For ABSOLUTE BEGINNERS Only - 12K 3D Printers Are Irrelevant - WTF is AVC?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 6 ก.ย. 2024
- This video is a bit more long-form than usual, If you are a regular viewer, maybe skip to about 00:07:00 - (though I hope you will watch it all anyway to help boost the video and allow it to reach and help more people) But many of you have seen me make this same point over and over in all of my printer review videos. And I've promised for a while that I'd stop repeating myself and make this separate video for the beginners. And now, in future videos I don't need to talk about 2k, 4k, 8k, 9k, 12k, 14k etc being misleading marketing terms anymore YAY! - I can just refer people here, which allows me to spend more time in reviews focusing on a printers features and the results it delivers.
TLDW, please stop comparing printers by their K metric, that measures the screen resolution, not the print quality - we nee something new, please can we call use AVC instead.
All external links in our video description are affiliate links. Clicking these and making any purchase will earn us a commission at no cost to you
See our reviews below
Phrozen Sonic Mini 8k - www.kqzyfj.com...
Amazon - geni.us/Phroze...
Phrozen Sonic Mighty 8k - www.tkqlhce.co...
Amazon - geni.us/Phroze...
Phrozen Sonic Mighty 12k - www.dpbolvw.ne...
Uniformation GKTwo - geni.us/Unfoma... (Discount Code “FAUXHAMMER")
Amazon - geni.us/Unifor...
See all reviews (Alphabetical Order)
Anycubic Photon D2 - • What is a DLP 3D Print...
Anycubic Photon Mono 2 - • The LITTLE PRINTER tha...
Anycubic Photon Mono X 6k S - • Anycubic Photon Mono X...
Anycubic Photon Mono M5 - • Anycubic Photon Mono M...
Anycubic Photon Mono M5s - • Anycubic Photon Mono M...
Elegoo Mars 3 Pro - • The Sweet-Spot for 3D ...
Elegoo Mars 4 - • Elegoo Mars 4 9k Revie...
Elegoo Mars 4 Ultra - • Elegoo Mars 4 Ultra Re...
Elegoo Mars 4 Max - • Elegoo Mars 4 Max Revi...
Elegoo Mars 4 DLP - • Elegoo Mars 4 DLP Revi...
Elegoo Saturn 8k - • Why don't more people ...
Elegoo Saturn 2 - • Everything Wrong with ...
Elegoo Saturn 3 - • Elegoo Saturn 3 Review...
Elegoo Saturn Ultra - • Elegoo Saturn 3 Ultra ...
Geeetech Alkaid: • Geeetech Alkaid Review...
Phrosen Sonic Mini 8k - • Phrozen Sonic Mini 8kS...
Phrozen Sonic Mighty 8k - • What Elegoo and Anycub...
Phrozen Sonic Mighty 12k - • Phrozen Sonic Mighty 1...
Uniformation GKTwo - • Uniformation GKtwo - B...
Sandisk USB 5 Pack - amzn.to/3ZxobJr (like all links, this is an affiliate link, and we will earn a commission on any qualifying purchase you make, at no cost to you. Thank you)
Get any printer working easily with the Photonsters XP Range Finder - www.thingivers... (watch my video for full instructions • How to Print Perfect M... )
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @fauxhammer
Buy WARGAMER - The best Resin for Miniatures yesthats3dprin...
Cleaning Mat: geni.us/3DPrin...
This Video is part of our series looking for the Best 3D printer for Miniatures; www.fauxhammer...
Affiliate Links to support us.
Element Games - elementgames.c...
Amazon - www.amazon.co....
This video is a bit more long-form than usual, If you are a regular viewer, maybe skip to about 00:07:00 - (though I hope you will watch it all anyway to help boost the video and allow it to reach and help more people) But many of you have seen me make this same point over and over in all of my printer review videos. And I've promised for a while that I'd stop repeating myself and make this separate video for the beginners. And now, in future videos I don't need to talk about 2k, 4k, 8k, 9k, 12k, 14k etc being misleading marketing terms anymore YAY! - I can just refer people here, which allows me to spend more time in reviews focusing on a printers features and the results it delivers.
TLDW, please stop comparing printers by their K metric, that measures the screen resolution, not the print quality - we nee something new, please can we call use AVC instead.
Way too damn long... way to slow actually explaining the key point, and you spread it out so far most people will have forgotten your starting arguments for part A by the time you finish actually covering part B. Video could have been more informative, and not even five minutes long. I'd recommend you do less... ranting... on future videos meant to inform people. For information, and not just random entertainment, the length works against people and their attention spans or ability to focus. And ya, when it takes several minutes to realize yes you're just trying to mention the same obvious thing I figured this video might be about within two seconds of reading the title... talk about wasted time. If you want to spread this out to get more views and new people to the channel... not the right way to do it I'd say... Hit the touchy titles and clickbait ok... but focus on the point without wasting everyones time.
@@terricon4 I hear you, and my comment above is my attempt at damage control for earlier comments saying the same. I:ve even had some independent friends watch it now who have echoed what you have said so the message is heard loud and clear.
What I do find odd is that when I check the stats on this video. It has higher engagement and a longer watch time than any other video I've put out in the last 6 months, which is crazy. It has more subscribers per view too.
So whilst I do hear you, and take the feedback onboard, I will cut the waffle in future videos. The video itself is really resonating with a good group of people. and i believe it's likely the beginners who the video was aimed at who want this kind of buy info, as many other comments have suggested.
I did go into this with an intentional slow burn intro, bit to drag it out, but so that people new to all this had time to digest the info I'm putting forward. I get that the first several minutes are the same point 3 different ways. That was intentional. I realised it was dragging and then instead of just moving on, apologised to my existing viewers for it happening. No idea if that helped or made it worse.
