Back to Ganoksin | FAQ | Contact

3Design Jewel


#1

Dear All, For the last 3 months I have been beta testing the new
3Design Jewel Package from Vision Numeric. This is a very exciting
product, that in my opinion will be the dominant Jewellery Design
Software. The fact that this is a hybrid modeler ensures a complete
model that is water tight at all times. Hybrid Modelers which allow
you to switch from solids to surfaces and back again offers a huge
advantage over other design software packages. The design intent and
the integrity of the model are maintained due to the fact that
surfaces and polygons are being calculated at the same time. Other
CAD packages do one or the other, which is why they are so weak in
maintaining integrity and for the allowance of making changes on the
fly without the need to redraw or re-assign new surfaces. Further due
to the fact that the software is controlled via parametrics that is
very similar to Solidworks with a Feature manager or design tree,
allows for changes to be made to the model without starting over or
loosing data. Parametrics allow the model to be designed either in
free form or dimensionally driven formats. Therefore what you draw is
really what you get. The feature manager allows you to select any of
the features and change the info on that feature only, without
disturbing any of the other features. However if you used a feature
that will be linked or used to control another feature, then that
feature will update accordingly. No need to go in and fix as is the
norm in most other packages. You can create models in solid mode or
wireframe mode or a combination of both. Either way, and at the end
of the day, it will be a fully defined solid accomplished
automatically.

So much can be said but I am trying to keep it short, however one
feature that was truly amazing especially for those wishing to enter
the CAD arena and are essentially talented artist, can actually draw
3 views of a ring lets say, scan it in and by using the wizard it
will actually create the 3D model from those 2D line drawings. If you
can draw 3 nice views of a piece, you can convert it to 3D. This is
the feature that I felt was the most compelling, due to the fact that
a customer could hand you a sketch of what they want and now all you
need to do is scan it, create the model and show them just how
amazing you are and how accurate your representation actually is.
Given that, changes can be made whilst working with the customer, is
really the key. Further for those who are afraid of the learning
curve, which of course will be there, especially to tap into the full
power that the software offers, allows you to cheat on the front end.
Yes you may wish to make changes to the model once created, and yes
there would be a learning curve on how to run it, however, you now
have taken 75% of the initial creation of the 3D item out of the
equation. As you increase your knowledge of the software, the
drawing of views by hand will become a mute but not necessarily a
redundant feature.

I have given you maybe .005% of the power that this package offers,
therefore for those that may have questions, by all means get in
touch. I can forward a news letter with more info for those that wish
to hear more about this package.

Best Regards.
Neil George
954-572-5829


#2

Dear All, Further to my post the other day regarding 3Design Jewel,
I have a little video showing the importation of a Sketch, and it
demonstrates how quickly we can take that sketch and create a 3D
model of a simple ring. Additionally, there are two other demos of
additional pieces for viewing also. For those that wish to see these
demos, just let me know. If you only want the Sketch to Model one,
clearly indicate that in your e-mail, otherwise it will be assumed
you wish to see all three. For those of you who already requested
there is no need to do it again, I will send it out to
you as additional info. Very Best Regards. Neil George 954-572-5829


#3

Neil, Based on your glowing recommendation, I visited the website for
3Design Jewel. It does, indeed, look like an impressive product and
one that I would love to someday try. However, its pricing places it
WAY outside the market for many (most?) of us smaller artisan
jewelers and probably out of the range of many independent jewelers,
with a single license being $4900 (USD). If you don’t need machine
output capability (which leaves you with exactly what??), you can get
a single license for $2000.

Considering that the Rhino/Flamingo/Penguin software is available
for a $1295 including machine-compatible format output capability and
full rendering, I don’t see how I could justify paying 3x that
amount. Rhino also has very attractive student/educational pricing
options (which those of us who take or teach jewelry classes at
accredited institutions quality for) that make the Rhino/Flamingo
bundle available for $215.

I asked Vision Numeric and they do not have any educational pricing
options available. The best they could recommend was to get the
instructor the $4900 version and the students each the $2000 one.
Obviously, they don’t know diddly about the likelihood of most
educational insitutions being able or willing to fork over that type
of money for a single course track.

So for the time being, I’ll be sticking with Rhino/Flamingo for my
modeling needs. Yes, it will make me do more of my own work, rather
than relying on a template library of stones and mountings. But that
actually might force me to be more creative.

Karen Goeller
@Karen_Goeller


Handcrafted and Unique Artisan Jewelry


#4

Karen, I will answer your questions accordingly.

    Neil, Based on your glowing recommendation, I visited the
website for 3Design Jewel.  It does, indeed, look like an
impressive product and one that I would love to someday try. 
However, its pricing places it WAY outside the market for many
(most?) of us smaller artisan jewelers and probably out of the
range of many independent jewelers, with a single license being
$4900 (USD). 

I fully respect your thoughts on pricing, however, in my opinion
price means little at the end of the day when it comes to calculating
productivity which equals profits. I agree that the front end would
be a high priced solution for many individuals, but that’s the
problem. Are you looking at your investment as a short term scenario,
or is this deemed as a long term investment?

If an individual design 8 hours a day, 5 days a week and you saved
just 20% of your time utilizing a more practical solution, then you
just saved yourself a full day of work in one week alone, and given
vacations of 2 weeks being taken out of the equation, it becomes 50
days in a year. Depending on your shop rate, and lets say its $30 an
hour, you either took 50 days more vacation whilst earning the same,
which is what I like, or you made an additional $12,000 for the year.

My shop rate is $75 to $250 per hour depending on which solutions
are being applied. So taking that $30 may be a low ball scenario,
work out exactly what your shop rate is and calculated your
situation.

If you don't need machine output capability (which leaves you with
exactly what??), you can get a single license for $2000. 

It means you get to use it and learn it at a reduced cost initially.
In reality you would upgrade to the full version somewhere down the
road. Additionally you cannot view this as a single user entity only.
What is important here, is that a company who has several designers
in house, purchases one master copy and as many of the $2,000 copies
as necessary. A huge savings.

A lot of thought has been put into the marketing strategies and also
how we can assist those with limited budgets to get their feet wet.
Here are some possible scenarios

  1. Set up an users group of no less than ten individuals or
    Companies and hook up with a Service Bureau and come to an agreement
    where he orders the software for all 10 users which you pay for, and
    he buys the master copy to process. It would be under a one year
    agreement with the service provider enabling that entity to justify
    making an investment.

  2. A Service Bureau as part of its customers service relations, may
    buy a master copy and 10 additional seats which he can provide to his
    customers for free, and also under a one year agreement. After that
    year is done the customer can either buy a copy and move on, or take
    on another annual contract. I guess a quota of some sort may be
    needed, maybe not. If it did not work out the Service Bureau would
    take back his copy, and give it to someone else.

