Why do 12k Printers come with this? nFEP vs ACF Film
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 окт 2024
- Link to DL the full sizes files.
drive.google.c...
Find my calibration tool and guide in the link below
bit.ly/3OZTPsi
Support my efforts by buying my favorite resin. Siraya Tech Navy Gray though my affiliated link. (Not a sponsor)
Siraya - Tech Navy Gray 90%
siraya.tech/pr...
Siraya - Tech 10% Tenacious Obsidian Black
siraya.tech/pr... 
Развлечения
you are a straight up 3D printing HERO! There's so much misinformation and abundance of information it can be overwhelming. Thank you for simplifying entry into the hobby.
Thank you! I'm not finished yet. Just getting started.
My goal is to help the hardware industry make better quality printers by helping educate the buyers.
Also to help the owners get the perfect print with ease.
Time will tell if it's a success.
I mean I get it very fine details will get affected, realistically thought its almost insignificant. I am using an Emake galaxy1 printer which is very large, for this ACF is just straight up better, detail still looks amazing, peel forces drastically reduced. print speed also increased so hugely beneficial on that printer. For ultra high detail miniatures perhaps stick with nfep.
@@garythmardellis1289 If you're printing something with a lot of texture, you won't notice it as much. But if your print surfaces, you'll notice the etching.
I would be interested to see your settings for ACF versus nfep because the only setting that you can increase or that I should say is affected by using ACF is the first stage of lift speed. All other prints remain exactly the same regardless of what release film you are using.
Well that's not entirely true, you do need to add a little more lift height with ACF. On a medium sized printer you can easily get away with 5mm lift speed total. Or push it to 4mm and most often be just fine. For ACF you're going to want 6-8mm lift height. This will chew at some of the speed gains you get from the faster first lifting speeds.
As for the reduction in peeling forces, it is true that it does have a reduction. However, ACF does wear out much faster and the Force actually starts to increase beyond nfep as it starts to wear down and that's going to be about 10k to 15k laters. After going to start having more peeling force than NFEP.
It's about three to four times the cost to replace and tears much easier.
In the end what you're saying is true but with a lot of ... Buts.
I have the M5s 12k and have an acf vat for speed and a nfep vat for detail
A great solution
Thanks for sharing these in-depth findings. Very interesting info. Wish more youtubers take the time to do this sort of testing. I suppose the ACF may be why the Amerilabs printout had weird lines running across in Vogman's testing of the M5s and Saturn 3.
I believe so, once I get my 12k I'll do a follow up.
But I've not even scratched the surface with these new printers.
There is a lot more going on.
@@J3DTech Will be very interested to see your findings. From the photos of the sample prints reviewers have been sharing, I am not convinced that the new 12k printers produce better print quality. If anything, they look worse. Could due to the ACF sheet or maybe the new 12k screen.
@@netnoob77 After I get my new printer, should get me about a week to get it all ready, then a day for editing and all that. So hopefuly soon.
Your cubes saved me from tossing my printer.... was just frustrated and the cubes are dimensionally perfect! And I run your test everytime I change resins! Thank you sir!!!
Thank you! I'm very happy to hear that all my efforts are helping at least a few people.
I'm sorry, but could you please help me and give me some guidance. I have a m5s... but after a week of active use there are problems with the film - scratches and voids. And now I have a problem of choice in front of me: what is the best choice for active printing (miniatures and toy prototypes)? Nfep for m3 of original AFC for m5s?
The ACF is only for speed at the cost of detail. If you want prints to look the best use nFEP.
Also don't ever touch the film with anything hard or plastic. Use a soft silicon spatula to mix the resin and check for hard bits before every print.
If you find anything use a vat clean to remove it.
Interresting comparison… while I am comparing first mighty 8k to 12k I have seen that same parameters are not also giving same results because of the changes made after upgrade. I honnestly supposed this is the same with acf… one must adapt parameters… and I think the exposure might be slightly longer with acf… overall I see a gain from 8k to 12k thus if there is minimal loss of crispness after changing to acf … I could accept that as it may bring the quality equivalent to 8k screen with much faster printing time… let see soon
The ACF in my Saturn 3 Ultra was ruined with the first test print! I printed a few small items to the sides of the big scar and have new ACF on the way. Its stupidly expensive, over $20 a sheet so next time i think i will take peoples advice and just to go FEP, but I have 4 fresh ACF sheets to ruin first, hopefully ill have a few dozen bottles of resin printed by then.
