The future of model building

[lotus123]

Let me start by saying that I have not been building models for as long as some folks (in fact my wife would say that I don't build at all- I just like collecting kits, parts and tools!).

However, having followed this hobby for a number of years through my local club, Internet forums (like this great one!), and magazines, I see one thread recurring from time to time - where are the new kits coming from. We read about licensing complexities, tooling costs and consumer preferences before we start another rant about being under-served by the model industry.

Here's my take on where modelling might go.
The internet has accelerated the evolution of modelling beyond all expectations. You can use it to buy models and accessories, you can learn online how to do a better job of modelling, and you can bask in the adulation of your fellow modellers when you do a good job! I think that this is Model Web 1.0.

The next step comes when we use the web in similar fashion to music downloading. Yes, that's still illegal in some forms, but the music business is getting around to understanding the benefits of the model (no pun intended), and it has changed the way we buy music - think of the simplicity and convenience of iTunes. Imagine if we could buy models that way. No, I'm not talking about buying kits online as we currently do - that's just an incremental supply improvement. I'm thinking of something more radical.

Imagine buying a digital kit - a 3D CAD design which is rendered to solid form when you decide "that's the one I want". You could buy the 3D file from any designer (maybe MFH, Fujimi, your pal at the club who designed a transkit for the 550 Maranello street version you want to change to LM spec). You submit the file through an ordering portal that processes your order/ charge your card, etc. They would have the file converted to a solid model through a service that does that sort of thing (see http://www.shapeways.com/themes/stai...inting_gallery), add the photoetch and other bits from a supply list of suitable parts and also have decals printed if necessary. They would then pack it all up and ship to you.

Now, why would this be radical?
Well, firstly, because the kits are produced on demand from digital files there will no longer be out of production kits. Stocking and packaging costs are driven down, and shipping costs are also reduced (you don't need to ship from Japan when 3D printers exist in every country). Economy of scale also comes into it. You don't have massive tooling costs for a limited run of a particular model, and because more people are building exactly the kits they like, more people will be building.

Secondly, it introduces more participants into the modelling business - the garage companies. We've had them until now on the fringes, producing transkits, decals, photoetch, special paint formulations. Now there's a new category - 3G designers. These folks take an idea and turn it into something substantial and digital. Somebody like stratos75 perhaps (http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbul...=933184&page=2) or (http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbul...mclaren&page=5). If you don't think folks are excited about his work and turning it into production then just read the posts!

Admittedly there are some kinks to be worked out before all of this comes about. 3D printing has a way to go yet (and thinking about it - maybe the 3D part only becomes a master for moulding). However, 3D printing has already evolved from being plastic/resin to metallic (see above link) so the parts are thinner/lighter/durable. Decal printing relies on big runs to be cost-effective, but there may be room for innovation there.

I'm sure the manufacturers like Revell will still have a market for their large run, general mass appeal kits to be stocked at your LHS/Toys R Us. For those of us who want more from modelling maybe this is the future.

I'd like to hear how you see the future playing out, and how the Internet can feature in this. Yes there are many reasons why it can't work, don't want to hear them. This is a moonshot vision exercise!

BTW- While looking at the Shapeways website look into the forum and see what people are saying, and how they're developing this idea as users of the service.

[jano11]

The future looks bright, isn't it?

However at the end it all depends on the costs.
No matter how you look at it, it takes many work hours to make a realistic and printable 3D model.
Than you print it or have it machined, than you clean it up, because let's be honest the 3D printed or machined parts are far from being good enough to be directly used for molding.

Than you have to take into account the molding and casting process, this takes more time than using an injection machine.

In the end, after investing hundreds of hours of work and a lot of money for the materials, one will probably go as far as making a few hundred copies, that would have a high price. Just take a look at what a simple resin kit costs compared to a plastic injection kit, it's anywhere from 100 to over 200 Euro compared to 30 Euro.

For now the future of model kits production stays with the bigger companies, we others can use the new technologies to improve kits or make rare kits, unless we are planing to invest huge amounts of money which in turn would turn us into a model making company.

BTW, big model companies also use rapid prototyping to design their products.

Did you see what is the cost of a good ready 3D model? It ranges from a few hundred USD to over a thousand depending on the level of detail and accuracy.
Having it printed even with the cheapest and lowest quality service will be, for a detailed 1/24 scale model, around 200 USD. The quality will be nowhere near that of a plastic kit, you'll need to work hundreds of hours to get a good kit, and than you can start to build it.
Trust me I know what I'm talking about.

