I like the Meshmixer 2 branching scaffold support idea. Adobe Photoshop CC is implementing something similar.
Branchng support uses less materials and gives better quality by not having major supports touching the models.
Meshmiser is still a pain to use and crashes alot. I tested a fe parts and it's promising .
Re: Feature Request Branching support scaffold
This would be far-and-away the best feature to add. Now that the big players, such as Autodesk and Adobe have set their sights on the industry you can see where they're starting to focus, and it's definitely the in the right place.
I've tried and printed both from Autodesk and Adobe, and from experience I can say that the Adobe support structure methodology is far superior to the Autodesk one. The Autodesk branches are extremely difficult to print as the posts are simply too small and complex to be counted on to make their way up to the top of taller models. The Adobe ones on the other hand are simple and well supported all the way to the top of the model.
The core issue with Adobe right now is that their supports are very haphazardly created and often result in open edges which slicers simply can't deal with. I had to bring my model back into 3D Studio Max and fix the supports, but once that was done the whole thing printed wonderfully. If Autodesk could apply their many years of 3D experience to Adobes design it would be a home-run.
I do think the Simply3D supports are a big step ahead of the rest of the free slicers, but after seeing and working with the Autodesk and Adobe ones it's extremely clear where the industry is going.
I've tried and printed both from Autodesk and Adobe, and from experience I can say that the Adobe support structure methodology is far superior to the Autodesk one. The Autodesk branches are extremely difficult to print as the posts are simply too small and complex to be counted on to make their way up to the top of taller models. The Adobe ones on the other hand are simple and well supported all the way to the top of the model.
The core issue with Adobe right now is that their supports are very haphazardly created and often result in open edges which slicers simply can't deal with. I had to bring my model back into 3D Studio Max and fix the supports, but once that was done the whole thing printed wonderfully. If Autodesk could apply their many years of 3D experience to Adobes design it would be a home-run.
I do think the Simply3D supports are a big step ahead of the rest of the free slicers, but after seeing and working with the Autodesk and Adobe ones it's extremely clear where the industry is going.
Re: Feature Request Branching support scaffold
agreed!
The meshmixer supports are great (although I edit the parameters and make them thicker, on supports where they start on the model rather than the base they also need more than one contact point to be reliable, but you can add these manually. Haven't seen the adobe ones.
To have a similar native solution in creator would be fantastic. That along with honeycomb infill and creator would be getting pretty close to my ideal solution.
The meshmixer supports are great (although I edit the parameters and make them thicker, on supports where they start on the model rather than the base they also need more than one contact point to be reliable, but you can add these manually. Haven't seen the adobe ones.
To have a similar native solution in creator would be fantastic. That along with honeycomb infill and creator would be getting pretty close to my ideal solution.
Re: Feature Request Branching support scaffold
Meshmixer supports needs to be thick to support tall objects but i have a lot of problems with tall models. I tested combining s3d manual support along with meshmixer .
I delete meshmixer base "trunk" and use s3d manual support for the main support. Branching is taken care of by meshmixer. Results are mixed. It would be best to have branching native in s3d.
I delete meshmixer base "trunk" and use s3d manual support for the main support. Branching is taken care of by meshmixer. Results are mixed. It would be best to have branching native in s3d.
Re: Feature Request Branching support scaffold
Since it's been four years since the original request I think it's not unreasonable to ask for a definitive yes or no (or at least possibly or never) on this.
Personally I would like to see it because it would save a lot of time and material on some of my prints.
Personally I would like to see it because it would save a lot of time and material on some of my prints.
