Quoted from Star_Gazer:And clearcoat on top? or wax?...or nothing and use Novus from time to time?
I don't think it was clearcoated over, the graphics are printed on the backside, so no chance of them wearing really.
There's a Bally game that has a big plastic playfield piece, what am I thinking of? Is it Elektra? It's clear over a printed playfield though I think.
Quoted from vid1900:New Canasta also has a plastic covered playfield
Maybe it's a Spanish thing? Bushido and New Canasta both came from Spain.
Using acrylic glass for a top layers sounds like a very interesting idea. No more messing trying to get the clear coats to be smooth and no gluing of inserts! wow. Worth a try.
What thickness of plywood and acrylic glass would they use for this?
How do they diffuse the 'insert' light now? The clear acrylic sheet offers no light diffusion for the lights, so that would look ugly.
Maybe it can be done with a sheet of opaque foil below the acrylic. Or just a white paint layer. Anyone know how this works?
I had this thought a few years ago but then thought about some of the mechs and their placement in reference to the playfield surface so either thinner playfield or extra routing or new designed parts for like flipper, sling shot pop bumper mechs.
Acrylic would not be suitable as will crack, polycarbonate is tougher but can't be laser cut and will scratch in time, and within a few years will start to go brittle and yellow.
I recently saw something else that could be an alternative way to apply graphics as done in the surfboard industry is via printed rice paper then a layer of fibreglass and resin. putting down the rice paper in place would be a little tricky but reckon doable
1. cut the playfield out and install inserts and apply a white coat to all areas of graphics to be applied maybe using a cut mask and then a clear coat ?.
2. get a full design printed on rice paper and resin over sealing the art to the playfield
3. possible apply one coat of glass over the art ??
4. apply a few coats of clear ????
found this on the net and the art printing could be a cheap alternative for those one off's
http://www.boardlams.com/products/your-board-logos-design
here is a example on a surfboard, lining up spot on probably would need 2 people
Has anyone tried this, any thoughts from anyone or those who are experienced surfboard makers
I've done a lot of fiberglass and Japanese tissue lay ups, so I have the experience to try, but I don't know anyone that prints on rice paper.
Quoted from Wolfmarsh:I've done a lot of fiberglass and Japanese tissue lay ups, so I have the experience to try, but I don't know anyone that prints on rice paper.
the link in my post prints for you and is in the US (pretty sure).
just thinking this could be a cool way to do one off playfield designs, as recently I saw a mates surfboard and he printed an A4 size design in his home printer and applied under the resin and it was sharp and nice colours which then got me thinking for pinball playfields
pretty sure this is the paper to get for experimenting
Hahnemuhle Rice Paper 100gsm
Quoted from swinks:I had this thought a few years ago but then thought about some of the mechs and their placement in reference to the playfield surface so either thinner playfield or extra routing or new designed parts for like flipper, sling shot pop bumper mechs.
I had considered this, but yea there can be some complicated hole cuts that you'd have to route twice (inserts wouldn't get cut on this layer). You'd still have the issue of the plastic getting cloudy over time (clear is harder and more apt to stay clear). IF you were interested in this, I would do it out of a thin layer of PETG since it's the best of both worlds (flame polishable like acrylic, nearly as impact resistant as polycarbonate).
Yeah, I'm not entirely sure how the layup would go. You would either have to precut the fiberglass somehow, or do the layup and try to route out the holes afterward.
Just brainstorming, so this probably could be better, but I would probably do the layup on a clean sheet of plywood with just inserts in it and an uncut sheet of rice paper. I'd let the paper/glass/resin cure completely, then align a CNC by something on the artwork to do the playfield cuts. Then I would probably coat the whole thing with clear after the CNC routing.
I still think direct to substrate printing of the kind John Greatwich has been doing is the future for short run playfields. You'd want to find a printer that does white so you wouldn't have to go through the extra masking and paint step he does.
Quoted from Wolfmarsh:Yeah, I'm not entirely sure how the layup would go. You would either have to precut the fiberglass somehow, or do the layup and try to route out the holes afterward.
Just brainstorming, so this probably could be better, but I would probably do the layup on a clean sheet of plywood with just inserts in it and an uncut sheet of rice paper. I'd let the paper/glass/resin cure completely, then align a CNC by something on the artwork to do the playfield cuts. Then I would probably coat the whole thing with clear after the CNC routing.
