Bespoke Object Process

Adapting 3D Printed Clay Figurines: Lessons Learned and Process Refinements

Introduction: Crafting a Bespoke Object

Ceramics studio 3D clay printing setup

For my 3D Object Design and Fabrication midterm project, I set out to create a set of 3D-printed clay figurines inspired by pre-Columbian aesthetics and my ongoing exploration of cultural heritage. This project fits within the framework of "The Bespoke Object" as each figurine is uniquely tailored—not just in concept, but in the very materiality and process of its making. Unlike mass-produced objects, my clay figurines required iterative refinements, collaboration, and a deep understanding of both digital and traditional sculpting techniques.

This project also raised an interesting question: What does it mean to recreate an ancient handmade form with a 3D printer? While digital fabrication is often associated with precision and uniformity, working with clay introduced organic variation and unpredictability. Each print, though based on the same digital file, ended up unique due to slight differences in clay consistency, gravity, and extrusion patterns. Rather than producing identical copies, the process resulted in bespoke objects, shaped by both machine precision and natural forces.

Throughout this process, I learned to adapt digital tools to the physical limitations of clay printing, refining my approach in multiple ways. This blog post documents my journey, the challenges I encountered, and the creative solutions I implemented along the way.

1. Understanding the Limits of Clay Printing

My first couple of test prints quickly revealed a fundamental difference between plastic filament printing and clay extrusion:

• Steep angles and overhangs that work well with plastic weren’t as forgiving with clay, which lacks structural rigidity during printing.
• Clay tends to sag or collapse under its own weight if inclines are too steep OR if the consistency is too wet/soft.

Solution: Adjusting the 3D Model

To address this, I revisited my 3D model in Rhino and modified the angles to create gentler inclines that would print successfully in clay. This was a crucial adaptation, ensuring that my design maintained its integrity post-print.

This limitation also highlights the interaction between machine and material—while the software allows for complete control over form, the material itself resists certain shapes. Unlike plastic, which holds precise angles as dictated by the model, clay requires a negotiation between digital intention and material behavior.

2. Optimizing the Mesh in Blender

A crucial turning point was learning from Jose, my classmate, who has extensive experience in Blender mesh modeling. My model was initially way too large because I had increased the subdivision level to 6, thinking it would make the object smoother. Instead, it created an unnecessarily complex mesh with an excessive number of triangles.

Solution: Optimizing the Mesh for Printing

• Lowering the subdivision level to 2 (the recommended setting) drastically reduced file size.
• Instead of high subdivisions, using "Shade Smooth" in Blender kept the visual smoothness without excessive polygon count.
• We also used Nomad Sculpt to further reduce the polygon count while preserving form.
• Improving slopes of forms so that there is more structural support

This optimization was key because high-definition details were not necessary for clay printing, where some fine details would naturally soften due to the material properties.

3. Learning Keyboard Shortcuts for Faster 3D Modeling

Jose also shared essential keyboard shortcuts that dramatically improved my workflow. Learning these shortcuts allowed me to navigate, modify, and refine models much faster, making the entire process more efficient and less frustrating.

Key Takeaways:

• Shortcuts streamline the process and reduce unnecessary clicks.
• Knowing how to quickly switch tools and views in Blender made modeling significantly more fluid.
• Efficient modeling practices save time and allow for more iterations, leading to better final results.

4. Refining Seam Placement for Intentional Design

Another major challenge was the random placement of seams, which caused my figurine to look unpolished and messy. The seams appeared wherever the printer decided to stop and start, creating unwanted visual interruptions.

Solution: Strategic Seams Using Grasshopper

Bryan helped me refine the seam placement using Grasshopper for Rhino, which allowed us to designate specific locations for seams, integrating them deliberately into the design rather than letting them appear arbitrarily. This step transformed the overall aesthetic of the figurine, making it look more intentional and refined.

This also raised the question: Is a seam a flaw or a feature? By consciously choosing seam placement, I was able to transform an artifact of the printing process into an intentional design element—highlighting the way digital fabrication creates its own unique visual language.

5. Experimenting with Surface Textures

I also explored how different printing line patterns could influence the final look of the figurine. One particularly interesting experiment was using straight and wavy paths, which gave the surface a smooth or woven texture.

Observations:

• The wavy path created an organic, textile-like finish, which added a handcrafted feel to the object.
• Straight-line paths produced a smoother but less intricate result.

This discovery opened up possibilities for how texture can be controlled in digital-to-physical workflows, blending both algorithmic design and traditional craftsmanship.

Next Steps: Firing the Figurines

Now that the models have been successfully printed in clay, the next stage is firing them in the kiln. This will finalize their structure and durability. I'm excited to see how the surface textures hold up and whether the intentional seams and optimized mesh translate well after firing.

Conclusion: Merging Digital and Traditional Craftsmanship

This project has been an incredible learning experience in adapting digital design for physical execution in clay. It reinforced the importance of:

• Understanding material limitations (adapting inclines and moisture levels for clay printing).
• Controlling seams intentionally rather than leaving them to chance.
• Experimenting with texture through print paths.
• Optimizing 3D models for efficiency rather than unnecessary detail.
• Leveraging collaborative learning—huge thanks to Bryan and Jose for their insights!

Beyond technical lessons, this project also deepened my understanding of what it means for an object to be "bespoke." Though each figurine was printed from the same digital model, they all developed unique characteristics due to clay’s inherent variability, gravitational effects, and extrusion differences. This challenges the assumption that 3D printing creates identical copies—when working with organic materials like clay, each object is a one-of-a-kind fusion of digital precision and natural variation.

This process has deepened my appreciation for the ways technology and traditional materials can coexist in a single artistic practice. As I move forward, I plan to continue refining these techniques and exploring how clay printing can further connect digital fabrication with handcrafted aesthetics.

Gallery: Process and Results

(Here I will insert at least 5 images showcasing the final fired pieces.)