ACF is much softer and will damage much faster if you're not super careful about how and what you print.
Just another con against its single pro.
Thank you for in depth review!
I have noticed that if you loosen nFEP (not correctly tensioned) you get that vertical lines so maybe that stretching property of ACF is the culprit.
I've never seen that before. Very interesting do you have any pictures of a print on an overly loose nFEP so I can visualize that damage?
I've been using the ACF film for a few months and I'm not liking the vertical line texture. I think the frosted particles of the film are diffracting/blocking the light as it passes through the frost, thus creating light & dark areas.
I just did another test in the Saturn 3 Ultra with the pre-installed ACF. Same patterns, I'm not doing my first print using nFEP
great write up! always have amazing information and the work to back it up
I came here to see if I had made a mistake in buying a Mars 4, and I can breath a sigh of relief now lol, the differences between the two are so unbelievably small, I actually prefer the softer texture over seeing level lines. But, I understand that for people who are really into the hobby how they could take issue with the ACF film, but it seems so insignificant to me lol.
It's very small, if you're trying to fit parts with very tight tolerances it will cause issues. For many, this is never an issue.
That said, you can always replace the ACF with nFEP if it is.
Ésto es intentar rizar el rizo. La mejora en el porcentaje de piezas impresas con éxito es tan grande cuando usas ACF, que el hecho de haber diferencias cuando aumentas 325000X de aumentos no importa nada.
nice and repeatable methods, not just opinion
Glad I picked up some NFEP after puncturing my ACF with the plastic scraper.
On my 3rd print. • - •
I even did this same test on the Saturn 3 Ultra with nFEP vs ACF.
drive.google.com/file/d/1FhqOFA1V3g-YHNylAvOnorkdBqC0rHRj/view?usp=drive_link
Excellent test! I'm a bit confused about this ACF Film. It appears that this is a classic FEP coated with a polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS). At the beginning of 3D resin printing where mainly projectors were used (replaced by DLP's) and later LCD masking printer were introduced, PDMS was the predominant release film. Basically is a silicone coting! The "non-stickiness" comes from it's rubber/elastic properties. So far Teflon and it's derivates have the best non-sticking properties. This "new"- I guess it's just badly done marketing (because ACF Films are used in electronics for other purposes), ACF Film is therefore a rediscovery of a hot water! The main issue about PDMS was it's opaqueness and lack of longevity. Not to mention the scattered UV light and as a consequence lost in details over time.
I'm not 100% sure of how it's made but it is a physical texture on one side and the material is softer and more flexible then FEP.
@@J3DTech Exactly the properties PDMS's have. You can try this exact effect if you... let's say use a wide rubber band and put a duct tape o it. Than start stretch a rubber band and you will notice that the more rigid duct tape basically releases itself from the rubber. Even better if you have some kind of silicon instead of rubber band ;-)
Fantastic video. I’ve been thinking of doing the same type of content because of spending so much time responding to people on Reddit.
One critique: got to cut out the “that one, this one” language. Use proper nouns or label every image. I’m lost when you zoom in and pan around your chart as to which film results I am looking at.
Will be bookmarking your vids and sending more Reddit people your way.
Good feedback, I'll keep this in mind as I go forward.
Hi. This is a super test. Do you get also dimension deviations? When you print cube 10x10x10 are this dimensions accurate after hardening and curing?
When you fully cure the resin you will get 1-4% shrinking depending on the resin.
Calibrating the resin to post curing will help offset this by some. However you can't ever get away from the fact that we are dealing with plastic and even the temps of your room while you measure can have a 1-2% change.
Thanks for your time making those test
I think pixel size that came with the 12k is not worth the money, I can't see the difference with naked eye lol
After I get my Saturn 3 Ultra, I'll do a full review and we will see.
Cuál nfep tienen , que marca usan ? Compré la anycubic de 14k y el ACF me está dando problemas líneas y puntos irregulares .
They are all made by just a few companies so the brand is not really that important.
hi!! it is not a problem to change the tray of a stock acf film printer to other film?
Not that I'm aware of.
@@J3DTech thanks!!
I'm contemplating switching to Nfep next time I have to change my ACF. I have an Elegoo Saturn 3 Ultra. Do I need to change my exposure settings? If so would I just start with the settings for the Saturn 3 and calibrate from there?
The Exposure settings are very similar maybe 0.1 to 0.2 second difference.
