1. It has come to the attention of forum staff that Dollshe Craft has ceased communications with dealers and customers, has failed to provide promised refunds for the excessive waits, and now has wait times surpassing 5 years in some cases. Forum staff are also concerned as there are claims being put forth that Dollshe plans to close down their doll making company. Due to the instability of the company, the lack of communication, the lack of promised refunds, and the wait times now surpassing 5 years, we strongly urge members to research the current state of this company very carefully and thoroughly before deciding to place an order. For more information please see the Dollshe waiting room. Do not assume this cannot happen to you or that your order will be different.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Dollshe Craft and all dolls created by Dollshe, including any dolls created under his new or future companies, including Club Coco BJD are now banned from Den of Angels. Dollshe and the sculptor may not advertise his products on this forum. Sales may not be discussed, no news threads may be posted regarding new releases. This ban does not impact any dolls by Dollshe ordered by November 8, 2023. Any dolls ordered after November 8, 2023, regardless of the date the sculpt was released, are banned from this forum as are any dolls released under his new or future companies including but not limited to Club Coco BJD. This ban does not apply to other company dolls cast by Dollshe as part of a casting agreement between him and the actual sculpt or company and those dolls may still be discussed on the forum. Please come to Ask the Moderators if you have any questions.
    Dismiss Notice

Doll marketing photography: Do Companies Confuse or Mislead?

Dec 30, 2008

    1. Here's a new debate/ discussion topic I've been thinking about for a while. I have been thinking back to the toy ads that ran when I was little and how a lot of times they'd picture the toy to look a lot more exciting than it actually was, or show it doing things that it really couldn't usually do or not without a lot of effort. Sometimes I'd get a toy and be very disappointed.

      Along similar lines, I've noticed some complaints lately about how different companies photograph their dolls, and I've also noticed, over the last couple years of doll-buying, that sometimes a doll looks one way in the official company pictures and a significantly different way in, say, someone's amateur marketplace photo, even if the doll in the amateur photo has the company face-up and so forth. I've also received a few dolls that to me, didn't look like the photographs, or had some sort of feature (such as a head in seeming disproportion to the body) that didn't show the way the doll was photographed for the company website.

      I realize some of this might be due to photographer's different skill levels, and I'm not including any differences in resin tone because I know that (a) resin can vary a little batch to batch and (b) resin tones can look different in different lights. And, it's expected that someone trying to sell any product will photograph it to make it look good. But still I wondered at what point these photos become misleading.

      One way a company might normally gauge whether it is misleading customers might be the number of returns, but that doesn't work for doll companies because they normally won't accept returns, and even if they did, who is going to pay shipping to send a doll all the way back to Asia?

      So, on to the questions:

      1) Do you feel that some companies mislead, exaggerate, or confuse through their use of photos in advertising their dolls?

      2) Have you ever received a doll that you felt was not as shown in its photographs (aside from resin color or obvious defects like breakage)? What feature(s) was/ were misrepresented?

      3) If you answered "yes" to (2), did you tell the doll company and were you satisfied with the response?

      4) Do you feel that misleading photographs are a serious problem, or do you feel that companies aren't to be blamed for wanting to make their product look good ? Or, alternatively, do you think that there are plenty of other places to see different photographs of a doll (or even the doll in person at conventions, meetups and so forth) and therefore buyers should simply educate themselves more before they buy? Other thoughts?

      5) Do you think it would help to have a standard format of photos that would be shown by companies in addition to their pretty advertising photos - for example, pictures of unfaceupped heads taken from the front and side; body comparison photos showing unclothed bodies in a few established positions, like sitting and standing) or do you feel that enough companies already offer these?

      Please make your responses as general as possible so this doesn't devolve into company-bashing.
       
    2. I was looking into buying a doll from a certain company, she was really beautiful in the photos. She was photographed in soft lighting, at different angles, she had a face-up. There was something about her though that didn't click, so I did a search on this girl and read what owners had discovered about her. What I read I didn't like, and certainly would have been upset if I had bought the doll and not had known about certain quirks before-hand. Some owners didn't see it as a problem, but I did after seeing owner photos.

      In this case I believe the company is misleading potential buyers concerning dolls by not providing photos that show the true features of a doll. The only photos they had of the girl on their site were the advertising photos.

      (Luckily I've never received a doll I have been dissapointed with because I do quite a bit of research before buying a doll.)

      As for companies misleading the public, it's something all companies do to a certain degree, because their main priority is to sell a product and make a profit. If a company has a 'defective' product they'll go out of their way to make the defect less detectable in advertising. Advertising by its nature is a manipulative and misleading source of information.

