Totally agree. Model rating is absolutely necessary. @spikeon, maybe add the “product request” tag.
Real-life example:
Two print profiles, one has 4.9 the other 5 stars.
Seeing so many stars caused me to think the model is good. But it actually breaks basic H2D filament buffer functionality by preventing the buffer to freely push and pull the PTFE tube and therefore cause error messages during very big or very fast prints.
So the only thing I can do is to add a comment.
Hardly anyone reads a comment out of hundreds.
If my comment was combined with a low rating I would get the necessary audience.
Since @BambuLab doesn’t offer a way to rate the model people will continue to download a model that breaks printer functionality w/o being warned by others.
100% agree, I’ve several models with profiles for SPECIFIC materials and I get random ratings where the person has rated my PLA profile while using PETG. Dumb. It is a bad system. I don’t rate lots of things as I will d/l model and use MY settings and materials for the print. NOT the modeler’s junk settings. Gyroid is one of those JUNK settings I see that just means the modeler/profile maker is a novice.
What would you use instead? Actually there are some advantages to gyroid. It doesn’t have the peaked crosses rectilinear has so no thumping between nozzle and model trying to knock it loose, and it’s open in three dimensions if using internal chambers for ducting/cooling or whatever. Hardly junk.
I’m always ready to learn, though. What’s “amateur” about using gyroid? For me, I use the infill that’s appropriate for the task. I’ve used honeycomb for its directional ducting while resisting flows in other directions, other infills for strength, etc. Seems to me that’s less “amateur” than just proclaiming one infill to be junk while ignoring the real reasons why people might want to use it.
If speed is the goal, sure, why not get rect But if you need strength, it may not be a good choice. Rectilinear fill is strong in the vertical axis only. It doesn’t resist torsion well, and is only okay resisting bending stresses along the long axis.
As with so many things: the best infill, or wall, or whatever, depends on what you want out of the print. If you want structural strength, first decide which directions you want to have that strength, then pick an infill. Gyroid is nice because it has similar strength in all directions.
You don’t have to love other people’s choices, but don’t be a d••• about it.
I expect most users would not understand the difference between print profile and model ratings.
Blaming the print profile, for not sticking to the bed. It can’t be they chose a different filament. or a different bed.
Maybe I am only paying attention to the vocal minority. That give the most comments.
“I’m a designer and I want a system that totally protects me when I release a well printed piece of trash that I misrepresent in the project description”.
I see so many clones and models with no engineering consideration that only after printing can I deduce will not function as intended. It’s not just AI models but those who see someone else’s idea and just pump out a replica with little seeming understanding of the nuances of the design.
The possibility of negative feedback from douchebags gaming the system is as unavoidable as the current situation of douchebag designers gaming it. Additionally, you have currently, a flawed setup that is being improperly used by anyone not expert in the system because every other site for reviews expects you to review the product…not the instruction manual.
Items must have capacity for review and feedback with some consequence. I’ve notified designers of critical faults and get a thumbs up with no action from too many. Some enjoy collaboration and I work with them to resolve or improve.
I think the core of this is people trying to run a business here in a hybrid form. Like YT or other content creation they start out with a genuine offer to community and then become all about benefitting from the community. A system democratising knowledge needs to have some protection against that I think.
Some of yall are thinking grid and saying rectilinear. Grid is the one that intersects and scrapes itself on each layer. Rectilinear is grid but only in one direction every layer, which makes it VERY fast but also VERY weak since its only fused at intersections and walls, its basically one big overhang/bridge. Rectilinear is only strong when very high %, and frankly at high % most infill are just as strong but at least rect is fast
I detest the whole “print profile” as the only thing you can rate. There is a need to rate them, but the model and the print settings are not the same thing.
I can understand why Bambu Lab’s main concern would be democratizing the print process so that all models print from Handy or Studio, but the designer kind of gets ■■■■■■ by the current state of things.
@MalcTheOracle
Sure, you are right.
