Good day. I am looking for sites that sell dolls in order to

>neither do I see that other boards would use tools such as dolls for sketching.
Have you asked /toy/?

While lurking /ic/ I've seen many threads about dolls for sketching and surprisingly often I read opinion that mannequins dedicated for artists are shit compared to dolls that resemble anime characters. But I'm not sure is it truth - I prefer using big mirrors and selfies as a reference.

Alternatively, if you can't find any dolls, then you could just use a digital 3d model: "Design Doll" is a nice program for that. A bit buggy, but useful.

Don't listen to anyone that tells you to get a figma for figure reference. Depending on your budget you could shoot for something like a ball-jointed doll but that have a ton of articulation but they usually cost a few hundred to thousands of dollars.

File: 2.jpg (89KB, 718x1078px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 718x1078px

S.H.Figuarts human models

http://www.amiami.com/top/detail/detail?gcode=FIGURE-014605

The fingers do not articulate, but there are several different hands to swap out.

It's not hard to find hand reference anyway.

File: SFBT-3.jpg (59KB, 820x546px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 820x546px

S.F.B.T

Fully articulate but looks like an anime alien

File: 21600-group-3-3ww-l.jpg (29KB, 395x600px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 395x600px

Art S. Buck Anatomical Models

A lot less articulation than the previous two, but more realistic proportions

>>2694159
Doesn't look much better than a GI Joe

I don't buy dolls for figure practice because:

-It is just about impossible to find a mannequin of any kind that has the same range of articulation as a person.

-With figures, all surfaces are hard unlike our soft, squishy selves, so they could never really accomplish poses that require one part of the body touching the other. Like crossing arms or legs for instance.

-Dolls don't have control of their balance like a person would, so if you need any pose where it isn't sitting, laying, or standing with its feet firmly planted on the ground, it's going to need a stand. In which case you'll never be certain if the pose is properly capturing the center of gravity.

-You miss out on a LOT of information about the human body that you could get from a real model or even from a photo. i.e. no skin, fat or muscle so you lose the info on how those bend/stretch/fold, the joints are often exposed so no info on those areas, face lacks detail/expression etc.

-Any model that can articulate well is generally pretty fucking expensive

>>2694144
c-cute! !

File: 14359177_10207619599591499_2328083267049997507_n.jpg (58KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 960x720px

Figma Archetype next.
they were recently released.
articulate to an extent.

bumping this thread!! with no survivors!

>>2694142
I have one of these. They're both stylized a little anime. The male is pretty fine but the female is egregious. All the cartoon proportions, do not use it as a reference for realistic people.

I got the male, though, and I love it. I was using it extensively earlier today. It's got very good range of motion. Not perfect, especially for really extreme flexing of elbows and knees. But it's versatile enough to get most anything you need. Fun to just fiddle with, too, I like to make a new pose every day.

You will likely need a stand for it, though. While you want to be able to try to make it balance, there are several poses that you need to support it with.

>>2695067
i pre ordered mine like a long time ago before it came out , i like it . its much better than the old model figma archetype she i had.