Hi @Grod, thanks a lot for the compliment as well as the fair feedback 
Let me check if I understand well, you would need some assistance / info / guidance when setting layer heights is that correct?
Thanks again!
Filemon
Skip to main content
True. Conclusion: We have not tackled this issue yet. I do think specifics is better than “low”, “medium”, “high” but indeed it probably doesn’t mean a lot for customers. Ideas here would be extremely welcome 
Yes, that would be better - use the same model at different sizes. Would make the prices consistent across all size variables.
The first time I saw the changes, my heart almost stopped. It was very surprising and unsettling, because it was unannounced.
From what I have seen and played with so far, most of the changes are positive, but there are some things that are not logical/unclear to me and some that I’d consider significant.
-I have multiple printers and 10 different materials, each with different colours, on offer at the moment. The new price display system means, that my hub page is really long and confusing right now. The tabulated approach for the different resolutions should be extended to the material level as well, so that the bar with the different model sizes does not have to be repeated for each material.
-The new ways of price calculation look really intriguing and are something that I greatly value. But some settings seem quite cryptic to me and I would appreciate some more information on how they actually work. Useful information for me means stuff like “The old part volume calculation assumed 20% infill and 0.4mm shell”. For example, what happens when somebody would like to place an order below the minimum value? Would my hub just not show up?
When I apply multiple ways of calculating part price, which one will the customer end up seeing? The most expensive?
-Changing the price of individual parts in an order feels even more arbitrary than before. At this point I still feel like material used is the way to calculate cost, so the fact that I can only change the final price and not the volume may look quite arbitrary to customers. This also does not allow me to make use of 3DHubs as a cost calculation platform, should I choose different cost calculation methods, right? I had already written a small piece of software that would spit out my final price based on slicer and material settings, but it would be much neater to have the 3DHubs calculations at my disposal. Even if this would be just for the sake of transparency.
That’s all folks. For now
Sincerely,
Jonas
0.05mm I would say is fine…i print at this height a lot when the physical print size is very small. I have an Ultimaker 2 and it doesn’t miss a beat at this height! i would agree partially that “Reprap” style printers may struggle at this layer height but the more expensive end of the market should be perfectly ok at this.
True points. Keep in mind that you could add any type of printer, not just FDM. I expect we would do an update soon, linking resolutions to printer types. This is currently not possible just yet
I totally agree with these suggestions and Talk with UX now. Will try to get fat Marvin in
Hi all! So, I just did a Talk Post on the new pricing features here: https://www.3dhubs.com/talk/thread/feature-update-hub-pricing. I will now also assess and answer all your questions individually. Cheers
@ Good points! Here I go:
The tabulated approach for the different resolutions should be extended to the material level as well
I understand the issue, will check with UX and Devs what is possible
The new ways of price calculation look really intriguing and are something that I greatly value. But some settings seem quite cryptic to me and I would appreciate some more information on how they actually work.
please see: https://www.3dhubs.com/talk/thread/feature-update-hub-pricing
For example, what happens when somebody would like to place an order below the minimum value?
The price the customer will see, bumps up to your minimum. You will not receive orders below this point
When I apply multiple ways of calculating part price, which one will the customer end up seeing? The most expensive?
They add up, so if you add multiple features, you will increase your price. Of course you can tweak to take a bit of pricing from multiple features.
At this point I still feel like material used is the way to calculate cost, so the fact that I can only change the final price and not the volume may look quite arbitrary to customers.
I’m not sure if I understand this one. Can you elaborate on what you feel is missing? thanks!
@Oliver_13 I totally agree and I’ve feedbacked this to UX. They seemed to agree as well so I expect a fix soon
@wei_sheng_3139 sorry to hear you find it confusing. Are you having any trouble with orders currently running? For new order sit shouldn’t be an issue. Please let me know
ps. response from dev “before we allowed Hubs to change the volume of a model on the order page. Because of the advanced pricing we can’t allow that anymore but they can change the price directly instead of the volume”. Does that solve?