The only setting ACF lets you change faster is the first stage of lifting under normal layers. All other settings are not affected by the type of film that you use. What this means is that a lot of these advertised films with ACF are only because they increase the speed limit on these printers for marketing reasons, not because you should actually go that fast.
@@J3DTech Thanks. I usually start with the settings suggested by Sariah tech for the resin I'm using and then run a series of the flat chip tests to get me close. After that I switch to upright tests to fine tune. Your tests on cults have been very helpful.
@@JHartModelworks Thanks! They're my main reason and I've used most of them.
If you've read through my guide, you'll see I've got some default settings that work really well for almost everything and then I just calibrate from there to dial it in.
Is this still the case or are new ACFs different from this previous type?
Its still the same situation, ACF has a physical texture that helps air get under the FEP. You simply cant have a texture in this part and have it not effect the quality of the print.
Thanks! Interesting way of keeping your left printer clean ;)
I've posted a few shorts on this very topic
It looks like you have PTC heaters blowing straight at the z axis. Ptc heater blow 60c plus for short bursts. The z axis is made of aluminium bolted to steel rails. They expand at different rates which will very likely leave artifacts on the prints.
The heater blows on internal not out. So really it's sucking the air from the rail then at the PCB of the heater that's then pushed into the hood.
FauxHammer brought me here.
Really? Did he mention me somewhere?
Indeed he did! He mentioned and posted a link to this video while he was reviewing the mars 4 ultra and the shortcomings of the new acf films in some on the new printers such as the aforementioned mars 4 and the m5s (which I preorder but now I’m not sure if I made a good purchase).
An excellent video mate, thanks for carrying out these tests. As an after-thought, there's definitely a reason that all of the marketing materials, and most of the reviews don't show close-ups of the printed models for this M5S machine...whereas in all other instances they are more than happy to throw close-up after close-up at you to show off the print surface quality...they new themselves that the prints were coming out with low quality surface finish but hoped that the 12K + Auto-Level + Speed Print combo marketing would get a crap load of quick sales before the truth was revealed that the surface quality is, perhaps still ok for many things, but certainly not what people were hoping or expecting from such a machine. People who like high quality surfaces for their miniatures should steer well clear of the ACF films. I guess the M5S would still be a good machine if you use nFEP, however these also seems to be the potential for bad compression problems with the auto-level feature, going by another review.
Thanks again for the video, love your work bro :)
The M5s is also using downgrade hardware to keep the cost lower after putting that money into a 12k LCD.
It's sad I think they stopped making the M3-Premium a much better machine.
My goal is to get the RUclipsrs the popular ones to start talking about quality instead of marketing and mostly useless features.
If we can educate the general population to demand a higher quality printer, we will all benefit.
But if we keep giving into these fast fast fast fast fast marketing gimmicks, we're going to keep getting degraded printers year after year.
@@J3DTech Agreed with all you've said here mate...I also wish they still made the M3 Premium, I've missed the boat on that printer...
Could this be caused by the matt finish on acf film or perhaps the slight thickness difference resulting in underexpsoure?
It is caused by the finish. It's diffusing the light and causing the surface texture.
Going to get Saturn 4 ultra
Can u tell me can i get extra film fep or acf can work ?
Also can i use satrun 3 acf ?
Luckily ACF seems to be going away.
What we have learned is that it only has a lower peeling force for a while but as you use it becomes very similar to nFEP but
Costs 3x, tears much easier, affects the print quality.
But you can use anything where the size of the sheet is larger than the VAT.
Ordered the NFep and changing my fep out .. THank you so much for your help..
No problem let me know if you need anything else
So you tested this on the M3 Premium? That’s 8k
Correct, I have yet to receive my 12k printer. The Saturn 3 ultra, I'll do a follow up.
New subber for this one 😮
Can you get your hands on the Phrozen ACF?
I purchased this from the manufacturer itself where all the printer companies source their materials.
However, I am willing to purchase one with a Phrozen logo on it and run the test again.
Love what you are doing ser :D
Thank you! I also followed up on the Saturn 3 Ultra using their pre-installed ACS. Same tests, same results.
im interested in your heating unit. please tel me something about it
I've tested 4 different options. The Thermal band vat heater. Chitubox heater, an egg incubator, and the white one on Amazon.
Each one has pros and cons I've listed these out at the bottom of my guide.
The texture seem to match the "rough" side of the AFC film, can you check on that?
I installed the Film according to the manufacturer's directions. I was very careful to make sure of that.
Once I get my Saturn 3 Ultra I'll do this test again.
By popular demand, I'll even purchase a Phrozen Film and run that test.
