Jump to content

The Rocket Printing Hype Train Thread


Recommended Posts

Wow, that's way more money than I expected. I'll pass.

Fortunately, we have a community-driven solution!

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/111483-KSPBlender-Blender-addon-for-importing-craft-files

Fortunately for those who want it now, and cheap, there's Paper Space Program - print out and fold your ship into 3d awesomeness:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/84621-Paper-Space-Program-%28-a-k-a-KSP-Rocket-Parts-Papercraft%29

Link to post
Share on other sites
Per the AMA on reddit, prices range from 100 to 200 dollars. I think I'll pass...

edit: Specifically it's a "Small", "Medium", and "Large" size, for 99, 140, and 200 dollars respectively, all including shipping.

on the AMA Nova asked for more details about their process. I'd recommend checking out Shapeways info, they have a good
. In it you can get an idea of the amount of manual labor involved, validating and cleaning up models.
Link to post
Share on other sites

  1. Regardless of the 3D modelling software used, the 3D model (often in .skp, .dae, .3ds or some other format) then needs to be converted to either a.STL or a .OBJ format, to allow the printing (a.k.a. "CAM") software to be able to read it.
    1sg1xew.pngWe have been rendering KSP models for the last week in Blender. Just export your file into a approved format and contact your local 3d printing company. If you check the classifieds there is lots of people will to print them at their homes as well. Check out http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/111633-Starwhip-s-Renderfarm-Taking-Requests%21 for ideas and http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/111483-KSPBlender-Blender-addon-for-importing-craft-files to learn how to do it. Not to sure if http://www.shapeways.com/ can print them out in different materials other than the blurry sandstone.

Edited by hellblazer
Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to be excited about this. Really, it's such a cool concept! But the execution is just so poor.

It's like when digital cameras were the new thing, but most of the world was still using film. Every once in a while you'd hear somebody all excited about his new camera, hyping up how great and revolutionary it was. Then you'd see the actual photos... and they were blurry low resolution crap! It was years before I saw a digital photo that could compete with film.

I think that's the same kind of deal with 3d printing. Exciting tech for the early adopter gadget lovers, but those who just want a quality final product still need to wait a few years.

I'm looking at that papercraft thread, and wondering how difficult it would be to adapt those designs to thin sheet aluminum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  1. Regardless of the 3D modelling software used, the 3D model (often in .skp, .dae, .3ds or some other format) then needs to be converted to either a.STL or a .OBJ format, to allow the printing (a.k.a. "CAM") software to be able to read it.
    http://i.imgur.com/1sg1xew.pngWe have been rendering KSP models for the last week in Blender. Just export your file into a approved format and contact your local 3d printing company. If you check the classifieds there is lots of people will to print them at their homes as well. Check out http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/111633-Starwhip-s-Renderfarm-Taking-Requests%21 for ideas and http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/111483-KSPBlender-Blender-addon-for-importing-craft-files to learn how to do it. Not to sure if http://www.shapeways.com/ can print them out in different materials other than the blurry sandstone.

you still have combine all the parts in blender to one single body right? or does the plugin do that?

or do you just import the ship, translate it, then send it to shapeways and pray?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I want to be excited about this. Really, it's such a cool concept! But the execution is just so poor.

It's like when digital cameras were the new thing, but most of the world was still using film. Every once in a while you'd hear somebody all excited about his new camera, hyping up how great and revolutionary it was. Then you'd see the actual photos... and they were blurry low resolution crap! It was years before I saw a digital photo that could compete with film.

I think that's the same kind of deal with 3d printing. Exciting tech for the early adopter gadget lovers, but those who just want a quality final product still need to wait a few years.

I'm looking at that papercraft thread, and wondering how difficult it would be to adapt those designs to thin sheet aluminum.

Yeah one of the big problems I have with the current 3D printing hype is that (with the exception of some high-tech applications) the result is hardly more spectacular than what could be gained using other techniques. That and the fact that we're supposed to think something is awesome just because OMG IT'S 3D PRINTED.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Seriously though, I shoot Canon gear, and that looks like Canon white balance or lack thereof...

I've used quite a few different cameras, and the white balance issue isn't remotely unique to Canon. Even lower-end Nikons will smack me if I don't make the effort to get a correct white balance (ahhh takes me back to my film school days when shooting with ancient plumbicon tube cameras).

In this particular case the camera was likely tricked by the off-white wall. Also, without knowing the light source (which looks like a late afternoon/early evening sun interior shot, judging by the amount of diffusion... but it could be anything at such a small area), it's hard to gauge just what colour that wall actually is. In the interest of seeing what colour that rocket really is, here's my speculative correction for white balance... hopefully GregoxMun (or whoever took the picture) could verify how far off I am from true... and hopefully won't mind that I messed with their picture. :)

mgXrXt7.jpg

Unfortunately the rocket picks up some of the reflected colours so I'm not exactly how close to true this is to the final product, but it looks like it's pretty close to the colours actually used on the game parts... which is a bit of a relief since most of the photos make it look like it would be more sand coloured.

