justin1985

Might be easier to simply offer someone a refund if they're clearly clueless about doing the print?

I think ScaleScenes really provides a test case in a lot of ways - including price. As I pointed out before, ScaleScenes PDFs are out of John's control as soon as someone downloads them, but that doesn't -seem- to undermine his business. I think his prices help explain that - most between £3 and £9, I think? Few people are going to baulk at that, so illicit sharing doesn't seem to be much of a problem. Looking on the Cults3D site, there are some really nice and very detailed "kits" for 1:72 aircraft - some for as little as £2! That actually seems too cheap to me! But single figures seems to be the key. The other way to think about it is how much commission do you actually get from a Shapeways sale? I've never actually sold on there, but when I looked into it a few years ago, it was a pretty low %. So probably actually single figures £ too? Digital locks ("DRM" - Digital Rights Management) are a non starter for reasons already mentioned - not least in terms of STL files needing to be processed and transferred to printers via any number of different routes for different machines. I think the trick really is in setting a price that encourages honesty to strike a balance!

Exactly this - it's been a very long time since I've bought anything on Shapeways, mainly because I actually think I can get better quality prints on my Photon at home. It therefore really rankles that the only way to get hold of designs by others is to pay quite high prices for a Shapeways print that is, in my opinion, inferior in quality to a home print. Therefore I'd be very happy to pay for STLs to print at home! But I certainly see the disadvantages - once an STL is shared, you can't control what happens to it further. That said, I'm not aware that that has been a problem for e.g. ScaleScenes - there is nothing technically stopping people who buy their PDFs from sharing them with others, but it doesn't seem like that's happening in any significant way. At least, it clearly seems viable for them to keep on with that business model and they keep developing new kits, so sales must be worthwhile. I imagine the trick is that there is a price point where most people would regard it as "fair" and essentially choose to pay, whereas if the price is seen as "high", more would be tempted to dishonesty. There seems to be a thriving scene in designing and sharing "minis" - figures for Games Workshop type gaming - to judge from the Photon users group on Facebook. Many designers seem to put their stuff on free STL sites like Thingiverse, but actively ask for donations on Patreon. There also seem to be some commercial STL marketplaces aimed mostly at this market, e.g. https://cults3d.com/en - this site has an "architecture" category that seems to have some scale models for aircraft as well as HO railroads. I get the impression from watching this community (via the Photon Facebook group etc) that this model does work - yes you do loose control of your STL, but at the end of the day if the price is fair, enough people will be honest and pay. And of course, an STL is much less useful than the original design if anyone wants customisation, and there is definitely a commercial market in that kind of thing around Thingiverse etc - make a basic version available, and advertise the fact you can customise it for people for a fee. I hope this helps - it would be great to get more railway bits available this way! Justin

How does the Mr Decal Paper stock look in terms of thickness? The sheets I got from Ghost when I ordered the toner seem much thinner than the old CraftyComputerPaper sheet I still had left, so I was kind of resigned to it being worth getting new stocks from Ghost in future. Ghost's delivery charges for anywhere other than Germany are just ridiculous. I did try using the address of a good friend who lives in Austria, and getting him to re-send by normal post, or bring when he next visits, but even that was really quite expensive. So I had cooked up a plan to get some delivered to a colleague's office I was going to be visiting in Münster - but then lockdown happened! Many German businesses have a cheaper rate for Austria and Switzerland compared to the rest of Europe, but with Ghost this was only a marginal difference. I don't see why they are so wedded to what is clearly a bad deal with Fedex, which is losing them business! I noticed they even had a page on their FAQs explaining that other businesses advertising "free delivery" pass on costs in other ways, but that doesn't explain why their rates so exorbitant. DM Toys, amongst others, manage to do very quick and efficient courier delivery to the UK for models for €9.99 with DHL and/or Deutsche Post, so it's clearly not impossible to get decent prices for overseas delivery from German couriers! Justin

Hi Izzy - I'm not sure of the distinction - what does loose heel signify, as opposed to 'hinged'? Thanks Andy. I have built turnouts (actually for Z / 6.5mm gauge) using code 40 flat bottom rail, but I found the rail was actually much harder to work with in terms of filing down crossing Vees and blades, compared to code 40 bullhead. It was, however, refreshing to be sure I had it the right way up! If most of the visible track work is going to be buried under paving etc. and laid on solid PCB or at least non-prototypically spaced sleepers, I don't really see any great advantage to either type of rail - apart from the fact the parts are easier to fabricate with bullhead. I'd be interested to hear why you think FB would be faster and easier?