  3. I will know more on Monday, but there is a solution in the works
    right now and only weeks away, where you will be able to run this
    software for a monthly fee. I know the question will arise if the
    amount spent monthly, will be deducted from the price when purchased.
    There will be a concession, but I will not know what all insundries
    have agreed upon until Monday

Many ways to look at it, only have to think outside the box a
little.

    Considering that the Rhino/Flamingo/Penguin software is
available for a $1295 including machine-compatible format output
capability and full rendering, I don't see how I could justify
paying 3x that amount. 

Justification is not always about price, even if the cheque book
does allow for it, but in reality justification should be governed by
productivity. Your investment in everyday tools in the kitchen like
food processors attest to the fact that we do indeed look for time
saving solutions. Yes home cooking like mama used to make, is all
very nice and gives us all a warm feeling, but who has the time today
to prep all of the required ingredients with just a knife.

I guess a rather stronger point would be, and it is not meant to
offend, is, if an user has utilized lets say Rhino for a year or two,
and has not accumulated the financial means to progress and improve
capabilities, then there is something drastically wrong. Many, many
questions need to be asked by users and potential users before they
even consider adding more tools or entering the technological arena
for the first time. My feeling is that if an individual or a Company
has not increased revenue by utilizing technology, then there are
many issues that need to be addressed before any further commitment
is made. Those who are no better off today after adopting to use
technology, should not invest further, because the fundamental
foundation of the business is totally unsound. For those who are
overwhelmed with the need for a faster turn around and see from a
financial perspective that they have benefited from said technology,
should re-invest in the immerging solutions and continue to grow.
Those who did not progress and obtain some financial gain have
issues to address. Is the software to blame?, is the user to blame?,
or is the lack of business to blame. Well the first one being the
software, you have a chance to improve by moving up in power and ease
of use. The second one regarding the user, you have a chance to
improve because of the intuitive interface. If it’s lack of
customers, well that speaks for it self.

     Rhino also has very attractive student/educational pricing
options (which those of us who take or teach jewelry classes at
accredited institutions quality for) that make the Rhino/Flamingo
bundle available for $215. 

Personally I hope they never come out with a student bundle and that
may look like I am being selfish or self serving towards the student,
and why I should hope to deprive them of software. However on the
flip side, it would be selfish and self serving of the student to
become my or anyone else’s competitor at a tenth of what I invested
to get the same thing. I am a firm believer in “if you wanna play,
you gotta pay”. The sweat and tears that myself and many others put
into building a business, only to have someone enter the same arena
without the grief and financial commitment that we went through. That
in my opinion is not right. I believe that if an individual or a
business is investing in any form or manner in software and hardware,
then they should be protected, and not undermined in any shape or
form.

    I asked Vision Numeric and they do not have any educational
pricing options available.  The best they could recommend was to
get the instructor the $4900 version and the students each the
$2000 one. Obviously, they don't know diddly about the likelihood
of most educational insitutions being able or willing to fork over
that type of money for a single course track. 

Well I guess not, but then again, they are software developers and
not an Educational Institution.

Maybe the comment can be reversed, and maybe I can ask you if you
know what it takes to write millions or trillions of lines of code to
develop a viable solution?

I don’t have a clue about the education environment or writing code
at that level, so if it’s any conciliation, you know 50% more than I
do :slight_smile:

    So for the time being, I'll be sticking with Rhino/Flamingo
for my modeling needs.  Yes, it will make me do more of my own
work, rather than relying on a template library of stones and
mountings.  But that actually might force me to be more creative. 

I do not see where you cannot be creative with 3Design also. Maybe
more so, because now you will accomplish more than what you currently
may accomplish in the same time frame.It is a very powerful tool with
or without a Library.

Anyway Karen, your comments where very much appreciated and I hope I
answered them accordingly.

Very Best Regards.
Neil George
954-572-5829


#5

I am taking classes with GIA, how would I get the package for $215?

Silverfoot-
Jewelry Designer and Craftsman
Main Site = www.firescale.com


#6

Mr. George, I do not like your answers to Karen Goeller.

In my opinion price means little at the end of the day when it
comes to calculating productivity which equals profits.

Sure, but at the end of which day? Let’s take the example you
provide: an individual designs 8 hours a day, 5 day a week, so s/he
saves 20 % of the time, which is to say one day, and, hurray, given
your calculation, s/he makes an additional $ 12,000 a year. Which
year? First, there is practically no individual which can do this
unless a very rich one: s/he simply does not have the time, remember
s/he is a jeweler with a business, as most of us are. And second, you
don’t reckon with a learning curve at all. It will take some time -
for Rhino it is typically between one of two years - before one can
use the program with confidence and with sufficient skill to produce
the models you have in mind. And since this tool - as all tools -
changes the way you work and think (after all, you are not going to
render in Rhino what you can do with your hands already), something
else is involved here, namely acquiring a new style, thinking about
aesthetics in a new way, exploring the possibilities, changing the
way you look at things. It will take quite a while. One day you will
make profits. The truth is that no one knows which day this will be.
This is just something that you people say. Your third point is
misinformed by this logic too: if a company, you say, does not
accumulate enough money to progress further on in two years, then
there is something wrong with that business. You completely argue
away the points I make here.

  In reality justification should be governed by productivity. Your
investment in everyday tools in the kitchen like food processors
attest to the fact that we do indeed look for time saving
solutions. Yes home cooking like mama used to make, is all very
nice and gives us all a warm feeling, but who has the time today to
prep all of the required ingredients with just a knife.

This is not so and things tend to be more complex than the
ideologues of productivity say they are. Basically, one day in the
West, people used to work so that they could enjoy the good life -
and eating well is certainly part of that enjoyment, but we have all
forgotten about that and the scandal is that all sort of ideological
institutions in our society call this progress (and freedom, etc.).
There is already liquid food on the market, which only takes a couple
of seconds to digest, so I’m sure we can increase productivity even
more if we would all drink it and skip dinners altogether. This
decision makes perfect sense if decisions should be governed by
productivity.

   It would be selfish and self serving of the student to become my
or anyone else's competitor at a tenth of what I invested to get
the same thing. I am a firm believer in "if you wanna play, you
gotta pay". The sweat and tears that myself and many others put
into building a business, only to have someone enter the same arena
without the grief and financial commitment that we went through.
That in my opinion is not right. I believe that if an individual or
a business is investing in any form or manner in software and
hardware, then they should be protected, and not undermined in any
shape or form.

