The handcrafted quality, 3D technology, and the future of BJD

I like your concept of hybrid technology. As a traditional-style doll sculptor myself, I'd love a technology that would let me do, for instance, symmetrical joints, or tweaking the same pair of legs for a different torso, etc. My idea of 3D sculpted BJDs has been shaped by dolls like the EIDs, which are a little too smooth and perfect (IMO). It's interesting to hear from you what else is out there and what the possibilities are.

 

Yeah, my ideas were shaped by the (non-existent) sculptural differences between the EID and SID bodies. That's why I was a bit reluctant at first. Don't get me wrong, I love EID, but for me I wouldn't easily buy and SID because it somehow feels like 'cheating'.

Come to think of it, that might be something companies using modern technologies will encounter. I'm sure I'm not the only one whose first response was a bit negative. If a product has an image of not being original or 'true art', that will have an effect on sales. (yup, i'm definitely a glass-half-empty kind of girl )
How long will it take before computer created dolls will become normal?

But it would be fantastic if all companies could use a 3d printer that gave a beautiful endresult. I'm kind of a sucker for niche-dolls (would like to have a bunch of 80 cm guys and girls with average build bodies - that is: men that are not too muscular and women that are a bit full) and this method would mean that creating these dolls would be a bit easier.

On the other hand, Surreality, for the example you used (the fish ears) you don't really need a 3d printer. Once you have a mold of the head, you can simply make a cast and add details, like those ears, and make another mold. Making a cast will take about 45 minutes, another mold 2 days. It's just that silicone is rather costly.

Then again, how affordable is 3d printing?

 

While I have to admit that the idea of handcrafted dolls makes me all warm and squishy inside, I also have to admit that I don't think I'd be able to tell the difference between handcrafted and 3D designed. And I probably wouldn't care, if I liked the sculpt enough. I'm strange like that.

I don't think it will take over the BJD-making industry, not with the pride a lot of companies feel with their own handcrafted dolls, but with 3D designing it really opens the door to more "personalized" scuplts. There are companies out there (not BJD companies) that will take a 3D design and make it into a reality. This is something I'm especially interested in, as many of my characters tend to have very different and/or non-human design, and I would love to see them as BJDs, but companies simply don't make them as they aren't in high demand.

In the end, if 3D designing does take a place in this hobby, I doubt that it will make such huge impact as we think. We will always have those who will remain loyal to handcrafted dolls, and there will be those who will love the 3D designed (and potentially cheaper) sculpts. It's like the love-hate with different companies, like Volks and Luts and Obitsu.

 

Actually, that's something I'd considered as well -- though I think I'd want, if this makes sense, a 'print blank', since the levels of mold-making do have the shrinkage problem. Though if the master from which the dolls would be produced was a first casting, rather than the original 3d print, I think it'd be possible to avoid that problem. Then the hand-sculpted variations could be produced from that first 'level' of masters -- you could just make another 'master' from the 3d print with the hand-made changes and remold and everything would still fit neatly. It's more one of those practical, fussy issues than a matter of possibility I think -- and it's definitely what I'd want to do if I am ever able to pull this off -- but that's probably a little derailing threadwise for me to keep yammering about.

I agree with that on the angle that it'd be the company or original artist doing all the design work there. I was talking more about something more interactive in a sense. What I meant about the printing for fish ears is more, say CompanyX decides to make a line of dolls -- I couldn't recast one of their heads to do the fishears I want on that head. But CompanyX could offer a 'customizing' service of sorts based on this kind of technology, essentially letting customers 'pre-mod' a head virtually, submit it with their order for printing and production for an extra fee. They could reshape a nose or half-close eyes/etc. as they wished, without violating the rights of the company to do it. I see it as something similar to the DIM and Nobility custom sculpt services -- just that it would keep the production in the company's hands, and the 'sculpting' would be the client's virtually submitted work or adaptations.

Costs on 3D printing are still obscene. They're dirt cheap compared to what they were ten years ago, though, and even compared to five years ago. It's definitely something becoming less costly, more prevalent, and more available. There's a company called Shapeways that is almost like a 'brokerage' that will allow artists to upload designs, and they're printed on demand for customers in a variety of materials, and each gets a cut of the proceeds. The output is severely limited, but the possibilities are fairly endless there, as well. Imagine a business model where you could submit, say, the wacky modified ears -- and if the doll company approved the design and you checked off 'OK for resale', you'd get a cut of copies of your designed head that they could sell alongside their own. It's definitely not something I'd expect to see any time soon, but I wouldn't be surprised to see something akin to this in the next decade or so.

The other issue for me is the materials, if something was ever developed that worked sufficiently as a 'final product' from the raw 3d print. If they can come up with something with properties similar to resin, but kinder to the environment and to the people handling it (sanding/handling/etc.) I would have to call that a big plus as well. In addition, there are some things that are downright impossible to make a good mold for that can be printed -- interlinked rings and so on -- that could open up some pretty cool design possibilities. http://www.shapeways.com/shops/bathsheba -- has a great examples that, well, the very idea of trying to make a mold of that makes my eyeballs itch. (Yes, I am a total geek over the possibilities here. )

 

Do you feel that by limiting dolls to only hand sculpted artist dolls that the future of ABJD is also being hindered? Or, will the posting of progress photos and further development of artists talents lead to the advancement of the hobby?