Edited by Scoundrel
turns out it's not GregoxMun's picture
Link to post
Share on other sites
I've used quite a few different cameras, and the white balance issue isn't remotely unique to Canon. Even lower-end Nikons will smack me if I don't make the effort to get a correct white balance (ahhh takes me back to my film school days when shooting with ancient plumbicon tube cameras).

In this particular case the camera was likely tricked by the off-white wall. Also, without knowing the light source (which looks like a late afternoon/early evening sun interior shot, judging by the amount of diffusion... but it could be anything at such a small area), it's hard to gauge just what colour that wall actually is. In the interest of seeing what colour that rocket really is, here's my speculative correction for white balance... hopefully GregoxMun (or whoever took the picture) could verify how far off I am from true... and hopefully won't mind that I messed with their picture. :)

http://i.imgur.com/mgXrXt7.jpg

Unfortunately the rocket picks up some of the reflected colours so I'm not exactly how close to true this is to the final product, but it looks like it's pretty close to the colours actually used on the game parts... which is a bit of a relief since most of the photos make it look like it would be more sand coloured.

It's not my rocket. It's just a picture from Reddit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I've used quite a few different cameras, and the white balance issue isn't remotely unique to Canon. Even lower-end Nikons will smack me if I don't make the effort to get a correct white balance (ahhh takes me back to my film school days when shooting with ancient plumbicon tube cameras).

True, but Canons generally lead the pack when it comes to blowing white balance. My camera bag has a little white card in it that I use for that purpose, plus I usually shoot raw anyhow, to give me a bit of headroom. My gear is a little old, so things might have changed since then. Somehow though, I doubt it.

In this particular case the camera was likely tricked by the off-white wall. Also, without knowing the light source (which looks like a late afternoon/early evening sun interior shot, judging by the amount of diffusion... but it could be anything at such a small area), it's hard to gauge just what colour that wall actually is

Well, we can't really know for sure (banana for color is about as useless as banana for scale) - it would be nice if someone could re-shoot that, but with a white card in the middle or with correct white balance. They could shoot it with one of the presets with the appropriate situation, for example (daylight setting outside on a clear day, cloudy setting outside on a cloudy day, incandescent under incandescents, etc)

Unfortunately the rocket picks up some of the reflected colours so I'm not exactly how close to true this is to the final product, but it looks like it's pretty close to the colours actually used on the game parts... which is a bit of a relief since most of the photos make it look like it would be more sand coloured.

I think you got it right there. Unfortunately my own software was bought by Corel and promptly ruined, so it's no longer able to manually set white balance, only supporting click-for-white operation:

GregoxMun-PrintedRocket-WB.jpg

Still rather on the 'hot' end of the scale.

One thing also I've noted is that the colors seem a bit saturated - that banana looks radioactive for example. THAT doesn't seem like a Canon (at least, not a high end one).

Link to post
Share on other sites
... My camera bag has a little white card in it that I use for that purpose... My gear is a little old, so things might have changed since then. Somehow though, I doubt it.

I've worked professionally with Canons since the 90s (still have my 35mm body... too sentimental to let it go), and you are correct that the earlier ones were atrocious for white balance. I was simply pointing out that virtually all cameras have their sensor issues. And yeah, I too still carry around a white balance card set, but mostly because I exclusively shoot HDR now so I focus on shifting to true first before I start messing around with the image.

...it would be nice if someone could re-shoot that, but with a white card in the middle or with correct white balance. They could shoot it with one of the presets with the appropriate situation...

I'm starting to think the banana-in-a-photo thing is some sort of internet meme that I haven't caught on to yet... or perhaps it's a photo by a Squad employee next to their paycheque. :wink: And I cringe at presets. I've always shot the first photo with the white and grey white balance cards so I have my temperature, then the next photo without. I then use my photo of the cards to get my balance (usually in photoshop), and apply the adjustments to the subsequent ones (because I don't ever trust my digital cameras... a hold-over from my days of pretentiously working exclusively in black and white film).

That said, I would have liked it if someone took a photo of the rocket next to something called a "ruler" which has things called "measurements" on them so we'd have an actual sense of scale. At 200 bucks for the large, a banana for comparison isn't going to cut it. Also I'd like to see one with a custom flag on it, just to be certain that it's doable.

...One thing also I've noted is that the colors seem a bit saturated - that banana looks radioactive for example...

I'd check the colour profile of the jpeg and adapt it for your monitor, but yeah, the original was a bit hot on mine even after I adjusted for the colour profile. I wonder then if the colours on the final product are more muted than what's in the photo? :huh:

And what about part clipping? Or parts that are accidentally/purposefully placed so they're floating? Will that be automatically corrected?

Edited by Scoundrel
missed close quote
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hrm. Neat idea but way too expensive. If it was, say, $20 for a small model, I'd probably end up spending two or three hundred bucks on various ships I really like... but if the entry price is $100 each, I will be spending a grand total of zero bucks. Sounds like a bad business decision to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest issue is that they are all the same physical size, not the same scale. I suppose given the price, few would ever get more than one, anyway. I agree that if they were cheaper, I might get some, but $100 seems high to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...