BJD Photos in Early-2000's Style

I totally love this idea!

I think you completely nailed a lot of the nostalgia factor. Another thought I had for the editing component was text overlay. I remember a lot of people putting text on their images for photo stories!

I think the styling of the dolls themselves could also play a big factor. Lots of mohair wigs and big, huge, chunky boots lol.

 

First of all, do not downgrade your gear or image size.
Photographers of that era worked with large negatives and
created amazingly sharp imagery.
Most early photographers used long exposure rather than flash.
When flash was used it was well off camera. Built in flash would
not be appropriate.
Clutter would be inappropriate. Photos were carefully staged.
Do convert to B/W. Color is a no no!
If you are looking to emulate a studio look then apply a tone.
Do dress them in period appropriate clothing and use period
appropriate props.

Vintage - B/W by Tom Beach, on Flickr

 

It sounds like a lovely project, but it's got me a little confused. Do you mean the photo should look like it's from the early 1900's? As in @TomB 's wonderful shot...or the early 2000's as in that's the age of the camera, big hair and chunky boots?

Sorry, but as an someone who is 51 years old, when you refer to the 00's era, I think 1900's

 

I think @ophelia meant the 2000s, since those were the early days of the BJD hobby. If that's the case, my suggestion is to style all of the dolls in "scene" clothing/hairstyles. Black fur wigs with bright colored streaks, black-and-white stripes, baggy black pants, arm warmers, boots with tons of straps on them. That or make everyone wear goth-loli gear. As far as I remember, these were the dominant styles back then.

And as a less serious answer, take some pictures with up-nose angles. Saw a lot of those back then haha.

 

Oops. Apparently I answered the wrong question. Apologies!

I would like to make one comment though.
Please don't dismiss digital cameras from 200x as toys.
I got my first in 2004 and I have 13 x 19 prints from some
of those images that I'm still happy to hang on the wall.

 

As a person who only recently got a decent camera phone and who lives in a tiny messy house with a myriad of plush and action figure always lurking in the background of my photos I feel so attacked right now lol

 

@ophelia Maybe if you save the images as jpegs? A lot of early 2000s pics were jpeg'd into poor quality even though they were originally taken with decent quality.

 

I still have my old digital Olympus... the camera I used when taking pictures of my first dolls back in the mid-'oughts. I'll have to pull it out again and drag one of my older dolls back to Marymoor Park.

I never used the flash, though, and tried my damnedest to avoid "up-nose" shots.

 

The good old days!

• swirly text (especially extra-large so it just looks decorative) or brush overlays
• Photoshop any visible joints out
• pure white background (shoot the doll against tracing paper taped to a window)
  
• pure white background + super soft/bright Photoshop layering effects, a la Jujube

I'm sure there are plenty more things (that I'm personally guilty of). XD

 

I'm actually rather fond of the quality images I took back then...
So maybe you want to rephrase this?

 

I take issue with your assumption that photos taken 20 years ago were all bad quality or otherwise deficient in style, equipment or technique and definitive of an entire era that "contemporary" shooters should view only with a modern-era indulgent condescension? You're going to get people using basic equipment or having limited techniques or just starting out in photography in any time period, and improving and evolving their taste, ability and equipment as they go. And some people will always do things in and to their photos because they enjoy seeing something a certain way or because it just doesn't bother them or because they're making do with what they have/thought of trying. No cause for being so judgemental ("Indoor photos on carpet; messy, juvenile decor in background" -bolding is mine). Even nose-up photos is usually a beginner's thing; and it's like posing a doll; some people get better, some people don't.

As far back as the 80's, I had camera equipment that provided quality details that digital cameras have only attained relatively recently. But oh yeah, we had to work with settings, then slides, negatives and photographic paper. Some of us had darkrooms and put effort into every step rather than relying on pure pixel power and preset algorithms. While some others of us had to take 5-6 photos and PAY to have them turned into photographs so we could see which was the best one.