For now the technology exists, it get's cheaper every day, but it's still to expensive for the usual modeler who wants to take pleasure from building a model.

[lotus123]

Thanks for your input, and I agree with your observations. The costs and time are major factors inhibiting growth.

However, consider this.
Costs
The current costs for producing parts are high, as you point out. That's because the machines are few and far between. The owners of the machines at present have a small window of opportunity to maximise returns on their investment. The colour printing business was like this, before prices came down and colour laser printers became available to everyone. However, like all commercial ventures, availability and demand will adjust until the price is right. I would bet that in the future your local Kinkos will have a 3D printer. Heck, I'll go one further - your local model club will buy one to generate funds!

Effort
Admittedly producing digital models is time-consuming and hard. However, computer processing power increases all the time, and the CAD software is continually improving to make it easier for even hobbyists to learn the basics. I would suggest that the open-source software development industry is an example of how this could play out. Sure, the professional developers work for the big companies, but there are tens of thousands of developers out there who happily write code that someone might need, for a small donation (shareware). I think there are enthusiasts who would develop digitals cars, and others who would build those cars.

I visualise picking a model to build like you search for a software utility - you go to the sites you know and trust, and choose what you want from a list. Who knows, maybe you even get the source code and do some modifications yourself before sending it off to production!

As for the complexities and costs of moulding and casting, who knows whether it will be necessary, if 3D printers develop in terms of capabilities? In the beginning of their development inkjet printers were laughably bad - now everyone has one and they've become very good (and cheap!).

As I said in the first post - there are millions of reasons why this can't work. The main reason, however, is because we apply the limitations of what we currently know. The thing is, it's what we don't know yet that will make this possible. I didn't know that there is a service to make 3D parts, until now. The fact that there is tells me that the business model for rapid prototyping is beginning to evolve. Now it becomes interesting!

[jano11]

Originally Posted by lotus123

Thanks for your input, and I agree with your observations. The costs and time are major factors inhibiting growth.

However, consider this.
Costs
The current costs for producing parts are high, as you point out. That's because the machines are few and far between. The owners of the machines at present have a small window of opportunity to maximise returns on their investment. The colour printing business was like this, before prices came down and colour laser printers became available to everyone. However, like all commercial ventures, availability and demand will adjust until the price is right. I would bet that in the future your local Kinkos will have a 3D printer. Heck, I'll go one further - your local model club will buy one to generate funds!

Effort
Admittedly producing digital models is time-consuming and hard. However, computer processing power increases all the time, and the CAD software is continually improving to make it easier for even hobbyists to learn the basics. I would suggest that the open-source software development industry is an example of how this could play out. Sure, the professional developers work for the big companies, but there are tens of thousands of developers out there who happily write code that someone might need, for a small donation (shareware). I think there are enthusiasts who would develop digitals cars, and others who would build those cars.

I visualise picking a model to build like you search for a software utility - you go to the sites you know and trust, and choose what you want from a list. Who knows, maybe you even get the source code and do some modifications yourself before sending it off to production!

As for the complexities and costs of moulding and casting, who knows whether it will be necessary, if 3D printers develop in terms of capabilities? In the beginning of their development inkjet printers were laughably bad - now everyone has one and they've become very good (and cheap!).

As I said in the first post - there are millions of reasons why this can't work. The main reason, however, is because we apply the limitations of what we currently know. The thing is, it's what we don't know yet that will make this possible. I didn't know that there is a service to make 3D parts, until now. The fact that there is tells me that the business model for rapid prototyping is beginning to evolve. Now it becomes interesting!

Maybe in 10 years time it will be doable.

As far as having 3D modeling or engineering software that everyone could use, I'm not sure about that, in fact I highly doubt it.