I think if it were limited to only hand sculpted that there would possibly be less people that would make these dolls. Some people just have their own way of doing things artistically.. I am an artist tho not a doll artist.. I know that if someone took away my comfort zone by taking away my chosen mediums and told me to work with something else I would likely just throw in the towel and decide to not use my art for money anymore.. I am sure that the 3D printing as was said isn't any much different.. you still have to make the "design" which is part of the art. I mean it takes away their need to sculpt by hand but they still make the initial design.

Will the open revelation of how a company produces their sculpts influence the way you buy dolls?

no I don't care how its made as long as I like them.

Is this due to the more intimate feeling of seeing the creation of a sculpt, or the knowledge of it's origins?

not really

Should it matter if it was a 3D image or handcrafted so long as the design is original?

it shouldn't matter as long as the design is original.

should 3D creations be held on a different level than handcrafted ones?

well yeah anything made by hand by traditional means is always going to have a bit of an upper hand over technology based art. You never know tho.. Technology based art is becoming more and more excepted.

 

Shrinkage is a problem, yes, although it depends heavily on what kind of silicone and resin you use. The platinum cure don't shrink at all, for instance, but are more expensive.

I don't know, maybe it depends in the batch or how long you let the mold cure, but the molds I made (with moldmax 30) haven't shrunk at all. The clay head cap still fits well on top of the resin head prototype.

I hope that 3d printing becomes available for everyday use soon, though. It's a very cool new technology that will help considerably, I think.

 

It's an interesting thought. If one of the reasons people collect BJDs is because of the hand-sculpted "work of art" aspect, I can see where it would take the gloss off that, if the company is making multiple sizes/versions of the same sculpt.

In my case, it's not so much that I feel Iplehouse is cheating, as that so far I'm not finding their 3D dolls very lively or interesting. But I know I'm in the minority here.

 

I agree with most posters that both require a vast amount of skilled work. I have absolutely no problem with buying 3D sculpts (given originality) as long as the aesthetics appeal to me.

 

Re: Iplehouse, I have to wonder if they chose to keep the look the same from size to size since so many people seemed to think the EID body type was wonderful -- just too big? They do seem to really work to try to please their customers when it comes to the options they make available, so I can empathize with shrinking the 'too big' body down to the size people are asking for, but keeping the look and detail that has proven otherwise popular. It may be what outed them as using the tech, but I don't necessarily think it's that they used it that's at issue -- more that it was somewhat unexpected, and therefore a little confusing.

The other thing that has been going through my head on this subject for a while is this: this is not exactly the realm of 'ancient traditional techniques' territory in many ways. These dolls -- on the whole -- have not been produced for very long. I was around before the resin BJD, apparently, and I'm not that old. The underlying foundations of ball-jointed dolls, often referenced from the older porcelain and wood varieties, is considerably older. My curiosity is this: how many of the porcelain BJD artists had similar objections to these new resin variants? I'd bet there were at least a few. (I keep picturing the porcelain doll-makers saying, "You didn't need to use a kiln, so you didn't have to work for it as much!" instead of "You didn't have to manually slave over the symmetry!" And then the wood carvers saying, "HA! When I was making BJDs, if we shaved off too much, we couldn't just add more clay and make a new mold, no, we had to start carving that hand over from scratch!" to the porcelain doll-makers. ) The BJDs we collect already have some 'new tech' in them in that sense; part of what I find interesting about them is the blend of traditional sculpting techniques with what we have available to us today in terms of materials and styles.

 

What I can't believe is that the news actually shocked anybody. Quel surprise! Quel horror! A blind person with no fingertips could see that SID is a junior Model-EID with revamped elbow & knee joints. Iples did it because the madding crowds love the body, but don't love having to own a 7-pound behemoth. Simple. They still do all their own original artwork, so it doesn't matter if they used a computer for shortcuts.

 

Also, the EID's themselves are quite obviously computer-generated; theyr symmetry is perfect, their joints are for sure computer piece detailed, like those dented parts on the thighs, and, overall, they look to me like a really nice, but very probably, computer generated work. Sounds a bit strange to me that a SID is ''cheating'', and an EID is not ; D

 

As someone who's done a lot of 3D art, and made several clumsy attempts at 3D modeling, I can confirm that it's not as easy as it looks. A sculpt is a sculpt whether it's done by hand or on a computer. Trust me on this one; both require skill, patience and a lot of talent.

Progress is inevitable, and as technology advances, people are going to find easier and more efficient ways to do things. This includes making these dolls we love so well. As owners and collectors, we can either bemoan the onset of mass-produced BJDs (yes, I felt that shudder, thank you) or we can accept it as an inevitable result of their popularity. The emergence of 3D sculpting on computer may well herald the advent of $50 (or even $20) BJDs. Like it or not.

 

Very doubtful. Production, at present, would still have to happen the same way, and a huge portion of the costs come from that, not the method of sculpting.

