But the joints are showing!

Actually, I enjoy the look of joints. My dolls aren't meant to represent real people, so perhaps that's why I'm not too worried about joints showing, but I like to showcase how these dolls are made. It's for the same reason that I don't mind seamlines.

The only thing I don't like is when joints don't fit the aesthetic of the doll. Really bulky doublejoints, for instance, are more off-putting to me then pleasing to the eye.

 

1. Does it bother you, even slightly, if you can't hide a joint in a picture? Will you dress your doll so as to hide certain joints? Or do you enjoy or even show off the joints? Well, it really depends. If the joint, or the limb it's connected to is askew or propped in a position it wasn't meant to be in, then yes, I'd be irked--"No, it doesn't go like that!" And seeing as how I can hardly scrape together my meager funding to purchase Feya any form of attire, no, I don't go out of my way to conceal her joints, considering covering them may actually impact her posing ability. The joints really don't bother me. I actually think her joints are the more attractive (is that term weird in this context?) among MSDs. And no, I don't go out of my way to display her joints. If they're visible, they're visible.

2. If you minimize their appearance, is this because it makes the doll seem more like a real thing to you, or aesthetics, or something else? If it doesn't bother you, is it appreciation of the design, or simple indifference and getting used to it, or something else? Actually, it's a little bit of both of the latter parts. I've gotten used to her joints--you eventually have to. After all, they're ball-jointed dolls.I was never bothered by them anyway. And besides, as beautiful and life-like as these dolls are, they are just dolls, and no amount of joint-concealing can really change that. Of course, this is my opinion--I'm not trying to dispute anyone else's.

3. Do you prefer the tradeoff of slightly less mobility (non-jointed hands, single versus double joints, mobility thigh joints, etc.) because of aesthetic reasons and desire to avoid a sometimes awkward look, or for realism? If you prefer it for realism, why is it that you don't want the range of mobility that is realistic? Or not at all - you want those joints? Sometimes, if I'm photographing my doll in a short shirt, I may try to hide the portion where her torso separates from her stomach, but only because it just looks kind of weird. Her torso piece protrutes slightly farther than her stomach (anyone who's seen a Kid Delf probably knows what I'm talking about), so it just throws this very apparent imbalance in to the photograph. As for the "jointed hands" thing, I don't own a set, and I have no intention of owning a set. To me, they just look... Off. Very off. Not pretty.

4. Do you attempt to portray your doll as something more than a doll, more alive? To what extent? Sometimes, just because. I don't attempt to convey her as, say, flesh and blood living, or necessarily sentient, but perhaps as though, I don't know, there's something in there, or she's sentient to an extent. But no; while I can appreciate dolly realism (it's very appealing if done properly), I seldom go to great lengths to achieve it. I do, however, for the sake of aesthetic, try to photograph my doll in settings that are physically proportionate to her. I think it's cute and it looks professional. But since my BJD is a Kid Delf Cherry, she doesn't look very human. She has incredibly large eyes. If I were to purchase a doll with more realistic features, I'd probably go for a more realistic appeal.

 

I don't notice or care about most of the joints in my photos. If it CAN be covered naturally by clothing or props or the composition of the photo-- without it looking forced-- then I'll do that. But if the pose just leaves all the joints hangin' out, I don't break my neck to cover everything. But I do try to avoid poses where the viewer is staring down into the tube of a limb because the doll's single-jointed (and I've gotten to be damn good at camouflaging SD13 limbs after all these years ^^).

On those occasions when you can successfully camouflage all the joints in a photo, and the doll is still in a natural soft-looking posture, it's a little *YES!!* moment in your head & you get the goosebumps. : It's a good day.

I dislike jointed hands, because the skeleton look is just too disruptive to the lines of the sculpture. But I love mobility-thigh joints & double-jointed torsoes, because I feel they're so useful that they're more important than preserving the lines. Gimme double-jointed elbows and knees any day; but if the doll doesn't have them, I can easily work around it.