Thinking in terms of "vintage look" by the clothing styles that were the only things available in the early days of the hobby, you're still sabotaging your own premise, since things like color streaked hair and certain styles are still being used in the hobby, and are still often in contemporary use in Harajuku street-culture clothing.

I don't understand the "nostalgia" thing, either. Those who were around then, already have their own photos they took and don't need to recreate things as others now declare as "period".

But actually, citing early-2000's is stretching it for most in the hobby. Yes, 20 years is the generally accepted interval for something to be considered vintage or antique (if you believe sale sites). 1999 - 2001 marked the first appearance of the SuperDollfie dolls by Volks. Dollshe brought out their first doll, Berman, in 2003. Luts came into being in 2000, but didn't have an international site until 2004. Since they distributed for several dollmakers/companies, that's when things started growing worldwide. In 2007, when I got into the hobby, there were mostly Delfs, Dollshe, Volks and DoD out there, so if you want even earlier "nostalgia", you'd have to carefully choose your doll model for the time period. Then too were the abundance of platform boots, the "Mary Jane" boat shoes (which, as said above, you can still see in some pix of Harajuku streetwear), lots of black, chains, and the now-sadly-peeling ubiquitous leather/pleather outfits. Nostalgia? Seems like yesterday....

 

Centred eyes were definitely more of a thing! Very 'starey eyes' in general. Possibly thanks to Volks and how they positioned their eyes back then. I have the 2004 Super Dollfie Bible and it's great inspiration for this sort of thing.

This sounds like a fun idea, I am really nostalgic for that early era of BJDs and it would be fun to style and photograph my newer dolls in a way I would have done back then!

 

^All of that.

 

Heh...I'm so old that I have a daughter who popped out just a bit after BJDs were becoming a thing. Nostalgia? Early 2000s sounds recent to me, not particularly old or vintage, you young whippersnapper. I can only say that my photos were bad then, and they're bad now. It's all about the hand that holds the camera...

 

I believe there are instagram filters that makes a picture came out from an old video camera, if that is the look you are going for. Too bad I don't have experience using it, as I just saw a friend did that on a non-doll-related post.

 

i think you're misunderstanding OP's intent due to a generation gap. people who were children, teens, or young adults in the early 2000s genuinely have a deep sense of nostalgia for that time period, and because those people are now adults, we're starting to see a movement attempting to pin down that period's "aesthetic" the same day people describe the aesthetic of the '90s or '80s. like, yes, there was obviously way more to living in the '90s than kurt cobain and grunge music and vhs tapes and mtv and dial-up internet, but those things bring back warm fuzzy feelings for people who remember that period fondly because they're so iconic and have come to stand as symbols of the '90s.

all you're seeing is the early 2000s coming to be treated the same way. the OP of this thread is speaking out of love for this time period, not condescension. i would definitely describe the early 2000s as a time when people were more open and honest on the internet, prior to the stranglehold of cringe culture and cancel culture, so the "messy, juvenile decor" comment has nothing to do with critiquing peoples' interior design choices during that time and everything to do with wanting to return to a way of life where we didn't spend every waking moment obsessing over how we came across on social media.

i don't think OP intended to say anything rude or condescending about bjd culture during that time period, although it might have seemed that way without context. if you're not nostalgic for the early 2000s, this thread/photo project is not intended for you. time marches on endlessly, etc

EDIT: aaaand i just realized i necroposted. i didn't realize how old this thread was. i'm so sorry.

 

I remember trying to be as aesthetic as possible with my dolls back then. The best I could do for backgrounds were taking them into the backyard to do photos or setting up stuff I had around the house. These pictures are okay, but back then I thought they were the most awesome photos I'd ever taken in my life, haha.







RIP, my Nikon point-and-click digital camera. You are not missed, haha.

 

Here's my attempt at recreating it! It's pretty mid to late 2000s though instead of early 2000s.