[Cheesey153]

Hi Lotus,
I know nothing of the technologies, and so I'll not comment on that side of the discussion, but I can think of one flaw in this business model: you said in your first sentence that you are more of a collector than a builder, and I think it's fair to conclude that most people in this hobby are collectors too. I suspect the kit manufacturers know that most modellers buy (and then stash) more of their kits than are ever actually built. It may not be in the manufacturers' interests to create a market where we (the modellers) buy only "the kit we want"; would there be sufficient profit margin per unit across the product range across the global markets to sustan their interest?
By many people's standard I have a tiny kit stash but if I had more disposable income I would have a huge kit stash - yet I would still only build a small proportion of that stash. Could the costs of this 3-D wizardry be driven low enough to enable modellers to continue to amass their considerable stashes, and thereby keep the unit profit margins 'ticking over' for the manufacturers?
"...because more people are building exactly the kits they like, more people will be building." - but they will each be buying fewer kits, I suspect.
I am not privvy to Tamiya's/Fujimi's et al business plan but I suspect it the mass affordable market that keeps them in profit.

I may be entirely wrong, but the sceptic in me says it'll never happen.

Jon.

[CrateCruncher]

Fun and Interesting thread Lotus123,

The pessimists will want to kill it. Until then we can have some fun. I've also spent some time on this and feel it is doable - at some point. Cost of technology curves always bend downward in the long run with scale effect so that doesn't worry me. But your example is abstract.

To bridge the gulf between theory and reality I'll share more practical examples of model genres that already make MONEY by exploiting the low cost of digital distribution:

Paper models https://www.fiddlersgreen.net/

I've built a few architectural models (cathedrals) from printed paper. It turns out paper is an excellent material for constructing buildings and modern warships because the real ones are hand fabricated from sheet goods also. The benefit of using paper is that it can be printed on a common inkjet from a digital file downloaded from the internet.

Bonus: With access to the digital file, builders can improve it by enhancing accuracy, improving colors, adding detail. It potentially harvests great untapped masses of individuals to add collective value to the product. All these small incremental changes - properly edited by a gatekeeper - can result in a much more valuable intellectual property (free to the owner of the property). Valve has exploited this user feedback in the gaming world. Anybody heard of Half-Life?

R/C airplane plans are also available digitally. Public domain plans are available here http://myunclewilliestoo.com/

For those who are unfamiliar, balsa wood is cut from sticks and sheets and pinned to the outline of the plan. These plans are now digitized and distributed by file on the internet too. With access to the file, the builder can shrink or enlarge the plan to meet his budget and other considerations (like the size of his car). Larger plans are emailed to Kinko's for printing on a 36" plotter. Unfortunately this business has developed a low reputation due to copyright infringement. There is a lesson to learn here.

The next stage of this R/C plan business, I feel, would be to include a laser cutter ready file of all the unique balsa parts that could be emailed to your local cutter/engraving shop. Conceivably, one could gather all the ingredients for the R/C airplane kit but the intellectual design local: printer, engraver, local hobby shop.

Bonus: Distributing the plan in common cad file format would also allow amateur designers to tinker with changes without starting with a blank sheet. User generated corrections and mod's could add value to the property as in the paper model case above. (Jano: TurboCAD v14 is $23 at Amazon. It includes 3D surface rendering ability and comes with an 850 page manual as a "starting guide". I highly recommend it.)

Edit: If someone could come up with a paper model style of construction for R/C planes that eliminates balsa wood that would really be huge! The whole plane could be printed on your inkjet and sprayed with fuelproof sealer.

Digital distribution also solves a huge manufacturers dilemma in the internet age. Manufacturers have historically made their profit from efficiency. (They make many, many copies of the exact same thing.) In the internet era, making a large production run of something causes the street price to plunge because suddenly there are dozens of distributors hawking the exact same thing right next door to one another and can only compete with price. I call it the "Tijuanna effect". Large firms with deep pockets can warehouse their run allowing it to trickle out but.... Digital eliminates the distribution flood by only producing on demand.

In summary, this is definately doable. From my experience with other forms currently in their infancy, intellectual property rights is a problem. The operating costs are lower and act as the primary motivation for the entrepreneur. I've bored people enough. I'll let someone else talk now.

[jmesawitz]

I love the idea of 3D modeling and rapid prototyping for product generation. I spent an afternoon checking out machines & prices to see if one of these things could be gotten hold of by the common man. There is a desk top machine in development out there. Part quality (smooth surfaces) is a bit of a concern but if modelings first chore became a technique to account for this it would not be too bad.