Think of it in terms of painting -- is an oil painting 'one of a kind' and an acrylic painting 'mass produced'? Nope. Just different mediums -- and it's the same here. There's nothing about 3D sculpting at all that implies mass production in any way, any more than a hand-sculpt does. That's just how the first item, from which the others are produced, is made -- not how each one that is sold to us is made thereafter. That's still precisely the same process for both at this point in time with molds and resin/etc. Plenty of hand-sculpted things have gone on to be mass produced, and plenty of 3d-sculpted things have been made as one of a kind art objects.

Going way back to the post that started this thread, about the 'why won't they share their techniques, and where are the oil clay mockups', I stumbled across this earlier: http://www.pixologic.com/zclassroom/homeroom/tutorial.php?lesson=jeff -- work safe, but a little creepy. No oilclay mockups required. And while the dollmakers using this tech in Asia might not be sharing step by step progress reports on their designs to the satisfaction of some, 3D sculptors have documented the basic process of 3d figure modeling quite clearly for some time now, so hopefully some of the misconceptions about 'how it must be done' might be put to rest.

 

Well, apparently I had a CAD doll and didn't even know it, so there you go. Although now that people mention it, that was probably the thing about the E.I.D. body I couldn't quite put my finger on. I have to say I find imperfect sculpting-by-hand to be more charming.

 

I have to agree! We started learning how to use Adobe CS2 (long time ago) in my ad design class, and it takes a long time to know all the bells and whistles used to create something relatively easy-looking. At the moment, we can't afford a version of CS for home, but we have Photoshop Elements, and I am slowly using my Google search engine to find out how to do and use things, like working with textures.

If companies want to make their lives easier by using things in 3D, I say more power to them. I don't mind if my doll comes from a 2-3 week process, or through a less time-consuming one. Maybe I get my doll faster, or it doesn't cost as much - both a plus for me. After all, someone has to create the design, so it's not entirely an impersonal process. Sure, it'd be nice to know how my doll was made, and all that, but it's not important. To be honest, I never really knew my dolls were created by hand. I thought that, like most things, there are dolls in stock, or they manufacture more.

As much as using 3D =/= mass produced, it's not an impossibility. It might not result in that right away, but it might down the line.

 

No more than any other sculpting method, though, which is an important point. Plenty of things were mass-produced without the aid of computer modeling, so again, the medium itself does not in any way suggest mass production.

There are additional requirements for something that enters a production pipeline, in terms of software as well as in terms of output. You can look at patternmaking software as a parallel here. There are some meant for home production, and there are others that not only make and scale your patterns but provide cutter's templates to manufacturing machinery to cut your fabrics on an assembly line. The closest parallel to that is the actual 3D printing technology, which is presently far more costly than resin casting for reproduction (and, I think, quite possibly slower per piece), which is why I don't foresee this being done any time soon as a production method. It's also a no less viable production method for a traditionally-produced initial sculpt, because those can be digitized, even though 3d scanning is also an impractically costly option at the present time.

 

^This. The production of these dolls is time-consuming, no matter what medium the artist uses. There is also a lot of testing involved, before the final product is ready for sale. I don't think we'll have to worry that BJD's will be mass produced anytime soon.

 

I agree with being a perfectionist. The doll is wonderfully perfect!!! Did you mirror it? Half off-topic, but what software and equipment did you use? I want to learn how to digital sculpt too.
Back on topic, I agree with what many said, every tool has the potential of being misused, just like a knife and help aid the cooking of a great dish or murder someone. But we don't see knifes banned do we? Being prejudiced over technology is silly. Handcrafted or made with the aid of technology, they are all special, why should they be discriminated against? And it is not like clicking on a magic button and boof, out comes a perfect doll. Hard work is needed for both.

 

Hmm...I go by the dolls I like, so finding out they were designed on computer and 3D printed rather than hand-sculpted probably wouldn't put me off the doll entirely. I do find hand-sculpted dolls and the idea of hand-sculpted dolls more charming, but if you think of it in terms of the perfection that customers are demanding these days, of course companies are going to find the computer assisted route a good way to get that symmetry, smoothness and interplay between the way people really move and the joints you can add to a doll to facilitate that.

I kind of like assymetry in my dolls though, (not Picasso style) but I think that is more of a mirror to 'reality' than a perfectly symmetrical computer designed doll. Human beings aren't perfectly symmetrical and I like seeing those little imperfections in people and in dolls. For me, it's those imperfections that make people interesting and alive, and dolls with slight assymetry have that too.

I can roll snakes and snails from Play-Doh and just about use Photoshop so I bow down to anyone who can hand-sculpt a BJD or design one on a computer. Both are valid forms of art.

 

And the proof is that some of the companies that are most successful recently (Iplehouse, Soom) they all use computer generated models; and these models had a great acceptance. In the case of Soom, for example, they use a master 3D model and do the alterations over it (Heliot's hooves, for example, are an absolutely exact replica from Sard's on a smaller scale, and re-shaped later; but if you put one besides the other, you can see every single strand of sculpted hair in the very same position in both). So in the end, it seems that the results were pleasant to people, despite the media used on them.