      All doll companies should provide standard photos of their dolls to allow a potential buyer to see the sculptural details of a doll without the distraction of advertising gimmicks. There are some companies that provide these photos, but not all. When standard photos are not available, it's in a person's best interest to do some homework before buying a doll.
       
    3. Well, they ARE trying to sell a product worth hundreds of dollars, of course they're going to try their hardest to make it look nice. I do appreciate body pictures to show what kind of jointing the body has, what the sculpt is like (i.e. buff and muscular, soft and rounded, or thin and bony) but honestly, it's not that hard to find photos of almost any doll on DoA... and there's always someone who will buy the newest dolls and post photos.

      I don't think anyone should expect a doll company to show off or advertise poor points in their dolls, just as you wouldn't expect a car company or an electronics company to do so in their advertising. If you're looking at buying a new car, a new plasma TV, a new laptop, etc... you check out Consumer Reports magazine or look for reviews on the web. If you're looking at buying a new doll, you look for owner photos and discussion threads on DoA, same idea.
       
    4. I agree with skwerlie that it's up to the consumer to educate themselves. The companies want to sell their products, so they're going to produce "glamour shots." And, let's face it, any photo set of a doll is going to be misleading because the doll is a three dimensional object. You can't feel the weight, joint action, etc. from a photo. I like the idea of making schematic photographs available, though.

      My first doll was a green Bobobie Sprite. I was actually *not* convinced to buy her by any official promo photos. It was only when I started looking for examples of the different colours of Bobobie resin that I became interested in the green, and that was when I found other posters' pictures of the green in natural light. Even when I got her I was still surprised by the exact shade, which is dependent on the light, so hard to judge accurately from a photo.

      Going to meet-ups and trade shows to see different models first-hand is the only way to be sure about a doll's appearance before you buy it, but again, that's not possible for everyone and every doll.
       
    5. I think after a while one gets enough experience to "see through" the promo pics, that is, to make amendments in your mind when you look at a promo pic to imagine how the doll will really look like without photoshop.
      The only time I felt misled with promo pics was with my first doll (I don't have it any more). He had such a beautiful dramatic make-up on promo pics and when he arrived... he looked like nothing. The make-up was very generic: some eyebrows, some eyelashes. I didn't say anything then, he was my first doll and I was excited anyway but now I feel I should have because he really was misrepresented on photos.
       
    6. I really don't see this as a even an issue. I mean it's the same doll with the same faceup (if default) It's not like they do weird artsy shots with only a small part of the doll showing. Of course a professional photographer with studio lighting and a good camera will take a much different picture than a newb with a cellphone under flourescent light and an up-the-nose/unflattering angle.

      As for question 5...well a lot of companies sell blank/separate heads and show what the heads look like without makeup. If not, then there's the good old BJD-opedia. ^_~ I've never been dissapointed or surprised with a doll, and I really don't find what's so difficult about separating features from faceup/lighting/angle.

      Also, I'd much rather see some interesting pictures that show the potential of a doll than blank, straight on pictures.
       
    7. I don't think they're doing anything every company trying to sell a product out there doesn't do. That's why it is very highly recommended that collectors look at owner photos before buying. Educate themselves - I like the way OP put that. .^_^

      I've been satisfied with all my dolls.
       
    8. Well, like mentioned before, doll companies are looking to sell expensive dolls - they obviously want you to like them :3 I'm guessing they'd choose a wig that really suits the mold, nice clothes, and get lighting all nice and pretty, to show the full potential of the doll and stuff. And they normally have more than one angle to show the mold properly.

      I think unless you are a complete newbie (and even then it's not likely), the shopper will be aware the doll will not be EXACTLY as in photos, and will look up owner photos,

      Generally, I don't have a problem with marketing photography - I always check out owner photos first, and I don't think there's anything wrong with them trying to photograph the doll in the best conditions etc. to try and get them to sell (:
       
    9. I've got in to the habit of waiting to see user pictures when ever possible. Twice now I've passed on a doll because the factory pics make them look one way, like an SD that looked almost like a big version of a MSD I have, but IRL they look different. In that case the mouth was different to where I would have been angry had I bought it. Half the time it's the angle and lense they use. Macro can distort a doll. Sometimes the skin tone affects my choice too, especially with a hybrid. Knowing how certain sized wigs and eyes look helps as well.

      On my website I do a range of user pictures on OT dolls for this very reason. When I was buying some of them I would have loved to see what they looked like compared to ones I have, would have given a few different bodies or skin tones. Even road testing some brands to see how they hold up is a great service to the doll comunity.
       