Lots of $$$ for this topic but it's the reason I'm doing this.
@@J3DTech I did not mean to say you install it wrong, but that the texture could be from the AFC, itself, rough surface.
Can you confirm if this is the Phrozen ACF? I trust phrozen more than some of these random listings I have been seeing.
I purchased it directly from the manufacturer. It is the same manufacturer that makes the film for everybody.
However, I am willing to go buy one with the Phrozen logo and run it again
@@J3DTech are you positive there is only one manufacturer?
@@user-it7kg3pm4q there is still the possibility for a quality difference, I have a discord where I communicate with a couple of different commercial 3D printers, one was absolutely furious at how bad the vertical lines on his new Mars 4 Ultra were, swore up and down about how bad ACF was, I was the only other person with experience with the material (purchased from Phrozen, placed on my Saturn 2) so I sent him some screenshots and we compared, his vertical lines were absolutely atrocious! Where as mine are only like a shadow on the model, they cannot be felt, you can see them, but, mostly only on flat surfaces, the best comparison is the old matrix Light grid arrays in the first Mono machines, sometimes you would see patterns or "shadows" on flat surfaces but it didn't affect the surface quality at all, I have vertical lines but they cannot be felt, I am reaping the benefits of ACF, I can print very large plates and hollow cross sections with a very noticeable reduction in supports, it handles steeper angles for longer distances, if i rest my hand on the machine I cannot even feel the pluck force on lift, my prints have become more dimensionally accurate because of the reduction in pull also allowing me to use smaller support tips. People compare ACF as a trade off between quality and speed, I see it differently, I feel like it's a trade off between absolute surface perfection or a huge QOL boost fighting against less forces casuing failed prints, as someone who supports and engages in all aspects of the process, I am a big Fan of ACF, BUT! That being said, I can see that my experiences may be an outlier or possibly some fluke, or it could be the lines I am seeing other people experience that are very terrible could be a reduction in quality to rush and meet demand to ship these printers, in the end, use what you like, but for me, I dont care about the lines appearing on models that will be painted anyways and the increase in reliability and QOL has been super dope, you can even see in one of the comparisons in this video there is a layer shift on the NFEP comparison where there is none in the same spot on the ACF model. So for those that are having really bad lines, I am sorry, that sucks, and I get the frustration, but for me, it's only like a shadow on the surface of the resin. Hopefully this ends up being sorted out soon because the potential here is great.
As a mini painter, I'd much rather lose a tiny bit of detail and not have to deal with visible layer lines.
If you're having layer lines on minis this isn't about nFEP this just means that your model is not properly supported or your settings are off.
You can get layer lines on ACF for the same issues.
@@J3DTech That's just not true. I'm not talking about layer shifting, I'm talking about layer lines. You can even see them in your video.
Video justified my purchase of some nfep prior to my 12k arriving. 😊
Yes 100%
Hi, what 12k printer did you order? I’ve ordered the m5s and will. Also buy an nFEP for it. Anycubic’s is said to have 95% transmittance whilst another brand said its 98%. Any clues? Also I need to know the size of the vat to order (one for speed and one for details)
@@avjebs for this generation I ended up going with Elegoo. Specifically the Saturn 3 Ultra
@@J3DTech I got it at the early bird price of 378$ so I’m still thinking about keeping it if the nfep enables great quality
@@avjebs It's a good price for a full sized printer.
thanks, great information I desired to buy nfep film but the doubt is which size I want to use (0.15,0.125,0.10) and I am using Mighty 12k and elegoo mars4ultra 9k
For the FEP thickness?
In my guide I have 2 links to what I use.
docs.google.com/document/d/1Z8fkzOxEgI9sOTwDKI6CeblpnuP4V8ayYVwZrYGmo44/edit#bookmark=id.f7x19c30uvoc
Great video as always.
What would be your assessment on the following situation:
I am using sunlu abs resin on a saturn 2. Both the dimmensional accuracy test and the cones of calibration print correctly. But i am having the recurring problem of many models sticking to the fep when using a layer height of .1mm, it does not happen if i print at .05mm height but for some reason the models at the bigger layer height do not hold to the supports. It is very easy to remove the supports on .05mm and quite convenient. But on the .1mm it just doesnt work...since i am printing models with good results on quality (when successful) at .1mm I wouldn't want to go for .05mm and twice the time...
A few things are going on here.
First, did you calibrate your resin at 0.1mm layer height? If not you will need to do that.
