But the joints are showing!

The only time it bothers me to see a dolls joints in a photo is if they are bent in some unnatural way or are completely disjointed from the limb/body. When I see a photo of a bjd I usually am amazed to how life like they seem to be and seldom even notice a joint.

 

It used to bother me when I first saw the bjds, but now it does not bother me as much.

 

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?
Only some joints actually bug me. It depends on how they're made/appear. If I really, absolutely wanted to hide the joints...Photoshop exists. I don't go out of my way to show off the joints unless I have a reason to, though.

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?
Entirely aesthetic reasons if I choose to hide 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?
In some cases I don't mind less mobility if it looks nicer overall without severely hindering its range of motion. If it's severe enough to be a problem I'd sooner by a PVC figurine and save myself the cash.
As for being okay with a lesser range of motion...it's a doll to me, they aren't going to be up and walking around, they're going to be in static poses while I take pictures. As long as they can pose the way I need them to a less mobile doll isn't a problem for me.

4. Do you attempt to portray your doll as something more than a doll, more alive? To what extent?
As interesting as I find the idea of a desktop human...I still recognize them as dolls. Even if I wanted more from them, they can't be more than what they are, not without some clever photography and lighting. That is to say, I like them as they are and I like to show them as they are, unless I'm going for a specific theme with some pictures that require them to blur the line between doll and something more.

 

The only type of joint that I hate to see are the hidden peanut elbow and knee joints (although 4!! of my dolls have them). I hate the edge that sticks out when the knee is bent visible from the side, and I hate the look of the tiny peanut that is visible from the front.

If I get more confident in my modding (I'm comfortable making mods, just not salvaging the bits I cut off), I may mod this to my favorite knee/elbow joint type, the "floating elbow/kneecap," which also has a peanut joint, but this peanut is always visible, even when the limb is straight.

The reason that three of my dolls have this ugly joint is that I will not compromise poseability for aesthetics.I will compromise poseability for function, as with jointed hands. I like the one pair I have (Resinsoul), but they wouldn't work for any of my other characters because they cannot grasp anything (the joints are very floppy, and difficult to align if meant to support any weight).

I'm not sure though that my issue is with the doll being photographed, I just hate looking at that type of joint period. I'm not sure why I have such an instantaneous and strong hate for it. (Perhaps because it makes the knee joint flat, rather than rounded?)

 

To answer just one question from the first post - I actually prefer the look of a lot of mobility-over-appearance joints! Like, even only considering appearance, I just really like double joints over single ones. Joints are a big part of the reason I like bjds - they can look really pretty and interesting, and almost alien sometimes. Especially if they have something cute added in by the artist, like the heart cutouts on that one little sheep tiny from a taobao company (which I sadly can't find a link to, but I know there are other dolls with these, too). It's also really interesting to see how different companies engineer their joints, and the different ways they make everything fit together.

I think my favorite kind of double joint is the "floating elbow/kneecap" americanseamstress described, by the way - It's just really visually appealing! (I even have a doll as a character in a project I'm doing for school, and they have that style of joint. They also have the little heart cutouts I mentioned before, because if I'm designing the most self-indulgent bjd, I might as well go all the way )

 

I've been hearing complaints about it a lot recently so I think this is an interesting topic.
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 only bothers me when the hollow dark abyss that is the inside of their joints is showing. Oh and the shoulder joints, I don't like the ball-ish look of the shoulders. Hopefully that made sense, it's the middle of night.

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? Noo, i don't want a doll to be realistic. I just can't do realistic dolls. So i love showing off joints. People say the back of knee joints are ugly but i think they're cute. Preferences I guess.


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? No never. Well actually, i have a doll thats double jointed in the torso, meaning she also has a hip joint. I loved the idea of a double jointed torso, but now i think it looks blocky. Maybe it can be done right but for now im sticking to single jointed torsos. The torsos that have absolutely no joints are too stiff though imo.

That said I love elbow and knee joints. I think it looks kinda cool when the double joints make that weird alien rectangle shape.

4. Do you attempt to portray your doll as something more than a doll, more alive? To what extent? Definitelynot. Theyre the dolliest of dolls.

 

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?
No, not at all! I love the joints, even more if they are pleasingly sculpted!

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 never though of hiding the appearance of joins, but I do like to see those photoshopped photos of BJDs where they have erased and drawn on to hide the joints. They can make dolls look super alive!

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?
Hmm in my case I sort of chose the Fairyland minifee moe-line body because it doesn't have the hip joint and her torso is super beautiful. I also like the way how we can't see the joint under the boobs! It's clever I think! : D And I also think posed hands look more pleasing as jointed hands has so many joints on them. But only on these cases I find joints a bit unattractive.

4. Do you attempt to portray your doll as something more than a doll, more alive? To what extent?
I haven't, yet. But I might try that photo editing someday! : )

 

I used to find the look of visible joints jarring but I think I've gotten used to it after browsing doll photos all day; I don't really notice them anymore, lol. I'd much prefer a highly mobile doll with highly visible joints to a doll that's difficult to pose. And I think the dollishness of BJDs are their charm point, so it's something I'm more inclined to emphasise than to cover up!

 

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? Unless the joints look weird/forced or too prominent I don't even notice.