    10. I don't think companies do it on purpose, or to trick people. Sure, there might be a few, but those are exceptions.
      A doll never looks the same in the picture as in real life, because you can't see the doll from all sides in all kinds of lights in a picture like you can when you actually hold the doll in your hands.
      But then there are companies that just overphotoshop their pics. I've seen this especially with limiteds. They look stunning with sparkles and such and when you get them, they're kinda blah.
      But as said before, these are just ways to get people to buy them. Sparkles do help with that. But I don't think it's to actual mislead the buyer, but to make them more interested.
       
    11. See, that's interesting because the main thing I want to see on a doll site is a picture of the plain sculpt with no faceup. That way I can actually see the features. If they also wanted to include some pretty pictures of a doll made up, as they probably do in order to get me to buy the faceup, clothes etc., that's fine - but I get so fed up with trying to figure out, say, how some doll's nose or lips are shaped from an artistic shot.

      There's at least one company that sells a lot of similar sculpts by the same artist, and trying to figure out the small differences between the sculpts from the artsy doll shots is a headache.
       
    12. This is another good point. I know there's been at least two well-respected companies that advertised a limited doll with a particular faceup, and then shipped some limiteds with a faceup that looked like a bad imitation of the one in the picture. My guess would be that some other artist did faceups on the shipped dolls and tried to follow the one in the original photos. Maybe this isn't a big deal because many people take the company faceup off anyway, but occasionally the company faceup is a big reason I buy a limited, so if I got something different in that case I'd be upset.
       
    13. I remember not that long ago when a very reputable, well known company was selling some beautiful elves with absolutely gorgeous and unusual face-ups pictured on their site. But there was quite a row of discontent when the people who ordered them with face-ups got ones that looked entirely different from the photos (even the face-up colors were different.) Fortunately I didn't order one of these dolls myself, but I sure felt bad for those who did and were naturally disappointed. Hopefully the company learned a valuable lesson through this experience because I don't believe the dolls sold very well once the word got out.
       
    14. Companies just try to show the best side of their dolls. I wouldn't call it "intentionally misleading" cause some companies in their effort to portray the dolls make them look uglier than they actually are *coughVolkscough*

      When I got my DOI Luke I was surprised by how much younger he looked than in DoD's pictures and the big spacey "deer in headlights" look he always seems to have. None of this showed in his pictures. But when I started taking pictures of him myself it turned out that he looks older and less spacey in them.

      Blank heads don't tell me much about a sculpts potential so I agree with Nefla on seeing some interesting photos that will give you a feeling for which expressions the sculpt takes. I'll have to start liking a doll with that and then, I'll go hunt for owner pictures with different face-ups to see if it's the face-up catching me or the sculpt. That said though, I do not like overly shopped pictures like Soom's MD pictures. They give a nice...atmosphere but you can't even properly see the doll you're ordering half the time. Especially because you cannot go look for pictures from owners.
       
    15. I have found that their are a few. Recent cases are my IH Mars and my AIL Elijah. I really thought with them taking 16mm eyes they would be big like my Dollstown kids. But no both are very tiny eyed, in fact my DT MSD kids have bigger eyes then these SD heads. As I have tried 14MM and barely see eye whites, so a 16 would be one solid color. So yes pics by both companies and even owners can be misleading.
       
    16. i really liked the concept of using photoshop to enhance the pictures that companies take of their dolls. there is one company that i really like, they have the most interesting dolls. one of the things that they do is they have a veryu colorful background with the doll in the center of the frame, but they distinctly blur the background, so that it is not distracting and emphasizes the character. i always find it interesting when a company does something like that. but i could tell that many colors were saturated in the dolls eyes, clothing and other areas of the faceup. i think that this can definitely be misleading to a viewer.

      i enjoy seeing a blank face on a doll like others do, but i prefer to see owners photos. i use these photos to gauge how much the sculpt is capable of, and i collect them over a period of years at a time.

      also like others said, i think that it really comes down to educating yourself. before you buy from a company you should do research on the company and the doll. if the doll is new or limited, i like to talk to other owners of doll's from the company and ask them about their experiences. this, for me, is the most helpful way to avoid a bad buy.

      there were two dolls that i was really interested in earlier this year. but when i looked on the forums know one owned them. i posted a question about them and it turns out that not many people buy from the company due to it's poor quality. i would never have guessed that from the beautiful poseable portraits that i had seen of the dolls.
       
    17. 1) Do you feel that some companies mislead, exaggerate, or confuse through their use of photos in advertising their dolls?

