Another opportunity for an exclusive

bsdozer · Post by **bsdozer** » Mon Jul 09, 2018 12:47 am

Gorgeous!

reddwarve · Post by **reddwarve** » Mon Jul 09, 2018 6:02 am

I agree with Cameramike. Fit women tend to have slightly deflated looking natural beasts, owing to their BMI, and fat content.
Personally, I like the looks of this one. Seconding the arms, and legs having more definition. Smaller beasts with a bit of sag to them lends a great deal of realism to the eye, and feel.

I'm an uncanny valley realist though. As real as possible is what I'm after. Without the talking, of course.

ts10208 · Post by **ts10208** » Mon Jul 09, 2018 8:19 am

reddwarve is on to something, if no bigger add sag to boobs. Realism makes up for size.
Also, please ask for feet large enough (don't know what size your contemplating) to wear a real shoe.

SinsuaLuvr · Post by **SinsuaLuvr** » Mon Jul 09, 2018 9:27 am

Booty Call Dolls wrote:What do you think of the sculpt below?
Do you think a tad bit more definition in her legs and a little bit more muscle shape in her arms and she could be the ultimate fitness babe?
BCD

You have my attention Jeff.....

So will there be an opportunity to bring this fine demo babe home (at a promo price)? Or are you just looking for suggestions and opinions?

What is her size, dimensions and weight? Who makes her?

I like her just as she is....maybe need a few more shots at other angles to be sure. But legs look fantastic compared to most dolls....just my 2 cents.

FCD94 · Post by **FCD94** » Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:49 pm

No added sag please.

*Assuming that what applies to some people who are fit applies to all or nearly all - eg: "the tits sag because fitness" - seems kinda silly. It would be news to many of the girls I train with.

Someone's vision of "real" might include this, sure. Others' don't. And that's fine. For example, I previously owned a doll which was far more "realistic" than my WM 157 from BCD, but the WM 157 is actually, for me, the better doll & far more fit-for-purpose even though it is not what some what consider "real". In fact for me I specifically looked for a doll that was in many ways LESS "real" than my previous one. For others it would be the reverse of that. Just personal preference I guess, & also a reflection of how people view the dolls they see or own, or the purpose/s for which they own one.

The doll looks great Jeff! I'd like to see some more pics if they're available! Is the sculpt actually an already existing doll model, or a modification of one maybe?

reddwarve · Post by **reddwarve** » Tue Jul 10, 2018 4:16 am

I'm not talking a lot of sag, just enough that the bottoms of the beasts roll under a bit.
Like these cuties.

ts10208 · Post by **ts10208** » Tue Jul 10, 2018 8:50 am

Shape is everything. It does not need to be prominent to be effective.

McPickle · Post by **McPickle** » Tue Jul 10, 2018 9:43 am

ts10208 wrote:Looks pretty good as is. You could add some definition with disgression.
Add a little more boob to suck in the boob lovers.
At 162cm and 32kg that would be a winner.

Seconded.

ts10208 · Post by **ts10208** » Sun Jul 22, 2018 2:41 am

Any progress with this project that can shared with us?

yungfit · Post by **yungfit** » Wed Aug 01, 2018 7:06 pm

My two cents:

No sag at all, more like lil silicone "bolts"

(that's just my opinion)

Yes, more muscle in legs, don't forget the hamstrings.
Yes, more definition in arms.
Slightly smaller waist..?

skyhawk747 · Post by **skyhawk747** » Wed Aug 01, 2018 8:59 pm

junkstuff7729 wrote:I was just looking at a photo I thought would make a great fitness doll here:

https://best-bikinis.tumblr.com/image/175588906507

And yes, 15-20% more muscle mass in legs and a touch more in the arms... pretty close to the above photo.

Perfect body in the link!