selecting the right FDM plastic for their application. We also heavily invested in creating a Knowledge Base for customers and hub found here, which is predominantly FDM based: https://www.3dhubs.com/knowledge-base
I hope this has helped answer some of your concerns.
Best,
George
1 Like
Hub information: What is the point then of listing my different printers with different cost structures if you just lump it all together and take the highest one?
If I can’t find my additional materials how is a new customer expected to?
Print analyzer: I can’t share the customers file. The customer contacted me because they were told the part could not be printed by FDM even though I had made it before. They were not happy about this and felt they were being forced toward more expensive services which they did not need or want.
FDM: If you are actually supporting or plan to continue, as you say, to support FDM hubs then why is it that every change you make is making it more difficult for the hub and the customer and NONE of the actual issues and concerns of the hubs that are being brought up are getting addressed? We just get the same tired excuses time and time again.
1 Like
Hub information: Listing every single machine with every single material option with every single micron level available would be incredibly difficult to do without overwhelming the customer. That’s why we stagger this process, so it feels like more of a process than one page with all information. To be completely transparent there are still tweaks and changes to be made to how where doing it now so it is valuable to hear your thoughts as we’re also trying to figure out what works best. What we’ve seen from a platform standpoint is no decrease in orders for specialist filaments such as woodfill, bronzefill or ninjaflex as most of these customers know what they need in regard to these materials and will fill it in the more filters tab.
Print analyzer: I think this is a completely valid point, and apologies for the confusion caused. We’re still working on the Print Analyzer heavily and optimising it for it’s purpose, to be a help not a hindrance. Is there anything in particular you would like to see changed with it, or features that need to be added?
FDM: It’s never our intention to make it more difficult for customers or hubs. What is it you would like to see changed or that you feel is a key issue being ignored that we can address?
1 Like
Hub Info: So then there is no point in me listing all of my relevant printers with their price structures if the customer doesn’t get to choose?
So if I have PLA at three different prices for three different printers, who chooses which price for PLA is used? I only see one listed. If I list PLA at .03 for a basic Replicator clone vs. .06 for an Ultimaker 3 who decides which price is listed? I don’t see a choice.
Print Analyzer: This thing is really not much more than a gimmick or eye candy for someone. I suppose it might let a customer know their file is junk and needing repair but beyond that it serves no real function.
Now, if you want to let them know that their model/file doesn’t meet a standard for FDM, for instance, and if they choose to proceed it may be at their own risk and refunds may not apply. This is something that could help protect a hub.
FDM: My only comment here is to go through the plethora of posts over time to see the reoccurring basic issues that don’t seem to be getting addressed.
1 Like
Your classification of materials and equipment is over simplified, incomplete, and extraordinarily misleading. Anytime you guys work on this you make it worse because your intent is not accuracy, it is manipulation of metrics. Those of us with specialized equipment and large catalogue of materials are marginalized instead of embraced. (Can you define “specialist filament”?)
Print analyzer is a joke. There are literally free tools out there that are better but from my experimentation it seems that the purpose is to tell all customers that their part cannot be printed in FDM anyway so maybe it’s working great from your perspective. My biggest issue with this is that you guys spent so much time and resources on it when no one asked for it and there are so many other things that we do care about that are broken and neglected.
“We also heavily invested in creating a Knowledge Base”
Are you kidding me? “Heavily invested” is what you did with the junk print analyzer. The knowledge base is written by interns and volunteers. This is “heavily invested”? It has some good info but again, much of it is over simplified, incomplete, and extraordinarily misleading. Not only have you marginalized FDM, but you have created some new classification: “industrial FDM”, to marginalize us further. I spend thousands on my machines. They print materials your “industrial FDM” cannot at resolutions your “industrial FDM” cannot and I’m not the only one.
-Jesse
"FDM: My only comment here is to go through the plethora of posts over time to see the reoccurring basic issues that don’t seem to be getting addressed." -wirlybird
Second that.
