Doll marketing photography: Do Companies Confuse or Mislead?

bunnydots, I'm relatively new here and it was kind of difficult for me to navigate my way around quite a few of the sites at first. But most of them are pretty easy to figure out, actually. Having DoA is great because I was able to do lots of searching on here and that was a big help in figuring out the different names each site has for their various sizes, etc.

 

Yes!! I remember months ago when I first got into BJDs, I got around to the DoD site and happened upon something that a lot of other people have noticed as well: the sale page for DoT Tender Shall in that spectacular nun-looking outfit. I looked for ways to buy it, only to find out that it's... never been for sale anywhere at anytime?!?! WTF?!

I was SO pissed about that.

It doesn't bother me when a company takes flattering pictures of the dolls they sell with a better camera than mine. They are trying to sell something, and it makes sense to make it look its best. I do sometimes wish that the buyer could see photos of the doll blank, or possibly with different faceups to show its potential, and some companies do this. But I agree with some of the previous posters about one thing: don't show the doll wearing magnificent outfits or awesome eyes that aren't available for us to buy!

 

My pet peeves:
- photos with beautiful high-quality eyes when you're really getting the lowest grade of acrylic eyes. It gives the doll a very different image and it's somewhat dishonest IMO.
O/T, but I really wish companies would offer upgrades to better quality eyes. I'd be happy to pay a supplement rather than find myself with a pair of eyes I will never use. The cheap eyes Volks use for Yo-SDs take away from the beauty of their sculpts (but at least what you see on Volks photos is what you get).

- different clothes, accessories or wigs when you get a fullset. I got my Kyrie Never Mind with a wig that wasn't the same as on the official photos. Soom told me to style it which is BS because you'd have to also cut it to get it to look the same. When it says wig on the photo, it should be the same wig. Same with any part of a fullset. No excuses. And if there are manufacturing problems, post it on the site so we know what we are getting.

- photos where you can't see the doll properly. Soom MDs are an example of that. I can see in the opening gallery that these dolls are stunning but it's a big risk to take. I understand Soom market these MDs with a certain styling and atmosphere but they should also include a few more candid shots.

Yes, very much so. You really need these to make an informed decision. And no, not enough companies offer these.

 

I do think some companies cross the line between showing the product as pretty as it can be and showing something you won't get. And to me, photoshopping something so much that it really looks much different from what you get (or that you're getting trouble seeing the actual product for what it is, Heliot comes to mind) is misleading. Anyone remember a certain company's Cherry colored wigs? The most vivid, beautiful orangy-red in the pics, almost rusty brown IRL, so different that people said "this is not what I bought!" And there's also the photoshopping up of a certain doll with beautiful, translucent parts, that looked like faintly tinted glass or even water in the pics, but turned out to be a semi-translucent dark orange IRL (at least, that's what it looks like in the owner pics I've seen). Just to name a few. I understand that companies want to make their things look as pretty as possible so they can sell as much as possible, but for me personally, too much 'shopping turns me off of the product. It just gives me the idea they're hiding things, that the doll can't possibly be that beautiful IRL and that buying that doll will leave me disappointed. Surely that can't be the idea..

 

Again, "ask and ye shall receive": Soom originally showed only moodily-shadowed, dimly-lit, downward-facing pictures of Bix 'Fateful Night' as he half hid inside his collar. Lots of people wrote in to the Q&A board to request more & better pictures that actually showed the face. There were several new clearly-lit head shots added to Bix's sales page within the week.

Really, if you need help making a decision on a large fullset, the companies are usually happy to help you (helping you could end in a big sale). If you don't tell them what specifically you want to see, they can't be blamed for not showing it. I've never suffered a lack of information when buying big complicated limited fullsets; if you look at the price of each option, it's readily available; if you look at the list of what's included, it tells you what you're getting. If you have trouble understanding the description, ask their Q&A (or, ask a DOA compatriot who's had more experience in reading Sales Engrish). If information is missing, call them on it.

