Hi,
is it possible to get 3D printed parts in other then polygonal .stl format (.stp, .igs, …)? NURBS data would be much simpler (and precise) to adjust to my needs than to rebuild polygons back to NURBS by myself.
Qantip,
I asked this myself a few months back. The answer was no.
I think Ryan is trying to discourage too much forking of the design and the diluting of his product which is understandable.
I do wish he would release some STL assemblies though for use when building a table.
Good luck.
That’s a pity. I got Ryans concerns, it’s his source of income I guess. But on the other side, he is publishing is under CC BY-NC-SA which allows adapting the files. Maybe then CC BY-NC-ND would be a better licence and I will fully understand it.
My opinion is that it would change nothing to share those files since those people who want proven quality and supported builds will pick Ryans kits anyway. And those who are not looking to buy them (for whatever reason) will have a simpler life to adapt them for themselves. Ryan could pick whatever ideas he likes since they will be again under the same licence and implement them in the next iteration or whatever. Everybody is happy, nobody loose. Even more, I think more adapted parts would invite more people to join and buy the stuff. (Look at the Prusa Printers for example which is even Open-source and people are buying it from Prusa like crazy, same apply for Arduino)
But I guess I not the one to judge.
PS: would it be against the licence to share them afterwards I would remodel them in NURBS?
Ryan is in his right to figure out the licensing as he sees best. The thriving community around here is a proof that many people are able to make use and adapt the system to their needs within this licensing model. Your concern has been raised many times, if you search around in the forum you’ll find leeeengthy discussion about this.
You can remodel or edit them however you like as long as you release them with the same license. If you are just tracing them, and not editing them, then I would really think that is rude to just release them in a different format. If you make a mod, and you did it by tracing it, and you want to share that, please do. Just keep the license the same.
FWIW, I think we all want people to make the machine their own, and edit it however they like, and then share those edits with the world. What causes problems when someone makes something and smacks a “Better!” “Improved!” “Moar Rigid!” label on things that are not that well thought out. I think we have a stronger community now so it is obvious what is and isn’t V1, but it has been a problem in the past. The other big problem is ebayer selling full printed kits, and really implicitly claiming to be V1, which leads to nasty emails and more support. It is a constant force, no joke.
1 Like
Thanks for the explanation Jeff.
As I wrote I totally respect the license and I am glad that it is (at least) CC BY-NC-SA. And I didn’t mean to question that, it’s the author’s law to license is as he wishes. I would do it differently but that totally doesn’t matter here.
But, back to the initial question: Is it possible to get 3d printed parts in other than polygonal format? Because I guess license is not a problem here, is it?
To explain my intention: I wanted to change some parts in the XZ assembly (x tensioner similar to Primo, display mount for MKS TS35 implemented in existing parts) and check and adjust if YZ Roller will fit 63mm wheels without collision.
With NURBS data it would be a matter of minutes. But with polygons I’ve got this:
which would be a nightmare to trace a build again. So I asked politely for NURBS files … not for the license.
Sidenote: People are and will anyway publish “Better” “Improved” “More Rigid” labels on their things. The whole Thingiverse is full of it. That in my eyes has nothing to do with the license until it is not totally closed one.
It’s up to Ryan (@vicious1). In the past, he has said no.
@Qantip
I think by not sharing CAD files, it limits the complex variations to being made by those few people with the skills and determination to do it. Rather than any person who has watched 5 fusion360 training videos and thinks they can do it better in 5 minutes. I’m not implying thay you are a part of that group, just my two cents as to why I think it makes sense to allow derivatives but not release CAD files.