I used a Canon Powershot G2 which my family got in the early 2000s. It's a compact and not a point and shoot and does shoot in RAW. I had this camera available to me when I first got my dolls, but I preferred my budget point and shoots. Here are some "features" of my shot:

• (lumpy) non-heat resistant wig
• gigantic black boots
• out of scale props including a burger king mini wiimote
• random cables in background
• my 2nd oldest doll (my oldest has a much more recent style faceup)
• slightly out of focus (those LCDs are so small!)
• no flash (flash yellows your dolls, remember? super overexposed from flash also works well too)

I looked back at my photos from 2009 and a lot of them were in my bedroom with a ton of books, games, and other junk you would expect a teenage girl obsessed with Japan to have. Most of them were even taken on my bed. The backgrounds were a lot more chaotic! The photos were also incredibly grainy or overexposed since I mostly took photos in the badly lit house.

A lot of this is probably just nostalgia of being a kid during these times and not having the nicest equipment or skills. But honestly I had so much fun with my dolls in those days!

 

THIS SLAPS, i love this!! you did awesome!! there's such a rawness to it, but it's so cozy at the same time!!

 

I agree with @clefairy in terms of social media on there being a time period in which there was a lot of posting/sharing online, sort of photographic windows into their lives, just before the careful staging of every piece that was put online came about as normal. It's not that we haven't always had staged photos, just that there was a time period where off the cuff, in the moment, unplanned photos that you only took one snap without feeling the urge to stop and fuss with it. For me, that's one half of what I would kind of refer to as "clutter".
A certain amount of me misses "sorry for potato quality" and posting pictures anyways.

I was a teen in the aughts, though scene culture either didn't hit as hard in my area or it just didn't show up as strongly until after I was out of highschool. Had half-colored hair through highschool, part of me misses that and all of my dolls currently have unnatural hair colors likely as a result. I can't say as much for the clothing styles that were more specific to BJDs, though I eventually acquired the chonky, strappy, D-ring covered, super platform shoes that admired but couldn't justify when I was early in the hobby.

The other half of "clutter" or the "messy, juvenile decor" style has a lot to do with having various kinds of collections or hobbies and finding ways to make keeping things out on display part of the regular interior aesthetic, using tops of monitors and odd display spaces. IDK if I'd 100% call it juvenile, but lot of the millennials I know (myself included) tend to keep 80% of the house fairly minimalist and then their hobby/office spaces are just every surface is covered in toy collections. It's also usually organized within itself, just visually noisy and lacks the spacing more common when someone uses a more dedicated glass or similar curio cabinet.
Toy Galaxy's host has a background that similarly showcases the sort of dense toy aesthetic.

I have a bare handful of photos...with obnoxious watermarks...going back to my first doll around 2008 or so. My biggest thing was putting her against objects that were obviously real sized objects just for the contrast (I guess my thought was if I couldn't get items that really felt in scale, emphasis on the non-scale).
The couple photos I still have end up at smaller resolutions and the focus tends to be "wrong", in which I was using an auto focus on a small pocket sized digital camera that had a very small and imprecise pop out physical zoom lens.
I may need to play around a bit, I don't know if I could emulate my old photos exactly, but it could be fun to do!

 

i knew exactly what you meant (OP) when this was posted, the aesthetic is so core to what i grew up on that i didn't think anyone could mistake it for anything else. i was pretty young first getting into the hobby and these images are from the super early 2000s. this a SOOM gem dimo actually. a lot of classic things are here (sorry for the size, i pulled these off a photobucket that got restricted for size and i don't use photobucket in general anymore)


dramatic b/w image (for a photostory) with offsize props...


flash image IN THE NIGHT....


golden hour image but taken with the worst point n shoot you could image & the hands of a preteen.
also, oh my god, a sock dress, so classic (when you're too excited or have a lack of childhood income to buy clothes for your doll but you have love and a sock)


unfocused up the nose shot....

i hope in some way this helps or further clarifies that time we were all in.
i'm so happy to know a bunch of other people feel the same way?!
i remember these days of early bjd forums and then when i first got on DOA so well

 

Film!!! Try using a point and shoot film camera! Like a disposable one or even like a Polaroid camera. I was born in 1998 and grew up through then and I mostly was given film cameras back then :] if you really want to recreate it you gotta get that authentic equipment lmao, I’ve seen a whole bunch of early camera phones at thrust stores and such (hell u can even still buy them for really cheap but it’s kind of a pain to get photos off of them with new tech)

 

Polaroid photos might be useful as well? My eldest kid has one, and the pics reminded me very much of my 90s/2k childhood. You could take a photo of the polaroid and edit it with nostalgia as well.