All types of joints, single and double and ball and sliding and twisting-- have SOME position where they look ugly. So it's all a matter of give-and-take as you work with them.

 

I don't mind the joints at all. If they can be covered naturally with clothing, that's fine but I won't go out of my way to cover them. They are ball-jointed dolls after all and their joints are what make them special!

 

I first saw ball joints on Rozen Maiden and they seemed really (slightly disturbingly) attractive to me
But then I saw real ones and they were soooo gross!
As a child, I was so happy that barbie didn't have any articulation aside from her hips and shoulders. I thought it was horrid looking. I liked another doll because she had the same articulation, but was made of really bendy material. So she could move, but didn't have the joints.
But I kept seeing BJDs around and I found myself liking them more and more. Now, I get so happy when I see a nice joint. I look at those non-jointed/non-articulated dolls now and it's just like... This doesn't measure up at all!
I love ball joints. I find Fairyland has really pretty joints. Obitsu 50cm has some very nice joints as well. I'd always pick mobility. I love being able to play with something and I think the doll looks gorgeous with all of the joints anyway.
I will say that I like the caps on joints, to hide elastic though. I just prefer how it looks under clothes. Rounded knees and elbows are really nice. but I'm happy either way

 

1. Does it bother you, even slightly, if you can't hide a joint in a picture? Will you dress your doll so as to hide certain joints? Or do you enjoy or even show off the joints?
I don't mind joints. Actually I hardly even notice them, they're a part of the doll and as such they don't bother me.

2. If you minimize their appearance, is this because it makes the doll seem more like a real thing to you, or aesthetics, or something else? If it doesn't bother you, is it appreciation of the design, or simple indifference and getting used to it, or something else?
I think it's being used to it. I know they're supposed to be there (as in, they serve a purpose), so I don't even really notice they're there most of the time.

3. Do you prefer the tradeoff of slightly less mobility (non-jointed hands, single versus double joints, mobility thigh joints, etc.) because of aesthetic reasons and desire to avoid a sometimes awkward look, or for realism? If you prefer it for realism, why is it that you don't want the range of mobility that is realistic? Or not at all - you want those joints?
I don't have jointed hands for any of my dolls yet. There will be one who'll need them, but usually they're the one exception to the rule because they look off shape-wise (what JennyNemesis said, basically). I love realistic poses, so I'm happy with non-jointed hands that look relaxed and natural in a way. With the "body" joints I tend to go for more points of articulation (mobility joints etc) because they allow for more realistic posing. If a pose causes a joint to look weirdly "bumpy" and throws off the realism, I try and camouflage that ... but I don't go out of my way to cover up, say, wrists or knees.

4. Do you attempt to portray your doll as something more than a doll, more alive? To what extent?
I try to avoid the "barbie" look. When I pose my dolls, I try and make them look as natural as possible, but I don't particularly try to hide the fact they're dolls. Still, I try and pose them in a way a human would sit / stand. If a doll is posed in a way that a human couldn't do without a massive effort (like sitting leaning way back without support), that puts me off. None of my Iple dolls ever sit on the floor because their lower legs stick up in a weird way due to the shape of their legs ... that kind of thing. So I have them sit on the edge of the shelf or on some kind of furniture to avoid the weird legs, and if they can't keep their torsos upright I'll have them support themselves somehow. A doll looking as human as possible without actually trying to be human.

 

I do kind of like the look of joints, but I think single-jointed dolls look a little bit better when just plainly standing, but I think I'd prefer more mobility before it looking a little better

 

1. Does it bother you, even slightly, if you can't hide a joint in a picture? Will you dress your doll so as to hide certain joints? Or do you enjoy or even show off the joints?

I don't really think about the joints a whole lot. I certainly don't try to feature them, but I don't hide them either. They're just a part of the doll and I think dolls are cool.

2. If you minimize their appearance, is this because it makes the doll seem more like a real thing to you, or aesthetics, or something else? If it doesn't bother you, is it appreciation of the design, or simple indifference and getting used to it, or something else?