It's all good feedback that will lead to better videos in future.
I always use the analogy of grains of sand on a beach. Because any display device is about pixel density as you point out. Not pixels in general. It’s why buying a TV for 4k for instance only starts making sense at a certain size/viewing distance. You have to get close enough for it to matter/you to see the individual grains of sand. Just a helpful analogy for laymen
All of the new printers are going to be 12k. The people over at Concepts3D told us last week that they 8k LCD panels that they and everyone else have been using have been discontinued. They are working to purchase enough of the remaining stock to cover warranties, etc. I opted for the 12k Athena more as a future proofing than anything. It comes with the cable and board that will be required to drive higher resolution displays and the concept behind the Athena is to have a fairly generic platform that can be upgraded over time.
Oh 'K' ur 'screwed' with the bigger the build volume the less quality output with same screen resolution. 'Bolt' of inspiration compare 'bolt and nut' benchies (benchmark) a simple visual of smallest working bolt and nut that resin printer can produce. This would be a direct comparison. So a postage stamp sized resin build area/screen would be very small jewelry sized bolt ( or smaller) and a drydock sized build area/screen would be a massive oil tanker size bolt. Scaling would be logarithmic or exponential. Sticker on side of printer with its bolt benchy quick visual comparison.
Sorry man, but this was too much click bate for little information. It took the video 6 minutes too even begin talking about the point being made.
Ok
I liked it despite having 3 printers and starting with the original Photon years ago. If manufacturers would stop using "K", this video would be just clickbait, but they aren't!
But I disagree with the AVC standard. What brands need to do is to specify an actual printing resolution in terms of lines/mm at a defined z-aspect ratio. They can then even sell the resin they used to measure it.
The point is, that a printer with 24 um pixels may perform much better than one with 17 um because it has better contrast ratio in the resin, which is determined by a number of optical factors.
I think the point is to make a video that he can point to and say "watch this" irregardless of whether you're up to date with the latest news or if you're brand new to this. I don't think this video was meant for people like you and me who can agree to a standard in 30 seconds.
As much as I really love the points of the video, it does feel like the first 10 minutes couldve been 1 minute addressing the title, it just felt a bit like waffling. After the 10 minute mark it gets more helpful and informative - retention will be interesting for this one!
Fair enough, I hear you
And as long as we're giving constructive criticism if you are going to waffle on recycling the same three or four stock clips throughout it makes it even less interesting to watch.
This video is 1000% runtime padding.
@@johnnyjoseph1389yep, thanks, heard you the first time
Yeah I just went to the comments after he made no points by the time it was 3min in. First time watching the channel and won't be back.
Yup fully agree on the use of the AVC metric for any type of resin printer. The fun part will be when comparing a DLP printer with an AVC of 51micron against a 22micron AVC LCD resin printer where the difference is pretty much negligible but the technology is different.
Yeah, agreed, but that's the bit where I did the car analogy with Horsepower/KG,. It's only ever going to be a raw number, you still need reviewers to dissect it before making a decision. - but its's a better more comparable baseline between printer sizes than K.
is there a TLDR? a lot of random talking
I'm giving up. I no longer give a a fuck what the answer was.
Never heard some tosser waffle on for so long without making a point.
Six months late, but leaving this for others: "12k" measure one dimension of the screen. You need both screen dimensions in both pixels and inches or centimeters so that you can figure out the *size* of the pixels since smaller pixels mean finer details.
I hear you! Yet, what I noticed is the following my LCD and my DLP have the exact same AVC of 50µm, the quality of the DLP is way better. I mean, you can dry brush a mini printed on the DLP without seeing ANY lines. We probably need to have something for DLP as well. In the 2d world this would refer to pixel-images and vector images, I guess. What do you think?
I haven't used a DLP, but I suspect it has to do with DLP being a consistent light source across the entire print area while individual LEDs in the LCD screen can be brighter or darker than the median. LCDs lose more power to the glass than a DLP as well, which could be a problem in itself as well as degrading the variations within the LCD further.
That minimal z step is really needed and hard to find characteristic. Also would be nice to know what are software constraints on z travel speed.
Yep, I’ve been begging brands for this info in literally every review. And they never tell me.
This is the best and only PRO-CONSUMER video I have ever watched... Thanks 🙌
Wow, that’s incredible feedback, thanks
Lost my attention after 5+ minutes of justifying the title. Still leaving a comment for the algorithm, just something to consider.
I mean, you're not wrong, but i have a feeling you already knew and understood what the point of it was.
point taken, comment appreciated
Honestly still don''t, I was on work break when I clicked in @@demijebus6831
Same, if this happens in another vid I’m unsubbing.
@@nobirdsnomasters lol
I'm all for this, and it will be up to reviewers to start using this as the way to compare printers in reviews. Viewers should start asking what the AVC/XY Resolution is, both to manufacturers and reviewers.
Build Volume (XYZ), XY Resolution (µm), and light source technology are what really matter to me, along with the quality of life features (heated vat, auto-refill, build quality, quietness, networking, etc).
You'll notice some manufacturers (AnyCubic) don't put the XY Resolution on their large volume printers because the XY Resolution isn't sexy enough for marketing and betrays the entire K rating system. Huge difference between 8K 13.6" and 8K 9.1" screen.
Man, I am so glad this is one of the first video I've been recommended as I started looking a 3D printers.
This saved me so much time lol.
Totally agree with what you're saying here, and the last 5 minutes of this video discussing community feedback was really great. The "boring tech talk" is really why I clicked on a video discussing the relevance of a fairly esoteric measurement.
