Now, remember, this is a print from an early pre-production model. Obviously, I don't have a sample from the most recent iterations. So, we may be talking about something that will be a completely non-issue in release versions of the Cube.
I did manage to find an image of a second shoe.
As you can see, this seems to be a much more consistent print. And, more importantly, the print seems to be a bit finer and cleaner. I'm assuming that both were printed from the same 3D Model. But, they may NOT have been printed from the same STL file. The most important thing to determine from comparing these two images is that some improvement is evident.
But there is something else to see in these images. And, that is the nature of the support material decision engine. Notice that the decision to create a support system does not begin at the extreme left or right of the arch of the toe. It was not until the line of the toe arch began to flatten out that the support decision engine decided that the toe needed supporting.
This is in keeping with the observations of the Rooks. As long as the slope is gradual, there does not seem to be a need for supports. Neither of these prints required any support at all at the overhang at the top of the Rooks. It seems that if we design for a gradual overhang we can possible avoid needing support materials. This saving a bit of money.
I will be testing this concept as soon as I have the RapMan 3.2 up and running.