Hey guys, why is this box smiling? Because it has an Anycubic D2 DLP printer inside!
Yes, I have one. Yes, I’ve been playing with it, and No, I can’t tell you much about it.
I know, I know, that’s very irritating, but Anycubic have specifically requested that I don’t
reveal any information before the release date on this printer on 2nd September. But they didn’t say
I couldn’t print with it. And they didn’t say I couldn’t show you those prints… w-ahhahhaha!
Just a little over a twelve months ago, I featured this ring in a video,
much like this one, where I sneakily revealed a print made on the Anycubic Photon Ultra,
the world’s first budget DLP printer. At that time, I claimed it was the
most detailed print I’d ever seen, and it was, until the Phrozen Mini 8K came along.
The ring was designed by the hugely talented artist and ZBrush Instructor, Tomas Wittelsbach,
and he kindly allowed me to use to this fabulous ring design in my videos. At the time I printed
the ring on the Ultra, and it did an amazing job… but the D2 of course is bigger and better.
And THIS was printed on the D2. It is incredible. I’ve known for a long
time that there was detail on this ring that the Ultra couldn’t reveal, but it seems the D2 can.
Up close and personal, the ring begins to look a little staggered, more like a Minecraft creation,
but that’s DLPs for you. As I’ve said before…
In a nutshell, when LCDs focus light onto a single pixel, it creates shadows and
blurs around the edges. DLPs use projectors and micro-mirrors to focus light, which is sharper,
without shadows and blurring. So in principle, DLPs should produce sharper detail than LCDs.
Get the idea? So where LCDs are a little blurred thanks to the focusing issues, DLPs are crisper
and sharper, which, when stupidly magnified to a level none of us could naturally see,
does give the impression of strong build lines.
Want a little more proof? I follow pro3dshopuk
on Instagram as Stuart is a buddy of mine and his company deals in all things 3D printing
and also metal casting. Anyway, he posted this the other day. Can you see the voxel lines?
Believe me, I’m not picking on pro3dshop here, I’m just pointing out that this was printed
on an Asiga Max X35, which is a professional DLP printer. If you want to buy one, it will
probably cost you around 10 times more than the D2 is likely to cost, and that’s impossible money
for most amateurs. However, my point is, even this high-end, professional DLP shows the crisp edges
associated with DLP printing. So when we look at the sharpness
of detail captured here on a home grade printer, I can’t help but be impressed.
A while ago now I compared the Ultra with the Mini 8K, and at that time I felt the depth was
much more defined on the Ultra, and, in my hand, I felt this really packed a punch and won the day.
But the Ultra is small, the Mini 8K is bigger, and over time my preferences changed a little,
which I’ve not hidden from you guys. Let’s just recap on the images from that video.
Like I say, the Ultra is crisper when strongly magnified, which makes the pixel edges stand
proud. The blurred pixel edges on the Mini 8K print makes it look smoother when magnified,
but arguably this smoothness is just lost detail. In the hand, the difference is very difficult to
see, though I still felt there was more depth to the Ultra.
Now compare the Ultra print to one I’ve made on the D2.
Yes, the pixelation is still there, that crispness of edges, but the pixelation is much smaller,
much finer, much more detailed. For me this creates a much crisper and more precise print
when viewed normally in the hand. I know this sounds crazy, but for me it really does.
And I guess industry as a whole agrees with me as five-figure DLP printers are pretty common.
And if we quickly compare the Mini 8K print with the D2’s,
it still seems the Mini 8K is smoother, but that’s kind of the whole point. It’s smoother because
it can’t help but be smooth as LCDs and LEDs are fuzzy on the pixels, whilst the DLP stays crisper
because it can, and again, in the hand, this adds depth and reality to the print.
Look at the forehead, which seems to be the point of focus in both images.
One is smooth. One is pixelated. But which of these two best conveys the skin pores
that are actually included on the STL file? For me the D2 DLP is a clear winner.
But this isn’t meant to be a comparison video. It’s not meant to be a review
either. It’s just a quick look at a print made on the Anycubic Photon D2 DLP
printer. And I think it looks BLEEPING amazing. Watch out for my actual review in a few days guys.
In the meantime, take care and thanks for watching.