I would tend to agree but to add to this, when I use to build cnc machines and owned a cnc for a while I experimented with different double sided routing techniques, quite often I routed a hole into the item right through in a unseen location and the holes would be in the identical location whether the say playfield was face up or face down. They were cut say when you routed the face up side 1st, then when you went to do the face down side you would ensure the waste board is locked down, place 4 dowels into the waste board into the 4 location jig holes and then load up the playfield in the face down position, home the machine to the start point (corner) of the face up but then load up the face down file and keep the same home position and save it.
This way with the jobs save, the waste board locked down with dowels you can machine in dimples for screws etc in the face down job as well as load the playfield at a later date in the face up position to re-machine any slots etc giving you a playfield with art, routed again in critical spots and then ready to clear.
As for the rice paper agree go a full sheet and have some location reference marks, a helper or skilled fibreglasser and resin in place
Quoted from ecurtz:I still think direct to substrate printing of the kind John Greatwich has been doing is the future for short run playfields. You'd want to find a printer that does white so you wouldn't have to go through the extra masking and paint step he does.
thats great if you could but still not a cheap process and won't help people outside the US / Canada as well,
with the resin idea the rice paper print is say $60, fibreglass and resin maybe $50 so very feasible for trying
My Williams Winner has all PF art screened on the reverse of an acrylic sheet and despite its age and the obvious number of plays looks just fine with no excessive wear or scratching.
Ben did it right when he built his 1/2 scale pinball (he's now done 3 pinball projects, and his background is art and doing game mods with realistic looking backdated bezels). He started with a routed playfield, stuck in inserts, then put on a layer of clear (mostly to hold the inserts, but also do give a clean smooth surface), then a layer of white (with inserts trimmed away with a cutter printer), then a layer of CMYK artwork printing on clear (the white layer backs up the areas that need backing)
Quoted from Aurich:Eh, I'm pretty uninterested in that. Definitely a super valid approach, but I'd want to play with real physics, and get my hands dirty. Virtual is great, but I think it also encourages WOOLY like games. Meaning 6 flippers and upper playfields and all that.
When you're forced to work physically you're going to stay more realistic. And learning how to actually make a ramp is part of the fun/challenge.
Besides, I spend all damn day on the computer. You can tell when work is slow, my Pinside post count goes up. I need to step away and do things with my hands. That's how I got into pinball in the first place, I build a virtual cab from scratch, and it was my gateway drug.
Every time I try to get out....
// Error: Image 420248 not found //
Quoted from toyotaboy:then a layer of white (with inserts trimmed away with a cutter printer), then a layer of CMYK artwork printing on clear
When cutting holes in the white layer for the inserts, then you get an uneven surface because these holes will be lower as the rest of the playfield. I don't think he did put lots of sanded clearcoat layers on top of it to smooth it out. How did he get an smooth surface this way?
Quoted from DDDwingmaster:When cutting holes in the white layer for the inserts, then you get an uneven surface because these holes will be lower as the rest of the playfield. I don't think he did put lots of sanded clearcoat layers on top of it to smooth it out. How did he get an smooth surface this way?
The layers of vinyl are pretty thin (less than .012"), and there's still a layer on top (color layer). Pretty sure it all evens out, but if you REALLY wanted to make sure I suppose you could put a couple layers of clearcoat on top of the white layer, sand it smooth, THEN put the top color layer on, and then clearcoat over that.
Quoted from toyotaboy:The layers of vinyl are pretty thin (less than .012"), and there's still a layer on top (color layer). Pretty sure it all evens out, but if you REALLY wanted to make sure I suppose you could put a couple layers of clearcoat on top of the white layer, sand it smooth, THEN put the top color layer on, and then clearcoat over that.
Total overkill for something this small. It's just a fun little project, not a game that's going to give you serious gameplay.
I know someone who had an issue with the poly, where when the game heated up from extended game play it would expand slightly, and I 'warped' in some places, which ruined game play until it cooled back down.
On painting white, obviously you could mask off the areas you want to remain wood before painting.
Quoted from swinks:Acrylic would not be suitable as will crack, polycarbonate is tougher but can't be laser cut and will scratch in time, and within a few years will start to go brittle and yellow.
That's the same material used for all plastics right? But that Elektra sure looks fine after all these years..and uses a really thick layer of plexiglass.