The thing I do not like in your outline is the comparison to music. Sharing specifically. If a 3D modeler were to spend 100 hours (probably a lot more) on a design that is sold electronically, the potential to share that file is not only possible but likely. There is no benefit to the design originator to enter into such an agreement. Music is different (only slightly) in that the group is looking to build fan base as well as unit sales. By giving into the sharing mentality(loss of unit sales) they are taking a leap of faith that overall it will result in a stronger fan base that will in-turn support them in a monetary fashion. Just not by todays youth that think music should be free, fame is the bands reward and money is something they just have.

Maybe I have taken this wrong, perhaps the intent is to have the electronic file shared among specific 3D printers to control the 3D modelers intellectual property.

Rapid prototyping is very cool though and I do believe it will find a place in the hobby room in not too many years. I struggle to see it as a full on replacement for volume production though.

[jano11]

Originally Posted by CrateCruncher

Fun and Interesting thread Lotus123,

The pesimists will want to kill it.

Kill it? Not at all, just being realistic given the conditions at this very moment.

I already use 3D printing for making model parts:

http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbul...d.php?t=952893
http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbul...d.php?t=960766

A few more models I did, just click on the link:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3463/...ca548ac353.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2528/...1f82613c68.jpg

And there is more that I do not wish to expose yet, as they are unfinished.

I just don't believe that the use of the technology is as simple as the thread starter implies.

First of all there is the need to understand the limitations of the technology.
Than you need to be able to design your model in such way that it can be produced with the technology at hand.
Than you will see that the result isn't exactly what you were expecting from what the 3D printing service told you, especially when it come to finesse of the detail.

Take teh Dino Daytona GT Campagnolo model from the link I posted above.
You saw the 3D model with all the detail. Well no way that will show on the printed part, at least not like that.
The Dino and Campagnolo graphics can not be printed in 1/24 scale, maybe in 1/12th but I wouldn't be sure about that.
The spokes were twice as thick as promised and the holes were almost impossible to see.

It took one day of work to clean it up and make it look like what you can see in the thread above.

And that is for getting one wheel done, doing 5 means you need to replicate them and so on, which isn't to be discussed in this thread, but it's expensive unless you do it on a regular basis and you've got silicon rubber and resin on the shelf.

Don't get me wrong, I'm happy that the technology exists and is getting cheaper by the day, and I will probably even buy a 3D printer for myself once they cost less than 1000 Euro and have good capabilities. But I doubt that more than a few percent of the modelers will make use of it in the next 5 to 10 years.
As for the manufacturers giving us more models based on this technology, well yes, MFH is already using it and they are coming up with new models every 2nd week, but the prices are prohibitive for most modelers even though they make 100-200 pieces runs.

PS: I agree it's a great thread to have and discuss.

[jano11]

Originally Posted by jmesawitz

The thing I do not like in your outline is the comparison to music. Sharing specifically. If a 3D modeler were to spend 100 hours (probably a lot more) on a design that is sold electronically, the potential to share that file is not only possible but likely. There is no benefit to the design originator to enter into such an agreement. Music is different (only slightly) in that the group is looking to build fan base as well as unit sales. By giving into the sharing mentality(loss of unit sales) they are taking a leap of faith that overall it will result in a stronger fan base that will in-turn support them in a monetary fashion. Just not by todays youth that think music should be free, fame is the bands reward and money is something they just have.

I agree with you.

Making a 3D model of a part can take from a few minutes up to a few hours depending on the complexity of the part and the detail you want to achieve.
Making the 3D model a full kit will easily take hundreds of hours and often even thousands.

Once the modeler sold a copy of the 3Dmodel he can count on at least 50% potential client loss, thus a 3Dmodel costs quite a lot of money nowadays. Which makes it rather impractical to buy an already made 3D model and print it to have the model as you'll pay hundreds for the 3D model and hundreds for the printed parts.

In the end it all comes down to how much someone wants a certain model that isn't already produced.

Back to the analogy with music, the musicians (single person or band) will get to make money from concerts and other shows, but a 3D modeler has none of these possibilities to make up for the lost opportunities.

[MidMazar]

jano, one quick question? WHat is the full name of the program you use?

[jano11]

I never understood this question people keep asking about the name of the software used.

The software is just a tool, like your hobby knife, or like your airbrush, and what's important is to know how to use it not who made it.
Any 3D modeling software will allow you to model a part, all you need is to learn how to do it because none of them does it all alone, in fact none of them can do anything without you telling them what to do

Feel free to pick any of these software and start using it to make simple shapes for a start and than just go on and make complex object using the simple shapes you previously learned. You'll see, it's very easy.