Wholly believe, however, that it doesnt take over 20 minutes to get this information across - BUT I understand you need watch time for the algo (hence this comment). I felt that you spent a lot of time repeating yourself, which nearly lost me a few times.
I look forward to this being the spearhead of a movement to redfine how we measure the specs of these machines (at least until we get true SLA printers in the home market with infinite XY accuracy - or at least 405nm² x 20um voxels haha), and I hope enthusiasts can prevail in the face of less than scrupulous overseas manufacturers.
Thanks for your time and for really considering all fronts of this. I'm in the market for a new printer - so I think its high time I sent requests out for this data...!
I am grateful for your videos. The explanations, definitions, and experience are tremendously beneficial. They have helped me avoid the marketing traps, and I sincerely appreciate it. Keep up the great work!
I understand the premise of the video and the information presented. I think you’ll get more views getting straight to the point. I will say I saw the short you were talking about but never watched it because the thumbnail was of Opie from sons of anarchy and I just couldn’t get into that show.
I think a term more relevant to laymen would help the industry. I think it should be ranged in dpi, it would be instantly recognized and understandable. Period. LxW dpi is close enough for me.
Please give Sons another chance, It's Shakespere on Motorbikes
Just to be pedantic here (and give you some tasty "engagement"), your engine size example does have one flaw. Maximum possible power output of a combustion engine is in direct relation to the engine volume. Assuming that the engine builders were both seeking max power output, the larger engine will be more powerful.
It would have probably been a better comparison to say that comparing two cars performance purely on their horsepower is irrelevant because that truck with 800hp and 1200 ftlbs of torque is also 3-4 times heavier than the 250hp / 185 ftlbs hatchback
Was thinking the same. Best would have been to compare same capacity engines, but one in a sportscar and one in a van. Which will go faster (print quality) vs which can move all your furniture to your new place the fastest (print size).
Thank you for the detailed explanation. So between the different K tiers, the main difference is actually the different screen sizes for definition within each K tier. I've had a FDM printer and just now have purchased a resin printer for improved resolution of my designs for molding. Picked up an ANYCUBIC Photon Mono M5s 12K for $293 to my door.
So as a more direct comparison. Look at pixel size on the screen rather than resolution of the screen.
A 13” 8k screen is significantly worse than a 6” 8k screen.
But even at those smaller pixel sizes. Light source is important too
FOR THE ALGORITHM! I have a DLP printer. It has a 51 µm voxel size. That's the only number I've ever used, personally.
If you get *good* atomization,, you can airbrush (or rattle can) primer down around 8-30 µm (when it's dry). Think about it, folks. Even when dry, a coat of primer is roughly half a voxel at my printer's 51 µm voxel size. If you aren't so lucky, the blobs of primer coming from the spray can will be many times bigger than the 51 µm voxels by my printer produces.
With the highest-resolution printers available, the _best priming job possible_ is going to add an inconsistent and (relatively) sloppy layer on top of the sharp layer the printer creates. If you're _painting_ your minis, we're fast approaching the point where there's no point in resolution improvements.
That's not to say there can't be improvements - the Apple Vision Pro, for example, has LCD's with pixels in the 8 µm range. I imagine it'll be a while before they can be produced at the size of a Sonic 8Ks mini or Mars printer.
I agree with @FauxHammer: Use voxel size in µm, but I'd demand the eccentricity from being a perfect square.
I just clicked the video as I am just starting resin. I have a FDM, and won a resin printer. I don't think mine has a "K" sticker on it. Everything you stated is however very very true as the "K" metrics don't apply when as a user I can set the layer height. I went ahead and subbed as I can see the learning potential of your channel. Thank you.
5 min in and NOTHING. * min in and he finally gets around to something. Whatever "K" means nothing, so what does mean something?
Keep watching and you’ll find out
You could have gotten to the point sooner, but it’d say you have been very clear. The metric they should use is pixel size or pixel density, not an absolute number with no reference. It’s a pretty straightforward concept, I think
basically you want the lowest µm value for x and y for the build volume you want
largest value of xy or z
@@FauxHammer so you want the higher the micron?
I have a 4K printer (the Phrozen Sonic Mighty 4K) and I'm curious just how much of a difference in visible quality there is between the 8K and 12K machines of similar size.
Here's something to think about: My Mars 4 DLP is a "2K" printer. It has a Voxel size of 51 or 52 µm (depending on who you ask... I figure there's probably a decimal point being rounded, and I don't really care). Your Frozen Sonic Mighty 4K *also* has a 52 µm Voxel size. You have *double* the K, but are going to have _literally the same print quality_.
So, with that eyeball calibration out of the way: I've spent a *lot* of time staring at prints under magnification, with various AA settings, from many slicers.
If you're young, and have good eyesight (or glasses), and the prints are unpainted, and have a resin that shows off contrast well: you can see differences if you pick it up and examine them closely.
If you're older (eyesight starts to go *fast* above 40), or if the prints are painted, or if the resin doesn't show contrast well (transparent or white resin, for example), or the prints are more than 30 cm away - then it's unlikely you'll be able to see anything.
Keep in mind: An _expertly applied_ spray coat of primer alone is going to be 20 µm thick. Expertly applied paints are likely going to add another 100 µm of additional thickness. That's a _lot_ of, well, "self-leveling filler." to smooth out any voxel blockiness.
The print size is generally larger with similar voxel dimensions.
stupid: it's just so you read and realize that sometimes it's not so you read it but so you realize it's true.
