Digital Art Zone

 
   
8 of 8
8
License Agreement / 3D printing question
Posted: 27 April 2013 10:12 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 106 ]
Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  62
Joined  2011-07-07

And we are still waiting for the 3D print licences ...

Well, I have a friend waiting for me to design some earrings and pendants.  I was going to do the character design in D|S.  He is getting impatient, as he has been waiting for 2 months. Well, I do have Poser Debut, and there is absolutely nothing in their EULA expressly prohibiting 3D printing of figures, or requiring any special licenses to do so.

For my other 3D print projects, it looks like I will have to learn 3ds Max, Maya and and/or Mudbox.  Good thing my previous occupation was as a graphics design software trainer. 

Once I have developed a library of high quality 3D printable meshes, I will be sure to make them available for free and post the download link.  The only stipulation in the license will be that they are not to be used for 2D rendering since DAZ already has that covered.

This may take a year or two, (maybe more, who knows) so, so don’t hold your breath.

 Signature 

Reality is perception.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 April 2013 04:15 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 107 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  10546
Joined  2007-11-06

...I’d still like to have a mini figure of my namesake for RPG purposes.

 Signature 

...it’s five minutes to midnight…

I’d rather have a blue sky above me than a blue screen in front of me.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 June 2013 01:40 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 108 ]
New Member
Avatar
Total Posts:  5
Joined  2009-01-17

I already posted this information once before, but since nobody really seems to have responded to it there, I thought it would be good to seek responses here. Has anyone seen these links?

http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:23365

http://3dprinterhub.com/3D-Design/DAZ-3D

The first link is to an article that talks about one person’s use of the Base V-4.2 model and a reported discussion with a representative of DS. The second link is to an apparent ad that promotes choosing Daz 3d for the very purpose of printing 3D models. I’m not sure about the legality of commercial use, but the two links are interesting.

Can anyone shed light on the second link in particular? Just curious.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 June 2013 07:29 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 109 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2537
Joined  2004-04-25
KorvisBlack - 27 April 2013 10:12 AM

And we are still waiting for the 3D print licences ...

Well, I have a friend waiting for me to design some earrings and pendants.  I was going to do the character design in D|S.  He is getting impatient, as he has been waiting for 2 months. Well, I do have Poser Debut, and there is absolutely nothing in their EULA expressly prohibiting 3D printing of figures, or requiring any special licenses to do so.

For my other 3D print projects, it looks like I will have to learn 3ds Max, Maya and and/or Mudbox.  Good thing my previous occupation was as a graphics design software trainer. 

Once I have developed a library of high quality 3D printable meshes, I will be sure to make them available for free and post the download link.  The only stipulation in the license will be that they are not to be used for 2D rendering since DAZ already has that covered.

This may take a year or two, (maybe more, who knows) so, so don’t hold your breat

A word of advice: just because the EULA for Poser Debut does not state it, doesn’t mean you have carte blanche.  Not long ago, there was nothing in the DAZ EULA prohibiting 3D printing.  To avoid legal complications which you and your friend may not be able to afford, I would suggest contacting SMS and getting something in writing from them.

It is best to go by what is stated you can do in an EULA than assume because it doesn’t state it, you can.

 Signature 

“...not world enough nor time…” 

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 June 2013 08:13 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 110 ]
Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  62
Joined  2011-07-07
InfinitySeed - 03 June 2013 01:40 AM

The first link is to an article that talks about one person’s use of the Base V-4.2 model and a reported discussion with a representative of DS. The second link is to an apparent ad that promotes choosing Daz 3d for the very purpose of printing 3D models. I’m not sure about the legality of commercial use, but the two links are interesting.

Can anyone shed light on the second link in particular? Just curious.

The site is just providing an editorial.  The author likes DAZ software and has suggested that it would be good for making 3D printable models.  The author doesn’t appear to be an authorized rep. from DAZ, so while their opinion may be valid, their suggestion to use 3D print services for DAZ model making could get one into deep trouble.

With regards to the first link, if you follow the rest of the posts, you can see that it takes quite a while to generate a poor quality model and that the current capabilities of Makerbot and similar printers do not allow for a finely detailed model.  The poster was providing instructions on how to do this model at home, on one’s own equipment and didn’t distribute the mesh.  That should keep them out of trouble with DAZ.