Quoted from rosh:where when the game heated up
Must be Fireball! 
Quoted from swinks:Acrylic would not be suitable as will crack, polycarbonate is tougher but can't be laser cut and will scratch in time, and within a few years will start to go brittle and yellow.
Quoted from Star_Gazer:That's the same material used for all plastics right? But that Elektra sure looks fine after all these years..and uses a really thick layer of plexiglass.
plexi_01.jpg
The issue with "plexiglass" is that pretty much every consumer refers to clear plastic as "plexiglass". 'Plexiglas' is a trade name for acrylic, much like 'Lexan' is a trade name for polycarbonate. The properties of these two materials (and other clear plastic sheet) are NOT the same.
I would be interested to know exactly what the Elektra PF is made of (it may even be plexiglass/acrylic - if it's not crazing I would doubt that though) but swinks is definitely right that acrylic would be prone to cracking/crazing around stress and ball impact regions after a marginal amount of abuse. Likewise he is correct that Lexan/polycarbonate would resist cracking, but would scratch all to hell in very short time.
I'm not sure what material old artwork plastics were made of, but I believe CPR uses PET/PETG for repros... (ie - neither acrylic nor polycarbonate) I'm very unfamiliar with PET properties but in very thin sheet form, it is known in our world under the trade name "Mylar" and tends to work quite well as a playfield protector 
Quoted from Purpledrilmonkey:I believe CPR uses PET/PETG for repros...
Correct, they use PETG. That's what I use for my Shadow speaker panels too.
Quoted from Star_Gazer:think it's clear, but this is what i had in mind.
01.jpg
I considered this technique myself in the paste but for mechs and other fixtures to be fastened securely you would have to maintain a similar thickness ply and then for mechs like the flipper, slings ball trough (even the locking t nuts) you would have to custom make some of the components because if you used standard ones they would be sitting lower by the thickness of the plexi. Alternatively you could use thinner ply or router out ply thinner in sections but the screws used to fasten mechs in place would be shorter and lead to issues I believe.
This approach is definite worth a try. Now a nice way to put the print on the acrylic playfield.
I came across a website with a instructable for making playfield plastics. They where putting first a printed transparent decal on the plastic, followed by an empty white decal. Would such a approach work for a whole playfield?
Quoted from swinks:Acrylic would not be suitable as will crack, polycarbonate is tougher but can't be laser cut and will scratch in time, and within a few years will start to go brittle and yellow.
You can water cut polycarb
for lighting effects would be different because without separate inserts it would bleed light over the artwork. In some cases that could be interesting. a 2nd layer of opaque below the clear with cutouts for the inserts might help control it a bit
Quoted from Star_Gazer:think it's clear, but this is what i had in mind.
Close to what I was thinking, I think the playfield and any small scratches might work like a lightpipe does. Think older style BMW LED Ring headlights (Acrylic tube with small cuts, the rough plastic of the cuts carries most of the light)
I've got a pair of SEGA VUK's. Looking to get $35 each shipped in USA (international extra). They've been cleaned and tested. These can shoot a ball up a tube a good 6-8 inches. I'm using the same one on my project:
http://homebrewpinball.blogspot.com/2015/04/layout-video.html
Here's pics:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/dm3tumoxk2rulhc/AAB6IdwHbEnH2wXweeecHyiza?dl=0
Quoted from VacFink:for lighting effects would be different because without separate inserts it would bleed light over the artwork. In some cases that could be interesting. a 2nd layer of opaque below the clear with cutouts for the inserts might help control it a bit
You'd want to do a light mask. A second hit of super opaque white might work, or you could alternately screen print it after the process color like an old school backglass.
You could use that method to make inserts of any shape you wanted. If you used PETG then you could laser etch exposed areas, to simulate jeweled effets. Or it might be interesting to screen on a transparent white over all the inserts, that would then be lit by RGB lighting to become any color in a really saturated fashion.
Quoted from swinks:I would tend to agree but to add to this, when I use to build cnc machines and owned a cnc for a while I experimented with different double sided routing techniques, quite often I routed a hole into the item right through in a unseen location and the holes would be in the identical location whether the say playfield was face up or face down. They were cut say when you routed the face up side 1st, then when you went to do the face down side you would ensure the waste board is locked down, place 4 dowels into the waste board into the 4 location jig holes and then load up the playfield in the face down position, home the machine to the start point (corner) of the face up but then load up the face down file and keep the same home position and save it.