In other words, competition has to be complete, lest the results
which markets create will be distorted and unfair. Proponents of this
logic typically often use the picture of a bicycle race: we all start
together and the one who comes in first is the winner because he is
the strongest, the most capable one. However, in society, such races
do not exist naturally, which is the reason why we organize them.
Situations at the beginning are never equal, indeed, there is no
beginning as society is made up of several generations and many, many
other relevant differences. There is no altruism involved here.
Educational prices increase the number of people using the product,
which, as a result of this, may lower prices of the product in
general. Educational prices bring the product in contact with the
developers and the users of tomorrow, i.e. the people who are likely
going to innovate the product and we’re not against progress, are we?
Other arguments can be made for educational prices on the basis of
sound economic reasoning. Educational prices distort the market in no
other way than the introduction of the product distorted the market
to begin with. There is no reason why this could not be accepted as a
mere fact of life, to be reckoned with when purchasing a software
program.

Will Denayer


#7

Silverfoot and others interested in the Rhino/Flamingo
student/educator package for $215 - go to
http://www.academicsuperstore.com

You will need to provide proof of student status (I believe you have
to send in a copy of your student id and/or class schedule).

They have a wealth of software with really good student/educator
prices. Please read the licensing carefully before
buying, though, as each software publisher has a different take on
who qualifies and what you can use it for.

I have no connection with academicsuperstore. Just a satisfied
customer.

Best of luck,
Karen Goeller
@Karen_Goeller


Handcrafted and Unique Artisan Jewelry


#8
Considering that the Rhino/Flamingo/Penguin software is available
for a $1295 including machine-compatible format output capability
and full rendering, I don't see how I could justify paying 3x that
amount.

Karen, while I haven’t used 3Design Jewel, from the presentation, it
looks to be an excellent package. For a modeling program of it’s
class and functionality, the price doesn’t seem out of line at all…
It surpasses what Rhino is capable of, because it’s a hybrid
modeler.

So for the time being, I'll be sticking with Rhino/Flamingo for my
modeling needs.  Yes, it will make me do more of my own work,
rather than relying on a template library of stones and mountings. 
But that actually might force me to be more creative. 

I agree that developing your own creative solutions to modeling has
definite advantages…If you stick with it, you’ll learn to model
outside the box. It comes down to work style/comfort level and
affordability for most of us… Some jewelers prefer a jewelry
specific program and some don’t. I’ve noticed that some experienced
modelers who started out with expensive jewelry specific plug-ins,
eventually let go of the “training wheels” and model directly in
Rhino, unhindered by pre-existing shapes and templates… thereby
becoming less prone to making typical cookie-cutter looking CAD
jewelry. You can build your own signature library of parts and
profiles. By the way, Robert Shultz of Off Broadway,
http://www.ob.com/ sells Rhino for $580 and Flamingo for $245. And
Rhino compatible 3D gemstone libraries are available for free.
http://www.3dlapidary.com/ (see Rhino full gemstone collection).
http://www.3dlapidary.com/HTML/Collections.htm

Best,
Jesse Kaufman
CAD/CAM Technology
Handcrafted Originality
www.jdkjewelry.com


#9

Neil, I had, in reading your original post, assumed that you had
simply left off the traditional “just a satisfied customer” tag to
indicate that you had no connection to the company producing the
product, and that your review was, therefore, unbiased. Your reply
cleared that up, and I now understand that you are involved in
marketing the product and possibly investing in it. That gives me a
different take on your defense of it.

At any rate, I think you seriously misconstrued my comments
regarding the product’s price. I am not knocking the product or its
possible ability to improve some jewelers’ productivity. However,
the entry point for purchasing an initial license of roughly $5000
makes it unaffordable for many SMALL and INDEPENDENT designers and
jewelers, even when that cost is amortized over years.

Many of us have already made the investment in Rhino and Flamingo –
that cost included not only software, but computer platform to
process efficiently, courses, and learning curve. Once that
investment is made on a mental and fiscal basis, your argument must
be much more compelling than the one stated to impel change that
involves RElearning and REworking process as well as software. The
true cost of change of this nature isn’t the cost of the software –
it’s the cost of the software combined with lost productivity while
learning the new software, the “lost” cost of the old software if
not fully amortized, the cost of transitioning existing designs and
design libraries into the new software, time to spend on courses and
tutorials to learn the new sofware, etc.

In the software industry – where I spent over 20 years before going
full time with my jewelry work – we knew that the hardest thing to
do was to convert a customer (even a dissatisfied one) from a
competitor’s product. The argument made must be incredibly
compelling and the customer had to see the COST of STAYING, rather
than the cost of moving. Additionally, the price points had to be
very carefully targeted to the demographic segment we were
addressing within that market.

If you are looking to convert small, independent artisan jewelers, I
truly believe your price point is too high for MOST of us. On the
other hand, if you are looking toward high-volume production
jewelers, then you may be right on target. I believe that must be
what you’re targeting based on your statement that you cannot view
this as a single-user entity. But if that’s the case, the marketing
materials (website) should clearly state that, which they do not.

I applaud you and your company for looking “outside the box” and
coming up with “pay for play” solutions and possible alliances with
service bureaus. If you can get some of the better service bureaus
to agree to make the investment, that will remove part of the
barrier to entry for some.

I have to tell you, though, that I was amused by the following
quote: Yes home cooking like mama used to make, is all very nice and
gives us all a warm feeling, but who has the time today to prep all
of the required ingredients with just a knife. Been in a fine
restaurant’s kitchen lately? Prep is done with a knife almost
exclusively – knife skills are taught as a full semester course at
cooking schools and a well-trained chef can outperform a food
processor for just about any task. It’s largely the
less-experienced home user / hobbyist who relies on the productivity
enhancing tools like the food processor. Extending that analogy to
the software model, the functionality of 3Design would be more
attractive to the hobbyist/casual designer rather than the
professional. NOT that I think that’s true – just pointing out
that the obvious isn’t always what you think it is.

Either way, you should re-think some of your approach to student
licensing. What students in art school are exposed to and learn to
use – and to make “sing” – is what they will leave that school
with a powerful loyalty to. Right now, they are leaving those
schools with good knowledge of Rhino/Flamingo. They are going to
employers who are looking for expertise in Rhino/Flamingo, which
they have installed and invested in. OR, they are going to smaller
employers who are thinking about expanding into CAD… they become
evangelists for the technology they know and influence the purchase
of Rhino.

One way to influence change is to start with the students. You do
that with student/educator pricing that is attractive to the school
community. You get the teachers to learn the product and they
become your marketing tool, convincing the administration to invest
in a lab license for a course they will teach on it. They attract
students and teach them, then those students take the message of how
great the software is out into the world.