Second, not all resin is great at a thicker layer height. This is because the light from the UV needs to be able to push through that entire layer. A good rule is the darker the resin, the more pigments, the more pigents the harder light will have pushing through it.
At 0.1mm you will really start to notice layer lines, more on the tops of objects then on the sides. Depending on what you're printing this is just fine or unacceptable.
@J3DTech thank you. Yes, I did the calibration tests at both layer heights. The .1mm resulted around 3.4s exposure for successful cones of calibration and accurate square fitting on your dimensional test. And for .05mm it was 2s exposure.
The resin is in fact quite black.
Would mixing a light color or transparent resin work as the resulting resin would be lighter color. ?
Most likely since they are presupported from the creator they might have used too fine tips, and the pulling force resistance could be higher the thicker the layer is. Just a theory.
@@davidc3150 Adding a light colored resin would help but also increase blooming. You would need to redo calibration.
After proper calibration, failures are almost always a result of not enough support.
This is most true when you get rafts and supports but no model.
@J3DTech thank you for your patience. I need to start practicing with supporting my prints lol. Will try to get away with a middle point at .075mm. Hopefully being a thinner layer and trying improve the resin colour will help for the quick short term.
This is extremely helpful! Ty for your time. I'd like to ask something though, so i assume ACF film is for speed? Is it possible to replicate it on lower models speed wise? I have an Anycubic Photon, if i put a fast resin + ACF film, will i get close to 105 mm/hour performance?
You will be restricted by the firmware speed limits of the machine.
The silly thing is that people have been using what's called vroom for a very long time to print at the top speed limit of their printers. This is all been going on. Long before ACF film became a thing.
So I did buy some ACF, I used it on my Mega 8K as if any printer would take advantage of it this would be the one. I did notice a different surface texture. As for loss of quality I didn't notice anything significant. As far as release being better perhaps but I still saw that it wasn't night and day. I would say that it might be worth it but not by a huge margin but only on something that large I do like that it does seem to stretch better.
I'm still surprised about is how I got less of the pillars to print then on nFEP
@@J3DTech I'll be honest that one does surprise me I'm not experiencing any of that I do know on my mega 8K sometimes I have supports that detach and then reattach when they find something higher up I did not have that this time at all and I'm pretty sure that's nothing more than it stretching and sticking to the film, I will say though from what I've read and this is all speculation because nobody will say what film this actually is it is not anisotropic conductive film it is something else. My guess is ETFE or something similar.
@@J3DTech Also I wonder if "ACF" needs a higher exposure due to UV transmission possibly being lower. Now if we had an MSDS or what it actually was we could figure it out.
@@Texas3DCustoms My thinking is that, it is a very small pillar 0.1mm, 0.12mm, 0.14mm. I think that the texture is creating weak spots where it's braking and bending.
@@J3DTech the texture I have is not very significant just a very slight difference. I will take a short video after post processing
What is the speed loss between a 12k printing on FEP vs ACF?
All depends on what you're after and your printer. People have been using Vroom settings on FED and NFEP for a long time. ACF just makes it a bit... easier on your printer. But only the newer printers allow for faster movment speeds. The Satun 3 Ultra goes very fast at 500mm/m where most printers are at 250mm/m. So really in this it does not matter what film you're using the speed will be the same.
But I don't care for speed as much as I care for quality. If I can have both GREAT but I won't sacurface qualty for a little more speed.
Algorithm love.
Is there a difference between FEP film and nFEP film?
Not massive but nFEP is just a little better, a little stronger and releases a little better.
i still didnt get it haha. Should i get Mars 4 ULTRA or not becasue of ACF? :DDD
You can just replace the film if you want more detailed prints. If speed is what you're after you can leave it.
oh its that easy? :O haha ok thank you!@@J3DTech
@@alperenozgur Yep!
I'm curious if you can do this test between a 12k and a DLP printer, this is one of the best detail scrutiny test with explications I've seen
I don't have a DLP printer, but I do have the mini 8ks and I will be testing it against the 12k Saturn Ultra.
In reviewing some of the specifications i found that most standard 3d Printing nfep (PFA) and fep is 0.127mm thick where as ACF sits in at 0.3mm could this increase in thickness be responsible for some of the results we see?
It's a part of it. Thicker material pulls you further away from the LCD. The further away the more out of focus. Also the more material for the light to pass through the more diffused it will become.
However most of it is caused by the physical texture in this film.
Although the texture is on the bottom, this will dramatically diffuse and refocus the light according to the pattern.