This way with the jobs save, the waste board locked down with dowels you can machine in dimples for screws etc in the face down job as well as load the playfield at a later date in the face up position to re-machine any slots etc giving you a playfield with art, routed again in critical spots and then ready to clear.
As for the rice paper agree go a full sheet and have some location reference marks, a helper or skilled fibreglasser and resin in place
If I'm reading you right, this and the correct plastic is the trick. If its a custom game, semicustom hardwear won't be that difficult to secure.
https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/a-new-chapter-in-pinball-game-development-has-begun
Maybe not quite a whitewood... call it a screenwood?
In any case, Multimorphic posted yesterday that their development kit is available to design games. Awesome stuff, I'm seeing what I can do with it right now. Obviously there's no hardware available yet to flip with so it's just simulated in Unity but it that does look pretty promising.
Quoted from Law:https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/a-new-chapter-in-pinball-game-development-has-begun
Maybe not quite a whitewood... call it a screenwood?
In any case, Multimorphic posted yesterday that their development kit is available to design games. Awesome stuff, I'm seeing what I can do with it right now. Obviously there's no hardware available yet to flip with so it's just simulated in Unity but it that does look pretty promising.
Developing a P3 game is going to be a ridiculous amount of work. And without a large built in base the payoff just isn't there. Multimorphic needs to prove the platform, ship games, and demonstrate some viability before anyone is going to jump into that pool.
I wish them luck! But there's a real hill to climb in front of them just to see some first party success, definitely feels too early for expecting 3rd party support. IMHO.
Quoted from Aurich:Developing a P3 game is going to be a ridiculous amount of work.
If by "ridiculous amount of work" you mean significantly less than developing a machine from scratch, then I agree.
- Developing a playfield module for the P3 is much easier, simpler, quicker, and less expensive than developing a full-sized playfield.
- Developing software is also much easier; we've already done much of the work. If you're worried about developing content for the playfield LCD, don't be. You can very quickly create a traditional style (static image with 'blinking insert lamps'), and if you want to go fully dynamic, that's possible too. Our dev framework works seamlessly with Unity3D, the most popular 'game engine' in the game dev community (read: mature and has a huge support community). It also comes with a full playfield simulator and a playable sample game with many mode examples, including ones where the ball interacts with virtual targets.
- Developing cab artwork is no different than with any other game. Plus, the end result is easily replaceable with our magnetic artwork system.
- Developing a control system solution is... already done. The control system is part of the platform. You simply put the driver and switch boards you need on/under your playfield module, and it acts as an extension of the platform simple. That's one huge advantage of our modular, chainable, extensible control system (P-ROC / P3-ROC + driver and switch boards).
- Building a cab is... not necessary. We've done that for you.
- The manufacturing process is also much, much, much simpler for P3 games than for traditional games (or even full-size playfield kits for other platforms).
And without a large built in base the payoff just isn't there.
I disagree. The instant payoff is a significantly easier game development process as described above. Certainly the long-term payoff and business advantage is the eventual installed base of P3 machines, and that will take a little time, but if you're comparing a P3 game dev to a traditional game dev right now, both start in the same place... no installed user base. With the P3, the user base will grow and develop into an easily addressable market. With traditional games, there's no such thing as an installed user base because the games are stand-alone.
Multimorphic needs to prove the platform, ship games, and demonstrate some viability before anyone is going to jump into that pool.
The dozens of people already jumping into the pool would clearly disagree with you.
I wish them luck! But there's a real hill to climb in front of them just to see some first party success, definitely feels too early for expecting 3rd party support. IMHO.
We're not *expecting* 3rd party support. We're just developing a platform that enables 3rd party development and significantly simplifies the game development process. We're obviously also developing our own games (ie. Lexy Lightspeed - Escape From Earth and others to follow soon thereafter). The P3 provides developers with all of the advantages described above, hopefully/eventually including an installed user base. If 3rd party developers do develop games, it'll make good business sense for them, and it'll be a huge plus for P3 customers.
- Gerry
http://www.multimorphic.com
Quoted from Aurich:Developing a P3 game is going to be a ridiculous amount of work. And without a large built in base the payoff just isn't there. Multimorphic needs to prove the platform, ship games, and demonstrate some viability before anyone is going to jump into that pool.