N/A

3. Do you prefer the tradeoff of slightly less mobility (non-jointed hands, single versus double joints, mobility thigh joints, etc.) because of aesthetic reasons and desire to avoid a sometimes awkward look, or for realism? If you prefer it for realism, why is it that you don't want the range of mobility that is realistic? Or not at all - you want those joints?

I prefer mobility over the aesthetic appeal of less joints. I vaguely recall not liking some joints when I entered the hobby. Some peanut joints weren't great looking to me, but I've not even thought about that in years! I think I just go for the dolls I like the look of and don't take the joints into account unless I'm given different joint options by a company. If that's the case, I like the more mobile options.

4. Do you attempt to portray your doll as something more than a doll, more alive? To what extent?

Nope. I'm not trying to hide what they are. I mean, I try to pose them naturally or at least how people might pose for pictures, but I'm not going to pretend that I am photographing people. I do that too and that's a totally different. I like my dolls and want to share them as well photographed dolls.

 

I like the joints...unless they are dislocated. That is just a little painful to look at lol.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk 2

 

What bothers me much more than joints visible: If parts are not flush together. One of my biggest pet peeves is when mobility joints (which I love, but must be well made) look as if they are put into the upper thigh as if the doll is wearing a pair of very tall boots. Or very visible gaps between joints. Another thing I do not like if the transition from one part to the other is not smooth, but shows edges. Of course you could say that it does not matter when the doll is clothed. But I know I can't stand it because I know it's there.

 

I really do not mind seeing the joints; I come to expect them as part of the doll and also part of the aesthetic. However, I really do not like seeing double jointed knee and elbows out. It is just personal preference, but they are really jarring to me. It looks awkward and unnatural to my eyes, especially when they are bent.

 

1. Does it bother you, even slightly, if you can't hide a joint in a picture? Will you dress your doll so as to hide certain joints? Or do you enjoy or even show off the joints?

The funny thing is, visible joints used to bother me a lot. When I first got Chaeri I wouldn't dream of letting her joints show in a picture. She always wore long sleeves and if I had her in a dress or skirt I would put her in stockings or tights to conceal her knee joints. I love the poseability of BJDs, but the joints always were a turnoff for me. I've had Riri for almost five years now, and over that time I've become much more comfortable with letting her joints show, even dressing her in a halter top and cutoff shorts for a cosplay at last years Mobicon. I honestly don't even notice her joints anymore and they're not a consideration when I'm dressing her.

2. If you minimize their appearance, is this because it makes the doll seem more like a real thing to you, or aesthetics, or something else? If it doesn't bother you, is it appreciation of the design, or simple indifference and getting used to it, or something else?

Indifference, really. Chaeri's arm joints are single jointed, so they're not that noticeable, but her knees are double jointed and very obvious, although she does have those Volks "kneecaps" that make them look a bit less like hinges shaped like legs. Again, it's become pretty much a non-issue with me.

3. Do you prefer the tradeoff of slightly less mobility (non-jointed hands, single versus double joints, mobility thigh joints, etc.) because of aesthetic reasons and desire to avoid a sometimes awkward look, or for realism? If you prefer it for realism, why is it that you don't want the range of mobility that is realistic? Or not at all - you want those joints?

I don't really like jointed hands. I have enough trouble controlling Riri's feet (they tend to swivel at strange angles sometimes). I do like poseability, and I'll take double jointed knees over single jointed any day. In the end, I strive for a balance between aesthetics and poseability. Stability also plays a part; too many tiny fiddly joints means more things that can break with continued use.

4. Do you attempt to portray your doll as something more than a doll, more alive? To what extent?

I always pose Chaeri as naturally as possible, both for photographs and when we're just sitting around watching TV or whatever. I know she's not alive in the sense that we are, but she's very special to me and I like to at least pretend she's a real companion. And it's not because I live by myself and have no friends. So there.

