For those of you in Chicago, you can see my piece ‘Laura: RGB’ (above) in a show called Improbable Objects, opening tomorrow at What It Is.

It’s an interesting collection of artists working with 3d scanning and 3d printing, and includes SAIC faculty members Claudia Hart and Dan Price, alongside Marius Watz, Micah Ganske and many others.

The gallery is located at 23 East Madison, near the corner of Wabash. For full details click here.

My sculpture “Dominick” will be included in this group exhibition, which opens this Saturday at MuseCPMI in New York. Seeing Ourselves is curated by Koan Jeff Baysa, M.D., and Caitlin Hardy, M.D. Here’s the full press release and visitor information.

I enjoyed reading the curators’ statement, which reads (in part): “Historically, the partial or fragmented image suggested grief and nostalgia for the loss of a vanished totality and a utopian wholeness. In diagnostic imaging, the body is examined in detail, piecemeal and irreconciled, described in terms of ‘cuts’ and ’slices.’ The body in pieces, viewed as relics and synecdoches, constitute deconstructed images of humans and problematize issues of creation and re-creation, existence and mortality, integration and dissolution, especially when the images of the dematerialized body are translated from digital code, existing as pure information. There are dire consequences of equating digital reconstructions with the real. Medical images circulate similarly within this belief system and are often thought to be equivalent to the bodies represented within them. Realizing that MRI images are only re-presentations and partial truths empowers us to recognize the political, social, and economic factors that affect the interpretation of these images…”

Please note that the exhibition now opens to the public on March 10th, not on the 6th as currently stated on the website.

I liked this post on ‘object cancers’ and 3d printing misprints at BLDGBLOG. You can see more renders here at zeitguised, though the idea of misprinted concrete houses being used by squatters is clearly architectural fiction.

Here’s another small test, this time using the gold plate stainless steel material from Ponoko. This is printed directly in metal — no moldmaking or casting required.

The design rules for this material are pretty stringent and I had a lot of trouble with the file… I felt bad for their (awesome and very patient) customer service team. I’m happy this finally worked!

I don’t usually post about this kind of thing, but I felt compelled to do so after I came across the website for Origo, which claims to be “a 3d printer for mom, dad and the entire family”. The product — still in the concept design stages, it seems — is explicit about its being marketed to children. Looking at their advertising, and the advertising for 3D Tin, the cloud-based 3d modeling app they use, it looks like it’s mainly targeted at boys. Above is the video for Origo, which shows a boy dreaming about dragons, airplanes and other images stereotypically associated with toys for boys.

Here are some pictures of boys using the prototype.

Here’s the splash page for 3dtin: lots of cars, robots, and spaceships. If you follow through to the building page, you see more of the same, plus some blue cars and video game characters.

Here’s are the three alternating front pages for Lego DesignByMe. Notice a common theme? This is admittedly a cute product: it allows you to design and order 3d printed Lego blocks. But the minifigs in the software are almost exclusively male, and a prominent feature suggests that you “build with Dad”.

It’s interesting how marketing to children is far more explicit than marketing for adults. While I’m sure none of these manufacturers were even aware of this bias, and it isn’t limited to digital building toys, if these companies wanted to alienate 50% of their potential market this would be an excellent way to start.

I remember that even as a young girl, the marketing of certain construction toys sent a clear, instant message that they were designed for someone else. And now as an adult woman artist working with technology, and as the mother of a daughter, this kind of thing just makes me depressed. Of course the solution is more complex than including pictures of girls in their advertising materials, but it wouldn’t be a bad place to start.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m off to 3d print a pink, sparkly fairy princess…

I have been curious about using Zcorp full color 3d printing for some time, having seen several artists experimenting with it. It took me a while to get a workable file for output, though (hint: if you are UV mapping in Maya, you will need to export an .obj and then use Accutrans 3d to write the .wrl format.)

Once I finally did, I ordered this test from Solid Technologies’ 3d printing service bureau. This was printed at 1:3 so it’s about 9cm high; obviously the resolution would be higher at life-size. It’s been coated with cyanoacralate, no wax, which apparently leads to less yellowing and more color fidelity.

I wasn’t sure how my photographic texture would translate, but I’m actually very pleased with how this came out. Ben at Solid Technologies was extremely helpful throughout the process, which I really appreciated, as my files are usually messy and 3d printing them is never straightforward.

I’ve never used any kind of color in my sculptures before, so this is a big step for me… Feedback is welcome!

I just posted images of a new sculpture here. This is the first piece I’ve made in ABS acrylic. I’m also thinking of having this cast in metal soon.