Printers are not made for your world of stupidity. They were created with the purpose of being able to physically extract things that are virtual and not only that but they can be converted to metal in a foundry, for example jewelry, where precision is the detail and microns are worth gold, it is not your case, you are only playing to test printers and act important, the microns of a printer are worth at casting levels since it leaves a smooth surface where it takes little time to finish it perfectly, above The 30 microns are already problematic, that is, stop giving opinions from a chair complaining about the lack of pleasure in your useless life and leave the microns to those who really care, those who work and have access to economical and super precise printers ( this for the useless video creator)
Great video and I totally agree they need to standardize the way they advertise the printers. Makes shopping for a new one hard for everyone when you have to use a spreadsheet to compare printers.
Good idea but how would it be tested to make sure the manufacters are doing what they are advertising? Or, to be cynical, how can marketing manipulate AVC to thier own advantage? One test I have been doing is finding out what is the smallest hole size that can be printed without obstruction and still be dimensionally accurate. This can be easily measured by the guage of wire that can be passed through it.
I'm only a couple weeks into this hobby, but it's been quite the learning experience thus far.
I really enjoy your content and appreciate all the passion you put into it.
My entry machine was a Photon 4k, but I find this topic really helpful as I'm already pondering what I want my next printer to be.
Currently researching my next 3D printer, as i want to print larger resin models, this was really useful.
I think this makes sense for LCD mSLA. However, we need a metric that shows why DLP gets better prints at lower resolution. And that has to do with the coherence of the light itself.
I think you can combine all of these things into the volume of the frustum (like a pyramid with the top chopped off) between where the pixel is masked and the projection that actually makes it to the previous layer.
Since people like to buy larger numbers, we just flip it (ie 1/v). This gives a number in 1/um3 they can market.
I’m sure there’s a way for them to rig it, because I just thought of it now
Engaging with the algorithm ! You can make a good comparison with pc monitors, resolution vs screen size, a 1080p would look sharp on a 23 inch, but as you scale up the screen, pixel density decrease and will look soft. Same with TV, 1080p vs 4K UHD all depends of your TV size and viewing distance. At least with voxel size it's easy to compare the actual "size" of details.
Incredibly helpful information! Anyone looking to buy a resin printer should watch this video before making a decision. Thank you Fauxhammer!
Thanks so much
This opened my eyes.. big time.. I am glad I stumbled upon this before I bought my first resin printer.
Thanks. Glad it was helpful to you
Hey @FauxHammer,
nice video. One thing that I still find worth to mention; the AVC of the DLP printers in the axial direction is not equal to the step height you set at the printer but is determined by the dose and the material absorption constant. I guess for a lot of resins that are not pitch black this value is >20µm. And that would be the AVC in my opinion. So it is even more complicated as it is material dependent.
That's more true with LCD than DLP. but I'm not trying to enforce brands to determine the actual printed voxel. I just want to help define clear marketing terms in contrast to the BS currently spouted.
I'm still working on helping people understand Exposure vs base exposure, if i ocvercomplicate videos with how pixels are formed. i'll loose my audience in a snooze fest quite rapidly
The impression this gives off is that resolution doesn’t matter. It does with regards to screen size. Brands should just make the micron count more obvious. Also I’d rather see more printers with vat heaters and residue detection than perfectly square voxels.
Yeah, that was the point
Dear FauxHammer, think it would help if you could publish the AVC for all the known printers. A simple spreadsheet should do.
Apologies if you already have that, then I simply was too thick to find it.
Not a bad idea, I’ve said it in all videos, just never called it AvC before
I totally agree and was going to suggest this - if the sheet (or webpage) were commonly adopted then it would help both people and companies understand whats needed of them.
Next step: how much of the resolution survives the non parallel(or slightly diffused) light rays bleeding into each other? At least for x & y axis. That might be another differentiator. Lightsource, masking element and optical path from there into the resin would have influence.
This reminds me of the confusion with 2D printers over image PPI vs printer DPI, vs pixel size and pixel resolution, and compared to camera resolution. Complicating this is that a 1440dpi printer is not capable of printing a 1440ppi image, because an inkjet printer can only print in ink droplets. Most of fixed droplet size, some can print a small range of droplet sizes. But in the end, the visibly smooth image is made of a pattern of approximately 240ppi printed as a stochastic (semirandom) fixed droplet sizes of between 4 and 8 ink colors.
I really liked the video and the explanation you give. Although I did get it before. To be honest, I don't care at all. There are so many factors that come in to play. The only real standard is the output it delivers. So ideally there is an independed organization that get the printers from all brands and they would print the same model with the same resin with the optimal settings and then you get a score on the level of detail and maybe the distance from which the layer lines become invisible. And of course on usability speed and all the other important details. Basically the job you guys are doing now but than more organized and for all printers. Only than we have a honest comparison and good idea of what is achievable with the printers out there. Till then I'll just keep following your channel 😉
I’ve been saying this for quite a while, I realize that an 8K on a small printer was half the size of an 8K on double size printer. It’s very much like what I go through when I explain Photoshop and screen resolution to clients that say that you need 300 dpi you also have to tell me how many inches or millimeters the sizes
Phrozen Sonic mini 8ks - 22 microns
Mighty 8k - 43 microns
Pretty straight forward. I only know these facts thanks to your channel & a couple others like Vogman.
So cheers
thanks, and you know what, that;s kinda my point. you only know it becasue of me and Vogman, because K is seen everywheremm but AVC or largest pixel size is what matters.
i;m glad you know, but so many people don't
Could label things as Minimal Square Voxel. The smallest square (within 10%) that is possible with the printer. Could also do the do the average of the pixel square so if it's 19×24 then the rating would be 21.5 micron. If you do that you could borrow car engine terminology and have over square (x has more pixels) and under square (y has more pixels) to define how it is skewed. So the previous would be like 21.5 os if it was reversed, then 21.5 us, if it's like the mini 8k the 22 s (square). I don't know just a thought. But yeah this whole thing is a bit silly.
