A mesh boolean is altering the geometry, plain and simple. Of course it can be separated again, that’s how it works. I can also separate my own models into each of it’s individual body’s from Fusion even if I export it all as one. This can be prevented by combining them pre-export, but it doesn’t change the facts. You can continue to ignore what I’ve said and proven, I’m not arguing it any further.
I still don’t understand where the problem is. only one color has been changed. There are also users who don’t have ams and who would like to print it in one color. as well as other inexperienced users who don’t know how to do it (and there are some…) that profile should have been created by the designer from the beginning.
1 Like
Dude, OP didn’t boolean the text at all. The way the text is, is the way the original designer did it. All of the geo is still there the way the original designer exported it. You haven’t proven anything.
The mesh hadn’t been altered, as my screenshot shows, the geo lines up 1:1, and is the same mesh driving both profiles. Vert for Vert, the same, same amount of tris.
Do you not see the screenshot I posted with the two models ontop of each other and the verts lining up 1:1? What are you thinking when you look at that?
With the photos you’ve posted, all you showed me is that the slicer will slice it differently depending on how to combine/export the meshes, but does nothing to show the actual mesh was altered or that the OP of this thread booleaned anything at all.
When I export the meshes from both profiles and pull them into a 3d authoring program, I can clearly see that the vert count and tri count are the same. I can move the model ontop of each other, and snap it vert to vert, for an exact match. Nothing was altered with the geo in regards to the text. It’s the same exact geo.
3 Likes
I think the creator’s only real issue with it is that they’re not getting points, at least that’s my guess. I agree and don’t see why they wouldn’t just make one themselves though. But it’s not simply a color change either, and maybe they do have a problem with that, idk.
2 Likes
Like I said of course mesh boolean can be reversed, that’s how it works, that’s how it’s designed. It’s not going to make them look different in software, yet it’s still altering the geometry, and yes can still be separated. It’s not a simple color change, as proven, end of discussion.
No boolean operation was done though. The actual mesh wasn’t altered, just re-arranged so the colors could be assigned differently. There would be exactly 0 need to boolean the mesh to remove the text. I don’t even understand how you think that would work in this context. There’s no indication any sort of mesh modification was made like that. There’s nothing extra going on in the print profile that modifies the parts in such ways.
The only change it appears is that the letters were attached to the main body, so that Bambu Studio would see it as a single object, and give a cleaner print. Nothing had to be modified on the actual mesh for this sort of operation though, and it shows because indeed, both meshes are the same thing and all the parts are still there.
The actual mesh has not changed, it’s still vert for vert, the same thing.
1 Like
So first off if you want to print a multi colour print in a single colour that doesn’t require a new print profile. So this monochrome doesn’t make much sense.
But that being said. That raise a really good question.
Print profile on MW don’t have a license per say. Only the model has one.
So you can technically post any print profile you want.
But if the model is licensed under standard digital file license or CC No Modifications. Are we allowed to post print profiles for that model? since, technically, it’s a modified version of the model.
If that’s true, there is a ■■■■ tone of print profiles on MW that doesn’t follow the license terms.
I never said a new print profile would be required for a color change? That would kinda prove my point in fact. Since why would OP bother making a new profile if all he had to do was change the color. I don’t know what you’re trying to say there?
1 Like
I hadn’t realised it was one from the @thebiggreek.
I have uploaded several profiles to his designs, not once with any complaints. We even created some complimentary designs honouring each other’s work.
He is a stand-up guy.
I have not spoken to him about this yet, but, I know he doesn’t have a problem with people uploading profiles for his work when it allows more people to access them using the A1 printer as he can’t test the design with a printer.
Now we have the actual model and your profile to review, I will review my earlier comments.
The original design has two colours with the green highlight colour used for the ring and the text.
If you were to print this using the Bambu Handy app, you couldn’t choose a different colour for the ring from the colour used for the text. That appears to be by design.
Had the original design used two filaments, both green, one each for the ring and the text then those in Bambu Handy could have chosen to exclude the caption.
But, here are the important two things.
- The designer didn’t make that decision, it’s clear the ring and caption are meant to be the same colour.
- The design IS the caption and the ring, it is different without the caption. It is an initial design choice that removing it means you and not the design made a change.
You removed the caption stl from the source file, you didn’t leave the original as an assembly which throws up errors in Bambu Studio and can cause print errors.
This IMHO moves it into a remix. Had you printed it for yourself and left it at that - perfect. By uploading it, even as a profile changes how the designer wanted it the design to look and becomes a remoix - even if it isn’t a stand-alone model.
Oh sorry I didn’t meant to make a direct reply to your comment. It’s just my general thoughts on this topic.
points? for the print profile? It makes me laugh to think how many downloads he would have to do to get 100 points with that single profile. otherwise, a second download on that profile would count as 2 instead of 1…it all benefits the designer in the long run. in my opinion it’s more the annoyance of… you won’t have any other profiles apart from mine…
1 Like
I recreated what OP did, no boolean operations needed. I combined the enjoy text and the lid 2 files. I exported them bambu studio. I imported them into 3D Studio Max. I combined them into a single object without any alterations to the geo. Just attached one to the other. I exported to a new stl and pulled that into bambu studio
All the geo is still there!
