• Mike Molitch-Hou

    I know it’s meaningless because we didn’t pursue it, but Danielle and I came up with the idea for a 3D makeup printer. Now, we will die.

  • Randall

    I’m not convinced it’s a 3D printer. To me is sounds like it’s just mixing materials and spitting it out in a tray of some sort.

    • Shane Taylor

      I agree. Indeed my second paragraph was originally asking whether Choi/TechCrunch had merely added ‘3D printer’ onto the header to gain audience attention, with a bit of my wittering about SASAM and ASTM definitions alongside a ‘what does 3D printing mean in the public consciousness’ for a more openminded definition.

      I decided to skip that and be subtle – the ‘may’ in ‘may be able to add 3D printed cosmetics’ at the close of the first paragraph was with this in mind. Better to provoke conversation that seek to define. 3D printing is an increasingly loose terminology: although that is in part because the mass media will do whatever it takes to hook an audience, even if it means tagging everything printed with ‘3D printer…’

      For now, I guess the popular consciousness definition may (just) encompass The Mink as a 3D printer. Industry standard definitions would probably suggest otherwise:


  • http://www.pud.ca/ Andrej Simeonov

    Already been done

  • chelsey reid

    Sounds great to me, cuts out the cruelty of animal testing that most cosmetic company’s are involved in.

    • Tethon, Inc.

      All regulations and testing of the raw materials still required for human use.