I have been working on and with computers for over forty years and i understand where you are coming from with the misinformation point and agree with the point you are making. i think voxel size should be what the industry should standardize to imply print quality.
briefly about the video: look not at the resolution, but at the XY density. the same screen resolution in different sizes have different pixel density per inch - this is what affects the print quality.
Thank you so much for this video. In hindsight it makes total sense - This is something that in the past used to be discussed about smartphone screens, when most companies were still trying to figure out what the best ratio was and weird panel resolutions were coming out all the time :)
This really helped me in making a better informed decision, as I've been eyeing resin printers, and I was focusing too much on the screen resolution.
Cheers friend!
Oh, you did watch it! Thank you
@@FauxHammer I did! I’ve been following up on your past videos too, and btw kudos on your Poland trip. The community there is absurdly good and fun. Good people too! They deserve all the attention. Hope to see you showing more stuff like that, the people deserve it!
Pixel density matters not pixel count/thread
nope. Voxel Density. Pixel density onmy means... actually, i;m not going to explain here what my video just explained.
If FDM filament is measured by diameter, I don't see why resin printers shouldn't be measured in voxels; I'm with you on this one
That's why I have a 14K printer. 😛
14k is also irrelevant. ;)
@@FauxHammer Yeah but bigger numbers!! I do want to know what magic causes the rectangular pixels not to stretch/distort prints.
@@tmilker lol
Its simple, dont look at the screen resolution but look at the microns, pixel size, to get a sense of the print quality.
Thank you for the work you put into this. I wholeheartedly support the push for AVC. As an engineer I already know the grief marketing dept. can cause when it comes to accuracy and relevancy of their claims in marketing. Leaving a comment for the algorithm.
Edit: Please release Wargamer resin in Norway, I want to test it out
Thanks, and we are working on EU next. Just about to do US.
Fantastic video! I've been trying to explain this to clients for YEARS now I'm just going to send them a link to this video..
When you print across multiple printers this becomes quite obvious but that's why I use different printers for different models but the M3 MAX prints are almost identical to the Jupiter as long as you dial in the resin!
Thinking about buying a Resin Printer for Models in the future, this is exactly the Problem I have. Their Technical specs are beyond garbage (even way worse than on FDM printers).
even on Displays (Computer Monitors, Laptop Displays, Smartphones...) resolution means nothing w/o knowing the screen size. That's why (especially on Mobile) we now usually talk about PPI (Pixel Per Inch). Thats sufficient because on Computer displays (unless they're total crap) are always square.
i personally (coming from that world) would be fine with PPI, but I agree with this on you - voxels X/Y/Z size is the way to go.
Ive been looking at getting into resin and am glad to hear this; the seeming resolution creep had been a reason I’d held off
I’d thought 12k didn’t look much better than 8k but hadn’t looked into it yet, but am glad to know to look out specifically for the pixel size - makes the comparison a lot easier
Very, very didactic video. In these times of fast video and ultra-consumption, sincerity is greatly appreciated. Thank you very much and I'm sorry for my English
Thanks, English was spot on, no need to apologise
Why aren’t we just saying pixel size? That’s basically what a voxel is. Great video btw
Thanks, because Voxel is the output rendered on the mode. the pixel is the output of a printer component. I'm also considering a future where LCD's have sub 10 Micron pixels, but the z-axis is stuck in increments of 10 Microns.
It’s true a voxel isn’t a pixel, but rather the slightly larger result of the projection. But people might start to understand the bigger picture better. (Pixel size vrs “K” metric is still a major improvement.) I also understand that the way the light is manipulated changes voxel size, but I’m talking marketing not technical specs. I honestly hadn’t thought about z axis not keeping up!
Regardless, good on you to raise community awareness!
@@jasoncompton5280 thanks mate, I am doing what i can.
Thank you for your video. I am new to the hobby and am currently looking for my first printer. I really thought the K meant something. Thanks for opening my eyes!
Hi, Its me again, the guy who thought differently about a board game I never played. Loved your response, i giggled. I am enjoying your frankness and sarcasm in your videos. I am learn heaps and getting a lot of useful info from your videos. Soon I will check out some painting ones too.
Glad you enjoyed it! I really appreciate you understand sarcasm! it will help a lot on my channel
While I appreciate the honesty up front of how this video is click bait and meant to drive views I don't appreciate the wasted time spent watching this video. Do the mini related content and printer reviews and follow-ups. I think your viewers understand screen resolution by now. I'll continue my sub.. but you really made me think about dropping it.
The point of this is so that I never have to do it again. You know I've said this same thing dosens of time. as much as I need to do in future is point people to this video. This is me putting it to bed.
This is a great thing for the community, thanks!
Glad you think so!
ok... so I both agree with you and disagree with you.
So yes, I agree voxel size is a good metric, HOWEVER, were getting to the point that processing time is a significant limiter on the printer cost, so I dont think we will see much increase in resolution... so, this would likely mean we would see brands race to a smaller and smaller AVC, at the cost of print volume. Then you run into the problem that resins start being your constraining factor on your 5 um printer... and the process continues.
and really, I do need to say for all practical application I really cant see the difference between my Saturn 3 ultra and my friends Saturn 8k... were both somwhat over exposing, and really on the tabletop we are fine with that. No one can see layer lines on the painted mini's, and were both happy with what we have (though he is jellous of the wifi... which TBH is why i got mine).
At the end of the day, I think marketers will market, and I think it comes down to reviewers who need to manage this. AVC is a good metric to point out, but I really hope we start seeing brands invest more in the periferal features... Vat heaters, filters, Wifi, ventilation, whatever else is next, rather than trying to decrease AVC, its fine where it is. IMO. (/rant)
I started looking at build volume and microns instead of resolution and it's blows my mind that some companies even put the screen resolution when their micron size is horrible.