Viewing students as “competitors” simply because they have the same
software available to them (albeit at a lower cost than you paid) is
like Picasso worrying about students being able to get a discount on
their oil paints and canvas at the local art store. It’s not about
the price of the software – it’s about what you bring to it in
design sense and ability. I don’t know of a single student who has
the mature design sense and knowledge of engineering required to
outdesign most of the members of this list… people like Sam
Patania, Cynthia Eid, Trish MacAleer, Peter Rowe, and many others
too numerous to name. Students are using the same equipment that
these people are using, but don’t have a mature vision that comes
from living the art for a length of time. No software in the world
will give them that… it only comes from experience and life…
it’s something that I and many other aspire to.

Respects,
Karen Goeller
@Karen_Goeller
No Limitations Designs


#10
    Mr. George, I do not like your answers to Karen Goeller. 

Mr. Denayer, You are certainly entitled to your opinion.

     In my opinion price means little at the end of the day when
it comes to calculating productivity which equals profits. Sure, but
at the end of which day? Let's take the example you provide: an
individual designs 8 hours a day, 5 day a week, so s/he saves 20 %
of the time, which is to say one day, and, hurray, given your
calculation, s/he makes an additional $ 12,000 a year. Which year?
First, there is practically no individual which can do this unless
a very rich one: s/he simply does not have the time, remember s/he
is a jeweler with a business, as most of us are. And second, you
don't reckon with a learning curve at all. It will take some time
- for Rhino it is typically between one of two years - before one
can use the program with confidence and with sufficient skill to
produce the models you have in mind. And since this tool - as all
tools - changes the way you work and think (after all, you are not
going to render in Rhino what you can do with your hands already),
something else is involved here, namely acquiring a new style,
thinking about aesthetics in a new way, exploring the
possibilities, changing the way you look at things. It will take
quite a while. One day you will make profits. The truth is that no
one knows which day this will be. 

I fully stand by my statements, because of a number of reasons in
your reply. I agree that your position is quite accurate as far as
the Rhino scenario is concerned and the anticipated learning curve.
However, with the new tools, the learning curve is dramatically
reduced because the solution was developed from the ground up by a
huge amount of input provided by jewellers. Lists where made on how
task should be tackled and handled. The logic behind the whole
solution was a major consideration in its user friendly interface.
The logical manner in the way it operates, far supercedes anything
else on the market today geared at Jewellery. Therefore unless you
have actually run 3Design, I fail to see where you are even qualified
to make the assumptions you make. You are thinking old school, and
running with outdated Do you even know what a Hybrid
modeler is and the power it represents?. Did you even look at the
videos I offered?. The whole point that I was making, was that by
reducing the amount of time handling a task utilizing CAD, it gives
you more time to run your business. I really do not care if you buy
this solution from me, or even at all. My intentions were to offer
and to offer freely my experience so you may benefit.
Many here know what I bring to the table as expertise and I can back
up everything I say with actions, therefore if you are not interested
in what I have to say or offer, just delete it.

    This is just something that you people say. Your third point
is misinformed by this logic too: if a company, you say, does not
accumulate enough money to progress further on in two years, then
there is something wrong with that business. You completely argue
away the points I make here. 

When you say you people, I will assume that you think I am just a
software solution provider. I actually own a manufacturing business
that utilizes high tech solutions, and further, I own a Company that
manufactures Aerospace Components, therefore I hope that sets the
record straight on that note. I fully comprehend the requirements
necessary to get involved in the high tech arena, and I fully
appreciate the commitment it takes to make it a success, so please do
not lecture me on whether I know anything about running a business or
not. I stand by the fact, that if no progress has been made in that
time frame, then, yes, there is something wrong. You state typically
1-2 years to get proficient in Rhino. Fine, so it takes 1-2 years to
learn, should you not have learnt something along the way to at least
make it profitable? When I started, I geared the jobs to my level of
current expertise at the time, therefore remaining profitable and
therefore increasing my salability. Your thinking is to wait 1-2
years and then think what the hell it is you are ready for. Give me a
break. I offered you free advice. Whether you take it or not, I
really do not care.

       In reality justification should be governed by
productivity. Your investment in everyday tools in the kitchen like
food processors attest to the fact that we do indeed look for time
saving solutions. Yes home cooking like mama used to make, is all
very nice and gives us all a warm feeling, but who has the time
today to prep all of the required ingredients with just a knife.
This is not so and things tend to be more complex than the
ideologues of productivity say they are. Basically, one day in the
West, people used to work so that they could enjoy the good life -
and eating well is certainly part of that enjoyment, but we have
all forgotten about that and the scandal is that all sort of
ideological institutions in our society call this progress (and
freedom, etc.). There is already liquid food on the market, which
only takes a couple of seconds to digest, so I'm sure we can
increase productivity even more if we would all drink it and skip
dinners altogether. This decision makes perfect sense if decisions
should be governed by productivity. 

The I provided was intended for you not to have to rely
on a liquid lunch. The whole intention was for you to receive
that may, or may not benefit you, and actually allow you
to eat a solid meal. Productivity in my opinion equates to more time
off not less. If you are more productive in less time by utilizing
smart solutions then for me that’s the bottom line.

        It would be selfish and self serving of the student to
become my or anyone else's competitor at a tenth of what I invested
to get the same thing. I am a firm believer in "if you wanna play,
you gotta pay". The sweat and tears that myself and many others put
into building a business, only to have someone enter the same
arena without the grief and financial commitment that we went
through. That in my opinion is not right. I believe that if an
individual or a business is investing in any form or manner in
software and hardware, then they should be protected, and not
undermined in any shape or form. In other words, competition has to
be complete, lest the results which markets create will be
distorted and unfair. Proponents of this logic typically often use
the picture of a bicycle race: we all start together and the one
who comes in first is the winner because he is the strongest, the
most capable one. However, in society, such races do not exist
naturally, which is the reason why we *organize* them. Situations
at the beginning are never equal, indeed, there is no beginning as
society is made up of several generations and many, many other
relevant differences. There is no altruism involved here.
Educational prices increase the number of people using the
product, which, as a result of this, may lower prices of the
product in general. Educational prices bring the product in contact
with the developers and the users of tomorrow, i.e. the people who
are likely going to innovate the product and we're not against
progress, are we? Other arguments can be made for educational
prices on the basis of sound economic reasoning. Educational prices
distort the market in no other way than the introduction of the
product distorted the market to begin with. There is no reason why
this could not be accepted as a mere fact of life, to be reckoned
with when purchasing a software program. 