Again, the information is RIGHT THERE, so no excuses. It'll say "eyes as shown on the photo", or "random acrylic eyes", or "eyes not included". You just learn to look for those lines. And read them.

Also, if you use your common sense, you'll know deep in your heart that you're not getting the fancy eyes shown: It's ludicrous to assume that a company will give you a free pair of expensive urethane or glass eyes if they're not an eye company. They give you their basic bottom-shelf eyeballs when they have eyes to include at all. Call me cynical, but I've just come to EXPECT this. You're supposed to customize the doll with fancy eyes when you get it home. If you don't want the cheap or random eyes for your doll, then don't check the Eyes option.

So-- wait, you're defining "IRL" as "the owner pics I've seen"? Remember, ALL photos look different. They vary wildly according to the viewer's monitor, the original light source, the camera used, etc. An owner-photo may be every bit as unreliable as a photo produced by a doll company.

In the end, you're making your judgment based on a kind of consensus; but that's how things go when you buy anything sight-unseen.

 

Well, I prefer to see glamorous company pictures. It's an established and accepted norm of the bjd hobby that company photos are only one example of how the doll can look when "finished" but that what is being sold is only the base - the head, body, and maybe a faceup. I actually have more confidence in a company that puts a lot of work into their photography and styling - it shows me that the artist(s) have pride and faith in their vision.

 

I agree, most doll companies tend to show a better side of their dolls, but sometimes it would be nice to add in a shot of a blank head with all the fancy pictures that they have up. Of course I think that buying the doll just based on the company's web pictures can be misleading just on its own. It's smarter to just inform yourself on what mold you're buying, how good is the company's service, how the body poses, etc etc. instead of buying on impulse.

 

This.

A few people have said that they buy almost exclusively based on owner pics, which I suppose can be an okay way to go, but it has its own pitfalls...I saw an owner photo while I was waiting for my Soony that made me go "o my god, what have I done?!?" but if I'd based my decision on that instead of the company photo I'd be down one very lovely doll. And I'd hate to think that someone might be basing their decision to buy/not buy a Dollstown kid in any significant part on my own poor photographing of my as-yet-cheaply-eyed Seola, because I'm just totally unable to capture the beauty of the sculpt. There are lots of great photographers in this hobby, but not all sculpts are represented in their collections.

So balance is really vital!

 

Except that they did post straight unphotoshopped pictures of that certain doll.

(The difference between those and the owner pics you've seen may be as simple as lighting.)

 

When it comes to owner pics it's good to look at as many different ones as possible--that plus the company pics probably gives the best idea of what you're going to get short of actually seeing the doll in person. That's why I love the database and pic request sections of the forum. It's a good way to see the same mold done up a lot of different ways and photographed by different people. When I say I buy based (in part anyway) on owner pics, the emphasis is on pics plural.

 

I bought one of the Luts cherry wigs when they were first released. It's almost the exact colour to my eyes here in person as it looks on the Luts website on my laptop screen, which I admit shocked me because I had imagined it would be a more sedate carrot colour. Luts tends to up the contrast on photos through their lighting and backgrounds so I assume everything purchased from them in real life is going to be less vibrant.

People need to do research before making ANY large purchase for anything, or there is always the danger of being burned. Dolls are no exception, and I have found that if you are unsure about something, it never hurts to ask for photos that clarify things for you.

 

I always tend to be a little suspcious of buying dolls or accessories (wigs, shoes, eyes, clothes, etc) that I haven't seen IRL.
The product photos are intended to 'sell' the item and show it in the most flattering way.
I've worked with Photoshop for many years, and I can spot a gaussian blur overlay in many product photos. In photography, we use that technique to help hide imperfections and make everything look lovely and soft with a smooth texture (mostly used for human models). I'm suspicious of doll companies that use that filter a lot. :/

The plain photos of blank heads showing the profile and front views of the head sculpts are one of the best things a doll company can do, IMO. It helps me [the buyer] visualize what the doll will look like IRL and if I like or dislike the proportions. A good face-up can completely transform a doll, and it's just good business sense to show your customers exactly what they're going to get. Even if it's some smaller photos under the 'glamour shots' or clear photos in the 'parts' section of the site.
I wish more companies would show full profile (side) shots of the heads, instead of front and 3/4 views... it's the strength of the profile that really makes me decide on a doll ^^;; (I'm strange... I decided on buying a B&G Afra just because he had a Nordic nose) @_@

As for clothes, I think companies like Dollmore have the right idea when it comes to product photos; cute, well done-up photos of the clothes on a doll, followed by photos of all items in the set just lying flat. It shows both the potential of the item, and the item itself.

