3D Printers

Hewlett Packard Emerges! Witness the Birth of a 3D Printing Behemoth!

HP 3d printer
Comments (43)
  1. Downeasta says:

    Now to get it to the people and not industry.

    1. Nothing stopping a group of people putting their money together and getting a printer that they themselves couldn’t afford alone.

  2. econolyst says:

    Hmm. Is this not high speed sintering developed and patented by Loughborough university in 2008. Looks very similar to the Factum technology now being developed as part of a UK government funded program. You guys covered it earlier in the year
    http://3dprintingindustry.com/2014/03/28/additive-manufacturing-hss-replace-injection-moulding-thats-factum/

    1. They wouldn’t tell me or let me look inside the machine, believe me, I tried. So at this point, yes, it’s possible it’s a variation on HSS technology. They did mention R&D began about 5 years ago, but they didn’t say HSS for sure.

    2. Official HP Quote: “Regarding your question, there are many 3D printing technologies that use inkjet to print onto build material, dating back more than 20 years, to some of the original technologies researched at leading American universities. HP’s Multi Jet Fusion technology is very unique, with the use of a multi-agent system and synchronous architecture.”

      1. I asked them specifically if it was HSS technology.

  3. BillD says:

    Wow, talk about marketing double-speak. I don’t see anything that makes this new printer worth that level of hyperbole. It looks like yet another commercial refrigerator sized monstrosity which will probably be priced at $50,000+. I’m sorry to disagree, but the “actual” 3D printing revolution started when the average person could buy one for under $1,000. Selling high end printers to high end clients with deep pockets has been done for 30 years without ever triggering a revolution in our daily life. I had hoped for more from HP, since they’re the biggest makers of inexpensive printers for ordinary people.

    1. I’m not marketing or paid by HP BillD. I’m genuinely excited about what I saw, and the fact that they’ve advanced past SLS, which I saw with my own eyes is exciting. We don’t know the price yet, but like I said, a whole new way to print is revolutionary at this point vs the same machines and technology in the witness protection program that have the same limitations of speed, price and quality that have been surpassed here. Why segment a revolution? They are all connected. Also, they announced no price.

      1. BillD says:

        I guess I wasn’t clear. I was speaking specifically about HP’s printer announcement, not your coverage of the announcement. The quotes from Dion Weisler were full of invented terminology and nebulous claims. Nothing says “marketing was here” like a quote filled to the brim with nebulous rhetoric and absent of any real specifications. If I had a dollar for every product announcement I’ve seen which claimed their printer was 10 times faster than any other, I’d be very rich. Show me unbiased test data to support this claim, then I’ll buy into the rhetoric. As users, many of us have been burned by unsubstantiated marketing claims before and are therefore justifiably skeptical of these carefully crafted product announcements.

        In all honestly, I really wanted to be excited about this printer announcement, but we didn’t get any real information to get excited about. What we got was a bullet point list of marketing claims with zero actual numbers to back them up. As a geek, I find the new technology interesting. As a 3D printer user, I care more about the costs, real world utility, and usable size.

        1. I guess we’ll all have to stay tuned for more information 🙂

        2. I’m an optimistic skeptic, Bill, and HP historically has a great track record as an innovative company, versus a lot of untested hype companies that definitely exist in the 3D printing industry today. Whether or not you trust the endorsements of 3D Systems, Stratasys, Terry Wohler’s and Peter Weijmarshausen of Shapeways is up to you. My point of view is that you don’t have to be pessimistic in order to be skeptical. You can allow yourself to enjoy the thrill of technology progressing, because it will. And it will alter what is valuable knowledge, which is an understandable concern to those who’ve spent a significant investment in developing a high skill level in technologies which could all of the sudden be rendered obsolete.

  4. Jeremy Pullin says:

    Ok Andrew ok.
    In the words of Michael Winner “Calm down dear. it’s just a commericial”.
    It does look different to HSS in the sence of multimaterials and multicolour but as with all such things I will believe it when I see it.
    We need to remember that there is a huge difference between a press conference and a working tried and tested product. Having said that if hp deliver what they have promised here then I want one of everrything please.

