All right, we've covered the GK3s,
and if you're thinking threes, yeah,
that's because there's two of them, not
including this one, the so-called Pro.
And that's what we're diving into today.
It's mostly the same, slightly
different, but those tiny changes do
give us some surprisingly different
results. So, join me as we uncover why
Pro is both the perfect name and
possibly completely the wrong name for
this machine. Hi, I'm Ross and this is
Farhammer Videos. Now, if this is your
first time watching one of my GK3
reviews, welcome. But I'm not about to
spend the next 20 minutes repeating
everything I said in my GK3's
review. You can watch that, too. And I'd
love it if you did because it goes into
way more detail. And another view, like,
and comment really helps the channel.
But for now, I'm just going to give you
a quick summary. So, with the GK3 range,
and that's not including the larger
Ultra, we've now got three nearly
identical machines with only a couple of
subtle differences. On the normal GK3s,
the nonpro versions that I covered in my
last video, one has a ball screw, the
other has a lead screw, also known as a
T-crew. The difference between those and
this Pro is that this has a ball screw
as standard with no T-crew option. But
more importantly, this Pro uses a 385
nanometer light source, where the
standard uses a more common 405. In
fact, this is one of only two printers
I've ever had that uses 385. and I'll
come on to show what that means later
on. Continuing the summary for now.
Outside, the lid design's decent, but
there's a weird VOC leaking gap that
shouldn't be there. USB port placement
is smart, but recessed too far for some
drives. I love the power button being
moved to the front, but they hid it
under a rotating plate. The build plate
is still one of the best. Great texture,
solid locking, and no need for faffing
with leveling, assuming you get yours
pre-leveled. If you don't, really easy
to do, and it'll never come unlevelled
again. The VAT's big, though. with the
resin pore spout makes pouring awkward.
They fixed the bill plate drip tray slot
kind of, but it's a bit of a bodgege.
The screen is 16K, 9.6 in, not 10 as
some brands claim. Great resolution, but
limited UV penetration due to new panel
trends. The real win of this whole range
is that the screen replacement is
stupidly easy, and that is a genuine
selling point versus something like the
Saturn or M7. And some standout features
include a decent internal heater, a
pre-built-in air filter with printable
exhaust, and the auto resin system,
which I personally won't use. It's also
got a webcam, and an app, which finally
lets you watch prints in real time. But
then there's the UI, which is still
basic. Overtheair updates don't work,
and the multi-exposure test is basically
useless in many scenarios. In the end,
it's a printer that exists. It works
great. It's got some great reasons to
buy it. It's just not smarter than its
competitors. In fact, it's genuinely
dumber. But it is more convenient in
some real ways. The build plate, the
app, live webcam, and that replaceable
screen specifically, they're standout
features, and that's true of all of the
GK3 machines apart from the Ultra. But
what does this 385 nm light source
actually mean? And what does it do?
Well, if I'm going to explain technical
stuff, I need to do it in a medium that
I am actually comfortable with. Crayons.
Hopefully my editor can turn these
scribbles into something halfway decent
on screen. But for now, let's keep it
simple, not because you can't handle the
detail because this stuff is easier to
get right when we strip it back. And if
you've got better info or want to
clarify something, please drop it in the
comments. We're all figuring this stuff
out together. So, when we talk about
wavelength, the wavelength is just the
distance between two peaks or two
troughs in an energy wave. 385 nanometer
light has a shorter wavelength than 405
nm, which means it squeezes more peaks
and dips into the same distance. And my
high school physics teacher, the
absolute legend, Mr. Grl, once called
this its jigability, and that stuck with
me since I was 13. And why does this
matter? Well, more jigability means 385
nm light burns out faster. It carries
more energy per photon, but it doesn't
travel as far. So, it doesn't penetrate
as deep as 405 nm. All right, settle
down. It's width that matters anyway.