AutoCad and MasterCam did the exact same thing you are talking
about. Yes at that time it was probably a smart decision according to
the so called think tankers, and I would agree that it does sound
quite logical to think so. It did succeed initially in getting
product recognition, however today, AutoCad and MasterCam are old
technologies. What happened?, well they continued to build on that
old technology with platforms that required major overhauling to
bring it to the next level. Point is, there was not enough money
coming in to warrant the development required to ensure its dominant
position in the market place today. Hence old hats. All they did was
open the door to their new competitors who had the latest
technological scripts and line codes running their software. Users
now knew about the technology, and essentially the marketing and the
education of customers was a much easier task for the new kids on the
block. They still sell, but nowhere near the sales they had in the
old days. Trained students did not mean more sales, because most did
NOT buy once they left school/college, their potential employers
already had a seat. Therefore the increase in revenue from that
situation was peanuts, and in actuality contributed to their eventual
downfall from the premium software list. The thought that readily
trained individuals coming out of educational facilities would put an
employer in a position of sticking with old technology was grossly
underestimated.

Therefore, your point of reduced costs to the students, could very
well mean less money coming into that business to further develop the
product. Therefore it affects everyone in a negative fashion. I will
be the one eventually paying for your freebie, because ultimately, I
will have to fork out top dollars again for the newest solution when
I shouldn’t have to. Instead of an upgrade, I have to move elsewhere.
Where does that leave the student?. Trained and experienced in
technology that has no future. Many of the AutoCad and MasterCam
users are having to retrain, because now the Companies are running
Catia, ProE, Solidworks, Solidedge, Think3, Top Solid, PowerShape.
Yes the fact that they have an existing background in CAD may help
get them in the door, but not if they are being interviewed along
with another potential employee that is up to date on the current
technology. On the Machining side, ProManufacturing, Catia,
PowerMill, WorkNC, SolidCam, and even now this will change in the
next 12 months. StepNC is the next technology. However in saying
that, the companies of today, are better positioned in their lines of
code and the use of Parametrics and kernell to move and improve along
with the new technologies than AutoCad or MasterCam where.

I am by no means suggesting that Rhino is no longer a solution, on
the contrary, but times have changed for it also. It has its place,
and it will continue to sell in its own niche markets, and that’s all
I have to say about that.

Take it for what it’s worth.

Best regards.
Neil George
954-572-5829


#11

Dear Karen, Thank you for the response, and I will clear up any
misunderstandings.

    Neil,  I had, in reading your original post, assumed that you
had simply left off the traditional "just a satisfied customer" tag
to indicate that you had no connection to the company producing the
product, and that your review was, therefore, unbiased.  Your reply
cleared that up, and I now understand that you are involved in
marketing the product and possibly investing in it.  That gives me
a different take on your defense of it. 

If this was the case at the time I wrote the post, and that I was
indeed a reseller for 3Design, you would have been 100% correct in
your assumptions.There was no intention to come in through the back
door, and to fool anyone, because in my opinion honesty is the best
practice. I hope you do not think that I would be naive enough to
think that something like this would not come back and bite me. The
reseller part came after the fact, which is why it was
included in my reply to Mr. Denayer. I knew I would get some flack
once that was put in there, but I prefer to put my cards on the table
come what may. I knew I would get the chance to clear it up and thank
you for the oppurtunity to do so.

    At any rate, I think you seriously misconstrued my comments
regarding the product's price.  I am not knocking the product or
its possible ability to improve some jewelers' productivity. 
However, the entry point for purchasing an initial license of
roughly $5000 makes it unaffordable for many SMALL and INDEPENDENT
designers and jewelers, even when that cost is amortized over
years. 

I guess I get carried away with the fact that not all business
people think the same. I am very aggressive in the pursuit of new
technologies and I am even more aggressive in investing into it,
therefore I guess I have to identify with the fact that we are all
not in the same boat and I apologies for that. However, I do believe
that nothing is out of reach if it really needs to happen, and it is
the right choice to make. The things I say are meant to be taken as a
different way of looking at things, and not to infuriate or
antagonize those that may not have the same mind set as myself. I am
a very giving person by nature, and I feel very good about myself,
especially if I helped another who is not as fortunate. Therefore,
what I offer are sincere facts from my own experiences. Is it
valuable to you or anyone else, I have no idea, but it is there for
the taking.

    Many of us have already made the investment in Rhino and
Flamingo -- that cost included not only software, but computer
platform to process efficiently, courses, and learning curve.  Once
that investment is made on a mental and fiscal basis, your argument
must be much more compelling than the one stated to impel change
that involves Relearning and Reworking process as well as software.
 The true cost of change of this nature isn't the cost of the
software -- it's the cost of the software combined with lost
productivity while learning the new software, the "lost" cost of
the old software if not fully amortized, the cost of transitioning
existing designs and design libraries into the new software, time
to spend on courses and tutorials to learn the new software, etc. 

Your points are indeed valid if you merely look at them from your
point of view. I prefer to think outside of the box. My thinking is
that your current solutions are not made redundant, they are still
the primary vehicle for you to deal with your day to day business.
Therefore in this manner, 3Design becomes the secondary tool for your
business until you are up to speed. Once up to speed, it either
becomes your primary tool, or works side by side with Rhino as
another powerful solution.

I run 8 different solutions here, therefore in a nutshell, in this
technological arena, to stay ahead of the game, you will be the
perpetual student. Oh my god, did I just identify myself as a student
:slight_smile:

    In the software industry -- where I spent over 20 years before
going full time with my jewelry work -- we knew that the hardest
thing to do was to convert a customer (even a dissatisfied one)
from a competitor's product.  The argument made must be incredibly
compelling and the customer had to see the COST of STAYING, rather
than the cost of moving.  Additionally, the price points had to be
very carefully targeted to the demographic segment we were
addressing within that market. 

I do agree with your points, but I do things differently here. At
the time of my post, I was offering and nothing else,
however what I do bring to the table, is not an ability to
communicate in writing why you should consider what I tell you, but
by saying “hey Karen, get on a plane and come here” This way, there
is no talking sales, it is infact a hands on evaluation. My
philosophy is that if I cannot show you how to go from A to Z and you
actually see it is being done the way you think it should be done,
then you already have the answers first hand.

Selling software is a hobby that apparently pays and nothing else.
Making some money on a piece of software does not change my life, I
do it because I enjoy it, and I want to help others. As a matter of
fact, it is far less productive financially for me to do so, because
the support required to service the customers in fact loses me money
in comparison to what I make in general doing my daily tasks. So
please do not for one minute think that my situation resembles
others, in that I do it for the financial gain. Far from it.

    If you are looking to convert small, independent artisan
jewelers, I truly believe your price point is too high for MOST of
us.  On the other hand, if you are looking toward high-volume
production jewelers, then you may be right on target.  I believe
that must be what you're targeting based on your statement that you
cannot view this as a single-user entity.  But if that's the case,
the marketing materials (Webster) should clearly state that, which
they do not. 

