The Straight Edge 3D Printing Manifesto
Be True. Be Different. Share and Spread.
Things have not been going well in the 3D printing industry for a long time. Much has been written on this topic and the reasons for this situation have been quite well defined and diagnosed. However, it seems to me that everyone has missed something quite important, which can be described in the following statement:
Companies on the 3D printing market fail because they try to be something other than what they are and have always been.
I expand on this idea below. But before I go further, I would like to present the solution right away. 3D printing must return to what it was, to what made it a disruptive technology. 3D printing must become straight edge — but instead of prohibiting, it should call for:
Be true
Be different
Share and spread
If you don’t agree with that, just keep doing what you’re doing now — burn the cash, lose your value, and struggle to survive.
How it started?
3D printing was invented by engineers, inventors, entrepreneurs — in short — by professionals. Charles Hull, Carl Deckard, Scott Crump, Hans Langer, Emanuel Sachs, Fried Vancraen and several others created all of today’s most important additive manufacturing techniques and founded the first companies that created the market.
At the same time — as befits professionals — they took care of their own interests. They patented what they came up with, securing themselves for the coming years to peacefully develop machines, materials and software.
It was clever, but it had one big drawback — in the 90’s and 00’s, few people had heard about this whole additive manufacturing thing. It was a very specific and very niche industrial technology.
Yes, 3D printers, materials and software were selling. Some of companies were even good enough to be listed on the stock exchange. But in terms of the entire manufacturing industry, it was plankton. It was tiny.
How it exploded?
We all agreed that 3D printing was invented by Charles Hull — he is the creator, he is the father, and without him none of this would exist.
Not taking anything away from his achievements, but if you read a little, you will discover that in fact he was not the first in the strict sense — he was the first to patent and implement it. But he was not alone in this — all those mentioned above (Deckard, Crump…) had a key impact on the development of technology and the industry.
Unfortunately, when we talk about inventors of the 3D printing industry, we often miss one name. A name that actually took 3D printing to new heights.
Adrian Bowyer. Creator of the self-replicating 3D printer — RepRap.
What was an interesting academic project soon became the spearhead of changes that shifted the image of industrial production. Young people became interested in Bowyer’s work and saw its incredible creative potential.
CREATIVE — not BUSINESS.
Zach “Hoeken” Smith, Adam Mayer, Bre Pettis, Josef Průša, Martijn Elserman, Erik de Bruijn, Siert Wijnia, Brook Drumm and many others began to develop Bowyer’s design, refining it and promoting it around the world.
In just 2–3 years, the global RepRap community has done more to popularize 3D printing than 3D Systems, Stratasys, Materialize and EOS did in 20 years. It was no longer just a specific industrial technology — it has become a home-based production facility.
New terms have been coined — “distributed manufacturing”, “democratization of production”, “bridge manufacturing”. In the past, to start producing things, you needed a workshop or an industrial hall. A lot of money for machines, material, tools and qualified specialists.
Thanks to 3D printers developed by MakerBot, Prusa Research, Ultimaker or Zortrax, anyone could start production in the hall or bedroom. Which they did.
Unfortunately, big money soon followed…
How it withered?
The temptation became too big. It wasn’t about not raising money for development and building the value of the company — it was about remaining yourself.
Bre Pettis was the first to betray. After removing Zach “Hoeken” Smith from view, MakerBot transformed into a „start-up corporation”. It stopped being open-source and started patenting (sometimes not necessarily its own solutions).
When it was absorbed by Stratasys it became a caricature of itself. Pettis paid the price for this — today few people remember him, and comparisons to Steve Jobs in the past are pitiable…
Ultimaker followed the same path. This used to be a wonderful company. In the years 2016–2019, I worked closely with them. Back then it seemed that this could be combined: open source and close cooperation with the community, with large professional business.
But it didn’t work.
After the C19 pandemic, Ultimaker also became a caricature of themselves. Until finally, when there was no other idea of what to do next, Ultimaker’ caricature merged with the MakerBot’ caricature, creating the essence of 3D caricature — UltiMaker. Forget about open-source, forget about the community that got you here, forget about being real.
Other startups have followed the same path. They received funding, took on board business angels, investment funds and managers recommended by them, and allowed them to run them.
They began to operate according to the old corporate principle: “FASTER — HARDER — HIGHER”.
Then, like Icarus, they flew towards the sun, only to lose their wings and fall into the abyss of death. More companies have gone bankrupt than are still in existence.
After desktop 3D printing fiasco industrial startups have appeared in their place. 3D printing was no longer called 3D printing, it has become Additive Manufacturing.
Higher technologies (light-cured resins, polymer powders and metal powders) meant higher budgets and higher subsidies. Most marked the stock exchange debuts desired by Venture Capitals.
Effect? The same. Everything has been going downhill for over a year now. Nobody knows how to stop it? Will it end and when?