    1. I’ve seen it. I believe it. The cognitive dissonance is something I can’t relate to. HP is definitely going to deliver, I’m sure of it. Sorry industry, change is on the way.

      1. Jeremy Pullin says:

        It looks absolutely awesome and hp have clearly done a fantastic job. it’s great to see a slightly new approach rather than a direct rehashing of existing technology. My reservation is that as a product it is still on the product development lifecycle path so no you haven’t seen it Andrew because it doesn’t exist yet. What you have seen is a technology demonstrator. The good folks at hp still have a lot of work to do on this.

        1. I’ve seen it. I’ve seen the parts. I spoke to the engineers. It exists and it needs work. It was a technology demonstration of existing technology that will get better.

          1. Jeremy Pullin says:

            Ok Andrew you obviously don’t understand new product development at all so fine.
            It’ll be great and change the world and be just like star trek and we’ll all make whatever we want at home so won’t need money and world hunger will be ended because we’ll be 3d printing our our food and it doesn’t matter if the the food is unhealthy because we’ll be printing our own replacement body parts and we’ll 3D print world peace.
            Now that I have told you all of the things above you can compile it all in an article and say that it’s true because somebody said so and you’ll look awesome.

          2. Wow, Jeremy, I should have sent you my extra ticket to the launch 🙂 Now, I guess we’ll have to wait and see…

          3. Jeremy Pullin says:

            Looking forward to it. By the way I do like it when a writer puts something of their personality into their writing so well done for that.

  5. Rachel Park says:

    It was a very slick press conference and it pressed all the right buttons on the excitement front. As ever I got over-excited by it all, and I was only watching the live stream. Managed to dial it back a bit over night! Andrew was actually there and he was buzzing — nothing wrong with that. Lots of hyperbole from the Autodesk peeps, that often strayed into cliche, but if they scale this up AND it does everything it says on the tin, (faster, better, cheaper) with strong parts and multi-materials — then you are talking about a process that will compete with existing prototyping and production tech. It’s a huge leap forward for inkjet tech in the 3rd dimension. It won’t have much impact on the desktop 3D printers IMHO, but it will almost certainly make 3D printing for the consumer, via 3rd party services, much more exciting. Looks as though Shapeways is buying in to it at least.

    Also – while the 3D printer is very impressive, in terms of driving the ‘ecosystem’ everyone is banging on about these days, Sprout is a really interesting proposition. This will have an impact on the desktop 3D printers, in that it will likely make them more accessible to more people via a very nice, intuitive interface. And with Autodesk involved, it’s only going to grow.

    1. BillD says:

      Thank you for injecting the voice of reason into this overly giddy celebration of HP marketing prowess. Like you, I don’t see this printer impacting the fast-growing desktop 3D printing market for years to come.

  6. William Holden says:

    The printer will cost only $500, but the proprietary cartridges will be $1000 per ounce…and it will go through an endless start-up routine… and… OK you get the point.

    1. Yeah, there’s no way HP could make an affordable printer that everyone ends up using all the time for years and years.

      1. William Holden says:

        It would be nice if new 3D printing tech involved material that’s not so self-contained or prepackaged. When a shop buys a new CNC lathe, they’re not forced to buy their materials from the lathe manufacturer in tiny packages. It seems to me these companies don’t really have a manufacturing perspective. I understand the whole consumables, residual income thing; it’s just a drag that’s all.

        1. A CNC lathe is a very different machine. And where does it say you will be forced to buy materials? In fact, the open platform mentioned in the article is an invitation to collaborate on materials innovation. And HP doesn’t have a manufacturing perspective? HP invented it’s first resistance capacitance oscillator in 1938! They are one of the classic “started in a garage” manufacturer stories. I understand being suspicious of big companies with a lot of capital, I really do, but there’s nothing they can do to stop someone from using a CNC lathe or any printer you want to make at home.

          1. William Holden says:

            I would hope that others can compete to supply material for these machines. I was talking about machines for manufacturing not their inability to manufacture machines (Of course they can manufacture machines themselves as they’ve proven).