It is targeted at all aspects and roles within the jewellery
industry and you may be right in that it is out of reach for many. I
guess I have to back off on this subject, because, can’t in this
context is not a word that I personally associate myself with and
that may be the problem here. If it needs to be done, I will find a
way to do it, but not everyone is the same, and I respect that.

    I applaud you and your company for looking "outside the box"
and coming up with "pay for play" solutions and possible alliances
with service bureaus.  If you can get some of the better service
bureaus to agree to make the investment, that will remove part of
the barrier to entry for some. 

Thank you for the compliment, and finally I can chalk one up on the
board for me :slight_smile:

    I have to tell you, though, that I was amused by the following
quote: Yes home cooking like mama used to make, is all very nice
and gives us all a warm feeling, but who has the time today to prep
all of the required ingredients with just a knife. Been in a fine
restaurant's kitchen lately?  Prep is done with a knife almost
exclusively -- knife skills are taught as a full semester course
at cooking schools and a well-trained chef can outperform a food
processor for just about any task.  It's largely the
less-experienced home user / hobbyist who relies on the
productivity enhancing tools like the food processor.  Extending
that analogy to the software model, the functionality of 3Design
would be more attractive to the hobbyist/casual designer rather
than the professional.  NOT that I think that's true -- just
pointing out that the obvious isn't always what you think it is. 

I eat at fine restaurants quite often, well let me say, what they
consider to be fine restaurants here in Florida. Egon Ronay would
probably not be thrilled and I fully understand why, but I might add,
I do not make it a habit of going into the kitchen. My job is to pay
the bill and tip accordingly. :slight_smile:

It was directed at all scenarios in my opinion. This last week, I
was turning on the machines at 6am and leaving at 11pm, therefore it
does apply to my level of productivity as well as the hobbyist.
Across the board, I think we all could do with more time, but your
analogy was very cute :slight_smile:

    Either way, you should re-think some of your approach to
student licensing.  What students in art school are exposed to and
learn to use -- and to make "sing" -- is what they will leave that
school with a powerful loyalty to.  Right now, they are leaving
those schools with good knowledge of Rhino/Flamingo.  They are
going to employers who are looking for expertise in Rhino/Flamingo,
which they have installed and invested in.  OR, they are going to
smaller employers who are thinking about expanding into CAD... they
become evangelists for the technology they know and influence the
purchase of Rhino. 

Kindly look at my reply to Mr. Denayer, I answered this one there.
The scenario you point out, is only part of the equation. It is in my
opinion a much larger issue.

    One way to influence change is to start with the students. 
You do that with student/educator pricing that is attractive to the
school community.  You get the teachers to learn the product and
they become your marketing tool, convincing the administration to
invest in a lab license for a course they will teach on it.  They
attract students and teach them, then those students take the
message of how great the software is out into the world. 

I also touched on this in my reply to Mr. Denayer.

    Viewing students as "competitors" simply because they have the
same software available to them (albeit at a lower cost than you
paid) is like Picasso worrying about students being able to get a
discount on their oil paints and canvas at the local art store. 
It's not about the price of the software -- it's about what you
bring to it in design sense and ability.  I don't know of a single
student who has the mature design sense and knowledge of
engineering required to outdesign most of the members of this
list... people like Sam Patania, Cynthia Eid, Trish MacAleer, Peter
Rowe, and many others too numerous to name.  Students are using the
same equipment that these people are using, but don't have a mature
vision that comes from living the art for a length of time.  No
software in the world will give them that... it only comes from
experience and life.... it's something that I and many other aspire
to. 

Your points are indeed noted and I concur that there is validity in
what you say and I respect the fact.

My mistake was generalizing your segment of the industry with mine,
when as a matter of fact they are completely different. My job is to
build the necessary tooling to manufacture the pieces and not on the
creative side of actually designing original pieces of art. My
company is strictly in the design of specialized tooling to make it
efficiently and therefore I do apologize for the confusion. The
individuals you mentioned are a rare breed, and should be commended
for that fact alone, but I was not thinking in the realms of these
kinds of artistic individuals.

I was addressing, and in fact identifying the students as
individuals who do nothing else than translate those paper designs or
sketches into 3D models, and with the help of intuitive tools with
built in Libraries can essentially perform the tasks of 3D modeling
as readily as you or I and that was the tangent I was on.

The fact that I created 3D models for designers who had no ability
to manufacture, whether in equipment or knowledge was the whole
essence of my thinking, and the student was to be seen as a CAD
operator rather than a true designer such as yourself. The CAD
operator scenario was the one I meant to address and nothing more.
Again sorry for the confusion.

Now the important part. Depriving the student of software or
solutions was not for you to think I was running scared, because in
reality, the level of investment I have here is to the tune of
$500,000, therefore they are a long way off in making a dent in my
business. However, I was in fact voicing my customers opinions to the
mere fact of discounted software being in the market place. How do
you think I feel, and further how do I even explain to them, why they
paid top dollar for their solution when others are not. You may have
thought that I was being a cry baby, when in reality it was my
concern for my customer’s well being that was the real issue. Many
of my customers are CAD operators, and I am only concerned for them
to have the ability to earn a decent living on as level a playing
field as is possible, and not for my personal gain.

I hope your reply will allow me to add some more to the board as a
successful reply :slight_smile:

That’s all for now.

Best Regards.
Neil George
954-572-5829


#12

Mr. George,

I’m getting into this discussion rather late. I missed previous
postings regarding your product. What are you marketing? I’m
looking into engraving/millingsystems myself.

Mike Buckner


#13
Mr. Denayer 

It’s Doctor Denayer, btw.

 You are certainly entitled to your opinion.

Well thank you. I know it’s often a problem.

Mister George, I am sure that you know a lot more about 3D design
than I do. In commenting, I was not questioning your expertise in
this domain, nor do I question the qualities of the program you speak
about. I objected to other things. Yes, I know what a hybrid modeler
is and I have sensed the power of it. You tell me, since my
assumptions are old school, what is, according to you, the time
necessary to learn this program so that one can use it confidently
and creatively? Let’s operationalize this. What is the time needed to
make a ring with 3 prong settings in this program for someone who has
never done this? Let’s say that we talking here about two persons
with a 20 % higher IQ than average, the first has no experience with
3D whatsoever, and the second knows how to handle Rhino. What is your
estimate? And about the costs. What will the final cost be for these
individuals to have the wax model (or whatever) in their hands, so
that the final product can be made, from the beginning to the end of
the line? Well?

