As makers we should:
- have the option to allow 3rd party print profiles for our own models as a setting per project, and overall
- have the option to remove specific 3rd party print profiles that may be problematic
- if I update a model and remove the old model version, 3rd party print profiles can still contain the old model
- 3rd party print profiles should be in a separate tab or section from the maker’s print profiles
I’m sure other makers have some thoughts to add here also. Please help improve this feature.
That’s a great point, if I update my model to fix or improve some things the other print profiles will have the old model. Then what happens when your popular (the one people should download) gets removed and has to start over so people start downloading the 3rd party outdated models because those become the “popular” model and your model gets buried.
I think they should have a way to highlight the creators print profile too.
I actually saw a model yesterday that had (or appeared to have based on the profile image) a completely different model. Unvetted/unmoderated profiles are already out of control. The whole point of the profiles is to make it easy for new people to get into 3D printing but how are they going to choose between profiles that really only show somewhat technical info. Is some new person going to understand the difference between “1 walls, 0% infill, SUPER FAST!!!A+++++” and the author’s preferred way for it to be printed that yeah, it may be fast (super fast since it’s barely printing anything) or may have certain settings that are intentional. A new person to printing doesn’t know the importance of walls or infill and those are just the ones mostly I see “advertised”. No telling what other changes are made in the settings.
When is this going to be a reality? People upload profiles for points taking no care to ensure the print is correct. Someone posted incorrect orientation profile on my object. I can’t remove that? dang.
Can’t report the profile? Report it and ask for it to be removed.
You are able to remove untested print profiles. If the profile doesnt have the wording “Untested” with it and it doesnt have printed pictures you should report it.
Also kinda annoying that they said the print profiles without print pictures will be put below the ones with pictures but that hasnt happened yet.
Edit: After having looked at what is probably the profile you are referring to, I dont see the issue. Why are you complaining about it. I’d say the other print profile is superior to yours because of the orientation.
This really brings home the points Ive argued before that just being a model author doesnt automatically make you a print profile expert.
Like Tridense, I also checked the model you are talking about (p1p tube clip), and I agree that there is no problem with that person’s print orientation. They should not be punished for the model creators opinion. In fact, their orientation seems better. Is there something we’re missing?
Just to chime in here (even though this is a bit of a tangent topic) I agree with you that the other profile is potentially problematic. For the others here wondering why, it’s because it’s a clip that splits in one direction to attach to the printer bracket. Turning the model in the other direction, while printing a nicer hole, subsequently creates a weaker part because the layer lines are now in the same direction the clip splits.
Ultimately I’m in favor of makers being able to control their own content. We work hard to create our own brand through our work and we should have control over how it’s presented.
It’s good points about strength and brand, hopefully the ‘Designer’ tag on print profiles is enough for users to see which ones are by the model creator. Is maximum strength necessary when it’s just sliding onto a metal frame?