 

I almost bought a B&G Natalia based on the official photos. Then I realized that there were no good photos of her nose so I searched for owner photos. Thank goodness I did because the nose was a huge deal breaker for me. Hazy was almost like the photos but her skin seems much lighter in person than in official photos. Soom's Super Gem body looks quite different in owner photos as opposed to the official photos, which hide part of the body in darkness and make it look thicker.

Variety is best here, like some people have said. I try to look at official photos and owner photos in all kinds of lighting, skill level of photography, angles, and more. I wish all companies would show photos of the blank heads from the side and front as well as the body. They might also want to show the body with a more neutral background color and white light, as opposed to being artistic about it and making dark backgrounds with very high contrast in lights and shadows.

I've noticed as someone employed to do "real world" color to online color matching, many people don't have the best color matching skills or know much about light based color versus pigment based color. Thus many photos are off, which is sad, but even if we try our best, there's always room for difference. This is where resin matching pics come in handy.

Thank goodness for DoA so we can see all these differences!

 

I hate when they use a terrible wig for me that is the ultimate bugger I would like to see several types and colors of wigs used in the promo pics but an ugly fur wig in a terrible color in every shot is my hugest turn off.

Some companies I will buy from on just promo pics and others I need to see owner pics and possibilities of what the BJD can become before I jump in and get one.

I've bought many from Soom on promo pics and have been very happy with the end results

Having bought way too many BJD's I've only gotten one that disappointed me she was far cuter and better posing in her promo pics and I did sort of feel cheated because she was expensive and not really what I ordered since she changed a bit in manufacturing. Needless to say I will not buy another bjd from them because the trust is broken. I still have her and when I get up the courage I am going to mod her I sort of feel sorry for her as she is the only oddball in my collection who doesn't fit anywhere. Also I did not tell the company how I felt.

 

FAIRYLAND DOES NOT MISLEAD, I have always gotten exactly or better ! However just ordered from Junky spot a dollzone mo-2 FULLSET doll, and the WIG and MAKE-UP were not the same as the pictorial. I was really dissapointed!

 

My problem is that most of the dolls I'd want to see owners pictures of are unpopular. And the owners-to-be themselves are all thinking the same thing too: "I'll buy one once I see owner pictures" so they are also waiting to see pictures. Therefore, the request threads and the database thread for the dolls I particularly like to see are empty. XD; and any other info about them are almost non-existing here.

When it comes to a situation like that, how can one go about trusting one's own judgement from the promo pic alone?

I agree with Doll-mage in that companies should show blank heads (and body), on all possible angles (and showing all possible posing on the body other than just sitting), so we can get a better idea how the heads look.

 

I love seeing photos of blank heads and bodies. The glamour shots are fine and all, but a number of companies tend to use the same angle or pose over and over in their shots, so all you're seeing is just a variation of the same theme three times over. As someone who likes to do the aesthetics for her dolls, it tells me very little about the potential of the doll. I'll often take photos of blank heads and shop paint over it to see if it'll work with the design I need.

Some companies do offer pics of the blank heads in their option parts sections, although not all molds are option parts.

I think most companies are just doing what they need to do to sell. I was pretty lucky to have someone actually warn me to always look up owner photos before buying a doll, and I think this is the most sage advice someone getting into the BJD fandom can get.

But what actually annoys me about the glamour shot photos--both from the big doll companies and the smaller artist-run types--is when it comes to clothes.

