Many technology writers have emphasized the potential of 3D
printing to democratize the design and fabrication process, enabling mass
customization or rapid production of sculpture for anyone. From what I have
seen, the great opportunity of 3D printing is not custom shoes or as fodder for
contemporary art, but rather as a new method for engaging with the physical
world. As a tool the 3D printer bridges the significant gap between the digital
and the physical.
A 3D printed part made of Ultem |
Objects
can be harmlessly scanned, cleaned up tuned up or tweaked and then printed back
into existence anywhere. Suddenly the hands off object can be engaged with up
close, the eye coordinated with the hand, the tactile informing the
intellectual. This is the huge conceptual step of 3D printing: allowing the average person to engage with
forms otherwise impossible to access. A patient can feel an internal structure
captured by a CT scan while talking with their surgeon or a student can study a
monument on a small scale across the sea from the museum itself.
Collections
could be archived digitally and printed, then reprinted and remixed, allowing cultural
cross-pollination to occur with greater speed and depth. The Makerbot company
recently led a Hackathon working with the Metropolitan Museum of Art, which
seems a positive indicator for established cultural institutions embracing
disruptive technologies like 3D printing rather than trying to shut them out. What
remains to be seen is exactly how much friction will occur as private companies
try to maintain a tight grip on intellectual property while the bootlegging of physical
products can be as simple as cut, paste, and print.