Who writes this

Jean-Benoit Buisson

Every page on MakerVerdict is written and signed by one named person. This page explains where the judgements come from, lists what the author is not, and gives an address for corrections.

What set this off

It started with a wattage. A laser engraver sold as a 40 W machine whose beam delivers a fraction of that. The larger figure is the electrical power the module draws; the smaller one is the optical power that leaves the lens and actually burns wood. Both are watts, both are printed on listings, and only one of them decides whether a sheet of plywood cuts through. Once that gap is visible, the same pattern turns up across the whole bench. A printer sold on a top speed that describes how fast its motion system can move, not how fast a part comes out well. A resin screen sold on its pixel count as though it were the accuracy of the finished part. An oscilloscope sold on a sample rate when the bandwidth is the limit. A power supply quoted at a voltage and a current it cannot deliver together. And most pages that answer the question look alike: a ranked list, a score, a button, and no figure a reader could check against the maker's own sheet.

The second problem arrives after the box is open. These machines are bought on a headline and kept or returned on details. A nozzle with the right thread and the wrong length, so the hotend leaks. A spool too wide for the printer's own holder. Glasses in a reassuring colour with no marking for the laser's wavelength. A rotary attachment too tall to fit under the head with the tumbler on it. A clear acrylic sheet that a diode laser passes straight through. A microcontroller at 3.3 V wired to a 5 V sensor. None of it is printed on the front of the packaging, and each one decides whether the purchase works.

So the site does the dull part. It reads what manufacturers publish, confirms each product reference market by market, and writes down the line that settles the question — electrical or optical power, maximum speed or typical speed, declared build volume, pixel pitch next to layer height, the wavelength and optical density on a pair of glasses — and it says so plainly when a figure is not published at all. That last habit matters more than it sounds: much of the disappointment on this shelf comes from a number nobody printed, or from one printed without the condition that gives it meaning.

Behind the pages are notes: the specification that matters for each family, the places where a manual and a sales page disagree, which nozzle and plate standards a printer ties its owner to, what a maker means by an outdoor life for vinyl, and the buying mistake each family invites. The site is those notes put in order, in five languages, because the same questions are asked in French, German, Spanish and Italian and are answered worse in most of them.

Every machine and part written about so far

This list is generated from the catalogue, one link per page, so it changes by itself when a family is added or a product retired. It is a record of what is written about on this site, not an inventory of machines on a bench.

What I care about

Three things run through every page. The largest figure on a listing is seldom the deciding one — a laser sold on module wattage rather than optical output, a printer on its top speed rather than its build volume and enclosure, a resin printer on screen resolution rather than on the exposure settings published for its resins, a bench supply on its voltage rather than on the current limit that protects a board. The cost of running a machine outlasts its price — a proprietary nozzle ties every future replacement to one maker, a release film is a consumable, a cartridge tip series decides what a soldering station costs in its third year, and filament that absorbs moisture needs storage nobody budgeted for. And the property that settles it is often missing from the sheet: whether the machine fits the room with its ventilation, whether the software runs on the computer already owned, and whether spare parts will still be sold when the first one wears out.

What I am not

I am not an engineer, an electronics technician, a laser safety officer or a machine repairer. I hold no qualification in those fields, I have never worked for a manufacturer or a retailer, and nothing on this site rests on a professional title. A page here describes a product — its dimensions, its stated figures, its published specifications — and stops there. In particular, every laser power, laser class, wavelength, build volume, print speed, layer height, pixel pitch, nozzle diameter, temperature, voltage, current, bandwidth, sample rate, optical density and material rating on this site is reported from the manufacturer, with its unit as published and its source named, and never derived by me. Where a maker states a figure under a named condition, the page reports that the maker states it, with the condition beside it, and no product is called more precise, faster or safer than another on the strength of a specification alone.

This site is not an operating manual and not safety advice. For lasers of any class, for resins and their fumes, for hot nozzles, irons and presses, and for anything wired to the mains, it points to the maker's instructions, the markings on the product and the rules where you live, rather than paraphrasing them. Two statements are repeated rather than assumed. A laser's electrical power and its optical power are two different figures, and a page always says which one a maker publishes. And no enclosure, filter, pair of glasses or setting is described here as making a machine safe: a page says what the maker supplies and what the marking states, and the maker's instructions decide the rest.

No page asks for trust on the strength of the name at the top. What a judgement rests on is written into the page that makes it, and the longer account of how rankings are built has its own page.

How I work

Every figure carries its origin: a datasheet, a manual, a marking, a named standard, or the consistent reports of long-term owners.
No price, reference or specification is invented. When a maker publishes nothing, the field stays empty and the page says the figure is not published.
Each reference is checked on Amazon, store by store, before a page is published. When a model has no offer in your country, the button opens a search on your own store instead of a missing product page.
When the cheaper choice is the sensible one, the page says it — and when the better move is to recalibrate, dry a spool or change a nozzle instead of buying a machine, the page says that too.
No page is built around a headline figure. Nothing is ranked by the largest wattage or the highest speed on a box, and when a new model barely differs from the one before, the page says so.

What a wrong wattage costs a maker

Because these machines are sold on the wrong numbers to people who will spend evenings learning them. Module wattage appears where optical power belongs. A motion limit appears where a realistic speed belongs. A screen resolution appears where nobody has measured a part. And the items treated as extras — the air assist, the dryer, the hardened nozzle, the fume extraction, the glasses marked for the right wavelength — often decide whether the machine is usable at all.

Plenty of good advice here costs nothing. If one line matters more than the others, it is that a published figure describes a machine; it does not promise a result. A lot of what improves a print or an engraving is free: levelling the bed again, printing a temperature tower before blaming the filament, slowing down for the first layer, focusing the laser before raising its power, setting a current limit before powering a board, and reading the resin maker's exposure table before the first plate. Pages that sell hardware tend to skip those steps. They are not skipped here.

Correcting me

If something on these pages is wrong, please write: it will be fixed, and the page will carry the date of the correction. The address is [email protected].

Jean-Benoit Buisson · MakerVerdict · Montrollet, France