@3DHubs: You better acquire more print jobs for us. thx
Skip to main content
Thanks both, it is indeed true that we’re trying to appeal to a more professional audience. We believe that this doesn’t move us away from makers at all as the features we’re developing should benefit both.
@Enza3D’s explanation on why we use the word “prototyping” for FDM is correct. It will appeal to a more professional audience. I also strongly feel this does not marginalize FDM at all, as the intended audience is looking for exactly that, prototyping. For the non-professional audience, price is always the key factor, which we’ve also clearly tried to indicate for FDM. Therefore, we expect FDM will not decline because of this (as said, I do agree some copy could be more nuanced)
I really like your solution.
I do have to say that these issues we’re experiencing now were really foreshadowed back on our forum page a few months back, with the lack of response for several weeks over our concerns with the new idea for tolerances, which were then promptly pushed out with pretty well a blatant disregard for all of the concerns raised.
I do agree that it is misleading, and unlike some of the other people in this forum post I do believe it is intentional. 3D Hubs makes more off of the one time big shot deals than the would off of several smaller FDM deals. It’s just common up selling techniques being used, customers pay more money then 3D hubs gets the same proportional slice of the pie, but in this case the pie is bigger.
By pushing SLA and other printing methods over the cheaper alternative to FDM they increase their potential revenue. This is unfortunate to see as for a while the 3D Printing community really truly did seem to be solely focused on getting the customer 100% exactly what they need and what suits their projects best.
I also disagree with the statement ‘visible lines’. I can get my fdm machines to do layer heights as low as 20 microns, and at that point the layers are invisible unless you look extremely close, and are fine enough that you can’t tell by the touch.
Not a happy hub either. My orders have dropped since the change as well.
@Enza3D, I like that idea too, but can we trust 3dhubs to write the descriptions in a fair way? BTW, this is your idea, that is not what I was suggesting. I was pointing out that they used prototyping as the only “outcomes based” description of the materials.
HQ, Flexible, Prototyping. One of these things is not like the other.
--------------------
@imagine3dps Those are some fantastic prints you have on your hub! Those are some of the finest “low quality prototype” prints I have ever seen!
Nice hub, nice work!
This is most likely the result of including “retention” into the Hub rankings, see changelog. The checkout does not appear to influence overall FDM numbers (see my earlier comment). Feel free to nudge support@3dhubs.com to find out about the cause
@PepCo_Parker Excellent prints, excellent reviews, wonderful work. I see you are also a person who has posted over 100 times in TALK, which means you have probably put more time into 3dhubs TALK alone than you have made in profits.
I think 3dhubs should spend more time working on helping you make more money, since you are a good contributor and a good hub, instead of trying to steal your customers.
This doesn’t seem right indeed. I’ll look into it asap
Blind loyalty is Fandom. Like here in Cleveland, where we have the Cleveland Browns.
Actual loyalty is a two way street.
You can look through my posts in the past here on talk, where hubs ask “Why should I keep my customers on 3dhubs” and “If a customer wants another print, do I have to keep them on 3dhubs.”
I immediately wag my finger at the questioner. “How do you think 3dhubs gets paid?” “This is cost of sales”. “Supporting 3dhubs helps them improve the software.” “Always stick with whoever brought you to the dance.”
Hi Simon (@Steelmans), I’ve been told the links have been removed, can you confirm?
For SLS the main advantage has be not needing support material. I recommend customers go to SLS when models require complex support that cannot be removed easily, for example inside cavities.
I recommend customers go to SLA when they require very small detailed features that not easily produced on FDM, for example jewellery or dental.
(By the way, I am not suggesting you should rename “High Detail Resin” with “Jewellery Resin” as this would be unfair on SLA printers, Much the same as “Prototyping Plastic” is unfair to FDM printers.
Clear, will discuss your ideas here. I do think SLA deserves a ‘smooth surface finish’ highlight as well, as many customers use it to get a sense of what an injection moulded part would look like, would you agree?
For Q2 we’re also looking into possible splitting current material groups into a 2-step technology + material selection flow. In that scenario, FDM will probably just be called “FDM”, which might be the most objective of all ideas.
Yes SLA does deserve “smooth surface finish” but it is more a capability rather than a standard feature. Remember some SLA machines can print at higher layer heights too.
Calling FDM just “FDM” seems odd but it depends how it is displayed. Maybe is will be listed as just FDM, SLA and SLS. Why not revert back to “General Purpose Plastics”?
I have been pointing out for several days that customers are being shown a “Can I help you select a material” dialogue, including returning customers. At the checkout point, the screenshot you included tries to move your customer away from FDM.
Since we as hubs seldom PLACE an order, we have didn’t see it. A customer had to point it out to me. Its been there for weeks. I mentioned it several times.
----------
I follow “how to hub”, I work hard for customer, I advertise, customer places new order–3dhubs tries to steal customer.
Customer comes to 3dhubs, uploads part, reads reviews, chooses hub, chooses material and price, makes sales decision – 3dhubs tries to move customer away from hub.
Now I do all that, and to add insult to injury, the customer is told that I am doing Prototyping Materials.
Who sees this? Let me tell you who:
My repeat customers. (Then I get dinged on ratings)
Customers who are referred to my hub from existing customers.
Customers where I paid for the advertising!
Customers from my Facebook page.
Customers from my business cards.
HERE IS A THING TO NOTE HERE: The other non-FDM hubs have NO WORDING or warnings about the downside of choosing that.