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? Again, I do want my dolls to look natural - I certainly DO want them to look as if they are caught mid-motion. But the joints don't particularly detract from that to me (unless they are too prominent, etc)

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 period.

4. Do you attempt to portray your doll as something more than a doll, more alive? To what extent? You know, the MAKERS of these dolls OBVIOUSLY want them to look very real, duh. I get these dolls because they LOOK LIKE REAL PEOPLE, they DO look alive. All my dolls shell characters that are PEOPLE. However, pictures where the joints are visible really don't bother me overmuch unless it looks awkward (as in, the knee bent so that there's a gap, etc).

 

When I saw this thread my immediate response was "I'm not bothered by joints in photography" but I don't think that's entirely true! I find that whenever I take photos I do make some attempt to cover joints, although I don't think it's because I'm really bothered by them, if that makes sense..? I think of it as just another part of the doll, in the same way as their face or hands, so if they do end up in the photo I won't be bothered, but the aesthetics of certain joints just rub me the wrong way. This is especially prominent in dolls like my Doll Leaves Amara, who's a great poser, but who's elbows aren't the most attractive.

I still totally love joints though! If given the option, 9 times out of 10 I'll choose extra mobility parts as opposed to keeping a doll simple. Despite how unrealistic joints look, the extra posing is completely worth it to me as long as it doesn't look awkward with clothing on! The only exception I have to this general rule is jointed hands. I'm not sure what it is exactly about them, but I find I don't like the sculpting on most and it's not a body part I can really hide. DC's hands are fine, but when the jointing goes to the fingers it's just not for me.

I'm not really trying to portray my dolls as real people or anything (if I was, I'd be going for the wrong style of doll entirely!) but I still like a degree of realism in the sculpting and posing.

 

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 worry about it with dressing, but I do try to keep the joints from becoming the focus of a photo. If a doll is holding up a hand or their elbows look weird when extended, I'm often rearranging them so that the slit holding the s-hook in the wrist is less obvious or their hair falls over their elbow joint to minimize it so it doesn't pull a viewer away from my intended focus. The one joint I will say I cannot stand seeing in photos is the one at the back of a doll's head. I think part of my brain inherently objects to it, maybe because normally the hairline would extend there on a real person.

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?

When I'm photographing a doll, part of the challenge I set for myself is to give them as much personality as possible. Joints can sometimes be part of that, and sometimes they're a distraction from that. When I think they'll distract a viewer, I do what I can to minimize that impact.

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?

It's really a trade off, and what I want depends on what character the doll embodies. I really like the old Delf body with the solid torso (both girl and boy), becuase a doll with a torso that's not broken up with joints is beautiful. It doesn't really help poseability though, and many of my dolls have underbust joints or waist joints or crazy double joints in their arms because they're more fun to pose and easier to pose realistically. Sometimes I prefer one over the other, but it changes.

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

Yup, like I said, part of the challenge I've set for myself with photography is trying to take shots where it looks like the doll has a personality and is interacting with their environment. I just think it looks neat to have "candid" shots of them.

 

I hate the huuuuge clunky look of some double jointed elbows and knees. If it's going to make the doll look like they have two separate knees and the leg has split in half with this gigantic honking rectangle in between... I'd rather have less mobility and not have a terrifying knee-chasm.

Ditto joints where the ball of the ball joint is set so far back from the surface of the leg that you end up with a chopped-open look when you extend the joint, as though someone's taken an axe to your poor doll's resin flesh.

I've also never seen a bjd collarbone joint that doesn't look awkward as hell. I could go on and on about this; I'm picky about joints and seem to be only getting more so as time goes on.

That said, I certainly don't dislike the presence of joints, or the visibility of them. It's not that I want them to be invisible, it's that I want them to look good. Fairyland is always in my good books for their fastidiously smooth joint design. And 5th Motif has really raised the bar by far with their cleverly natural elbow design. Those elbows, man. Those are the best elbows. I feel silly fangirling over doll elbows but I kid you not, it was the elbows that ultimately convinced me to buy.

One more pet peeve about joints while I'm racking them up: why is it that almost all doll makers seem to think human arms come down at a painfully unnatural-looking 180° angle? Good god, even if you're standing ramrod straight at your best possible posture your arm wouldn't do that, it would have a slight crook at the elbow.

 

I don't really have an opinion on the visibility of joints. I was never bothered by them and don't take particular notice of them. They are part of the doll-people anatomy.
My dolls wear a lot of long sleeved shirts and pants outfits that happen to cover all the joints, but that's because I love to look at the movements and wrinkles of fabric. And because I personally dress very covered up, so I think it's just an extension of my clothing preferences.
I don't like jointed hands because I think they really are gruesome looking compared to the beautifully sculpted albeit frozen hands dolls typically have. Otherwise I prefer my dolls to have all double joints and whatever is needed to make them move well and pose naturally. Awkward looking peanut joints don't bother me at all.
In my own mind my dolls are staggeringly real and alive. I have powerful emotional relationships with them and no level of joint visibility can change that!

 

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. I really like articulation and they are called ball jointed dolls for a reason. I expect the joints to be there.

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 like them to look nice, but they are what they are. Unless one is broken or something I don't mind them showing.

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 love graceful hands and the hands that are very jointed don't do it for me even though I usually like articulation. I don't like it a whole lot in the hands.

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

Nope. I like characters and that, but to me a doll is perfect just being a doll.