DarkOne wrote:Hinge, ball joint, multi-link suspension, I don't really care what they use so long as its not wire that snaps with normal everyday use. I don't need anatomically correct. What I need is a doll that does not act like it has broken wrists after normal everyday use.
That's good, so we are (almost) on the same page here
Except that I want an - as close as possible - anatomically correct range of movement in the ideal doll, they can
use whatever works. I don't know how the DH168 wrists are constructed, but they do provide what you are asking for. They are robust, have a great range of movement and don't break, even in photographical (= more stressful) use. Opposed to the skeletons mostly used by a certain other manufacturer.
Regarding the current DH168 foot design, they still use a gooseneck. IMHO, this should be changed to a solid plate, which would enable other possibilities like standing as well.
DarkOne wrote:[…] is a fine wrist design IMO. One axis is more then enough.
I tend to disagree. This is a doll I dismantled because certain parts of the skeleton broke. Twice, actually. Maybe I make a more detailed post about this sometime. It was an very expensive experience for us (the vendor).
DarkOne wrote:Sadly the skeletons pictured in the video you linked don't have the wrist/hand installed yet.
Maybe I'm a bit paranoid, but I believe there is a reason that almost no manufacturer shows detailed pictures of the parts in question. That leaves us with to forensic methods: X-ray, and cutting the doll open. I don't have access to X-ray equipment, which only leaves me the destructive method of wasting a $2,000 doll just to check how the skeleton actually looks. I am not sure yet if it's worth that…
In the meantime I made a quick video to demonstrate how the wrists move:
http://en.dollstudio.org/node/1663.
Sandro
[quote="DarkOne"]Hinge, ball joint, multi-link suspension, I don't really care what they use so long as its not wire that snaps with normal everyday use. I don't need anatomically correct. What I need is a doll that does not act like it has broken wrists after normal everyday use.[/quote]
That's good, so we are (almost) on the same page here ;-) Except that I want an - as close as possible - anatomically correct range of movement in the ideal doll, they can [i]use whatever works[/i]. I don't know how the DH168 wrists are constructed, but they do provide what you are asking for. They are robust, have a great range of movement and don't break, even in photographical (= more stressful) use. Opposed to the skeletons mostly used by a certain other manufacturer.
Regarding the current DH168 foot design, they still use a gooseneck. IMHO, this should be changed to a solid plate, which would enable other possibilities like standing as well.
[quote="DarkOne"][…] is a fine wrist design IMO. One axis is more then enough.[/quote]
I tend to disagree. This is a doll I dismantled because certain parts of the skeleton broke. Twice, actually. Maybe I make a more detailed post about this sometime. It was an very expensive experience for us (the vendor).
[quote="DarkOne"]Sadly the skeletons pictured in the video you linked don't have the wrist/hand installed yet.[/quote]
Maybe I'm a bit paranoid, but I believe there is a reason that almost no manufacturer shows detailed pictures of the parts in question. That leaves us with to forensic methods: X-ray, and cutting the doll open. I don't have access to X-ray equipment, which only leaves me the destructive method of wasting a $2,000 doll just to check how the skeleton actually looks. I am not sure yet if it's worth that…
In the meantime I made a quick video to demonstrate how the wrists move: http://en.dollstudio.org/node/1663.
Sandro