Often they'll take artsy shots without showcasing the fit-and-fall or design of the clothing very clearly. Clothes can often be much harder to do research for than, say, dolls. =_= A great deal many of the fullset type outfits can easily soar up into the three-digit price tag, so they're no small investment either.

As an example, there was a set of clothes I was interested in. They listed what you'd get with the fullset, and even detailed measurements of the clothes (!!!!), which is all very awesome. But the photos... didn't really very clearly show what the clothes actually looked like.

The photos were all from similar angle, with the doll posed (SITTING!!) in a very cluttered, colorful setup. The photos had been shopped so heavily that the black of the outfits blended into the black of the background, and the designs on the material were hard to see.

I don't think this particular example was misleading or false advertising, but it was obvious these photos were simply used to glamourize the clothes versus actually informing the buyer.

I do believe there is a small amount of responsibility on the behalf of the seller to at least provide some information--if nothing else, to boost a potential for a sale! (Honestly, providing information on the spot makes one much more likely to snag that impulse or on-the-fence buyer! It also makes the consumer much more likely to trust you if you seem eager to please and provide.)

But at the same time, nothing beats research on the behalf of the consumer.

Just, some things are easier to get information about than others. =_=

 

I'm with those in this thread that believe that doll companies do not intend to mislead customers when they release promotional pictures of their dolls.

However, I feel that there is a need for standards in advertising ball joint dolls so that us collectors will have a better idea of what the dolls are like from pictures from the company websites. These standards should be established by an unbiased committee made up primarily of doll collectors and doll artists.

I believe that there is a great deal of misrepresentation in doll promotionals but I believe this is unintentional and only a result of a lack of advertising standards.
What would these standards be? I think browsing through this thread one can find many ideas such as : showing blank heads from different views and showing a fixed set of photographs that have not been retouched with Photoshop and indicated as such (along with Photoshopped promotional photos as well).

I would suggest that a certain number of the promotional photographs be taken with a 50mm lens so that there is no distortion of the image of the doll. I would also like the finished doll to be put in front of a neutral gray background so that the color rendition of the faceup and resin color is as accurate as possible. I won't go further with suggested standards since that will be beyond the scope of this debate.

There is already an association of ball jointed doll artists in Korea (KBJDA) that function as an academy and hold annual events to recognize the best artists and sculptors. It would be best if KBJDA set up an advertising standards committee, if they haven't already. I don't know much about what their mission is since I'm not in the loop so to speak, but if Den of Angels members want to form a committee and submit a proposal for advertising standards, the KBJDA would be the first organization that collectors should approach.

I do strongly believe that all the problems that this thread addresses can only be solved by a set of advertising standards or rules that doll companies should be compelled to adhere to.

(I apologize if my reply to this debate thread sort of strays a little bit off topic. It's just that I didn't want these issues to be discussed without some sort of pro-active conclusion as to what plan of action collectors can take to remedy the inconsistencies between what doll promotionals depict in their photographs and the actual product that the collector receives.)

 

I don't think there needs to be a proactive conclusion--at least not a collective one. The best suggestion in this thread is for people to simply take the five minutes to send an email or post on the Q&A board and simply ask for more pics or information if they feel the promotional materials aren't doing the job. These are more like independent artist studios rather than large companies, and I don't think they can or should necessarily be compelled to follow and arbitrary set of standards that also assumes companies all have access to the same types of photography equipment and individuals skilled enough to use it (remember, poorly taken pics are just as common if not more so than overly polished images).

Of course the individual hobbyist also has a part to play too. Your computer monitor can easily alter the way an item appears, some potential customers notice things in pictures that others don't, and what is a easy to navigate layout for one person is confusing to someone else. What you might want to see may not be what Jane Doll Owner wants to see or what I want to see. It's just not possible to make buying complex items over the net completely fool proof, and that's something people have to be aware of. No matter how useful the promo pics are in the decision making process, holding the doll in your hands is completely different, and I don't think trying to enforce advertising standards will ever be able to really address that.