Re: Jouets et Objets: My Sanhui 168cm Abigail
Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 2:31 pm
Wonderful photos!!! I want more ... many more photos, you do an excellent job, I would say that he is a professional photographer. Now with Christmas nearby is the ideal time for Christmas photos with sexy costumes...
The legs are very thin, but they are within the parameters that are considered normal. However this is about the numbers, in the photos they look very good, not thin.
The torso is something small, or perhaps there has been some problem in the measurement, curiously it has the same measurement as the 156cm doll of Sanhui. Considering that this doll is higher (168cm) so I should have a bigger torso. And it is clear that the back is narrower than a real woman, since a woman with a G-cup should have approximately a 120cm bust not only 83cm.
However in the photos it looks quite proportionate, it certainly has a great modeling, in the photo with the legs open the shape of the crotch tendons is a fine job, it is those details that make a doll special.
Seen in the numbers the doll has very thin legs and a small torso, but in the photographs she looks very well proportioned contradicting the numbers. I know that this is thanks to good modeling that dissimulate it perfectly, So, since you have this doll I ask you the following questions, and if you can answer them it would be great.
* In the numbers the doll has a small torso for its height of 168cm. > Do you perceive it when sitting next to the doll, the torso is lower than normal when she is sitting? And lying down in the position of the missionary, would you say that the heads of both are placed on the same height as with a real woman of that same height?
* The legs about the numbers are very thin although in photography they look quite nice thick. > By having the doll in front of you, do you feel that the legs are more delegated than they should be, or do you think they are good enough unlike many other dolls with legs as thin as sticks? I emphasize the area of the calves where most dolls fail, does it feel good in this area beyond the photos?
* The waist is a bit thinner than even the waist of a top model, the width of the torso also seems to be too thin to have such large breasts. > Are you having trouble trying to get proper clothes, or do you get it to fit pretty well? Do you feel that the proportions are adequate?
Thank you very much for everything, and I hope to see more of your incredible photographs
- CHRISTMAS.gif (1.16 MiB) Viewed 2775 times
Regarding the measures, thank you very much for having bothered to take the measurements.Jouets et Objets wrote: Bauta,
Here are the unknown measurements you asked for:
Torso length (Shoulder to Vagina): 51cm or 21"
Thigh Length: 40cm or 16"
Thigh circumference: 49cm or 19.25"
Calf Length: 34cm or 13.5"
Calf circumference: 31cm or 12.25"
These were all done by me, by hand. I am by no means an expert at measurements, so please consider a 1-3cm difference in human error.
The legs are very thin, but they are within the parameters that are considered normal. However this is about the numbers, in the photos they look very good, not thin.
The torso is something small, or perhaps there has been some problem in the measurement, curiously it has the same measurement as the 156cm doll of Sanhui. Considering that this doll is higher (168cm) so I should have a bigger torso. And it is clear that the back is narrower than a real woman, since a woman with a G-cup should have approximately a 120cm bust not only 83cm.
However in the photos it looks quite proportionate, it certainly has a great modeling, in the photo with the legs open the shape of the crotch tendons is a fine job, it is those details that make a doll special.
- Sanhui_168cm_Severine_82.jpg (3.14 MiB) Viewed 2775 times
* In the numbers the doll has a small torso for its height of 168cm. > Do you perceive it when sitting next to the doll, the torso is lower than normal when she is sitting? And lying down in the position of the missionary, would you say that the heads of both are placed on the same height as with a real woman of that same height?
* The legs about the numbers are very thin although in photography they look quite nice thick. > By having the doll in front of you, do you feel that the legs are more delegated than they should be, or do you think they are good enough unlike many other dolls with legs as thin as sticks? I emphasize the area of the calves where most dolls fail, does it feel good in this area beyond the photos?
* The waist is a bit thinner than even the waist of a top model, the width of the torso also seems to be too thin to have such large breasts. > Are you having trouble trying to get proper clothes, or do you get it to fit pretty well? Do you feel that the proportions are adequate?
Thank you very much for everything, and I hope to see more of your incredible photographs