And still, for the people not posting models but only “consuming” models (which I expect to be the majority) from Makerworld it simply implies a model is great when you see 5 stars where in my opinion most technical models I have downloaded are far from great even though they print great. But are still useless for their meant purpose.
From my experience, some users from Printables are also toxic to the point that I fed up and delete my account there.
A while ago Printables only allowed to upload STL file, not spoon-fed and ready-to-print completed print profile, yeah? And some guy complained that he printed this measurement cup and failed, blaming me because there was no support.
These little niche things I share won’t get me enough print count/download count to get good benefits. But really, those guys discouraged me from sharing the things I’ve made.
I also encountered some here at MW. Fortunately, until now most people download my stuffs at MW are more understading. Like, I don’t think the people who print that cup would use handy app but more likely orca slicer. And the people who use handy app would not print my stuffs but “arcticulated buddy” instead.
@all
And if you not know before, print profile on MW is designed to work with handy app, to promote handy app. That is super “handy”, just open your phone, tap on the model you like, and tap print. No need fiddling with support settings, infill, wall count or a hundred settings to feed into slicer, like how we used to do to have a successful print that looked just as ugly as a child’s playdough stuff.
Sure, it is very nice for 3D printing coming to the masses but the technology is not really there to be fool-proof (or idiot-proof if you will). And those hiccups along the way, like dirty bed for example, are to blame on the model designer as the current system designed to be. No no no, it’s not the printer fault, it’s not user fault, it’s designer’s fault to have that print fall off the bed. But really, is it?
I agree many of the STL download sites encourage the people that don’t know how to adjust for failed prints. Just because a print profile works on one model does not mean it is optimized for others models. Even if you assume they use the same filament. But there are so many options for filament that need different settings. Let along different printer brands.
MW is much fewer variations. But does not stop stupid.
Most people don’t understand the difference between model, and print settings.
It is kind of like ratting the vegetables in a soup. Most people who eat the soup rate the soup on “did they like the seasoning” or not. Then if you have the question how was the vegetables. it does not give a realistic answer. Might discourage people from responding to the survey. Someone that knows about a topic, can pick out the details, and understand the differences in the questions. But most people don’t understand the difference. So much better to ask only one question. Even if the words of the question where specific. The question answered is “Do they like the results”.
then if you combine the ignore the words of the question described above, with the concept of different languages automated translation. makes anything more than one question ridicules. And even if it was ask, using the right words. using the answers is ridicules. As a designer, I would love the feedback. But how do you get the feedback. What people write. Star systems are unreasonable for anything more than “Did you like that”.
And honestly, I agree with you—and I like Clippy too.
But I think Bambu is trying to change how 3D printing is perceived and used. They want to make it mainstream. They want people to make things, not to “do 3D printing,” if you know what I mean.
Think about today’s average car driver. Some people don’t even know where to put the gas, or where the engine is—yet they still drive perfectly well. They don’t need to understand how the car works internally to use it effectively.
Bambu is aiming for the same thing with 3D printing: turning it into a tool for making things, where the process becomes invisible to the user. For most people, it shouldn’t matter how the printer works. Designers and engineers should understand the technical side—but someone who just wants a dragon doesn’t care about flow rates, profiles, or slicer settings.
That kind of simplicity is what enables mass adoption.
We’ve seen this happen with coding. A few years ago, everyone said “everyone should learn to code.” Today, many non-programmers do “code”—but really they assemble components, reuse snippets, and rely on tools and AI. They might be terrible Java developers, but they can still build websites and apps using modern platforms that abstract the complexity away.
I believe Bambu is doing the same thing for 3D printing. And from what I can see, they’re succeeding.
All the user should need to do is dry the filament and clean the bed. Everything else should be invisible if we want truly widespread adoption.
But if you need strength, it may not be a good choice. Rectilinear fill is strong in the vertical axis only. It doesn’t resist torsion well, and is only okay resisting bending stresses along the long axis.