I wish them luck! But there's a real hill to climb in front of them just to see some first party success, definitely feels too early for expecting 3rd party support. IMHO.
Respect you a lot, Aurich, but going to have to disagree with most of your assertions there.
However much work it is to develop a p3 game, it's going to be less than starting from scratch. Adding 2d art and blinking lights to a screen in Unity is not that difficult. If you've used Photoshop you can do it.
As for third party support, I don't think that is the intent of the release based on the other thread. Seems more like something they're putting out there so that anyone that feels like it can get their hands dirty using a simulator.
Didn't Heigway try to do something similar but with the caveat of "we own everything you create" only a month or so ago? No such restrictions here as far as I can tell.
Quoted from Law:Respect you a lot, Aurich, but going to have to disagree with most of your assertions there.
Didn't Heigway try to do something similar but with the caveat of "we own everything you create" only a month or so ago? No such restrictions here as far as I can tell.
Correct, no restrictions here. We might participate in a certification and/or labeling process, but you retain full ownership of all P3 games you create. We'll of course offer as much help as we can provide (ie. design and/or manufacturing services). You can use that help or completely ignore it.
The more P3 games there are, the happier the community will be.
- Gerry
http://www.multimorphic.com
Quoted from Law:Didn't Heigway try to do something similar but with the caveat of "we own everything you create" only a month or so ago? No such restrictions here as far as I can tell.
I have no involvement in that project, so I honestly don't know any of the details. That's really John Greatwich's baby, he shopped it around to multiple people before Heighway agreed to something with him. So I can't discuss it, because I'm ignorant.
Quoted from gstellenberg:Certainly the long-term payoff and business advantage is the eventual installed base of P3 machines, and that will take a little time, but if you're comparing a P3 game dev to a traditional game dev right now, both start in the same place... no installed user base. With the P3, the user base will grow and develop into an easily addressable market. With traditional games, there's no such thing as an installed user base because the games are stand-alone.
Well that's really the point though, isn't it? With a standalone game I can sell it to anyone. With a P3 game I can only sell it to someone who owns a P3 cabinet. Right now that number is zero.
It's a lot like being an indie game developer and choosing between PC and console. Console only works when there's an installed base to sell to. And you obviously then have to work within the limitations of the platform, as far as controllers and specs.
Understand that I'm not attacking your company or product, I'm simply saying that as a 3rd party developer it's not really an attractive business model right now from my perspective. Obviously if Multimorphic sells a lot of P3 complete games, and there are people clambering for content that's different. And you can gamble and try and get ahead of that curve, but you don't know that it will exist. Right now there's just a pre-order list that isn't worth a whole lot, since it was deliberately set up to require no commitment of any kind. Maybe you have some kind of projected sales model that has more reliable information behind it?
Quoted from Aurich:Well that's really the point though, isn't it? With a standalone game I can sell it to anyone. With a P3 game I can only sell it to someone who owns a P3 cabinet. Right now that number is zero.
With a standalone game, you buy a full machine (playfield + cabinet + everything else). You start with nothing and wind up with a playable game.
If you want a 3rd party P3 game and don't already have a P3, you buy a P3 + the game. You start with nothing and wind up with a playable game.
If we offer an empty P3 system (no game) for sale, then it's a perfectly valid comparison, with the exception that you're buying 2 items instead of one (but for similar total pricing). That said, I suspect customers will likely opt to buy the P3 with the included game; so they'll end up with 2 games for what is likely significantly less than 2 standalone games. P3 pricing isn't final yet, though, so the exact math is TBD. Pricing should be finalized soon as we ready our production BOM.
What you're focusing on (marketing 3rd party P3 games to existing P3 customers) is an advantage that will develop over time as people buy P3's. I fully agree with you there. Until then, to repeat, you'd start with no cab & no game and end up with a fully playable game in either case (P3 vs Standalone). Then you can build up your game library with new game kits as they become available from Multimorphic and 3rd parties. We expect game kits to cost around the $1.5k-$2k range, with complexity-based outliers.
Companies in many market segments develop and market applications to people without the requisite base hardware. If people want the application, they buy the hardware to run it.
