Allow creators to help "Hyper Casual" users

What are “Hyper Casual”

“Hyper Casual” users are users that have a 3d printer but don’t have any knowledge in 3d printing.
This kind of users were created by Bambu Lab pushing to get 3d printers to everybody and although it might seem good at first it has serious flaws.
Basically they can only go through makerworld and click to print a model they like.
They don’t have the knowledge on how to edit any parameters in a slicer, they don’t know how to transform the 3mf file to their own printer needs and in fact they don’t even know what a 3mf file is.
A big source of these users is the bambu handy app that is only there to send prints to your printer and remote access it (it isn’t a slicer).

My explanatory ranking would be:

  • hyper casual: can only print what already exists
  • casual: hyper-casual that can do slicer edits
  • normal: casual that can do simple CAD edits
  • advanced: normal that can do advanced edits and/or use more advanced tools

The issue

In an ideal world any 3d model on makerworld should be able to be printed by a hyper casual user, however this isn’t the case.
Print profiles are notably 3d printer specific, profiles for an P1S can’t ,for example, be printed on a A1mini.
And while in Bambu Studio there is the possibility to convert the printer setting, this can’t be done by a smartphone user for example.
As a small creator, some have already asked me to convert the file for them and to add the profile to my created model but this is, officially, not always possible.
Indeed, at the moment, to publish a print profile, it requires to have used it previously to successfully print the model. While this is only a checkbox to tick, it exposes us to repercussions should we lie.
The problem is that we don’t necessarily have all the printers required, but we might still have enough knowledge to propose a possible solution and it is a waste to not allow us to try.
(we don’t have any solution as we can’t simply send the 3mf file either in the case of smartphones)

Possible solutions

I can see three main solutions:

  1. Create a smartphone slicer and make hyper casuals disapear
    (similar idea here: Bambu Studio for Android Mobile - #2 by StormDragon6139)
  2. Allow creators to upload print profiles whithout a previous make*.
    (similar idea here: Ability to upload profile and mark it as not printed)
  3. Make a smart print profile conversion tool build-in makerworld

I would suggest at least option 2 as it is easier to implement and could be useful in other cases as well. However, (*) to avoid misuse I would only allow users to make such a profile if they have at least made one profile that was posted with a make on this model previously.

This could be implemented as such:

The checkmark for “safe” profiles (posted while made previously) and the question mark (could also be a yellow caution sign, yellow exclamation mark,…) for “unsafe” models (user takes the risk, could become safe after a rating for example)
Note that this would be user (and model) specific, you need to have a safe profile on the model before being able to put unsafe ones onto the same model.

This can also be interesting when we want to provide print profiles for different kind of setups like: No MMU (using filament swaps), MMU in layers (automated filament swaps) or regular MMU for example.
All of them will have similar results and we might not want to print them all: making one safe and two unsafe could be handy.

Side note

While I have nothing personal against lower rankings I consider that everyone should at least be at “normal” tier and be able to make basic edits to their models.

Otherwise (wanting to open the hobby to the extreme) this results in constanly lowering the level and ultimately destroying the hobby.

A great example is video games where now most of the major AAA games are bland, easy and are basically the same. Removing the gameplay and logic of games (in the name of “progress”) was nonsence and without drastic measures it won’t get better.

2 Likes

I’ll just let you know that this is (I think) planned :wink:

1 Like

This feature has been available for a while now, as long as the print fits within the physical dimensions of the A1 mini it will show as compatible even if the profile is set to P1S or X1C. There are some exceptions like the “print-by-object” setting which is handled slightly differently for the A1 printers but for single color designs it works great and I haven’t had any requests for printer specific profiles since the update. I’ve even verified it works as expected using Bambu Handy and my own A1 Mini to print an X1C profile I uploaded.

That would be great : ). I didn’t really find a post indicating it, so that why I put this one here, do you have a link?

Well I posted this topic as the same day someone asked me for this once again. I don’t mind it but since it wasn’t the first time, I gave it a shot.
What you mention makes sense however as the requests were more related to multipart models or when the conversion needed some help/tweaks.

Automatic conversion is an obvious solution but I can’t help but hope they give creators a bit more lee-way in terms of control as well : /. At some point we know what will work and what not, adding a hole for example doesn’t necessarily requires a new print. And while an automatic algorithm could probably handle 99% of the cases, there will always be cases were the creator should intervene so why not simply allowing it by default. After all, they already require that we select printers on which our model won’t work, but maybe they only do it to put the burden on us : /.

I’m still not sure what you’re asking for, can you provide a more concrete example? The majority of my designs are multi-part models and require some assembly but they’re all designed to fit on the A1 mini so I can create just a single model and print profile that supports all printers.

