fae_alba

Dude, we hear you. You are holding am on your shoulders and there is no need for "sorries".

My granddaughter loves those shorts. We watch all the time.

Roger..if there were a better option I would take it. Shelton....I am working on a bit just to get back into the workflow... I do think I need a better rig...and perhaps the mo cap challenge from this summer is a good place for me to play around....

Well, I can only speak for myself, but I am currently working on an AI engine that classifies diseases for a "major" metropolitan area in the states..and I aint getting rich!

not sneaky...overworked. Means I am billing over 40 hours a week to clients. In other words overworked and underpaid!

Slowly, oh so slowly I am getting my head above water with work. The company has been through one acquisition and now a merger with another software company, and the past 18 months have been very insane. During the initial acquisition my title went from senior solution architect to consultant (a demotion) then I was moved to a management position, then to a higher management position, all without a bump in pay. On top of that I manage three multi-million dollar projects in three states, and have to maintain a billable rate of 75% or better (I'm at 105% and work 60+ hours a week). Now the acquisition is in the final stages, with a round of layoffs about to happen in the next five weeks for those roles that are deemed redundant. BUT, in spite all that, I have been missing AM, and this forum. So here I am, getting ready to renew my subscription and looking forward to reviving Papa Bear.

Not going to lie....that movie clip is mildly disturbing!😀

I use a:m almost exclusively for 3d printing. Granted I do not print mechanical pieces out of am. My models are all organic and honestly I find a;m much better than other tools for that purpose. Now 3d printer objects from a:m comes with challenges, but it is what I use. The only part of my workflow that I don't use am for is breaking the model up into pieces in order for it to fit on my printer. I've never been able to do that in a:m reliably, so I do it after exporting in another slicing tool.

If the amount of space between the walls is less than the nozzle, then you will wind up with a very weak print. You would need to adjust the model in those areas. Also, investigate increase the fill percentage. In a small print theres no shame in 100% fill.

You do need to build volume or space in the outer walls of your model. So if say you want to use am to make a hollow ball, you need to model two spheres and stitch them together to form one sphere with an inner and outer wall.

I suppose, but there have been times where in the STL model during slicing I see weird dimples that aren't there in am. I normally just accept them, and putty fill them after printing.

That's an interesting point. I've seen such issues in cura when slicing STL files from am. Never made the connection to the STL file itself...makes me want to try an obj file now!

Why export to obj ? Why not export to STL then slice the model to get it in gcode. I have found that the measurement system in hash is off by an order of 100 percent, so when slicing you may need to increase the size of the model. Another thing to watch out for is positioning of that model on the print bed. There are going to be a whole lot of supports, and if the model is delicate it will be next to impossible to clean it up.

I wish I had more time to get out to this forum, but lately work has had me flat out. So I'm late to the party. But yes, Robert does a bunch or work to keep us all living the a:m dream, and I for one while not expressing that enough, appreciates his efforts.

I see him...doing exactly what cats do... Sitting and watching us humans do strange things for their amusement.