I wanted to share the full process of printing a SANIX 3D model with the Anycubic Photon P1, from the actual resin print to support removal, cleaning, and final assembly.

One thing I’m really appreciating about the Photon P1 is how straightforward the setup process is. The guided build plate leveling makes the preparation much easier, especially because getting the first layer right is one of the most important parts of a successful resin print.

With a properly leveled build plate and a correct Z position, the parts adhere much better to the plate, and the risk of failed prints or detachments during printing is significantly reduced. This makes the whole workflow feel more reliable and less stressful.

After the print was finished, I carefully removed the supports to avoid damaging the details, cleaned the parts, and assembled the model. The final result came out with sharp details and clean surfaces, which is exactly what I like to see from a resin character print.

Overall, this was a very enjoyable print, and the Photon P1 made the process simple, intuitive, and reliable.

I’d be curious to know what settings or workflow tips other Photon P1 users are using for detailed character models.

I saw the model posted by #Sanix on Anycubic P1 facebook page and subscribed right away.

Printed at 30 micron, using ANYCUBIC water wash abs like 3.0 resin.

Bottom layer 8 seconds, standard layer 1.45 seconds intelligent lift and wait on.

I just had some minor failing supports but it is so hot now and the resin went up to 35° during print. Despite the heating function being deactivated and the air conditioning being on

Ps. This is not my kitchen 😝 it's a room in my office building an these are my old home furniture that i kept for my hobby room 😉

After a very busy period, I finally managed to continue testing the Anycubic Photon P1.

This test was not sent by Anycubic. It is part of my personal work within the P1 Performance Lab — Track B, where I am trying to better understand the real performance limits of the Photon P1 under different printing conditions.

In this test, I compared the peel force behavior between two different Photon P1 units:

• Printer 1: equipped with nFEP film
• Printer 2: equipped with ACF film

The goal was to check whether using ACF can further improve the P1’s performance, especially in terms of:

• reducing peel force;
• improving print reliability;
• potentially reducing the number of supports;
• potentially reducing support size or contact density.

Test setup

I created a test file with eight hollow cubes, each measuring 25 mm per side.

The cubes were divided into two groups:

• 4 cubes with vent holes, to reduce the suction effect;
• 4 cubes without vent holes, intentionally left closed to generate a suction cup effect.

All cubes were supported using very small supports, with a 0.25 mm contact point.

For each group, the support spacing was set with different “distance in model” values:

• 1.5 mm
• 2.0 mm
• 3.0 mm
• 3.5 mm

The exact same file was then printed on both Photon P1 units:

• one with nFEP;
• one with ACF.

Results

With the ACF-equipped Photon P1, the printer successfully completed three cubes in the vented group.

With the nFEP-equipped Photon P1, only two cubes were successfully printed in the same group.

For the cubes designed to create a stronger suction cup effect, both printers managed to print only two cubes.

Based on this test, the ACF film appears to reduce peel force enough to allow the third cube to print successfully, specifically the one with 3.0 mm support spacing.

Important note

Please do not judge this test based on the aesthetic quality of the cubes.

I am fully aware that printing large flat surfaces parallel to the LCD is not standard best practice. In this case, that was intentional.

The purpose of the test was not to produce perfect cubes, but to create a controlled and demanding condition to compare the peel force performance between ACF and nFEP on the Photon P1.

Surface quality observation

I am also including a comparison between the cubes printed with ACF and nFEP.

Even though the tested surface is vertical, the ACF print does not show any particularly visible marks, lines, or surface artifacts that are often attributed to ACF film.

So, at least in this specific test, ACF seems to offer a measurable advantage in reducing peel force without introducing obvious surface quality issues.

Of course, this is not a final conclusion, but the result is interesting and definitely worth further testing.

I would be curious to hear from others using ACF or nFEP on the P1: have you noticed any measurable difference in support reliability, peel force, or surface quality?

I usually print models from the Gundam series, almost always 1:60 scale

​

Here instead, I printed another model provided by ANYCUBIC to participate in the #PhotonP1 #PerformanceLab

​

The model is pre-sliced, however I changed exposure parameters based on the results of my calibration tests.