1 Like
I can’t read minds, guy. Don’t take it as fact.
I think you’re all missing the point here. The question is not really to know if the OP’s print profile is a remix or not. But if we can publish print profiles on models under standard digital file licenses.
I didn’t miss the point. I was just being a stick in the mud about that other thing.
I mean, personally I think OP would be better off taking it down and moving along. There’s a lot that can be done within print profiles that can tip that line of just an alternative print profile to probably technically a remix. Do I feel it’s a remix?? ehh, no. I’m sure enough of an argument can be made though, and the original designer sounds like they aren’t too open to the whole thing, so. To me it just sounds like a losing battle.
It’d probably be best if Makerworld set it so that a designer can allow or disallow print profiles. I don’t entirely agree with that position, because I think print profiles are an important part of bringing content to the user, and not every designer sets up print profiles for every machine. However, I can still see why designers would want that feature.
I mention this because there is the idea that perhaps if it’s set to a digital license, it’d automatically reject any added print profiles. I personally wouldn’t want those things coupled though, as I may provide something as a digital license, but that doesn’t mean I wouldn’t allow print profiles. I think they serve their purpose, as mentioned above.
So, basically, I don’t think standard digital license should = no print profiles too, but I do feel the option should be given, given the number of designers that want to tightly control even that aspect of it.
1 Like
I would say yes, you can under the digital file license provided you do not make any changes to the appearance of the resulting model.
If the designer created a profile for PETG, X1C, smooth plate with the fan always on and someone came along and provided one for the A1 mini using PLA and with the fan always off - the design hasn’t changed, just an increase in the choices prospective downloaders have.
As I mentioned, I have the A1 mini (and other 3D printers), and if I like a design and there isn’t existing support for the A1 mini, I will create one.
I have not had a single complaint and I will often get a shout-out of thanks.
I have never changed a design or removed elements. If the designer didn’t make those choices, I not going to present users with a design choice the designer themselves didn’t make
These lids are part of an increasing set, that also plays into the question.
The designer has a vision for their work that doesn’t include a captionless version.
OPs question is dependent on what is changed though, which is why people are talking about remix. A print profile should generally be just that though, a print profile. As in changing how the object prints, whether that’s changing supports, speeds, strength, nozzles, etc. It should not contain changes to the actual model IMO unless it is the designer doing so.
You can change the model entirely to something completely different in a print profile. So just because it’s a profile and not it’s own upload as a new model, does not mean it should (or shouldn’t) be allowed.
If someone remixes a model that does not allow remixes and uploads it as a profile rather than a new model. The original creator still has every right to take it down as it still violates the license.
Whether or not people agree that this is or is not a remix doesn’t change the fact that it’s not just a simple changing of a color. The fact is, they designed it with text, and if they don’t want the text removed, they’re allowed to have such profiles removed. Even though they’ve given (poor) instructions to make it “blank”, I’ve shown how that would not work very well.
Maybe I should also post here, since it’s about the file I created.
I really don’t know why so much fuss is being made about it.
I have already been asked if I could make a simple file and have said that you only need to change the colors. I see this more as a help so that others can practice using the slicer and get the desired result.
It’s not that I wouldn’t help or don’t want to help. I also consider design requests (if there are enough).
I personally find the creation of that print profile absolutely superfluous.
For me, this is nothing more than scoring points, otherwise why open a thread in the forum? Instead of writing to me directly and talking to me about it. I also wrote to him directly. I could have just reported it without writing to him.
The description of the profile with NO TEXT and the corresponding picture without the text, suggest the remix of the file, and that is not my wish, because if it were, I would not have chosen the license as it is there.
I wonder how you would think/feel about it if you came up with something great “colorful” and someone came along and just made it black and that’s it.
I find it sad that my wish that there should be no remix is not respected.
The design contains the text and the ring - in my opinion, everything else is a change to the design. Whether it contains a change to the geometry or not.
It is also a pity that the creator of the threat does not say anything more about it
It’s a shame that this is getting so out of hand.
4 Likes
As many have suggested, I have gone ahead and taken down the profile to honor the designer’s wishes. While I dont necessarily feel I did anything wrong with posting the profile, It is ultimately their design and its not worth fighting over.
This thread has clearly gotten a little out of hand, and was never my intenton. I simply wanted some external input before responding to the message of the designer. My omitting the link to the model was also intentional as I didnt want to call anyone out.
I didnt expect to get nearly this response from the community. I left my computer for 3 hours and expected a response or two, not all of this. 
Thank you all for your input and assistance, I look forward to additional participation in the forum in the future
These are issues that affect everyone, not just you, so people have a lot of opinions about it. These discussions help drive policy and changes at Bambu/Makerworld too, as they read these forums and will adjust based on how people are feeling about certain issues.
3 Likes