See, I knew there was something missing in regards to a "quality" measurement when I was last considering getting a resin printer (I still haven't bought one), and here it is, put right in front of me what I didn't realize was missing. This is great!
Only complaint I have against your video is how it feels like one of those dumb scammy video websites where it talks about some irrelevant crap, jumping between related topics, while promising for over an hour that they're about to explain what it is the person started watching for, and in the very end it just tries to sell you a book or a course on the topic instead of actually explaining it. Kind of an extreme description, but I did have that feeling about 5 minutes in, looked at how long the video was, and bumped it up to 2x speed to finish it faster. This video really could have been taken down to 10 minutes if you kinda just got to the point, and I think people would enjoy watching your videos more if other videos of yours are similar to this one (algorithm recommended this video to me, so I haven't watched others yet).
Fair enough, taken on board
I would say that marketing information is more likely to be intentionally misleading. Perhaps not at first, when manufactures needed an easy way for the consumers to understand the first resin printers, maybe using the screen resolution made any sense. After that, when the consumer was more familiarized with the printers and new sizes and resolutions came up, the focus seems to change in a way to create confusion rather than a base line for comparison, specially If you have an inferior product or if you want it to look more effective than your competition. That's why I don't belive the industry will change the way it refers to Screen resolution as a main quality feature. Is not that they are being completely dishonest, but is a way to make the printers look better than they really are. Hope in the future we can change this, but somehow they will find a way to distort these numbers making they look better than they are.
Thanks again for the great content!
Thank you for your video. I did not know that the xyz resolution of a printer is called AVC. And it is true that the k number is irrelevant. And you can find the xy resolution in the technical details for every printer, too. I can only imagine why the printer companies do this. because everybody can imagine what the K number mean but 20 um xy resolution is like a book with seven seals for people starting out with 3d printing
I bought the Mars 4. It’s my first 3D printer. I bought it because it has the lowest microns I could find. I didn’t realize how small it really is.😅
At first I thought this was just extremely common knowledge and did not understand why someone made this video. The comments make me see I stand corrected.
After decades of this discussion in jet-ink printers, computer monitors, digital cameras and 3d-printers I just assumed people had understood that there is a pattern. Except for printers we saw screen pixel counts go up followed by the screens themselves getting larger. At a midpoint there was a need to understand what DPI/resolution meant and that smaller screens with the same resolution looked better than the larger ones. After a certain pixel count, however, the only thing that mattered was screen size. A 4k TV still looks great at 70"+, a 20MP camera is fine even at full 35mm.
The thing that IS important is that in parallell with all this, there are other features that become much more important, like true-black for TVs or dynamic range for cameras. The same is true for 3d-printers. The new 14k from Phrozen has a bunch of new features I, for one, am looking forward to see how impactful they are. Even if the resolution is about the same as for my 8k mini.
You are absolutely on the money here. While this topic is confusing to many, it seems folks don't realize the physical size of a pixel in 2d (voxel in 3d cubed output) is smaller on a smaller sized screen compared to a larger size screen of exactly the same Resolution. Folks either understand the difference or they don't. Those that don't will just continue to be mislead unfortunately. A really good example is to play a 480p video on a smart phone full screen and play the same video on a 20 plus inch computer monitor full screen 1080p (2k). The results are night and day, but then maybe they will see the significance of pixel size compared. On the smartphone it will look good, while on the computer screen not so much.
Exactly that, and you are right, people either get it or they don't, already had so much hate on this video - as expected I guess. Serves me right for trying to be helpful and educate people steadily.
@@FauxHammer in their defense, this topic is complex. People are to used to 2d resolutions etc. I only been on resin printing 3 months now and also got caught in the marketing hype 2 Mars 4 ultras and a Saturn 3 Ultra later, but your previous videos explaining this in use for 3d resin printing made sense and brought me in sync with reality and how it all correlates together. In this case, ignorance is not bliss and can be costly. Don't be to hard on yourself or the audience.
Edit.. I'm willing to bet that if it were possible to put a modern smartphone under the vat, we would get some really nice results for smaller prints.
@@colinmclean1300 thanks man, I knew this would be a divisive topic, but IO gotta be honest, this one has been a bit brutal and I'm not as thick skinned as I thought - These are words I needed to hear right now. Thank you.
I've found today that I'll respond to people in kind., I guess you know me, if brands are being dicks I'll call them on it, same with commenters. People have made the same point about this video both rudely and politely and each has gotten a response in kind.
@@FauxHammer its common knowledge on TH-cam that the tubers love putting up titles for click bait, but in your defense you admitted that up front. So imo there is no foul. Your videos are very informative. This was no exception
I’d really like to see the voxels in the advertising and have it equal dimensional pixels length by width μm, but height doesn’t necessarily need equal but should be less for adjusting layer height for accuracy. When you have 19μmx24μm flat dimensional resolution you have 25% difference. I’d much rather se a 19μmx21μm at 10% difference I feel it would skew the accuracy of the print at some point.
In your opinion, what is the AVC beyond which diminishing return makes further refinement irrelevant?
I think i did the math on this recently, I think around 18um is where you can get 2x magnificattion without seeing a difference in horizontal pixles
@@FauxHammer Seems like current resin 3D printers are quickly approaching that level of detail, at least the small ones are. In a couple years I imagine resolution will become pretty standardized across the board so we can get over having to deal with +2K per iteration every 6 months lol.