I'm not sure I quite followed the instructions, and as Andy said, it will be buried, so not worrying about sleepers. But this looks like it should work, I think? Thanks for everyone's help Justin

Thanks Martin. Do you know if Templot has been checked as working in it? I was a bit put off by the fact that the two other Windows only programs I need to use occasionally, which are much more common - MS Access, and ESRI ArcGIS Pro - aren't listed as checked/supported on their online database. Doesn't seem to bode well ... I never actually tried those two in WINE before, but if I'm paying £50, I'd like to know they'd work!

Many thanks for all of the replies - I don't think I would have ever worked that name out myself! It does look quite fun, so my temptation to build it is growing! I work in 2mm Finescale, so hinging and tie-bars would probably be a bit different to larger scales. I just replied to a thread in this subform asking about this this. On a 2mmFS layout I inherited from another 2mm member, he had built hinged switch blades in a way that seems to use flat headed brass pins (probably custom turned) soldered to a small notch where the bottom of the bullhead had been filed off. This seems to work well. I tend to use under - baseboard tie bars with wire droppers. If I did go ahead and build this little scene, it would be a cameo/diorama to fit the 2mm Association Diamond Jubilee competition size of 600mm x 240mm. I am very inspired by Mikkel's Farthing dioramas, so I'm thinking this would work along similar lines - perhaps the inside of the goods depot could be an adjoining diorama etc. Unfortunately MacOS Catalina has broken WINE by removing support for 32-bit code, so I'll have to wait until I dig out my old Windows laptop (which i keep for things like this) before I can play with Templot again, probably tonight. Justin

Hi @Wayne Kinney - I "inherited" Bill Blackburn's 2mmFS "Long Melford" project - he had used hinged switch blades on one crossover. It was already painted and ballasted, so I haven't been able to get a complete understanding of how he built them. It LOOKS like he might have filed off the bottom web of the bullhead rail at the pivot and soldered on a small flat headed brass pin (perhaps a 2mm loco flanged crankpin with the short end removed?) to act as the pivot. Some pictures here: https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/124928-2mmfs-long-melford/page/2/ . I can take close ups if it would help? This has been a reminder of how long it has been since I made progress on that layout - whoops! Justin

Some might be familiar with this image on the cover of vol.1 of "Great Eastern in Town and Country". It shows the approach to the terminus of the GER "London Dock Railway" branch (twig?) near St Katherine's dock. It sort of typifies the grimy urban yard doesn't it? At first glance, I assumed the trackwork in the middle of the view was a slip of some kind, but then I realised the two turnouts are actually independent of each other. They're just "overlaid". What is the proper term for this? I've searched things like "interlaced" but that is something quite different! And how should I go about designing something like this in Templot? I've approximated something like it by first creating a parallel track, then crossover, then inserting a turnout into the original parallel track, and roaming it to overlay the crossover at the right point. Is that all there is to it? Or should I be doing something specific to prevent conflicts? (e.g. sleepers are all over the place) Thanks! Justin

Strange! They only have LMS and GWR now, but they definitely did have them for all of the big four a few months ago. These were new introductions after the N Gauge Society arrangement ended. They're much more useful than the Fox ones because they have ready made numbers, as well as a good selection of wording for special wagon types etc ("LARGE", "Fruit", etc.) https://modelmaster.uk/691-2mm-scale-sr-gwr-lms-lner-wagons\ It might be worth getting in touch to see if they've sold out and are planning to re-stock? J

Such a great series of blogs Anthony - really inspirational!

