Manufacturing the Cyclops POV System with Industrial 3D Printing

Introducing Cyclops POV

Cyclops is a head-mounted POV camera system designed to capture footage exactly as the operator sees it.

Developed by cinematographer James Medcraft, it sits at the intersection of filmmaking and 3D design. From the outset, additive manufacturing wasn’t just used during development, it became the foundation for how the product was built and produced.

That decision shaped everything that followed.

You can see more real-world footage and behind-the-scenes use cases on Cyclops’ Instagram.

The Challenge: Making POV Footage Feel Real

The idea behind Cyclops is simple, but the execution isn’t.

“Having shot many projects in the past that required a point of view solution, I was never satisfied with the on-set experience or the resulting footage.” — James Medcraft, Founder of Cyclops POV

Traditional POV rigs tend to introduce compromises. Either the camera setup gets in the way of the operator, or the resulting footage doesn’t quite match what the human eye sees. In many cases, both.

Cyclops was developed to remove those compromises entirely. The system uses custom optics to reflect the wearer’s view directly into the camera, capturing a natural field of view and depth of field, while still allowing the operator to interact freely with the scene. At the same time, it needed to remain comfortable enough to wear for extended periods, something that’s often overlooked but critical on set.

Solving all of that in one system meant dealing with tight packaging, unusual geometries, and a constant balancing act between weight, strength, and usability.

Why Additive Manufacturing Was the Right Fit

From a manufacturing point of view, Cyclops doesn’t fit neatly into traditional processes.

The parts are relatively low volume, geometrically complex, and closely tied to an evolving design. That combination is exactly where additive manufacturing starts to make sense, not as a workaround, but as the most practical route to production.

More conventional methods like CNC machining or casting would have introduced friction at almost every stage. Complex internal geometries would either need to be simplified or broken into multiple components, bringing added assembly, more tolerance stack-up, and more potential failure points.

Tooling-based processes would have created an even bigger constraint. For a product still being refined, committing to tooling too early would have locked the design before it was fully proven. Any meaningful change would come with both cost and delay, often forcing compromises just to avoid revisiting the tool.

Additive manufacturing removes those constraints entirely. Parts can be produced directly from CAD without tooling, without minimum order quantities, and without redesigning around manufacturing limitations.

In practical terms, it meant Cyclops could remain a tightly integrated system rather than becoming an assembly of simplified parts. Geometry could stay compact, features could be built in rather than added later, and the product could evolve without being locked into a fixed design too early.

This is where additive manufacturing delivered real value for Cyclops:

• No tooling, no design lock-in: Development could continue right up to production. Design improvements weren’t delayed or avoided due to tooling cost or lead times.
• Fast iteration cycles: Moving from CAD to physical parts in days kept momentum high and allowed real-world testing to drive decisions, not assumptions.
• Complexity without penalty: Compact, integrated geometries could be produced as single parts, avoiding the need for assemblies that would add weight, cost, and failure points.
• Low-volume production without compromise: Parts could be produced in the quantities needed, without minimum orders or excess inventory.
• Reduced total cost of development: Avoiding tooling didn’t just remove upfront cost, it avoided the hidden costs of tool revisions, delays, and redesigns as the product evolved.
• Seamless path to production: The same process used for prototyping carried through to end-use parts, removing the risk and disruption of switching manufacturing methods.

This is where additive manufacturing delivers its real advantage. Not just in making complex parts possible, but in removing the commercial and technical constraints that would otherwise shape the product in less optimal ways.

From Iteration to Production

A big part of getting Cyclops right came down to iteration.

Weight distribution, structural strength, and overall ergonomics all needed to be tested physically, not just on screen. That meant producing multiple versions of the same part, making small adjustments, and repeating the process until it worked.

“The primary challenges were iterative testing at speed, which was where 3D People gave me some great support. They helped along the way with fast turn-around times and material advice.” — James Medcraft

What that looks like in practice is a much tighter development loop. Instead of waiting weeks between iterations, changes can be made and tested within days. That momentum is difficult to maintain with traditional manufacturing, especially when every revision carries additional cost and delay.

Crucially, that same process carried through into production.

There was no handover to a different process, no redesign to suit tooling, and no pause between development and manufacturing. The parts being used today are produced using the same approach that was used to refine them.

“I worked with 3D People through the prototyping stages of Cyclops and now use them for manufacturing the final parts.” — James Medcraft

Design and Materials in Practice

Medcraft’s background in 3D design played a big role in how Cyclops came together.

Rather than simplifying the design to suit manufacturing, the system was developed around how it needed to perform. Additive manufacturing made that possible.

The geometry of the parts could be driven by function, whether that was reducing weight, improving comfort, or integrating multiple features into a single component. This kind of design freedom is often talked about in theory, but in this case it directly enabled the product to exist in its current form.

Most of the Cyclops components are produced using Multi Jet Fusion (MJF) in PA12 Nylon.

 

“PA12 has become the material of choice for Cyclops due to its inherent isotropic strengths and design freedom when combined with the MJF process.” — James Medcraft

The material offers a good balance of strength, durability, and consistency, which is important for a product that needs to perform reliably in a range of environments.

In areas where flexibility is needed, TPU is used instead.

“I’ve also experimented with TPU for some components where flexibility and elasticity are important functional considerations.” — James Medcraft

Rather than forcing one material to do everything, the design uses each where it makes the most sense.

From Manufacturing to Real-World Use

As the project moved into production, consistency became just as important as flexibility.

“From experience, I have found over time that the best 3D printing service provider isn’t just a company with lots of machines but a company with a team that understands their customers’ products and that cares about the end result.” — James Medcraft

That support goes beyond simply producing parts. It includes design input, material guidance, and making sure the final result performs as intended.

“I have tried many other 3D printing services but the quality of parts that 3D People deliver has proved to be superior to every other supplier I’ve dealt with.” — James Medcraft

Once printed, most parts are dyed black, with some kept in their natural grey depending on the application. Finishing plays a subtle but important role. It improves consistency across parts and gives the system a more refined, production-ready appearance, something that matters when the product is being used on professional film sets.

Cyclops is now being used across a range of demanding production environments, from controlled studio shoots to unpredictable outdoor filming. These are not test conditions. The system needs to perform reliably while being worn, moved, and operated in real time.

In situations like this, the system has to work as an extension of the operator. There is no room for bulky setups or fragile components. The compact, integrated design made possible through additive manufacturing plays a direct role in making these shots achievable.

Cyclops has also been used across commercial work for brands such as Playstation, McDonald’s and FIFA, as well as feature films scheduled for release throughout 2026 and 2027.

This is where the manufacturing decisions are ultimately validated. The system isn’t just technically interesting, it’s being used in real production environments where performance, reliability, and usability all matter.

The Takeaway

Cyclops is a good example of additive manufacturing being used where it genuinely fits.

The volumes are low enough that tooling doesn’t make sense. The design is complex enough that traditional manufacturing would introduce compromise. And the product benefits from being able to evolve over time without being locked into a fixed design.

In that context, additive manufacturing isn’t just convenient, it’s enabling.

It allows the product to be developed, refined, and manufactured in a way that would be difficult to achieve otherwise. And importantly, it does so without forcing trade-offs that would undermine the original idea.

There’s a tendency to treat additive manufacturing as either a prototyping tool or a catch-all solution. Projects like Cyclops sit somewhere in between. They show what happens when the process is used deliberately, in the right conditions, and with a clear understanding of where it adds value.