If you’re splitting a large model differently to support the A1 mini then you will need to verify the print profile since the model geometry is different. You can upload the modified files without a print profile and include instructions if you don’t want to re-print them but any published print profile needs to be verified by the uploader, that’s the standard MakerWorld has set.

My use case is different than OP’s as /I’ve been asked very seldomly to adapt P1S profile for A1mini, and AFAIR I haven’t done so since BL activated the automatic conversion. What I’ve had is a few requests either specific or tangential to my designs to modify specifically for someone, I’ve done this quite a few times, and the commissioner acts as a beta tester, all of there cases have been successful at the end, but I do wish there could be unprinted profiles that could be tested and confirmed by the users. Because sometimes we don’t really want to print stuff we have no need for.

There are multiple sub-subjects but for the one that is about the P1S to A1mini conversion I am obviously not talking about changing the geometry of the model in any way.
If the geometry changes a lot, it is important to reprint the model to ensure proper printability.

The issue with your proposition is that designing all print profiles to the A1 mini seems more like a hack than a real solution as it basically negates the advantages of a bigger printbed.
For non A1mini users you have the additional issue that you can’t leave it as an A1mini profile as you wouldn’t print your exact print profile.
If non A1mini users don’t do this and simply design for their machine then it could be that the automatic conversion doesn’t work (plates could need to be split, object could need to be rotated in Z).

The thing is also that this issue branches into others but all could have the simple solution that is to allow unprinted models under certain conditions.
While Bambu Lab decided this way of doing, it isn’t certain that they opposed doing it differently, it might simply have been a good easy solution that they found while other exist too.
If it would only have been about a conversion issue I would have only added a comment on the “ability to upload profile and mark it as not printed” post.
In the mean time I also found this post: Fairness and Rule Enforcement on MakerWorld where the user complains about people reusing the same image for different print profiles that sometimes don’t have significant differences.
This can come from people simply not wanting to reprint models for nothing, so this would also be improved by allowing profiles without a make but with a warning for example.
I feel it’s like allowing handicapped people to sometimes use the exit as entrance as it may be easier for them. It is insignificant for us while it could be a big game changer for them and apart if you find an issue it is something to consider.
From a computer science aspect it isn’t a difficult change to make either.
There are many bigger issues (for the users) I can think of but usually they are the result of active bambu lab choices, this one seems possible to change at least.

To be complete, as you asked for it, here is a simple concrete example: You have an extruded ellipse of size 185mmx100mmx20mm (XYZ) that you put it unrotated on your P1S printbed. After conversion it fails on the A1mini (plate of 180mmx180mm) but in reality if you rotate it 45° it is possible.
Another case is simply to have a P1S bed full of parts (ex: 9 default cubes in object mode), the conversion will fail at the moment but you can obviously simply make more plates.
There are also more advanced setups that would brake if you move pieces around for example like connecting brims to reinforce them

Finally, print profile are there to have everything already setup for the user.
Even without it being confirmed as printable it is already useful.
Making some extra profiles to handle special cases to improve some user’s experience shouldn’t be made more difficult by forcing the use of a less convenient method.
Personally, I am not only on Makerworld so I already make available non Bambu Lab solutions but these, sometimes less easy methods, shouldn’t dismiss more specific solutions like ready to use bambu 3mf files.

I didn’t think of this case but indeed this also somewhat happened to me.

Additionally there is also the case where you make a small change and with the skill you acquired you simply know it will work and you don’t need to reprint the whole thing for it another time. As an example, adding a vertical hole to a simple object to make a keychain. If the main object worked, a little hole like that wouldn’t change anything but it would be a waste of filament to print it twice for this.

The saddest part is that for hyper casual users even adding a simple little hole is impossible so if Bambu Lab doesn’t wants to force them to learn at least the slicer this should be considered.

Nope, it’s a leak :shushing_face:

1 Like

I feel like I’m somewhere between hyper and casual. I’m definitely learning (or attempting to) and have been steadily improving my skills (slowly! but still steadily). Maybe it’s because I use my desktop to print things, but I’ve never had an issue printing something that was meant for a different printer except when there’s a size issue.

I never had any problem too, before buying my printer I was already quite informed through the internet so I nearly never was a (hyper-)casual.
If you already can use a slicer, I would classify you as a casual as I spoke of “hyper-casual” to really mark the idea of being incapable of making any change.

We all have to start so its normal to begin low, however I think that starting from a pc will nearly automatically push users beyond the hyper-casual category.
Smartphone users might however not have the incentive to learn as they would need to change their ways, the gap is bigger for them.
I feel like it is the 3dprinting equivalent to social media bubbles made by the site to keep the user dependent.

I would recommend not spending too much time trying to do model changes in the slicer, I see it more as a quick way for temporary edits. The slicer is what “Paint” is to image editing, useful but at some point you want to be able to edit your changes.

1 Like