Hi @njee20 - yes its two passes needed for white + any other colour involving black. It would be theoretically possible to include colours based on the CMY colours BUT the big catch is the fact that all home/office printers work with RGB colours from your computer and convert them to CMYK colours to suit the toners, themselves. Even if you design in CMYK in your graphics software. So whatever colour you design, the printer is assuming it can use white (paper) and black (K) to modulate that colour. If you print any other colour when you have the white toner fitted, you might get quite unexpected results because it will be mixing in the white as if it were black, if that make sense. But, I did find layering two decal sheets, one printed with white, the other with black/other colours, was very successful, because the decal film is so thin. Two passes through the printer with the same film seems good enough for the t-shirt printing etc that seems to be their main market, but not accurate enough for small scale models, unfortunately. This 2mm scale private owner wagon has the shadow applied as one layer, with the white layer over the top. Justin

Hi there, looks like some great work you're doing! Re: the membranes and other spurious features, have you tried running your files through the Photon File Validator before printing? https://github.com/Photonsters/PhotonFileValidator I long since gave up on using the Anycubic slicing app. Regarding the Chitubox size issue though, I do remember having a similar problem with scaling of objects when I first started using it - the screen resolution wasn't set correctly! Worth double checking? I like the DCC++ case - I had been considering something similar for a setup I recently put together, but ended up just using a ready made box from Rapid for now. What kind of tolerances did you use for the clips / are you using a specific flex resin? Justin

Hi Nick, I actually ended up getting an MF70 after already having a TBM220 (I'd ended up with a generous gift card for Axminster) and I've been vaguely playing with the idea of getting rid of the TBM-220 - not least to save space, to be honest. One thing I've found with the TBM is adjusting the height of the drill body on its pole, when changing between bits of very different sizes, makes it hard to get it aligned perpendicular to the work piece again, and it can end up swinging on an arc around the pole if not tightened back up frighteningly tight, and therefore holes can end up wandering. This pushes me towards using the MF70 for drilling ... Just wondering what your experience has been drilling on the MF70? Are there any jobs it hasn't worked so well for? I recall being told the MF70 has the opposite problem to the one @michl080 mentions with the TBM-220 - its spindle speed can't go slow enough for larger drill bits? Justin

This looks amazing! I'd love to know a bit more about how you made it? It looks like you've got a few Arduino Nano boards there, is that what's running the handset? The display you've got on the little LCD there looks very clear and intuitive.

Couriers all seem as usual here, but Royal Mail are even worse than their typically awful selves here in deepest South London. In the last few weeks I've literally had DHL parcels from China quicker than its takes RM to get a jiffy bag here from Essex.