 

I don't care about joints that much but if it's possible to hide them easly in clothing and accessories i would do that at least for picture posing. Still i prefer the doll to have more body joints so it can pose so much better. Maybe one day i would get the jointed hands for my doll and then i will see how much it disturbs me, as for hands i think it can be more visible, if so i will just try to put some gloves on them.

 

The responses to this are such a surprise to me! I'd always taken as granted that no one wanted to see joints in a photo and I've gone to great lengths to tug the cuffs down, adjust the hair etc. to hide them. What a revelation that so many people don't care if they show!

 

I only mind if the joints show on some of my dolls - my four dolls from Fairyland have joints which I enjoy posing with, and I love the way they can make my girls hold poses. But my other two girls are from other companies, and while they are beautiful, their joints are less mobile so I don't always like the way they sit in photos, which means I usually have them in semi-long sleeved tops (their wrist joints are as mobile as most dolls are) and long pants. Less for the aesthetic and more because I find it means that they can hold the poses I want a little better. I plan on getting kips for them so as to help with the posing, and then it won't bother me.
I adore the way they are jointed as they are engineered so incredibly, so I don't mind at all about seeing joints.

 

1. Does it bother you, even slightly, if you can't hide a joint in a picture? Will you dress your doll so as to hide certain joints? Or do you enjoy or even show off the joints?

It doesn't bother me, for the most part. Sometimes I find double joints a little painful-looking, though! But if they can't be hidden, well... that's just part of the doll, and it's sometimes worth it for a really good pose, even if, say, a pair of shorts or a skirt shows off some really awkward knees (I'm a little blessed in having a couple dolls whose knees I consider cute-- the worst offenders in my crew are probably my off-topics anyway).

2. If you minimize their appearance, is this because it makes the doll seem more like a real thing to you, or aesthetics, or something else? If it doesn't bother you, is it appreciation of the design, or simple indifference and getting used to it, or something else?

Sometimes I can see wanting to hide joints for realism's sake-- though right now the dolls I have are so stylized that I don't bother. It's something I can see myself trying to do with more realistic sculpts in future, though. And there are joints that I would DEFINITELY want to hide for aesthetic purposes, if my dolls had them. But mine don't bother me. I'm sure being used to it is part of that, and the appreciation of the design/engineering and all the work that went into them is another big part. And for Vince, well... his character is that of a living doll, so he's SUPPOSED to have them!

3. Do you prefer the tradeoff of slightly less mobility (non-jointed hands, single versus double joints, mobility thigh joints, etc.) because of aesthetic reasons and desire to avoid a sometimes awkward look, or for realism? If you prefer it for realism, why is it that you don't want the range of mobility that is realistic? Or not at all - you want those joints?

I wouldn't want jointed hands unless they were going to be in gloves all the time! That many joints in such a small area can look a little too... skeletal? Fragmented? I'm not sure exactly-- I know it would be an aesthetic turn-off in my own personal dolls, but I do admire them on others' dolls (in part for the engineering, and in part because hey, other people prize different things, so I can appreciate the things in their collections that I wouldn't want in my own). Double joints are hit and miss for me-- some companies do a better job than others, in my opinion, just from what I've seen both in pictures and in person. I like the posability, though, and it's not like they couldn't be covered.

I used to think I'd never want mobility joints and then I saw the difference it can make in posing, with the body I want... and wow. I guess in the right pants it won't matter much... right? They still look painful to me, but the end result is so great.

4. Do you attempt to portray your doll as something more than a doll, more alive? To what extent?

With Pete and Billy it's kind of in the middle-- they're very stylized, so it's not like I'm ever going to get those pictures where they look real/alive, but at the same time, I like to get some illusion... I wish I had more of an environment for them so that I could get pictures where it at least looks like they belong in a world their own size, but that will have to come later.

With Vince, though, his character being that of a living doll, it's okay that he doesn't look 'real'. I just try to make him look as lively as possible without trying to make him look lifelike.