My intentions were to offer and to offer *freely* my
experience so you may benefit. Many here know what I bring to the
table as expertise and I can back up everything I say with actions 

No, you don’t. You are referring to an outdated model of
It’s impossible to seperate facts from values. Your
will always be biased in some sense. There is no
objectivity.

When you say *you people*, I will assume that you think I am just
a software solution provider. I actually own a manufacturing
business that utilizes high tech solutions, and further, I own a
Company that manufactures Aerospace Components, therefore I hope
that sets the record straight on that note. I fully comprehend the
requirements necessary to get involved in the high tech arena, and
I fully appreciate the commitment it takes to make it a success, so
please do not lecture me on whether I know anything about running a
business or not. 

This is all very well, but you are obviously not a jeweler and
certainly not a small scale jeweler, i.e. the type I admire the most
in this trade, the man or woman who tries to make everything or most
of what s/he sells her/himself, the sort of artisan if you want, or
perhaps even artist if s/he is really good at what s/he does. Quite
frankly, and I do not mean this as an insult at all, I think that you
are completely off reality here if you assume that (most?) people
like this have the means (financial and timewise) to make this kind
of investment. It’s simple isn’t feasible for many, since many
jewelers work under constant pressure already: pieces have to be
made and sold or the liquid stuff will be on the table ( a crime
against humanity).

The I provided was intended for you not to have to
rely on a liquid lunch. The whole intention was for you to receive
that may, or may not benefit you, and actually allow
you to eat a solid meal. Productivity in my opinion equates to more
time off not less. If you are more productive in less time by
utilizing smart solutions then for me that's the bottom line. 

Well, this can be answered easily. Browsing through literature after
my solid meal, most if not all serious sociologists of labor etc.
hold (and have proven) that, since the seventies, the working
population in the first world (the most industrialized countries)
have been working more, not less, while this has not been making life
more easy. On the contrary. It’s easy to refer to a parameter such as
the GNP of a country, but this is a falsification because it tells
you nothing except the productivity itself and only in a very limited
and fundamentally unreal way. There are other parameters such as the
human development index. Fundamentally, the relationship between
rising productivity and more satisfaction in life is far more
complex that you suggest.

This technology is not within the reach of the people I spoke about
and I think you know it too, but that you don’t care about it. This
technology is meant to be used by manufacturers which produce many
pieces, simply, because it is designed for it. So, if we see 50,000
of exactly the same rings on the market next year, perhaps they were
made with this program. Yes, productivity increased.

Best, Will


#14
    It's Doctor Denayer, btw. 

Dr. Denayer, I had a feeling I was dealing with an intellectual,
funny how I sense these things ahead of time :slight_smile:

     You are certainly entitled to your opinion. Well thank you. I
know it's often a problem. 

Not at all. As along as we can debate this without anyone’s feelings
getting hurt, then all is well. I am very direct in my writing, and
it does not truly reflect my true personality, never are my responses
meant to offend, but the fact that my explanations can leave me wide
open for speculation. The intent is always to get a point across that
may, or may not benefit others.

What is the time needed to make a ring with 3 prong settings in this
program for someone who has never done this? Let's say that we
talking here about two persons with a 20 % higher IQ than average,
the first has no experience with 3D whatsoever, and the second
knows how to handle Rhino. What is your estimate? And about the
costs. What will the final cost be for these individuals to have
the wax model (or whatever) in their hands, so that the final
product can be made, from the beginning to the end of the line?
Well? 

I believe that before we discuss this further, it would be fair for
you, to at least look at the sample videos I offered, so that you may
better understand where I am coming from, and we can discuss this
more on a level of mutual comprehension.

    No, you don't. You are referring to an outdated model of
It's impossible to seperate facts from values. Your
will always be biased in some sense. There is no
objectivity. 

When I say back it up with actions, I mean real life actions. You
and I debating back and forth will never bring us into line and agree
with one another. Therefore my actions are reflected in the fact that
at any time a potential customer would like to see this in operation,
and I mean design the piece and take it through manufacturing, then
that’s how I prove my points by showing you. Talk is cheap I know, but
you can rest assured, that I only validate solutions that I know
work, and are testament to the fact that they are being used here at
my facility daily.

but you are obviously not a jeweler and certainly not a small scale 

jeweler,

i.e. the type I admire the most in this trade, the man or woman who
tries to make everything or most of what s/he sells her/himself,
the sort of artisan if you want, or perhaps even artist if s/he is
really good at what s/he does. 

You are way of base there Will. I have 31 years at the bench and in
fact started at the age of 11 in my fathers retail and custom
jewellery business. Therefore, I fully comprehend the total
manufacturing solution and the retail realities.

Quite  frankly, and I do not mean this as an insult at all, I
think that you are completely off reality here if you assume that
(most?) people like this have the means (financial and timewise) to
make this kind of investment. It's simple isn't feasible for many,
since many jewelers work under constant pressure already: pieces
have to be made and sold or the liquid stuff will be on the table (
a crime against humanity). 

Will, no insult taken, but at the end of the day we all work
hard. I put in on average 16 hours a day, and mostly seven days a
week. I know all about pressure and maybe more so than jewellers, and
I speak from first hand knowledge. The Aerospace Industry is as
grueling as it gets. Yes I make a tremendous amount of money doing
it, but if I make a mistake and for any reason, missed the delivery
date, even worse with a plane sitting on the tarmac at $40,000 per
day, well you can take it to the bank that they would come looking
for compensation. Yes in jewellery, you have similar commitments that
have delivery dates with consequences if they are missed and I
acknowledge that, therefore my problem is doubled by that mere fact
alone. I never assume what others have in their pockets, and I
certainly do not look down at anyone that do not have the means to
move like I may have, in fact I try to help them. Give a man a fish,
he will eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he will eat
everyday…something like that anyway. I put in the hours because I
want to retire early, and not keep working until I am too old to
enjoy it , so do not read into the fact that there may be something
wrong with the amount of hours I work. The I provide
should not be misinterpreted as me saying, you are foolish if you
don’t do what I say, the is meant to enlighten the
individuals, that there are solutions being worked on, and that
solutions are available to possible make it easier on them. Whether
they can pull it off, or even if they never enter the CAD market,
they are still entitled to know what is out there. I am not in the
business of telling people how to run their business, but if any
single one of them needed help, in finding creative solutions or
answers as to how they may actually be able to enter, then I
sincerely and openly offer them my assistance. I have told many, that
I do not care about making money off of them, but more importantly I
will offer them advice to the best of my ability to make the right
choices for them. It is not about the money for me. Yes I like to
make money otherwise I would not be in business, but I prefer to make
money from those who can easily afford my rates, and most certainly
not from anyone dealing with a weak poker hand.