I do not know either. But I know why it happened. We all have ourselves to blame… We tried to be someone else. We tried to be like “the real manufacturing industry”. Meanwhile, 3D printing is specific. Different.
What is 3D printing anyway?
According to the definition: it is a manufacturing method that involves applying material layer by layer and selectively bonding it together. Compared to all other production techniques, it has three advantages and three disadvantages that significantly interact with each other:
Advantages:
is the fastest
is the cheapest
allows the production of geometries that would be impossible to produce otherwise
Disadvantages:
has the poorest accuracy and finishing quality
becomes problematic as part sizes increase
not profitable for mass production.
When do we use 3D printing?
When we need to produce one or several things.
When we want something done quickly and cheaply, and quality is of secondary importance.
When we came up with something so specific, unusual and complicated that only a 3D printer would be able to make it.
Let’s summarize:
low quantities
very specific
cheap
quality is not the most important thing.
It cannot be compared to injection molding. Neither for CNC milling. So you can’t have the same business expectations for 3D printers as you do for injection molding lines, right?
Well, VC does…
That’s why they invested so much money to make it grow just as big, right? But it couldn’t have worked from the beginning. This expectation was contrary to the essence of 3D printing.
A brief display of potential power
In March 2020, the C19 pandemic spread across the world. It was a terrible time. But that’s when consumer 3D printing took to the pedestal and showed its true power.
First, the Italian company Isinnova created replicas of ventilator valves that saved the situation in Milan hospitals.
Then Josef Průša presented the protective shield project for medics. And then in subsequent countries, innovators created another projects.
All designs were provided for free. Everyone started 3D printing them and — in most cases — giving them to medical services for free. Everything happened naturally and spontaneously. Instantly all over the world. Full-scale distributed manufacturing.
Although it may seem funny today — protective shields were even 3D printed in the presidential palace by Andrzej Duda — the President of Poland.
Importantly, these projects took full advantage of all the advantages of 3D printing, minus the disadvantages:
it was fast
it was cheap (or even free)
the geometries of some parts were difficult and demanding
quality didn’t matter that much — it was supposed to work
most of the parts were small
production did not take place locally in one place — but across the entire city, country, continent; distributed manufacturing can be mass.
The pandemic ended as suddenly as it began and the above action also naturally ended. But the memory remained. What if we went back to this concept, but under normal circumstances?
Back to the basics
To get out of the crisis the industry is in, we need to go back to the beginnings. Understand what was the foundation of the industry’s success and what caused it to get into its current problems. Swallow some bitter pills. Frame the ego.
3D printing is a RELATIVELY small, simple and cheap manufacturing technology.
It should not compete with other methods that have been on the market forever. Find your niche. Come to terms with your role. Don’t try to be someone other than who you are. But actively seek your unique opportunity at every moment. Make difference.
The Straight Edge 3D Printing
What is straight edge? As defined:
Straight Edge (sXe) is a subculture that originated from the hardcore punk movement in the United States in the 1980s. The main assumptions of straight edge are abstinence from stimulants such as alcohol, cigarettes and drugs, and often also avoiding casual sex. Some people who identify as straight edge may also avoid caffeine and other stimulants and follow a vegetarian or vegan diet.
What does it mean in a deeper sense? Full control over yourself and the ability to resist temptations that are not beneficial to us or consistent with our nature. As a consequence — freedom.
„How is it freedom if you can’t drink, smoke or take drugs?”
A truly free person is the one who frees itself from the lure of false aids and remains in harmony with itself. We do things that are good for us in an absolute sense — not things that give us a sense of temporary comfort.
How does this relate to 3D printing? I modify the approach of the straight edge movement and do not prohibit anything. Instead, I call/encourage you to:
be true — do not try to be someone you are not and will never be; don’t lie, don’t prove that “you can make anything with a 3D printer”
be different — use all the advantages that it give and go where no one else goes
share and spread — for 20 years, no one was interested in 3D printing because it was sealed with patents; it spread worldwide when it was opened to all; the more closed this technology is, the fewer people will use it; it’s not about doing things for free — sell them, but let people develop it free.
Go beyond yourself. Don’t lie the world by trying to position yourself as a company you have no chance of becoming.
Not because you are too weak, but the solutions you offer are so different and specific from the so-called “mainstream” that it simply will not work by definition.
Instead of looking for money for development — start selling. Produce and sell not what is cool and “disruptive”, but what people actually need. Let disadvantages become advantages. The pandemic showed how to do it. Do it again.
Final clarification:
I’m not a communist. I’m not an anarchist. I don’t live in a squat. I have a wife and two children. I have been running a 3D printing business for 11 years.
I just observe, analyze and draw conclusions.
I see it’s bad. I’m trying to help. Maybe my ideas aren’t good enough, but those currently implemented by others don’t work either.
So maybe let’s try to do it differently? It won’t get any worse…
This article was originally published on 3DPrint.com on May 23, 2024.