And I've got neither. And I've still got
kids, so clearly it works, and that's
what matters. Now, yeah, that's a crude
analogy, but it fits. And unfortunately,
it also lines up far too well with how I
actually feel about the existence of
this printer, but we'll come back to
that in the conclusion. But the primary
benefit of this change is one that we
can clearly see when using transparent
resins. The difference is visible, but
again only when using transparent
resins. The more opaque the resin, the
less this matters visually. So whilst
it's technically doing something, that
difference becomes less and less
noticeable the more pigment your resin
contains. Now I need to mention that the
normal GK3 uses PFA release film with
its marketing name.
But on the Pro, you don't get PFA. It
comes with CPFA, which if you want, we
should say stands for crap PFA, but it's
just a marketing word that Uniformation
have since admitted it's ACF. And
they've explained that this is a newer
ACF with a finer grain, but yeah, you
still get the surface texture just like
you would with ACF. And maybe that's not
a huge issue for you if you're printing
bigger models and you don't really need
a perfect smooth surface or if you're
printing with transparents because if
you want that glass-like texture, you're
going to need to clear coat them anyway.
And I've got a separate video on that if
you want to follow along and get
glass-like results from any clear resin.
But to really show off the difference in
penetration depth, Uniformation have
created several samples which have
cavities within solid objects. So, the
idea is with a reduced penetration
distance, there'll be less bloating in
the GK3 Pro printer. So, we'll be able
to see those internal structures because
they won't be filled in by the UV light
penetrating as deep. And yeah, you can
see it. If you're specifically after
something like this application in resin
printing, that's the difference. Less
bloating on transparent resins. And I
need to stress again, this is only on
transparent resins. The more opaque your
resin is, the less of an impact this
penetration depth will have. Now, to
cover my ass, because I am still new to
this, I will also say that there's an
argument for resins cured with 385 nm
lights being tougher, but I expect that
just like the penetration depth is a
minimal amount. In my hands-on
experience, I haven't noticed models
printed in normal resins break any
differently to ones printed on 405
nanometer resins. And to be clear, all
of this was done with the settings
Uniformation told me to use. But I've
also printed exposure tests on both
machines which are both balanced. I've
got another video on balanced exposure,
meaning perfect exposure, and why that's
not great, but why this works. Again,
check that. But this is enough to tell
me that yeah, I'll happily concur that
the settings uniformation provided are
solid for what we're trying to achieve.
But going back to the ACF release film
you get on these printers and why
uniformation of advised that this is
needed. Apparently, it's because the 385
nm light source will actually make PFA
brittle much quicker and could reduce
its lifespan in upwards of 50%. And
that's because of its increased
jigability. And I just haven't printed
for long enough and don't have enough of
these machines to actually test this,
put it through its paces and verify it.
But I also know I have another printer
which has a 385 nm light source and that
uses PFA release film. And I haven't
changed the film on that in about a year
or so since I got it. The printer keeps
telling me to do so when it says it's
run out and I just keep lying to it and
saying I have. Shut up. And that's why
Skynet will come to hate us. But on that
other printer with PFA film, I've come
to my third round of release film
ignorance and it's still printing. But
then on the other hand, I also trust
Uniformation wouldn't just make this up
and promote something as a necessity on
their machine when it'll be seen as a
negative by so many people and they know
it will be. I've had that conversation.
But that's it. Now look, in summary, I
am sure this is a great printer, and I
even trust that 385 is a better light
source in general terms, but the
difference here is only really visible
on transparent resins. Now, that's not a
bad thing. Any incremental update is
still an update, but the benefit also
comes with a promoted drawback. And once
again, I'll use the term apparently, it
degrades the PFA film significantly
faster, which is why they ship it with
ACF instead. And that makes the whole
endeavor feel like one step forward, one
step back, and therefore we haven't
actually moved. And we had the same
thing when ACF came out. Yes, it's
faster, but it reduces surface quality.