​

I used Anycubic water washable abs like 3.0 resin with 1.8 seconds exposure for the normal layers and 8 seconds for the bottom layers.

​

As always the printer did not disappoint me, the print quality is excellent and the details are sharp.

​

This time I have to say I'm really happy with the purchase. Unlike when I got the M5s, which was really awful.

​

Photon P1 Lab Track B

One of the points that the ANYCUBIC campaign insisted on for the launch of the P1 was the reduction of peel force thanks to the wave release film.

To be honest, I thought it was just another gimmick. I won't deny that I thought about removing the film immediately and going back to using the ACFs.

To be honest I had to change my mind, I have now made several, prints not only the tests sent by Anycubic to participate in the PerformanceLab.

I have to say that the peel force, with the wave release film, It's really reduced a lot. I feel like I'm getting the same performance with ACF film. In fact, in Photon Workshop, I use a lift height of 1 + 3 mm and have never had any problems.

Prints peel off the nfep after just 1mm.

This really allows you to reduce the number of supports and the size of the contact points.

I currently use 0.25mm supports at 1.5mm spacing, but I'm sure these could be further reduced.

And with the smart lift, when it works properly, (anycubic I'm waiting for the promised firmware update) printing times are reduced to a minimum.

I measured with a caliper how much the build plate lifted with Smart Lift enabled. The minimum was 3 mm after about 300 printed layers.

Here are the test results provided by Anycubic. The models were already sliced; I changed the exposure settings based on previous calibration tests.

Resin is anycubic water washable abs like 3.0

Standard layers 1.8 seconds, bottom layers 8 seconds

Sinanju from u/RQMecha

One of my favourite model, reinterpreted by a great artist!

Printed with my new four u/anycubicofficial #photonp1

Resin is u/sunlu_official #waterwashableresin

I upscaled the model from 1:100 to 1:60

It took me only a week to print 25 full plate with my new four Photon P1. I had 0 failure, I didn't have to reprint any parts. All the components fit together perfectly.

I've had several printers—Elegoo, Nova3D, and even the M5s—but none of them have produced such perfect results, with a 100% success rate.

The supports were made by me with Voxeldance Tango, which I've been using for 5 years now.

I'm posting a comparison between two copies of a model from the ANYCUBIC Photon P1 Performance Lab.

The files were provided pre-sliced ​​by Anycubic to test the P1's capabilities.

In this comparison, you'll find two identical models, printed with two different P1s. One was equipped with ACF film installed thanks to the optional metal film frame.

The other is printed with the original NFEP.

In the series of photos, the model printed with ACF is always on the same side, but I won't tell you which side. Take a guess and let me know if you notice any significant differences or if one of the models seems better.

I apologize for the photos, but I only have an old Nikon D5000 or my cell phone, and I'm not a great photographer.

Also, I broke the mesh jacket with my big fingers; at the time of printing, it was intact on both models.

In the photos, you'll also find the settings used for the resin, which is Anycubic Water Washable ABS Like 3.0.

I’ve been testing Anycubic Water-Washable ABS-Like Resin 3.0 to find the optimal exposure settings for the new Anycubic Photon P1.

The goal of the calibration was to achieve the best possible balance between detail, dimensional accuracy, surface quality and print reliability.

With the Photon P1’s smart features, the entire workflow feels much easier and more intuitive.

Once the exposure settings are properly calibrated, the printer produces very clean and consistent results, with excellent detail and a noticeably lower risk of failed prints.

So far, the P1 is proving to be both user-friendly and reliable, while still delivering high-quality resin prints.

I’ve included the full calibration process in the video. I’d be interested to know what exposure settings other Photon P1 users are getting with this resin.

To make it short, i've used 1,8 sec for standard layers and 8 sec for bottom layers. These settings are alredy test with real models, not just flat exposure test, and are came out perfectly.

No adhesion issue at all

#Anycubic #PhotonP1 #ResinPrinting #3DPrinting #ResinCalibration