To all 3D Printing bloggers/journalists: Can we call a moratorium on stories about “The World’s First 3D Printed [whatever]”. I thought these stories had become passé and had died down, but today I caught up on my blog reading and ran into a number of them.
-
There are now so many creative people using 3D printers, it’s extremely unlikely that the people who’ve sent you a press release or story tip have actually made “The Worlds First 3D Printed [whatever]”.
-
I don’t take you seriously as journalists (or, at least, sources of credible information) if a 5 second internet search reveals precedents to the supposed “World’s First”. Perhaps you should add “that we know of” if you insist on lazy reportage, and you’re OK with ending a sentence with a preposition.
-
Being 3D printed doesn’t make an item interesting to me (anymore) unless it functions as well, or reasonably close, to the traditionally manufactured version, or takes advantage of 3D printing to give the object a new form that previously would have been impossible. It helps if the files are available to me for a reasonable price and can be printed on my machine.
-
Years into this 3D printing revolution, I assume everything at one point in its development was 3D printed. It’s the new normal.
-
Having gone to hackerspaces, reprap meetings, and Maker Faires for years, I know that most people don’t make something and then immediately rush to document their work. What you see online is the tip of the iceberg. The fact that you don’t acknowledge that in your coverage makes you seem like a dilettante in the field, and your work not worthy of attention.
Rant over. Sorry. I feel better now.
Woohoo! World’s first comment to this post!!
@Dave_Durant I call worlds first reply to the worlds first comment!
While we’re on the topic, I’d love to see the end of “ABCx faster than current 3d printers!” or really any comparison to “current 3d printers”
Your machine is not 300x more accurate than the nanoscribe. Your machine is not 300x faster than the foam printing concrete form maker I saw at MIT.
More to the point, if your machine is 300x more [adjective] than what most people think of as current (Makerbot FFF machines), it’s probably orders of magnitudes worse in some other aspect.
There isn’t a single unifying factor between all current 3d printers beyond the most basic “they make things by adding material in a precise manner.”
@Nick_Parker I saw the following post right after reading your comment:
Which curiously didn’t mention a thing about his amazing discovery, and Bre had the look of ‘My calendar says I have to be here and look good for PR purposes’
This is a case of “everything is amazing and no one is happy” isn’t it? These articles are link bait, and the best form of link bait is finding a new audience for your stuff. My mom sends me an article about a 3d printed kidney. “Have you seen this?” She says. Honest answer? “Of course I’ve seen this, Mom. I’ve got my thumb on the pulse of this stuff.” But the correct answer is “Wow, that’s awesome, isn’t it? I can’t wait to get a 3d printed kidney in me, even if I don’t need it. I’m sure there’s space in me for that.”
Let people be excited. Let people be inaccurate. Who knows, maybe that article about the first 3d printed widget will be the thing that gets your Dad to accept your 3d printing lifestyle.
Truth. I am sick of all these so called 3d printing breakthroughs. 3D printing is in the mainstream because lots of people still don’t know what it is. They hear the words and when they find out what it is they think it is science fiction. When they see it in action they are amazed as was I and still am. But there are inertial limits with FFF. With speed you lose accuracy and vice versa. The news whores will post whatever brings readers to them to get traffic.
@Joseph_Larson Hmm if I had a couple extra kidneys, maybe I could sleep later…
Old person humor, sorry.