I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH the guidelines, that last line “consider something else” is outright an F.U. to us.
Yes the links have been removed, much better. Whilst we are on this subject I still don’t like the term “disclaimer” would it not be better as “Material Information”?
You could also add that although FDM parts are printed with 20% infill by default, they can be printed at higher infills at an extra cost?
Also why is there no disclaimers for SLA or SLA? Surely “SLA can be brittle and is not suitable for mechanical parts” or “SLS has longer lead times” etc would be along the same lines as the FDM disclaimers?
Or perhaps the customers came to your site and found that you do protoyping materials, and went to a different hub.
Or perhaps the customers came to you and was shown a “can i help you choose a material” and went to a different hub.
Or perhaps the customers got the point of placing the order, and was told they should “consider a different material” and went to a different hub.
Hi Filemon, I also noticed a couple of other things you might be interested in…
The disclaimer appears with ABS and PLA but not Polycarbonate. The reason I noticed that is because other materials (PolyFlex, PolyWood, Taulman T-Glase etc) are missing from my listing. I Imagine this is because they are not classed as “Prototyping Plastics”. This is another argument to change back to “General Purpose Plastics” that cover all FDM used materials.
Ok, good.
Re: infill - over the next few weeks we’ll add support material calculation to our uploader, after which we’ll also do infill. At that point we can do this automatically. That’s also when we plan to introduce infill adjustments to the customer.
SLA limitations we’re currently working on (similar to FMD guidelines). Once finished we’ll make sure to add those as well.
Will put the word “disclaimer” up for discussion, but as I mentioned earlier, we’ve seen no decline in orders so far.
Thanks again!
True point, we’re touching upon a lot of things here 
We’re working on a complete overhaul of our material database (and thus grouping), which will address this issue. I plan for this to go live in May. That will solve this problem
You are correct here, but that view is only one application of the technology (much like prototyping is only one application of FDM).
The general flow (for engineering design) starts with FDM printing, which is used to print as many iterations as is necessary to reach a final design. The FDM prints are used to help gauge how the final product will “feel” and behave so the design can be improved upon as needed. This is why it’s not uncommon to have multiple prints which demonstrate multiple changes to each part at this phase (the prototyping phase).
SLA is used once the design is refined and finalized for injection molding because, as you mentioned, it’s surface finish mimics that of an injection molded part well (when it’s properly post-processed) and it gives a really good representation of what the final, market product will look like. This print will include all the injection molded pieces components (gussets, coring, ribs, draft, etc.), which are not necessarily included in the initial FDM prints. Generally, the final design is printed once in SLA but can be printed again if major design changes occur.
To be honest, I think labeling each technology by it’s name from the get go is a better approach. Yes, customers may not know what it means initially, but it’s a more holistic approach to doing this (in my opinion). Not only does it eliminate almost all the issues being addressed in this thread, but it helps the customers better understand the process if they want to. FDM has a much wider range of materials than PLA and ABS (which is what people think of when you say just plastic), and customers may not even know TPU, Nylon, wood based, metal infused, etc. are options. Breaking it down by process, then material is much better for everyone as each process has a lot of materials at this point. For SLA, you can choose casting, dental, flexible, standard, etc. all of which have drastically different properties, but none of that is well explained by the default selection process. The same goes for FDM; PLA is nothing like Nylon, TPU, or WoodFill (or any of the exotics), and that really should be better presented to the customer. It’s more work on your end, but we are rapidly approaching the point where the choice of material/desired end properties supersede the choice of print technology. Gone are the days where SLA was just for visual models and delicate prints, and when FDM was just for ABS. Material variety is growing more and more diverse by the month, and that’s not represented here.
Question - if my orders have slowed, it might be difficult to pull repeat orders, not just new orders. When the change went into effect, did you look back at a hub’s history to see what kind of repeat business they already had? I’ve had a few repeaters already.
One thing that is interesting here is that I actually push some of my customers to HQ hubs on my own:
1. When the customer needs really smooth parts, such as an art piece.
2. When a nylon customer wants a part , and the customer’s reason for choosing nylon really wont hold up well for FDM nylon.
3. When the part has a lot of really thin, complicated structures.
4. When a customer wants to know what the weight will be like when they have it pressed.
And more. My numbers of referrals from my own hub to others hub is probably very high. I am sure this has hurt my rankings, because it creates more “rejected” orders.
This is where voice of the customer comes in. We get dinged for pushing customers to higher margin prints when we should get rewarded. In fact, instead of lowering the bar, 3dhubs should have a way for us to get bonus points AND CREATE AN ORDER IN A PARTNERING HUB so that 3dhubs does not lose control of the customer in that step. That is, we have the ability to just move the order over to an HQ hub, POOF that order appears in an HQ hub, and a dialogue between that hub and the customer begins automatically. Rising tide! Not denigration.
Personally, I’d love a disclaimer for SLA that the “perfect” smooth finish a lot of SLA pictures have is only achievable with sanding and good post-processing. It is impossible to get that smooth finish with only basic support removal (I can get close but not all the way there), and some customers have the expectation that the print will be smooth everywhere by default. I am continuously explaining that that’s additional processing, and there’s no feasible way to build that into my pricing by default as each print is unique (and it’s not fair to the customers who don’t want the sanding).
@Filemon would you consider adding this?
I was under the impression that “rejecting” an order because it was better suited for a different technology had no impact on your rankings but who knows at this point. I do this a lot too, and haven’t seen a negative impact in my rankings when I check by uploading a part and poking around.