[hirofkd]

Once data is digitized, it practically holds no commercial value just like mp3 and avi, so selling digital parts doesn't seem to be a sustainable business model, I'd think.

Besides, Honda has been distributing dxf on its web-plamo website for free for years:
http://www.honda.co.jp/WebPlamo/

In the far far future, people might be making solid parts with an affordable Hi-Def 3D printer. But It's probably not going to happen in our lifetime.
(Yeah, Fujimi releasing service pack 20 to fix their inaccurate F1 kit!)

Originally Posted by jano11

I never understood this question people keep asking about the name of the software used.

That's when you tell people, "Go buy a CATIA!"

Seriously, it's because knowing what to use will eliminate one uncertainty. For example, if you know someone who can archive an awesome result with a certain tool and if you use the same one, you know the ONLY thing that matters is your skills. But if you just happens to own a sucky tool, you never know whether it's a technical limitation of the tool itself, or your skills.

Like you said, skills are what matters MOST (I bet you can design the same wheels in CATIA or Turbo CAD), but that's from an experienced user's point of view. For the beginners, they need assurance.

[drunken monkey]

There's another road this can go down.
The larger scale die-cast cars are pretty good when it comes to body shape and proportions.
If you have the money to buy a desk top 3D scanner, you will undoubtly have the money to buy a good die-cast to scan, scale to your desired model scale then send file of to 3D Printer.

Who needs to do the actual modelling?

The real debate is this, what do you get out of this hobby.
For many, it is the making part that is the buzz.
For some, it is simply having the thing.
For some, it is about hand crafting little teensy bits of styrene and metal.
For some it is about doing what-ever it takes to get something.

Just as you have Modelled Wheels and other parts in software for 3D printing, MPWR has milled parts out of metal, Wingrove beats body panels and fashions parts out of sheet metal and I have re-shaped die-cast bodies and made crude wheel spoke patterns out of styrene for casting.

We do what pleases us and for me, the digital route for model car building aint quite it.

[CrateCruncher]

Well I think the ultimate benefit of 3D printing technology is that it eliminates the tooling. Even resin has some outlay for tooling. There are a lot of builders out there with a passion for one particular car that doesn't have a snowballs chance of being offered commercially. (Mine is the Alfa Disco Volante). But if a passionate designer builds one digitally, it can be distributed to 10 people or 1,000 at basically no cost. Theres no tooling to amortize, no equipment to justify and all that. He doesn't have to have his garage re-zoned commercial or risk his health working with scary chemicals. He would have made one for himself anyway. Now it gets appreciated by many instead of stuck away on the back of a shelf.

What would really be cool is if 3 or 4 people with different skills could all agree on a single project. One guy designs the body, another does the drivetrain, another designs the photo-etch. Maybe another test builds, revises and writes the instructions. By sharing files they make sure the independently designed parts all fit together even though they may be half-way around the world from one another. Then they take their digital work and license the right to manufacture it to a small studio - oh wait, we could do that today!

I once volunteered as a beta tester on a totally amateur-developed historical simulation (a video game) that never would have been made commercially. We got it working and the designers even made a little money on digital downloads.

[jano11]

Originally Posted by hirofkd

That's when you tell people, "Go buy a CATIA!"

CATIA? What use?! It's a very very complex software and very very pricy on top of that, plus there is really no need for it in order to make simple parts.

There are plenty of free software that one can use, like:

TrueSpace7.6
http://www.caligari.com/

Google SketchUp
http://sketchup.google.com/

And many others:
http://www.3dlinks.com/links.cfm?cat...TOKEN=64698641

Sure you can also decide to pay a premium few thousands for a well known 3d modeling software like 3DSMax or Maya or even more for a CAD software (surface design will be trickier with these ones), but is it worth it?

Some of them even offer a limited time full version demo package or a version with limited tools but with unlimited usage.

If someone asked me this question a few years ago the only answer would have been a professionally developed software. Luckily nowadays we get free products in almost any possible domain.

One should pick what suits him/her best from a financial and ease of use POV.

PS: If interested there are comparisons of different software available:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari...phics_software
http://wiki.cgsociety.org/index.php/...on_of_3d_tools
http://www.tdt3d.be/articles_viewer.php?art_id=99

These will help get a good understanding of what these software allow you to do and possibly help you to chose the right one for your needs.