      Of course. EVERY kind of marketing company does this, though. I've seen so many cases of someone ordering a doll that they have only seen company photographs of, it arriving and being NOTHING like that. I've been one of those people, unfortunately. :|

      2) Have you ever received a doll that you felt was not as shown in its photographs (aside from resin color or obvious defects like breakage)? What feature(s) was/ were misrepresented?

      Yes. Her mouth.
      At this point in time, there were only about two owners of Gus here on the forum, and there were VERY few pictures of her up.
      Angell-Studio Gus was shown by her company pictures (to me, however) with cute little sad pouty lips. However, it depends on what ANGLE you're looking at her from. If you look at her straight forward, she has a flat place between her lips, as if she were ment to have teeth. That part was painted along with her lips. It looked as if she either had no teeth and gums showing, or was doing something with her tongue. I couldn't STAND it. Also, her string was BROKEN when she got here, so I had to wait a few weeks for a friend to restring her for me.

      In addition, her feet were ungodly small and made it difficult to stand her up. Her eyelashes were hella long and way too easily bent.

      3) If you answered "yes" to (2), did you tell the doll company and were you satisfied with the response?

      I ordered Gus from Denver Doll Emporium. It's not really their fault.
      However, no, I didn't e-mail A-S. Figured it to be fruitless.

      4) Do you feel that misleading photographs are a serious problem, or do you feel that companies aren't to be blamed for wanting to make their product look good ? Or, alternatively, do you think that there are plenty of other places to see different photographs of a doll (or even the doll in person at conventions, meetups and so forth) and therefore buyers should simply educate themselves more before they buy? Other thoughts?

      I've learned more than ever to wait and look at owner pictures before I order a doll. I don't think its really a problem, because the dolls have the potential to LOOK like they do in their photos, I suppose.

      5) Do you think it would help to have a standard format of photos that would be shown by companies in addition to their pretty advertising photos - for example, pictures of unfaceupped heads taken from the front and side; body comparison photos showing unclothed bodies in a few established positions, like sitting and standing) or do you feel that enough companies already offer these?

      It would be REALLY helpful and nice, but I seriously doubt any company would oblige...
       
    18. My experience has always been the opposite with the dolls I've bought directly from the doll companies with company faceups. The dolls have been much nicer in person than on the website. I do wish, though, that the companies would show profile photos of the face and nude photos of the body. I have been thinking about buying a certain big guy and I love his face, but it's only from an owner's photo that I discovered exactly how long, pointy, and exaggerated his nose is. I still may buy him, but not with the company faceup, because I would just have to wipe it off when I mod off some of that nose.
       
    19. 1) Do you feel that some companies mislead, exaggerate, or confuse through their use of photos in advertising their dolls?

      Yes. Some do. I also feel that some companies hurt themselves with their own photos

      2) Have you ever received a doll that you felt was not as shown in its photographs (aside from resin color or obvious defects like breakage)? What feature(s) was/ were misrepresented?

      Not really

      3) If you answered "yes" to (2), did you tell the doll company and were you satisfied with the response?

      If that did happen, I doubt I'd tell the company. Unless it was really bad.

      4) Do you feel that misleading photographs are a serious problem, or do you feel that companies aren't to be blamed for wanting to make their product look good ? Or, alternatively, do you think that there are plenty of other places to see different photographs of a doll (or even the doll in person at conventions, meetups and so forth) and therefore buyers should simply educate themselves more before they buy? Other thoughts?

      We all know they're going to do it, so we have to be careful. Look for owner pitures if possible. They're always better in my opinion. If only one person (that I can find) has that doll I may even pm them for more photos and hope that they don't mind. :sweat

      5) Do you think it would help to have a standard format of photos that would be shown by companies in addition to their pretty advertising photos - for example, pictures of unfaceupped heads taken from the front and side; body comparison photos showing unclothed bodies in a few established positions, like sitting and standing) or do you feel that enough companies already offer these?

      I love photos of unpainted heads, but sometimes the resin shades make it hard to tell anything from them. I love lots of differnet photos of different dolls. Not just the same on in the same outfit over and over again.
       
    20. hmmm every company takes particuarly flattering photographs for all manner of merchandise, whether it be dolls, cars, clothing, make up etc. Having experience in this world I know how much things are photo-shopped and prettied up sometimes to the point of being ridiculous!

      I do like it when the doll companies however do pictures of an unface-upped doll and the body so I can really start to visualise what I want. I normally do quite a bit of research when it comes to buying a mold and look at owner pics here on DoA as that gives a really good idea on the versatality of the doll and a more realistic perspective sans photoshop, awesome lighting, weird angles etc. However; with new dolls such as Akando and Vesuvia I have chosen to go with the company reputation and hope for the best :)