[1] https://images4.sw-cdn.net/product/picture/710x528_583780_19...
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9YAAS0cZ_w
also all hail king Quilez, master wizard
Is it much more enlightening for a doctor to hold a model of a medical scan in their hand, or rotate it on a screen?
There's potentially a lot of information to be interpreted in a 3D model, being able to use our natural systems to interpret the model seems like it would make it easier to understand. I imagine VR would be a step from looking at a model on a flat screen.
Having the physical model goes a step further, allowing you to experience it tactiley as well as visually. I suspect that the ability to manipulate the model with your hands while looking at it would make it easier to understand its features as well.
For simple antenna models I suspect not much is gained by having the printed model, they just look pretty cool. If you were to model more complicated antennae, or include interference from surrounding components, the resulting physical models have the potential to make understanding exactly what is going on much easier.
Physical model is nice...but its utility is not justified for the expense of 3D printing.
Probably in industrial design and architecture. I don't come across a 3D graph where I go "Gee! I wish I had a physical model. I just can't understand this thing".
Don't get me wrong, it is nice. But I am debating how much better?
Like that color, I bet you could print a pretty convincing peach
What about the colours?
https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/6959/what-is...