     The I provided was intended for you not to have
to rely on a liquid lunch. The whole intention was for you to
receive that may, or may not benefit you, and actually
allow you to eat a solid meal. Productivity in my opinion equates
to more time off not less. If you are more productive in less time
by utilizing smart solutions then for me that's the bottom line.
Well, this can be answered easily. Browsing through literature
after my solid meal, most if not all serious sociologists of labor
etc. hold (and have proven) that, since the seventies, the working
population in the first world (the most industrialized countries)
have been working more, not less, while this has not been making
life more easy. 

These, or their offspring’s are probably the ones that recommended
we create situations such as Nafta, other trade free zone alliances
and unbalanced tariffs on import and export duties. A friend of mine
quoted on a job for an extremely complicated metal mold. his bid was
$23,000 with an 8 week lead time. Comes back as a no way Jose’,
because a company in China had bid $11,350 with a 3 week lead time.
For the same money they put more people on the job which reduced the
lead time, but the biggest factor was, they were delivering the tool
at $3,500 less than the material was costing him here in the US. Now
if the duties would have balanced the playing field, well he may have
had a shot. Therefore, they are correct in their studies, but do they
offer a solution for me or him on how to compete with China other
than dropping our pants or finding solutions or niche markets.
Further I might add, the quality of the tooling would not have been
close to what he would have made, but it didn’t really matter. Lead
time and cost prevailed over quality. My point is, I do not need to
read studies by so called experts telling me what I already know. If
the experts were that good, they would have predicted the predicament
we are in today. Therefore the situation did not allow him to compete
or get paid what he deserved, it actually meant that he was either
getting sucked down to their pricing, or not get the job at all. You
know the answer to that one. This was the point I was making to
Karen, in that it is not whether the low skilled can get up to the
respected skill levels, but whether those with skills get pulled down
to the lower level. This will tell you why, tool and die makers, mold
makers and general machine shops in the US are not making what they
should as an annual salary and why the industry is struggling on the
whole. I have many friends in this field and I hear them complaining
about it daily.

    On the contrary. It's easy to refer to a parameter such as the
GNP of a country, but this is a falsification because it tells you
nothing except the productivity itself and only in a very limited
and fundamentally unreal way. There are other parameters such as
the human development index. Fundamentally, the relationship
between rising productivity and more satisfaction in life is *far*
more complex that you suggest. 

The data provided in these reports mean little to me at the end of
the day. It does not tell me where I am heading, or even what I need
to do to stay competitive, it only enforces the fact that there are
issues that need to be addressed, and that they do not tell me how to
address them. The Auto Industry was a classic example. Japan
utilizing new technology and just in time manufacturing processes in
the form of Kanban really rocked the US auto Industry. Granted in the
early days, the quality was poor, but the price was right, and as
time went by, the quality improved and the product dominated the
market. It took a long time for Detroit to catch up, and the only way
they did this was to implement smart solutions, lower the costs of
manufacturing and thus resulting in a lower priced vehicle that could
compete on the showroom floor. This meant that the skilled US auto
workers where now making a product that was competing with the price
points set by the Japanese Auto Makers and not the other way
around. Same thing with the influx of jewellery from China. Again,
thin walls, stones falling out, very poor quality, but it sold to the
masses. The jewellers that were in the mass merchandising of products
where now not looking to maintain their original price points, they
were looking to see how they could lower the cost of manufacturing
with the concept of getting closer to the price set by the Chinese
jeweller but with better quality, hoping it would be enough to make
the sale. In a nutshell, a product with reasonable pricing but with
less problems for the retail jeweller. I am talking first hand here,
because this was my core business in assisting those companies in the
automation of their facilities. I offered many solutions to the
extremely fine Jewellery Houses also, so you can take it that the
issues where across the board. They could not do this in traditional
manners, they had to automate their processes. Therefore,
productivity is not only a question of how many pieces you can
produce, but what can you produce it for. Yes you can produce
millions of an item, but if it is not competitive and has the ability
to sell…well what more can I say. Many view productivity as volume,
I look at it from another direction. Productivity to me, means having
the ability to manufacture a single item in less time, therefore
freeing up more time. Getting the costs down on a single piece, will
most definitely results in higher profits once in production.

    This technology is not within the reach of the people I spoke
about and I think you know it too, but that you don't care about
it. 

That’s the problem, I do care. One member on the list who uses Gem
Vision, asked what he should do to move forward. I told him, seeing
as his staff was trained and knowledgeable in Gem Vision, it made
more sense for him to go with Matrix and keep everything native.
That’s what he did. Therefore you may deduct, I offered him my
opinion taking into consideration what was good for him and his
business. If it was about me making money, I would have sold him
something else that I would have made money on. That’s all I have to
say on that one.

    This technology is meant to be used by manufacturers which
produce many pieces, simply, because it is designed for it. So, if
we see 50,000 of exactly the same rings on the market next year,
perhaps they were made with this program. Yes, productivity
increased. 

Not the case at all. It is geared towards the Artisan and the
manufacturer alike. It is for a better sense of the word geared
towards the custom jeweller who needs the tools to produce faster.
Your point of no one has the time because they are all under the gun,
only enforces the fact that they really do need more intuitive tools
to get the job done. Therefore your contradiction is noted. It is
therefore geared to produce one piece efficiently. The fact that you
produce 50,000 pieces from that single efficiently made model, well
isn’t that the point.

Best Regards.
Neil George
954-572-5829


#15

Dr. Willy D I hate to jump in on this techno love fest but things are
getting crazy here. I’m about seven years from BEING a Dr. but my
prescription is to chill. It is a noble endeavor to defend the poor
working class jewelers who make their own rouge and stuff like that.
That IS what Doctari do. Mr George has some very good points though,
technology does save time and time is money and cash is king. I mean
you are both sitting at a technological wonder writing back and forth
so eloquently. Imagine mailing this stuff back and forth. This
conversation would not be happening and God knows I would not be able
to jump in. And Jump in I must to defend the modern diet. There is,
as my brother in law likes to put it a meal in every can/bottle. I am
talking about one of humankinds MOST techno inventions,
beer.(Affordable for working slugs like me and filling too) Doc there
is no need to slink to those disgusting slim fast malts. You can make
it on beer. And when I am sitting at my new laser welder I can slug
down a bottle of a good nut brown and never have to waste precious
work time running out for some she she Boulder grub. I can keep on
working. And work I must because that laser welder was pretty freakin
pricey! Ya know when you think about it so were rolling mills when
they first hit the market and torches that you didn’t have to blow
through. Oil paints in a tube and air tools to carve marble. Oh yes
and Beer.

Regards J Morley Techno Laser Arts/Beer Lover