I think there have been a few threads on here mentioning DCC++ in the past, but I thought I'd share my experience of putting together a system using it now, and hopefully join up some of the dots of the different bits of kit and and code that are necessary - especially to use it with WiFi. I've never been totally satisfied with the DCC controllers that I've owned, but equally never felt that any of the others on the market particularly appeal either. My main DCC controller has been a ROCO Multimaus system with the basic booster split from a train set and bought cheaply from German eBay, which has the big limitation of not being able to read-back CV values or anything. The relatively high track voltage also made me a little tetchy. A little while back I got tempted by the Digikeijs DR5000, which seemed very appealing in terms of offering many of the WiFi based advantages of the ROCO Z21 system, without the need for a clunky second WiFi router, however I personally found it very counter-intuitive to use and ended up selling it. So, when I saw a mention of DCC++ as a system built off an Arduino, I was hooked by the potential for a flexible system that, to me at least, seems to demystify DCC by making it a bit less of a "black box". DCC++ is a system that uses a combination of off the shelf Arduino circuits to implement the NMRA DCC standard. It seems to have been developed single handedly several years ago, and development of the core code doesn't seem to have continued much since 2016, but it is fully functional. The code is all open source and freely available via GitHub here: https://github.com/DccPlusPlus . The name is a deliberate pun on the fact that the Arduino platform is coded in the C++ programming language. The developer posted a really comprehensive videos on YouTube that explain (very clearly) how the NMRA DCC system works conceptually, as well as how it is implemented. I found these really illuminating: The video very nicely explains the fact that a DCC signal is required to be bipolar (swinging between equal + and - polarity to encode the digital bits) whereas a normal micro controller, such as the Arduino, uses digital signals that range between a + value and 0. The video goes on to explain how the code he has written takes clever advantage of some of the low level features of the Arduino, like using low level functions to customise the duration of PWM signals generated by the controller's timers, which just happen to work in a suitable way on just two of its pins. The third video explains how the next stage of transforming the customised PWM signal into a bipolar signal using a particular full bridge driver chip, which just happens to be the one used on the official Arduino motor shield. As he says, this is getting very lucky! Jumper pins are added to connect the PWM signals generated by the Arduino to pins used by the motor shield for 'direction', which it controls by reversing the polarity of the signal. Hey presto, a DCC type signal is created! So, I ordered a new Arduino Uno, and a genuine Arduino Motor Shield, rev.3. Apparently some of the clones will work, but not others, so I went genuine. Before clipping the two boards together it is also necessary to cut one trace marked V-IN CONNECT on the bottom of the motor shield, which isolates the shield's external power supply from feeding back to the Arduino itself. This is necessary as the motor shield needs 15v, which will the track voltage, but that is at the upper limit of what the Arduino can handle - it's designed for the 5v supplied via a normal USB connection. This means you'll need two power supplies. The other step is connecting the jumpers between pins 10 and 12, and 5 and 13. The external power supply connects to the outermost screw terminals of the motor shield, the next pair of terminals are the track feed, and the final pair are used for a programming track connection. I've put the whole lot into a small project box, and connected the power in to a standard 2.1mm DC power jack, and all of the track connections to some chunky 4mm Hi-Fi style test terminals. I really like these because you can both plug in a normal banana plug, and screw in a bare wire - useful for testing! Once powered on and connected to the track, you can use all DCC running and programming functions using the Arduino's USB connection. The developer of DCC++ provided an interface for this created in an environment called Processing. This is a bit confusing, not least because the author's layout track plan is hard-coded into it! I hadn't met the Processing environment before, but it looks like it wouldn't be too difficult to master. Nonetheless, I decided it was easier to just ditch this, and use JMRI, which has built in support for DCC++. I found this worked with no hassle at all, although of course control via a PC is a little clunky. The other component you can see in the box is a ESP-01 WiFi module. There seem to be lots of ways of implementing WiFi with DCC++. many of them documented via threads on the Trainboard forum. This one called BaseStation seems like its been the most commonly used one for a while, which uses a combination of an Arduino running the normal DCC++ software, plus an ESP module. The ESP family of modules are very compact WiFi clients that can be programmed in the same way as an Arduino. However it seems like several of the libraries the most recent version depends on to compile in Visual Studio code have already changed too much or disappeared, and I couldn't get it to work. Instead I used a simpler project called WiThrottle https://github.com/vhar/withrottle by a Russian developer, which is documented in this video. The ESP module needs an adapter to program. There are some instructions out there on using an Arduino as an interface for this, but I found it was easier to buy a UART - USB adapter from eBay for a pound or two (although even this needed a jumper or switch soldering on to put it in programming mode). Once that is flashed with the WiThrottle code (via the Arduino software), the module I had needed an adapter to connect the 3.3v board to the 5v Arduino. The video shows how to do this with resistors, but I got a dedicated adapter circuit (also dead cheap from eBay) so I could still easily plug it back into the programmer if needed. This made it easy to collect to the Arduino via jumper wires (to Ground, 5v, TX to RX, and RX to TX). So, now I have a working controller which I can use EngineDriver on my phone to control as a throttle via WiFi without needing a PC turned on, or I can program via JMRI and a USB connection. I've basically spent what it would have cost me to buy a Sprog. But I certainly feel like I know an awful lot more about the way DCC works! It seems like the developers who have been working on this kind of thing have moved on from Arduino as a basis to using ESP modules on their own. The developer behind BaseStation has a new project that connects a more up to date ESP32 module directly to a motor shield: https://www.trainboard.com/highball/index.php?threads/esp32-command-station.112634/ which looks really promising. However, for now, I've decided to try effectively replacing the ESP module with a Raspberry Pi running a full version of JMRI, which will allow the EngineDriver app to download loco profiles, as well as letting me program decoders etc via WiFi as well by connecting to a remote desktop. The big attraction for me is being able to connect via my normal home WiFi, so phones connected as throttles can still access the internet and other devices on the network at the same time - not being able to do this with Z21, DR5000, etc, seems a bit of a fatal flaw to me. I've ordered a Raspberry Pi 3A+ (older slower model, but designed for embedded applications) that hopefully should arrive very soon. I hope this little write up has been useful. I'd love to hear how others have got on with DCC++! Justin