Plus I'm pretty sure part of that pattern does get stamped into the layer.
Add all of these aspects together and you have the texture we all see.
@@J3DTech I wonder if that texture would be as pronounced if they produced it at half thickness if that's even possible.
@@sporeknight123 The texture is why it works how it does. If removed I don't think it would peel off of the LCD as well and you're back to nFEP.
Phrozen has an animation comparing ACF vs nFEP vs FEP. You can guess the impression it portrays. However, I did the 12 upgrade on the Mighty 8k including replacing the nFEP with the ACF and.... well.... it still goes pop on release. That animation definitely gave the impression there would be a silent release. I have not done tests on reducing bottom layer exposure yet. Phrozen made the claim that printing will be faster but did not specify how. I can only presume they were talking about reduced bottom exposure. But they made no recommendations, that I have seen.
Gotta love marketing.
The loud pop is often a result of the Z-offset being too low. I have another video titled "All you need to know to get started with 3D printing."
In that video at around the 9min mark I show off a calibration part for your build plate and I show how to use it. I'd recommend giving it a try.
Finally to get the speeds you have to use their slicer. Use a speed profile that will print at 0.1mm layer height. But you also have to use the speed resin that is a version of Eco resin with massive warping and shrinking properties.
It is fast. It just won't look good or last very long.
for me ACF vs NFEP reduced a lot the stickness to the FILM, i dont hear anymore the FLOP FLOP, only for first layers and really low sound, Im using ACF with Halot One and Halot Mage 8k, im loving it, my prints rarely fail
@@michaelnoardo3315 Yes me too acf for me is just better contrary to a lot of opinions. DISCLAIMER I think it is better for very large printers printing very large things, for small printers with inherently less peel force nfep is better, especially if you require maximum detail although for me both films produce great detail. I do hear that apparently there is a lot of poor quality acf suppliers so results might be mixed depending on which you buy and yes it is expensive. I actually like the matt finish you get using acf as it gets rid of any shiny spots.
Great video, ACF film needs 12k to justify the speed ( appreciate your waiting on 12k arrival). I personally think the speed increase is worth the slight loss of quality.
Please explain "ACF film needs 12k to justify the speed " Have you increased your speed? If so, how. Have a look at my post.
is it textured on both sides? i recall instructions to put fuzzy side down and smooth side up from some random old alix listing. reviews were meh tho anyway xD
It's only textured on one side. And yes there are very specific institutions on how to install it.
Why are all of them coming with ACF? do you think manufacturer of the 12K screen is telling them to go with acf?
My thought is the 12k screens and the downgrade of the hardware in order to keep the price point low created prints that we're not good looking. Looked worse than 8k.
So they made the decision to lean heavily into speed and not into quality.
I think the Saturn 3 Ultra is the only printer that focused on build quality versus gimmicks and marketing. I did order this printer and when I get one I'll do a full review
@@J3DTech this is the first time I'm seeing quality loss using ACF film though, any other prints I've seen these lines didn't show up even at higher speeds
so it does make me wonder whether something else might've just gone wrong here
@@J3DTech "I think the Saturn 3 Ultra is the only printer that focused on build quality versus gimmicks and marketing" - VOG says in his review of the S3U - "Too much, for too little", ruclips.net/video/UUY1lTtKtps/видео.html
@@retromodernart4426 I saw that and he failed to point out the downgrade screw and light source on the M5s, while the Saturn 3 Ultra upgraded theirs and finally removed that trash Ball joint.
@@J3DTech Can't wait for your review...
But ACF and NFEP have different percent transmittance(due to different materials and increased depth of ACF film which made at least at 0.3mm instead of standard 0.1), why the hell you decided that using exact the same settings is representative? They, at minimum, requires different exposure times, using exact the same settings only says that settings does matter.
And well reason why it's started to be used on 12k printers is pretty obvious - because film refraction is less noticeable when you have smaller points of light, it's can be neglected even more if you properly use fresnel lense to enforce UV direction
I also expected them to have a different exposure time.
However both printers cured this resin to perfect dimensional accuracy at the same exposure settings.
I was within 0.02mm tolerance on XY and Z of the STLs printed.
In fact I don't think I've seen another resin. Or printer comparison where this was done.
Well its still very noticable and ruins thw print quality.
I have a Chitu UV meter that i will use to measure this directly -- I suspect the transmission loss will be very small
@@patrickl9930 Yep, not enough to make a difference I'm sure.