May 26, 2019
I tend to prefer the realistic eyes for my dolls as well.
Realistic eyes are more preferable for my dolls, even if they have fantasy design overall.
I like realistic eyes in anime styled heads. Has almost a creepy cute vibe sometimes and seems so full of life. I do like anime eyes though but a bit picky with the design in them.
I'm all about the realistic eyes. Even with my fantasy characters I want the eyes to be more on the realistic side. I like trying to get my dolls as close to realistic as possible in every way I can, it's just the look that appeals to me most. I'm personally not a fan of the anime style dolls or their eyes so I don't even really consider those when looking at eyes for dolls.
If we're talking about the sculpt/eyeholes, here's a fun fact: most "realistically" proportioned eyesculpts are not truly realistic because eyes in normal size in either artwork or sculpture aren't all that appealing. Even in two-dimensional artwork, eyes are usually drawn anywhere from ten to twenty percent larger than life, because 100 percent accurate scale usually makes eyes look too "squinty" unless you're going for hyperrealism (in which case, why not just take a photo?).
Now, if we're talking just the eyes themselves, I vastly prefer realistically-textured eyes, with natural highlights and realistic iris shading...but I also like headsculpts with anime proportions (as shown in my avatar). This hobby has spoiled me forever against having painted eyes of any sort, but even with inset eyes, the action-figure kind of realistic headsculpt just doesn't really appeal to me. If you like that sort of thing, cool, but give me them big ol' peepers.
Realistic eyes all the way, but I prefer the more realistic sculpts as well.
I think I'm probably in the minority tho, I'd expect there to be more people who prefer a fantasy look in various styles.
It might seem boring to some, but realism is a challenging subject to recreate in any medium (other than photography), because just about anyone can tell something is off if you don't get exactly right. So hyperrealism is even more challenging to accomplish, and one of the reason why only a few chose to go that route. Have you ever seen the works of Kei Mieno or Leng Jun? Both works are mind-blowing; as an artist who doesn't love to do portraiture myself, I can't begin to imagine just how much patience it took for them to get to that level of hyperrealism. I've been painting for a bit longer than Kei Mieno has, and I still fail when doing portraits (which I rarely do, most of the time they just don't resemble the person close enough for me to get any enjoyment out of it), let alone hyper-realistic ones. Having said that, when doing portraits of a living being, you do want to get the exact proportions of the person, otherwise you won't get the portrait to look like the subject. So even if the end results are eyes that are too small to be attractive or interesting to some, proportions have to be accurate to the subject when doing portraiture of an existing subject with a face. I don't mean to be an annoying a-hole, just thought your last words on that sentence were pretty interesting to read, so I thought I would comment on your "why not just take a photo?" (:
I do apologize for seeming glib; I know fully well the incredible talent required to do a hyperrealistic painting, and I applaud anyone who has that level of skill--I certainly don't. I wasn't intending to sound dismissive, but I seem to have come off that way. I was speaking purely from a personal point of view. I don't care for hyperrealism in art, but that doesn't mean I don't consider it a valid art form. It is, and it requires a level of talent I could never hope to aspire to. To be frank, my "why not just take a photo" comment was meant to convey my personal view that art is supposed to be representational--not "this is how X looked at a given moment" but "this is how X looked to me". A perfectly reproduced photo-like image tells us nothing of the artist's perceptions, and that's a big part of the aesthetic to me. YMMV, of course.
But back to the business of "exact proportion" in art; I took art classes waaaaaay back in the day, and we were always told that precise, exact reproduction of every line and proportion of a photograph (like a "tracing") would not result in a truly pleasing reproduction. There were tips on how to slightly enlarge the eyes, slim down the neck, not draw every individual tooth in a smile...that sort of thing. But this was back in the 1970s, and everything was fake back then. Heh.
You didn't sound dismissive to me at all, it sounded like a sincerely curious observation to me, and that is why I replied. (: I know that hyper-realistic art is not a popular subject, for many reasons besides the amount of skill and talent, etc.. I guess some find it dull and uncreative as well. I think most assume hyperrealism is uncreative because of the believe a person is simply trying to copy a photo onto canvas, but from what I understand Kei Mieno works from subjects in his mind, and not actual people or photos, to me that's an insane amount of creativity and talent. I took art courses in the mid-eighties all the way to college (in 2004-2008). I always had teachers with varying opinions on how to approach art. The few courses I took on portraiture (very few of them, I'm really not into portraiture), were always about getting the facial proportions of the subject as close as possible, to get an accurate looking portrait. I feel like graphic design courses for me were more about making things look appealing to the eye, and "pretty from all angles," even if it meant editing an image to death. Most of my later courses were in 3D art however, which focused (back then) on mimicking real life. So maybe my more vivid memories are from those courses, and I'm mixing things up now in my head.
I do apologize to the other people on this thread, for "hijacking" the thread to discuss art and realism. It still has to do a lot with the subject in a way, but not all to do with doll eyes. As I originally commented a few pages back I still believe that for me, as long as the eyes fit the style of the doll or the character they are based on, then I don't care if they are anime-ish or realistic in style. I don't take good photos anyway, but I like the eyes to work for the doll they are intended for. Sadly, I've never been able to find the perfect pair of eyes for any of my dolls (yet!).
I love both, depending on the sculpt I plan to use them in. If the dolls have a more anime-esque face, I'm likely to go with anime style eyes, but if the sculpt carries a lot of realism, I'll go for realistic eyes (or, subtly fantasy).
I personally like realistic to own but I admire anime eyes owned by others.
I love both. I just think of it as two different families, anime style dolls and more realistic dolls.
Anime styled eyes in anime sculpted faces, and "realistic" in the same. My narrow eyed Granado would look pretty damn strange with anime styled eyes, and my DollZone KeAi would look pretty weird with realistic eyes. I kind of want a few more styles of anime for my little DollZone, but I haven't seen any "Oh God I Need Those Now" eyes yet.
I think somewhere in the middle for me! Not too realistic but not too anime-ish and I think that suits my doll the best.
Large eyes all the way I do need there to be definition in the face, like clearly visible lips and nose that actually resembles a nose and not a slight piramid -shiver-
Very cool, interesting fact!
For me, it depends on the doll. I understand that realistic eyes are generally more popular but sometimes anime eyes look great; I own and love both.
I fell in love with realistic eyes lately! Especially since the artisans create such unbelievably believable eyes - they are just gorgeous!
I like anime eyes way more than the “real” ones
I think BJDs look better w realistic eyes, unless they have an anime face then I wouldn't mind anime eyes but even dolls like Soom or Dream of doll that are not realistic looking look better w realistic eyes
I personally prefer realistic eyes.