Hmmm. Is the size of the Scottie Dog prototypical on the blue one? Looks very big to me! I am intrigued by the promise of a Next18 socket though - does this mean the dodgy PCB has been upgraded in general? I'd definitely be interested to see under the hood once someone gets one in their hands!

That's the one. https://github.com/Photonsters/anycubic-photon-docs/blob/master/temp/slice_angles-van_kesteren.jpg It certainly makes sense, and using those angles has worked for me. But whether that is scientific success, or luck, I'm far from sure!

I remember hearing at the time it was serious health issues, so I don't imagine it will be possible to make any contact anymore

Great idea! Aren't they a bit brittle once cured though? Perhaps worth trying in a "flex" resin if they were going on a layout?

I've just been looking at those too. There don't seem to be many reviews or anything of those yet - at least not in English (several on YouTube in French ...) although one I did see mentioned the laser module looking "not quite the same" - hopefully in a good way! It is interesting that the Emblazer's laser is 4W - presumably directly equivalent to the "15w" laser on these units (supposedly actually 4.4w light output). I'm sure the Emblazer has a much better manufactured unit, and better optics. But if they're at least comparable in output and cutting capacity, that is encouraging! I wonder whether the "20w" version of the Ortur Master 2 is worth the difference? £220 versus £160 on GearBest.

I gather what is now sold as the "Photon" actually uses the apparently questionable controller board that is in the Photon S! Although apparently firmware updates for both have given compatibility for third party (i.e. much better) slicer software, which theoretically should get past the main complaint about the "S". On paper the S has a better spec, both in terms of the Z axis being better than the stock one on the Photon, and I believe a more powerful UV array giving faster curing times. The complaints were always the controller breaking compatibility with other software. I have heard a lot of good experience with the Elgoo Mars though. I think someone is posting about one on the 3D Printing Forum here. On printing orientation, there was a chart doing the rounds on owners groups calculating the optimum angle for each layer height, based on pixel size/spacing on the LCD. I seem to recall 22.9 or something being optimum for 0.02 layer height? J

Hi all, I've noticed quite a few YouTube videos recently using a range of diode based Chinese laser cutters branded as "Ortur", and very similar clones. They seem to be (optimistically) rated by input wattages of 7w, 15w, or 20w, and most have a neat (but presumably not so robust) format with an arm projecting into space, rather than a rigid rectangular frame. This video seems particularly interesting in terms of reviewing one for cutting capability, whereas most seem to just focus on engraving: It doesn't seem surprising that a basic diode laser can't cut MDF or clear acrylic, which a CO2 laser could. However, the fact it can cut card, foamboard, foam, thin ply, and black acrylic does give me some interesting thoughts about one of these making a more flexible replacement for the kind of jobs I'd currently use a Silhouette cutter for - i.e. buildings, or perhaps things like coaches or wagons built up from overlays. It might not be able to cut plasticard, but I find the Silhouette quite limited when it comes to cutting out very intricate shapes in even 0.5mm plasticard. Has anyone tried one of these, or anything similar? Justin