 

 Signature 

Reality is perception.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 June 2013 08:45 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 111 ]
Active Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  586
Joined  2011-03-26

edited and removed by user

 Signature 

DAZ User Gallery / Facebook / Deviant Art

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 June 2013 10:03 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 112 ]
Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  62
Joined  2011-07-07

As I understand it:

DAZ and the PAs spend a LOT of time developing content.  They don’t want this content distributed freely in the public domain.  This is entirely understandable.  By allowing the mesh files to be distributed to 3D print services, there is the VERY slight risk that these services could accidentally allow the files to be re-distributed.  Slight risk is still risk, hence the reason for a 3D print license.  Also, there may be some paranoia that the mesh files could be extracted from the printed 3D models.  I believe that it would be difficult to extract mesh files for several reasons, such as understanding what a 3D printer can do and the modifications that are required to produce a printable mesh.

Hobby 3D printers such as Makerbot, PrintRBot, Solidoodle, etc offer layer thicknesses of 0.1mm.  While people may think that is a very thin layer, it is actually pretty thick.

Top quality commercial 3D printers (starting around $80K and going up from there) can provide layer thicknesses of 0.016mm.  At that level, details such as eyelashes can be seen on the models.

So, hobby printers lack the accuracy and detail level to produce a high quality model, and even the top quality commercial 3D printers have layer thicknesses that would be too thick to provide an optimal scan.  Keep in mind that a scanner capable of providing 0.001mm accuracy would cost over $50K.

And then, there are the mesh changes that are required to produce a good model.  When preparing a DAZ model for 3D printing, there will be several errors created.  These errors will need to be corrected.  Correcting errors will alter the mesh so that it is no longer the same mesh as originally designed.

This means that there should be no concerns over 3D models being scanned and having the mesh reverse engineered, it would be easier to create a new mesh from scratch.

It should also be noted that the bulk of DAZ content is not appropriate for 3D printing.  That is to say, the models are not designed for 3D printing.  There will be errors.  Lots of errors.  Errors that can’t be easily or quickly repaired.  Most hair, much of the clothing and virtually all of the props are not suitable for 3D printing. 

What works?  Nude, bald models, cartoon hair (usually), tight pants, shorts, shirts, flat shoes.  And by “works” I mean you only have 1,000 to 30,000 errors to deal with.

So, while I really want to see availability of licencing for 3D printable models, it is understandable why DAZ has not posted any pricing yet.  As one PA told me, “This is a niche market of a niche market”.  Trying to get all the PAs on board for this, and trying to develop a unified pricing level would take a long time.

I could see a hobby license @ $100 (for the production of up to 500 models), a small biz license for $500 (production of up to 5000 models) and a big biz license for $2500 (unlimited production). 

I imagine that when license types and pricing is posted, there will be a lot of initial interest.  I know I will be interested in seeing postings of what the resulting models look like.

 

 Signature 

Reality is perception.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 June 2013 10:12 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 113 ]
Active Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  586
Joined  2011-03-26

edited and removed by user

 Signature 

DAZ User Gallery / Facebook / Deviant Art

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 June 2013 01:52 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 114 ]
New Member
Avatar
Total Posts:  5
Joined  2009-01-17
KorvisBlack - 03 June 2013 08:13 AM

With regards to the first link, if you follow the rest of the posts, you can see that it takes quite a while to generate a poor quality model and that the current capabilities of Makerbot and similar printers do not allow for a finely detailed model.  The poster was providing instructions on how to do this model at home, on one’s own equipment and didn’t distribute the mesh.  That should keep them out of trouble with DAZ.

 

I see the article says this:

“We have to go round-about this way to avoid violating the copyright on the Victoria 4.2 Base model. I cannot post the raw .stl directly on Thingiverse because it was derived in part from Victoria, and the TOU forbids distributing derivative meshes. But the differences against the Victoria 4.2 .obj (the .pcf) can be distributed. This technique has been in use in the Poser community for quite some time to Daz’ satisfaction. Many thanks to Ratteler for pointing this technique out, otherwise the model would have had to be removed from Thingiverse entirely.”

So something -is- in fact being distributed, but not the actual model/mesh of V 4.2. I’m not sure I agree about the quality of the model shown in the images being poor. It actually looks pretty good to me.

In any event, I do appreciate your insightful response. Thank you.

Profile
 
 
   
8 of 8
8