 

1. Does it bother you, even slightly, if you can't hide a joint in a picture? Will you dress your doll so as to hide certain joints? Or do you enjoy or even show off the joints?
Usually, I'm not bothered by joints showing. As a child, I hated the looking of the "jointed" Barbies, but now I become so accustomed with BJD joints that I feel bothered only when they are in some awkward, unnatural pose and with my only doll that shows a wide gap in her knees when I bend them. She is the only doll that I intentionally dress with the purpose to hide her knees.

2. If you minimize their appearance, is this because it makes the doll seem more like a real thing to you, or aesthetics, or something else? If it doesn't bother you, is it appreciation of the design, or simple indifference and getting used to it, or something else?
I probably started to appreciate the design. When a doll can assume a realistic pose (and doesn't show unsettling gap that make her look almost broken) I admire the design that make it possible.

3. Do you prefer the tradeoff of slightly less mobility (non-jointed hands, single versus double joints, mobility thigh joints, etc.) because of aesthetic reasons and desire to avoid a sometimes awkward look, or for realism? If you prefer it for realism, why is it that you don't want the range of mobility that is realistic? Or not at all - you want those joints?
I can trade slightly less mobility only to avoid an awkward look or to have a better aesthetic. Usually I like more realistic sculpt, but I don't consider realism something to be considered when talking about joints's aspect (only about their movement).

4. Do you attempt to portray your doll as something more than a doll, more alive? To what extent?
I love how photoshoots makes my doll almost alive, but I don't make any specifical effort to make them more realistic. My dolls are also all anthros, so it will be really difficult, too XD

 

1. Does it bother you, even slightly, if you can't hide a joint in a picture? Will you dress your doll so as to hide certain joints? Or do you enjoy or even show off the joints?
Not at all! They're dolls, and the joints are as much part of them as anything else shown in the photos. I'm more likely to be bothered by a failure to get the right angle of the head for the expression I'm after, or a slight gap showing around the eyes. The joints are part of what makes these dolls what they are--it's right there in the name, after all--so I really have no concern about hiding them.


2. If you minimize their appearance, is this because it makes the doll seem more like a real thing to you, or aesthetics, or something else? If it doesn't bother you, is it appreciation of the design, or simple indifference and getting used to it, or something else?
Like I mentioned above, it's part of what makes them what they are. I don't think I've ever been bothered by them in these sort of dolls (some other ones can have "creepy" joints to me, but in BJDs they're not off-putting). Some do have some pretty fantastic designs to them, too, that I actually enjoy looking over and manipulating to see how they work, but even with the most basic ones, they just don't bug me.


3. Do you prefer the tradeoff of slightly less mobility (non-jointed hands, single versus double joints, mobility thigh joints, etc.) because of aesthetic reasons and desire to avoid a sometimes awkward look, or for realism? If you prefer it for realism, why is it that you don't want the range of mobility that is realistic? Or not at all - you want those joints?
There was a mention of "Barbie" above me. Barbie has great aesthetics, and very little mobility... as a child playing with my sister's Barbies (I think I had 1-2 that lived at the bottom of the toy box and never came out, I didn't like dolls at all until I was an adult!), it always annoyed me that none of them could really pose. Sure, I could swivel their shoulders and hips, but it just resulted in really wooden, robotic posing that was frustrating even as a child. Moral of the story? I'll choose mobility first every time now! If a doll has a choice between jointed or solid torso, give me the jointed one, even if it has an extra joint. Choice of mobility or regular legs? Mobility, please! Choice of single or double joint? I'll take double! I want my dolls to get as close to natural posing as possible without resorting to mods. My only reasons so far for not getting jointed hands are problems of resin-matching, size-matching, and that they're a bit more finicky than I think I want to deal with. If not for those issues, though, I'd definitely have at least one set of those around here, too!