And as many, many people have echoed
now, people don't want ACF. They get
resin printers for the best quality. If
ACF reduces it, then that's not a thumbs
up thing for the majority. And I have to
say, and this has been widely debated as
well, but in my experience, and I can
only talk about my experience, I see it
as a weaker material, too, as in it's
not as strong. It doesn't last as long.
I've already had this one tear a small
puncture in the time I've used it, which
led me having to replace my screen
protector. And I can promise you now,
this isn't because I tried to start a
print with loose cured resin in the
back. But yeah, here we're told we need
to use ACF because 385 wears out PFA too
fast. Again, we've gained more accurate
transparent prints, but again, we've
reduced surface quality. And that
reduction in surface quality extends to
everything else you print, too, not just
transparents. So, this does one job
really well, but it does other jobs
worse. So, if you're looking at getting
this, I think there's there's two
options. You can accept the surface
quality issue and print away. Fantastic.
Thumbs up. Crack on. Or you could
replace the ACF with PFA and accept that
you might need to replace your film more
frequently. And if you do that, please
let us know what it's like for you in
terms of lifespan. Is it any better or
worse than what you've seen before?
Because I think we do need some
community consensus on this topic. And
we need more brands chiming in, too. I
want to be clear and say I haven't
concluded my opinion on this light
source yet. I just don't personally see
a benefit for my use case, but I don't
use transparent resins very often. And
what I want is the smoothest surface
quality possible so I can prime and
paint my models immediately. So, this is
one I just want to put out to the
audience. I'm not the gospel voice on
this. My opinion is not everyone's. So,
more so than ever, I open the floor to
you. Do you see the benefit here? Do you
get more than what it takes? Will these
benefits apply to you? And why? or do
you feel like me that this is an upgrade
but with the drawback of release film
that cancels out the benefit? I
genuinely want you to tell me. But
either way, I think it's the naming and
approach to releasing this that I think
is a huge misstep from uniformation. I
do think Pro is the best name for this
device because well, very specifically,
I think it's mostly for manufacturing
and prototyping professionals who will
genuinely see a benefit in this light
source. But I also see it as the worst
name from a marketing standpoint because
I think general everyday users will see
pro and immediately assume better than
the non-pro version and buy it without
realizing that that there are some
drawbacks that need to be considered.
Drawbacks that may not matter to you
depending on what you're printing, but
things that you should know about
specifically around surface quality and
model scale. Now, personally, I think
all of them should have just been one
product, the GK3, and let you choose
385, 405, T-screw, or Ballcrew on a
single product page rather than making
two, well, technically three separate
products that likely just confuse people
more than drive sales. But honestly,
overall, I feel this is just the
incorrect product for Uniformation to
have pushed to YouTube creators because
I genuinely don't think that the people
who would be tangibly getting the
benefits out of this machine are
watching YouTube hobbyist videos for
their buying choices. And the majority
probably aren't buying uniformation
printers in lie of things that are much,
much more expensive. But hey, I could be
wrong. I often am. I was wrong about
something 20 minutes ago, but I am
married after all. In all seriousness,
if you do fully understand the benefit
of 385 nanometer and specifically you've
been looking at buying a more budget
friendly 385 nm resin printers, please
tell me why in the comments. But for
now, I'm going to come back to my
earlier analogy and just say, "Yeah, the
normal GK3 doesn't penetrate as deep,
but it works just fine." But if you do
decide to buy this one, I'd expect it's
because you want a GK3 thanks to the
easily changeable screen and the other
two models are just out of stock. And if
you do buy and this video has helped you
at least expect what you're getting for
your money, then I'd appreciate you
using my affiliate links in the
description before your purchase. That
nets me a commission at no cost to you
and is genuinely how I fully afford to
run this channel. You know, by eating
and staying alive. But above all else, I
want to say thanks for watching. A like,
a comment, or hitting subscribe goes a
long way. And you could also join our
members who are on screen now, who get
early access, Discord rolls, some
exclusive videos, mostly of me waffling.
But until next time, I could do
something heroic, but I've just put a
pizza in. Fauxhammer out.
[Music]