I publish topographic maps on Printables and MakerWorld and the maps are very detailed and the 3MF file size can get large (200-400mb) for the larger map models. It seems that Makerworld has total combined models file limit of 250mb and each print profile is limited to 150mb each. Printables has a much larger file limit and I’ve never run into them since individual file limit is higher and there does not seem to be a combined file limit either.
I often cut up the larger maps into puzzle pieces so they can be printed separately and pieced together. So each individual map file may be half or quarter size, but if I create a 3MF with multiple buildplates to make it easy for users to print all pieces of a map, it ends up being the original size since the original map model is divided into multiple build plates in a single 3MF. I could split up each individual map puzzle piece as a separate print profile but that ruins the point of multiple buildplates.
The current MakerWorld file size limits are too low and I think that a higher limit for print profiles close to 500mb would be an improvement to help creators share bigger multi buildplate models rather than create a separate print profile for each map “piece”.
Combined raw model file limit should be increased as well (like 5gb) since creators would be able to to store multiple variations of models (in my case: linear scale, logarithmic scale, dual color, single color, etc) under a single listing to avoid duplicate listings.
Please do not say “just decrease the size of your model”. Due to the nature of creating an accurate topographic map over large areas (such as an entire US state, not just a city scape, decreasing the number of triangles leads to inaccuracy and noticeably worse detail. I’ve tried multiple resolutions and the lowest resolution of 0.1mm is really the lowest the looks best when printing with a 0.4mm nozzle.
The maps I make are also dual color with two interlocking objects (not painted) to represent features like rivers and coasts which also has a bad result when decreasing resolution.
You can take a look at my printables and makerworld listings to see an example of what I mean by large detailed maps.
I know this is an older post, but I couldn’t agree more that file size limits should be increased for MakerWorld & BambuStudio as well. Decreasing the size of the files in my case (miniatures) and giving up any fine detail is a non-starter. I have print profiles/files (even single plate designs) that are over 400mb and will not open as a 3MF in BambuStudio. They need to be converted in other software and returned to BambuStudio as a different file type (usually STL). I don’t want to say that it doesn’t make sense…but, it’s very hard for me to grasp that when I create a file native to BambuStudio, that myself or anyone else has to convert it to a different file type to make it usable in BambuStudio. The latest updates limiting the direct importing of files i.e. Orcaslicer to my X1C is a perfect example…the file opens fine in Orcaslicer, but why not Bambu Studio? If your going to limit the ability of other software to interact with a Bambu printer, then the next logical step would be to increase the file size limits to make BambuStudio more user friendly and desirable. This is the exact kind of topic the online critics love to jump on. Thanks for considering.
Good advice: Blender is your friend when it comes to miniatures and file size. I say that from my own experience, as well as from watching how the pros do it. This allows you to reduce the file size, or more precisely the vertices, without reducing the quality. Almost all professionals manage to make even the most detailed miniatures smaller than 100MB. The most detailed figure I have, for example, only has 25 MB because an absolute professional was involved.
If a minitaur has more than 400MB, then I would check your workflow. You are probably making it unnecessarily detailed or incorrect settings. I’m not talking about the starting topic maps, but specifically about miniatures: More MB does not mean better quality. Most of the time the model is simply not optimized when the file size is so large.
This usually happens when large, detailed models are simply reduced to miniature without taking into account that this does not increase the quality. Your problem sounds more like a mesh problem than a file size problem. I can say that because of the very unusual and much too high file size. Have a look at how others do it, that will get you a step ahead. The sooner you get to know Blender, the sooner you will reach a new level.
The function you need for this is called: Decimate Mesh