4. Do you attempt to portray your doll as something more than a doll, more alive? To what extent?
Not overly. I view them in a similar realm to my other artwork. In the case of dolls, the joints are an element of the medium, and it doesn't bother me if they're there. It's a lot like when I'm drawing, and have some irregularities in the line work as an artifact of inking with a brush, or the particular look of marker coloring, or the way my sculptures are constructed--it's all an offshoot of the medium, and those artifacts reveal information about that medium to the viewer that I enjoy.

 

1. Does it bother you, even slightly, if you can't hide a joint in a picture? Will you dress your doll so as to hide certain joints? Or do you enjoy or even show off the joints?
Not really. It's a doll, so of course the joints are going to visible. The only thing that I might be concerned about is the hook in the hand - sometimes when I go back thr​ough my pictures I will see the glint of metal and it distracts me, but even then I just shrug as there really isn't anything I can do about it (beyond photoshop and I don't want to mess with that)

2. If you minimize their appearance, is this because it makes the doll seem more like a real thing to you, or aesthetics, or something else? If it doesn't bother you, is it appreciation of the design, or simple indifference and getting used to it, or something else?
Sometimes they are like little people and since most of my dolls are characters of mine from RPGs, I do want them to come to life. And the joints don't really bother me because I have learned to overlook them.

3. Do you prefer the tradeoff of slightly less mobility (non-jointed hands, single versus double joints, mobility thigh joints, etc.) because of aesthetic reasons and desire to avoid a sometimes awkward look, or for realism? If you prefer it for realism, why is it that you don't want the range of mobility that is realistic? Or not at all - you want those joints?
I prefer mobility. I like to be able to pose them as I like. My first BJD was a beautiful body from Fairyland, and although I like that his upper body is a solid piece without a joint - it does limit his posing possibilities.

4. Do you attempt to portray your doll as something more than a doll, more alive? To what extent?
Sometimes he shows he is more than a doll, with his own personality and he will show it in his poses. It's fun to get him to pose in different settings, like playing on his computer or whatever

 

1. Does it bother you, even slightly, if you can't hide a joint in a picture? Will you dress your doll so as to hide certain joints? Or do you enjoy or even show off the joints?
Nope. Honestly, if I'm not looking for them I don't think doll joints even register in my brain anymore so long as they aren't really ugly or sharp-looking, or really disrupt the flow of the doll's silhouette. I have seen some great work people have done in photoshopping the joints away, however, and that does tend to give me a double-take, sort of, "Oh yeah! They don't normally look that natural, do they?"

If it doesn't bother you, is it appreciation of the design, or simple indifference and getting used to it, or something else?
A well-thought-out and executed part is lovely in itself, so I like to look at them and learn about them, especially when I've taken a doll apart. I like art that implies motion, whether it's a picture or a sculpture, and sophisticated doll parts are a prime example of that to my mind.

3. Do you prefer the tradeoff of slightly less mobility (non-jointed hands, single versus double joints, mobility thigh joints, etc.) because of aesthetic reasons and desire to avoid a sometimes awkward look, or for realism? If you prefer it for realism, why is it that you don't want the range of mobility that is realistic? Or not at all - you want those joints?
I want as many as are useful for realistic movement! Posing my dolls is one of my favorite things ever, and of course I aim for the most realistic human pose I can get. I don't often display my dolls nude, but when they are more exposed I find myself wondering about the thought processes of the artist who designed those joints. It gets me thinking about how they could be even better.

4. Do you attempt to portray your doll as something more than a doll, more alive? To what extent?
Umm, I suppose sometimes I like to leave them posed as if they're hanging out together or doing something. If it's a nice scene I've created I might leave it for several days because it makes me smile when I come into the room, and sort of sparks my imagination to think of what they might do once I leave. (Err, not like Toy Story status, but on a character level.)

Even the simplest of ball-joints look inhuman. We can't really get out of having them, so IMO as much care should be taken in making them pretty and functional as in sculpting pretty muscles or toes. I find bodies with really abrupt edges where it obviously looks like the doll was sculpted in one piece then lazily hacked apart to be a lot more negatively distracting than any number of joints, so long as they are artfully made. Efficient function, to me, is beautiful.