          2. Ah ok. I agree, I hope they don’t make that an impossibility regarding materials. We’ll have more details about the technology in the coming months.

          3. Btw, people are pretty happy with their vinyl cutters, which is a machine that manufactures. It is a staple of many digital fabrication labs around the world.

          4. James T. Kilroy Jr says:

            Oh come on, when was the last time you purchased 3rd party ink for your HP Plotter or Printer with an HP endorsement? That’s what I thought. It will be a closed box.

          5. Quincy says:

            Open materials collaboration! It’s not hard to understand. HP is openly collaborating with Autodesk. Maybe it will be, but nobody knows for sure.

  7. Dizingof says:

    Sorry to spoil the party.. The HP, Autodesk Video showing Mr Terry Wholers holding my design – Voronoi Sea Stars Lampshade – without permission nor attribution to designer!
    as per Creative Commons – non commercial – Attribution – license !

    1. We took it down. Let us know what happens 😉

      1. Dizingof says:

        HP/Autodesk have edited out the parts in the video where Mr Terry Wohlers holds my design in his hand.

        Was it so hard to add a credit to designer than to cut all scenes of his grin face holding my design in his hands?..

        Shame.

        1. Julia Truchsess says:

          Asher, maybe you should have specifically said that they can keep your design in the film if they just give credit. I agree that would have been a much nicer solution for everyone, but your original post made it seem like you preferred to have it removed completely. Your work is the best, I want to see it out there with proper credit!

          1. Jeremy Pullin says:

            I agree it would have been good to keep it in with the proper credit. It looks great.

  8. Martyn Hogg says:

    Always good to see the bar raised and I expect we will see this happen regularly. I’d like to see an independent review from actual users of existing technology both for printing finished designs to developing new designs.

    1. They wouldn’t let us use or see inside the machine. I really want to see if I can get them to let me use it and write about it.

      1. Martyn Hogg says:

        In order to really believe the hype, these systems need to be independently tested and evaluated. Easier said than done! In the meantime, they are all pretty cool 🙂

  9. Guest says:

    What a great article!

  10. econolyst says:

    Jez, as always sensible to the last.

    I agree, it is a commercial and people (especially the media) should calm down. In reality it is just another process to add to the arsenal of existing processes. are the parts transparent (No), translucent (No), bioresorbably (no), conductive (No), resistant to oils, acids, alkaline s (?), can they be used as patterns for casting (?), can the process be used to make large flat surfaced objects (?), can the process build multilateral functionality (?), is the material flight certified with zero flame and smoke emission (?)

    So in short – the King is dead – long live the king………

    There is of course the issue of part / process validation. It is hard enough to get a laser sintered nylon into a supply chain. Now imaging a propitiatory polymer power that has been infiltrated with ‘multi-agent’ additives using synchronous architecture. I am happy that the developer of the process in the promo video hung his car from a chain link made using the process but my land-yacht is staying at sea level.

    PS – I did see some parts earlier in the year (Hush….) and they do make SLS look like the poor orphan relative. But as you say – lets wait until the machines are out in the open and the users can decide on how good they really are.

    You may be totally bonkers when you present on stage my friend, but you are honest to the last about technology capabilities. I cant wait to heat the Pullin review in a year or two’s time.

    1. It’s ok to get excited, everyone. I’m against hype, which is why I was so excited. And you can tell a lot by the parts of a 3D printing machine, no? The actual product that the machine produces? They added a different category of technology that outdoes SLS and invited people to collaborate on translucent (yes) bioreabsorbable (yes) conductive (yes) and other materials in their Open Platform, an invitation to everyone. I respect Jeremy’s opinion as much as anyone, and I agree with his position on hype, and worries about the industry. But this whole ecosystem, sprout, open platform and multijet is a big deal for the industry. It’s worth being excited about. That’s my opinion, I’m excited for it, and I encourage others to enjoy the announcement. Also, I’d rather hang my car with HP multi jet fusion print than an SLS print, because the cross-section of layers that absorb the torque of twisting force would snap the SLS link, bringing the car crashing to the ground.

  11. econolyst says:

    Roll on 2016, by which time we will no more…..

Leave a Reply