@@FauxHammer thanks for this number there, a lot of us are trying to get the clearest smoothes print out of clear resin and knowing where we can stop worrying about surface "frosting" or texture would warp the light on smooth planes it good to keep in mind. 💙
Have you put together a list of printers and their voxel measurements? I like the idea of focusing on potential print output quality. I think it could force manufacturers to actually produce higher quality printers not just bumping some bs number. It reminds me of the muscle cars in the 60s when the big 3 kept slapping bigger numbers on the side of the cars.
Yea it is annoying that they try to put in the smallest print possible the UM of the printers, im joy bothered by the fact i bought a Saturn 3 Ultra I also bought a GKtwo 🤷♂️ they are in my opinion some of the best printers on the market. I still print at 50 UM. So.. not really a big deal at all.. but 50 UM for me is the base if you cant print at that I'm not buying.. even if 51 is only a 1 micron difference which we cant even see.
So, TDLR; Much like how fast a car can be is not determined by power but by power/weight, printer sharpness is not determined by pixel count but by pixel count / how small those pixels are.
Is that a half decent understanding?
Jupp, compare DPI, not physical resolution.
@@joergsonnenberger6836 well no - as the point of the video says DPI is just X/Y resolution - Layer Hight / Z axis needs to be included hence the move to tward actual voxal
Thanks @FauxHammer, I now understand print resolution better. BTW… I wrote this in 20K, hope you appreciate the effort!
40 x 40 microns is actually 4 times as big as 20 x 20 microns, when sides double, area squares!
In the same vein 40 x 40 x 40 is 8 times as big as 20 x 20 x 20 because volume cubes when the sides double
Thank you SO MUCH! Voxels all the way. Thank you so much for putting this video out there. You have said it so much better than I could have ever had. 👌🏼
Oh yeah, totally agree with this video. It was always obvious to me that the "k" was irrelevant. (Also capital K = Kelvin, a measurement of temperature. lower case k = kilo which means a thousand. So all of these 8K printers are just claiming to be EXTREMELY COLD! But apparently the hotter the printer the better I guess)
This also very much reminds me of the "megapixel" designation every digital camera maker would use back in the day. As if that was somehow a metric anyone really understood. Everyone just went "bigger number good." (Even though most peoples computer screens were a lower resolution so when you opened said image it was super zoomed in)
Keep up the fight, I do agree, the K is irrelevant… used your videos for help selecting my newest resin printer, Mono X2 - anything higher is useless for my needs
I read the title as a 12k printer being irreverent 😂
it;s not wrong
Since these are consumer printers, they are at the mercy of whatever the LCD manufacturer is going to produce. These printer companies do not custom design the lcd screen's, they buy from a lcd manufacture which is why most companies offer the same resolution screen. As technology advances and the lcd manufacturing process gets better the lcd manufacture offers their new higher resolution lcd screen for sale, sometimes at a lower cost than last year's lower resolution screen. So, you will be talking about this every year as the product cycle changes. Side note: I designed electronics for a living and wish somebody with the proper equipment could get actual data (I'm sure the R/D team at these companies have done this, that is why we would never see the results of this test). The test would set up a print with just 1 lcd pixel lit up, do a normal exposure then using a microscope, measure the size that was actually printed on the build plate, I suspect we would be surprised at the results.
I understood this before seeing this video. But you touched on a point I never thought of. On a large printer Is there even atcualy any point printing a .02 layer height when the it's only giving you 43um X 43um.
Should we just be printing .04 layer height and speed up the print now that is has much less layers.
I atcualy just noticed the standard profile for the M3 max is .05mm layer height
Bought an Elegoo mars 4 ultra for it's 18x18um pixel size. Need the most detail possible for some small functional parts. Screen resolution only makes sense comparing the same sized screen for sure.
I’ve got the uniformation gk2 8 k plus other brands of resin printer but for details I think the 8k one is amazing plus you would never see any more details no matter what printer you your using.
Probably the easiest way for people to understand that the resolution doesn't actually mean anything, if the screen size is different is to compare cellphone screen to a TV; if you got 1080p screen on your phone, you probably can't distinguish individual pixels from 1m away. Now look at a 40"+ 1080p TV screen at the same distance, and the pixels are huge in comparison!
There's been a lot of similar confusion/misconception in PC monitors, where people "upgraded" a 22" 1080p monitor to a 27" or 32" one, and are wondering why the image is so much worse, because they don't realize the pixels are bigger, hence the image is less sharp. With regards to monitors the PPI metric has slowly over the years started to make sense to the larger audience, but i have no clue why so many still insist on the K number in printers being somehow meaningful in itself.. 🤷♂
I agree that a base measure of AVC is a good place to start, but how does that corespond to actual output? There is a fair gap between the screen and the resin ( probably more than the AVC size ) Fep film is what 50 microns or more? , and the light is scattererd by the the film so the final blob of light that cures the resin will be different to AVC and as different printers have different ways of collimating the light it would be nice to be able to recognise manufacturers that work on improving this rather than possibly meaningless ( at the 25 micron and below range) AVC figure? The Saturn in your tests seemd to print better that others at the same resolution for example.
Would a smallest resolvable resin feature type standard make sense? Such as the pillars and holes on the test piece you use for tuning in exposure times.
Let’s make sure I’m getting this right. It is prefer or best to print as a square a 24um AVF or pixel size would be 24 um layer height this would give you 24 x24 x 24 give you the best print quality.
well, there's variables beyond pixel size and settings, but as a base metric, yeah that would do. assuming the printer is capable of 0.024 on Z
If the best z movement is .036 than you will need to set the print to 36um or they z movement is fast at .019 you would set it at 24um. Looks like you need the AVF size and the z height for a perfect print quality. You should have AVF rating then the AVF print rating due to z height being other limiting factor. Call it AVFZ.
@@windforward9810 there’s no point.
Let’s say we have a future where there’s a printer with 9um pixels. But the minimum step distance is 10um, then the AVC is 10.