To bring this post back on topic (or at least close), the P3 represents a platform that makes it significantly easier to build games vs a standalone game. If a game dev simply wants to create a game by focusing only on the actual application needs (p/f layout, rules, art, software), they can do that successfully with a P3. When building a standalone game, there's a lot more work they'll have to do.
- Gerry
http://www.multimorphic.com
I'm interested in the P3 however think for my first pin from scratch, I want to focus on getting in the basics. Down the road, I can see wanting to give it a try and the value in creating a package that can be shared with others in a limited run.
While not ready to build my first whitewood yet, i've been looking over ebay parts to size up what it would cost to buy and rebuild used parts. However, I would hope to offer a kit long term, if there's interest, in my machine, so think sourcing new parts makes sense.
Has anyone looked into this? I'm thinking of things like entire drop target assemblies, VUK's, entire pop bumper assemblies. I also feel some obligation to leave the remaining spares to those who are building a specific machine. Sure I can grab 3 used pop bumpers from ebay but then somone wanting those for a rehab is out original parts. I guess is the car guy in me that makes me sympathetic.
Anyone have any thoughts? Suggestions? Maybe there's an opportunity to get a group/buy on the basic set up of parts from a vendor.
From what I've seen, I can part up to a complete assembly piecemeal but haven't found entire assemblies available.
great to here Gerry in regards to programming a basic playfield that has that typical look with flashing inserts as that is more encouraging for the beginner to start and get comfortable.
I also think what P3 is offering is reasonable, yes the initial setup is probably not the cheapest. But if you were to buy this system as like with Heighway it would not be cheap and probably a little more expensive but at least once you have a system you have one major advantage as I understand it, as you can even using the same playfield layout and replace the graphics and rules to create a totally new game which is cool and all it will cost is your time no parts etc. Unlike with Heighways developer model to benefit you have to buy the game (like P3) but to benefit from a new game you would have to buy all the parts, get screen printing done, perform wiring and in the end you don't own the rights as well if you join john's group.
For me signing legal documents giving my legal rights away was a huge turn off as it was discouraging when I asked questions to help me decide and they couldn't be answered and only would be answered after I sign legal documents. To add the designs were restricted to using Heighway typical parts putting Heighway up there in the same boat as P3 if doing comparisons of you base setup.
Overall I think what P3 is trying to do is great especially making game design free sharing (of course the owner decides this) but has alot of potential.
Quoted from VacFink:I'm interested in the P3 however think for my first pin from scratch, I want to focus on getting in the basics. Down the road, I can see wanting to give it a try and the value in creating a package that can be shared with others in a limited run.
While not ready to build my first whitewood yet, i've been looking over ebay parts to size up what it would cost to buy and rebuild used parts. However, I would hope to offer a kit long term, if there's interest, in my machine, so think sourcing new parts makes sense.
Has anyone looked into this? I'm thinking of things like entire drop target assemblies, VUK's, entire pop bumper assemblies. I also feel some obligation to leave the remaining spares to those who are building a specific machine. Sure I can grab 3 used pop bumpers from ebay but then somone wanting those for a rehab is out original parts. I guess is the car guy in me that makes me sympathetic.
Anyone have any thoughts? Suggestions? Maybe there's an opportunity to get a group/buy on the basic set up of parts from a vendor.
From what I've seen, I can part up to a complete assembly piecemeal but haven't found entire assemblies available.
May I recommend the main pinball vendors?
http://www.pinballlife.com/index.php?p=catalog&parent=107&pg=1
http://www.pinballlife.com/index.php?p=product&id=658
http://www.pinballlife.com/index.php?p=product&id=1513
And tons of crap here with varying degrees of availability:
http://www.marcospecialties.com/pinball-parts/MECH-ASSY?
The cheap way is used or old mechs, but whole new assemblies are certainly available.
Wanna join the discussion? Please sign in to reply to this topic.
Great to see you're enjoying Pinside! Did you know Pinside is able to run without any 3rd-party banners or ads, thanks to the support from our visitors? Please consider a donation to Pinside and get anext to your username to show for it! Or better yet, subscribe to Pinside+!
This page was printed from https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/lets-figure-out-the-bare-minimum-costparts-to-build-a-whitewood/page/19 and we tried optimising it for printing. Some page elements may have been deliberately hidden.
Scan the QR code on the left to jump to the URL this document was printed from.
Torrance, CA
Sana'a
Noordwijk
Napier
Toronto, ON