Skin diver : the new dermal anchor
«« Sterile gloves How Do I Become A Proper Body Piercer??? »»
Thursday September 11th, 2008 @ 10:09 AM
Filed under: Implants
Hello BME !
I was wondering if you knew more about this new kind of piercing/implant called the “skin diver”. It’s like a dermal anchor or microdermal, except that the skin diver it’s smaller and thiner, so it’s really on the surface of the skin. My piercer artist and a few more in France do this new kind of procedure.
I’ve had a look on the ‘net at these things and I have to say that so far I am not overly sold on the idea. I worry about the conical bit that sits below the skin. My concern is what would happen if you got a whack on it especially if it was placed over a bony area like the sternum?
That being said, I am curious as to have one in my hand (and I don’t mean implanted!!) so’s I could get a proper look and equally as curious as to popping one in myself to see exactly how they sit/feel/heal and how easily they are removed. As with everything, the proof of the pudding is in the eating.
Posted by Tiff Badhairdo | Permalink | Leave a comment | Trackback
Rate This Post
12 Responses to “Skin diver : the new dermal anchor”
Wow. Made in Thailand, stated as being just “G23″ titanium, and with the idiot’s guide to installing a “skin diver” (Video CD available!). Sounds reputable, alright!!
Dimruthien on September 11th, 2008 at 8:40 pmWhen I looked at it I thought the little cone would be on TOP and the flatback in the skin…but it’s the other way round. That does seem dangerous not to mention it would seem really easy to rock it out once it’s healed.
HereKittyKitty on September 11th, 2008 at 11:04 pmanother one of those “new” things like the micro piercing… bleh.
Clara on September 12th, 2008 at 6:17 amwhy bother yourself with a stoopid vcd dim, when you can just watch a 3 minute youtube video instructional? (i’m not joking. google it.)
from the video it actually looks *bigger* than a standard IS microdermal, and has about the same chance of healing as a subdermal labret stud. it’s even being marketed as a sort of microdermal for dummies, complete with matching tools to make it a connect-the-dots procedure.
to the person who posted the question, there’s a good chance your piercer either isn’t as well informed as they should be or is more concerned with making a quick profit than actually giving you a modification that will last more than month. i presume the practitioners using these things aren’t able to competently implant microdermals, because they offer no advantage - find someone who can do it.
i’ve seen french manufactured microdermals which have a larger base than the IS/anatometal ones and are supposed to be significantly more difficult to place, although the result is more “robust”. perhaps your piercer has been using these anchors with difficulty, and would find they had more success with the american style.
regardless, i think it’s time to find a new piercer.
redeye on September 12th, 2008 at 7:32 amThanks everyone for your answers !
Eleozero on September 13th, 2008 at 1:00 pmBut you can place as well the cone on the top of the skin. But yeah, I think in a bony area, this is not a good idea to put the cone on the skin, maybe.
if its from Thailand, which it is, its less then $1.
So hope the piercers in france are only charging like $20-$40 total for these procedures.
its just a bad idea all around and I would never recommend “Skin Divers” to be used.
although it does make me want to sing: “HOLY DIVER” totally!
Warren Hiller on September 15th, 2008 at 12:56 amlol at HOLY DIVER comment!
Sassie_L on September 22nd, 2008 at 12:00 amIt’s about that new “dermal skin diver”. I’m a what you can call an “oldschool freehand piercer” and I wonder if someday people won’t beleive in “trying” new things anymore. No critisism to anyone, it’s more of a positive view of the evolution of BODMOD, I share the point that it can always be ameliorated of desing and practibility BUT, let’s give it a try. By the way, just to let you know all, I saw this type of anchorage on the back of a tattoo magazine and never saw a “piece” in real, so my comment is partial, IAM Syl20
Syl20 on September 25th, 2008 at 1:13 pmI had my first skin diver done 3 weeks ago and have had no problems with it. So for anyoone having doubts i would advise doing your research before getting it done but in my experiance there was no problems.
x
PiercedFreak on October 3rd, 2008 at 7:14 pmThree weeks isn’t even REMOTELY enough time to decide if it’s going to be problematic or not, of course.
Lori St.Leone on October 4th, 2008 at 6:53 amI just had two of them placed and I’ll let you know what happens. I was curious and the shop I did it at is a very reputable one, but indeed, we’ll see. There aren’t enough of fully healed examples out there to know if it was a good or bad idea.
Ayla on October 6th, 2008 at 1:24 pmi did two on my wrsit and they popped out when i did as little as touch them, so i taped them in for 14 days and low and behold i put my hoody on and theyd vanished shite idea, shite jewellery im not even going to offer these at our studio.
paddy on November 3rd, 2008 at 7:27 amLeave a Comment