But another example, If we have that same printer but the minimum step distance 3.1um, then, then you can have a z height of 9.3um, which more closely matches the pixel size of 9um. But the AVC is still 9, not 9.3.
Because in that example you can still get layers at 3.1 & 6.2. So Z is not the constraint.
The “constraint” is the largest minimum size of the 3 possible dimensions.
@@FauxHammer thanks that cleared it up for me a lot.
A massive asside, but something that I realized when I saw those 14k resolutions. Sorry for the rather long post.
As someone who once worked in the film industry where 2k and 4k were ACTUAL resolutions, I hate that people took the UHD resolution and marketed it as "4k" and made this odd "yeah it's aproximately 4k" No.
2k resolution is 2048 pixles in the pictures width. 4k is tus 4096 pixles in the pictures width. These are cinema standards, and in cinema the height can vary since aspect rations can vary.
In monitor and TV where aspect ratio quickly got standardized to 16:9 aspect ration, we started talking about the number of pixles in height. 1080p became the standard for HD (Or actually FullHD, 720p was the HD format). The width pixles are somewhat irrelevant to telling people about the resolution because it's always 16/9th bigger than the height.
But, since FullHD was 1920x1080 we had a problem. This was slightly smaller than the Cinema's 2k format. And so, when we doubled the height and width the UHD format was suddenly 3840 × 2160. It's close enough to 4000, but it's not.
As for not seeing 6k monitors. That's partly because a doubling happened in Cinema first. Doubling makes the most sense when it comes to scaling, as you just quadruple each pixel. 6k would be the 1.5 resolution increase. And this isn't uncommon. We just didn't call the resolutions "k" at the time. Standard resolution is 480i, 720 is 1,5 times as large as 480. And 1080 is 1,5 times the size of 720.
But then monitors got weird. The next step up became 1440, which is the double of 720. You'd think the next step would have been 1620, which is 1,5 of 1080.
So in a sense. If 1080 is "2k" then 1440p is "2,66k" which just doesn't sound so cool.
Looking at the integers of formats though, "6k" would make sense, being 1,5 times as large as "4k"
Thank you. This may save me a few hundred dollars between the Mars and Saturn printers now that I know to look at the XY resolution and not just the K
I was always skeptical about how the number of k of a screen was related to the pixel density. Thanks for the thorough clarity on this.
I was looking for a 12K but now i know what to look for, thanks!
Brilliant, so you understand now it's not about K it;s about the pixel size! You are the reason I made this, and it;s made my day that i can help you.
But honestly, right now, some of the best detail printers are the 12k ones. like the Saturn 3.
I'm always amazed in how much work you put into your videos. Excellent presentation.
It would be useful a table with AVC resolution for all available resin printers (or at least for all ones you review)
Already done, In all the reviews, I just called it pixel size before.
Agree, many people don't understand that if you have a 4inch 8k display and a 10inch 8k display the pixels on the 10inch display will be way larger, Same for these printers, bigger squares means less details.
yep. too many people don't know this still, even now.
Thank you for the round up at the end. I am shopping for a new printer since my move, and this sealed the deal.
the fact that the industry gets away with "total pixels" rather than "pixels per inch" is ridiculous.
i wish manufacturers would make a 20 x 20 x 20 micron printer using whatever size build plate they want but have it always to those values, with a flip top lid or doors, a vat that is heated, 7 inch screen with great UI, force sensing, sensible attachments as in build plate/vat, wifi/ethernet, inbuilt 4k camera, power switches and usb ports in their proper place, auto resin filler /drain, without any mess, several vent holes left right and top so you have a choice with printer position all at a reasonable price, so all up give me a build plate that can easily fit a mando helmut on it in one piece, and a wash and cure station appropriate to that size, then I will be happy
Nice video btw
Any resolution will still have layer lines.... , though Moving to monochrome screens was dramatic change
I fdm print now. Really enjoy the builds. I have been looking at resin and think this video answered questions I had about the machines. Thank you 👍 from me.
Got to say this was my first vid by you I watched and like the rest already pointed out once you got past the waffle waffle stage, and got to the point is when I got really interested as I been putting off getting a printer till I get my new home and move. Thank goodness I put it off as I'd been in line with the K equals better right? crowd.. Now better informed I'll do more digging on printers and keep my eye on the used car salesmanship (upselling a potentially huge pile of garbage as a diamond) of printer makers. So thanks for that going to watch some of your other vids now and subbed😁😁🙃😁😁
I actually found it interesting.
I was thinking I should have got a bigger printer- but as it turns out the smaller ones are actually more detailed??
Keep the videos coming 🙌🙌
Thanks, I guess you are who this video is aimed at
Thanks for hammering this info for people. If you think about voxels as 3d cubes (which they are), your example of 22x22x20 vs 43x43x40, the latter is worse than twice as large - it's 8 times as large. The voxels are twice as wide, twice as deep, and twice as tall.
fair point...
Should we apply a similar metric to resin types? It’s not uncommon to see 8k resin on the label. However, as you’ve pointed out in others videos, there are many factors to consider (detail, flexibility, etc). Overall nice video if a little drawn out (but I understand I wasn’t the target demographic and I just watched it for our god the big G algorithm).
We absolutely need a metric for resin accuracy. But it will be significantly harder to determine.
Beautifully explained. Very useful for me as a newcomer to the 3D printing industry. And love the proposal of using AVC
lol I accept your click bait. I have brand new elegoo Saturn 3 ultra and curing station sitting on my office floor fresh off the UPS truck today. Super excited to crack it open… and I get my first x1carbon next week. I went pretty big this month 🤣🤣
Wow, Flex!!!! I'm so excited for you!