I think it counts if you are aiming for kid/teen photo taking or what adults where doing photowise at the time. Going to a library and look at magazines for what demographic your wanting. Teen mags vs like a Martha Stewart mag are very different vibes.

Hope you have a lot of fun with this project!

 

I don't feel like film is the right answer here. Polaroids might get the common overexposure issue with the flash, but I feel like a good amount of the photos uploaded in the mid 2000s were all digital. There are and were certainly people who took beautiful photos using film, but I'm not sure the majority of people were developing and then scanning their prints to share online.

I would bet anyone who wasn't too invested in photography would have used a digital point and shoot for their photos. High ISO and small aperture seem to be common in a lot of photos from around 2005. Lots of overexposure from flash and missed focus were common as well. I know I was guilty of shoving my camera in my doll's face outside of the minimum focal distance. For photos from people who were invested, all bets are off. You'll have to go straight to styling and choosing the right model to emulate those photos.

Uploaded images were also much smaller! No one wanted to wait 5 minutes to have 10 3MB photos load (if you could even produce a 3MB image). Definitely resize your photos. 600px for the largest size attribute was a decently sized image. I used to save every photo in PNG and it was rather rude of me to upload them.

Sculpts, faceups, fashion, and wigs seem to be the best way to emulate the time period. Early Volks, DoD, and CP dolls definitely have that look and the default faceups on top of that will just scream pre-2010. Many have custom faceups but the styles were different back then. Keep in mind there were also dolls that did exist in this time period, but were not popular in the West due to extreme difficulty to get at the time. Some people did pull out all the stops and got them anyway, but I wouldn't have called them common.

Here are some websites that are still up! A few, if not all, are people who are/were DoA users. A few of them have links to other sites that you can also visit. Most of them are down and/or missing images. You can also use web archive to look at the ones that are gone now. I think this are the best way to find photos of that era due to the photobucket purge.
Fallen From Briah
Acquired Rapture
Vivid Colours :: Revival
Dollfieville
st.net's [ tangled web ] | ...volks sd site since 2003

I've taken a lot of photos with my game boy camera of my dolls, which is a camera that did exist in the early 2000s, but they're certainly not the kinds of photos I've ever seen online either. Unfortunately they're a bit of a pain to get off the camera. Same with early cell phones. It's just about impossible to get photos off most of those if you can even find the cable for them. These formats are definitely nostalgic but not really used online for BJDs.

 

Haha, this is so nostalgic. I definitely remember having my dolls look wistfully out windows, or looking straight at the camera looking pouty. I definitely think the posing is a big part of it. The selfie style photo, where the doll is looking at the camera or interacting some way? Like their hand held up in front of the camera itself, things like that. I don't necessarily think the quality has to be poor, though I definitely think adding a bit of noise/grain over it helps simulate a slightly older camera. I'm embarrassed to show some of my old pictures but I know that looking at them I was definitely emulating (as best as I could) what was popular on DeviantArt at the time.

 

The "photoshop out visible joints" advice - I like the idea! Should try. Certainly depends how well it's done, could result in awful mess. But that's the joy of digital - you mess up, you cancel and start fresh or leave as it was originally. In scale vs out of scale objects - yes again. Sock dress - absolutely! Lots of socks and lots of love here.
But what is it with centered eyes or side glancing eyes? Do you replace eyes for shot or now the eyes are different? Saw an ad somebody was selling doll eyes where the gaze follows the viewer. Is that something unique or something eyes normally do nowadays? Remember one of my childhood friends had a 19th century painting in their house, a portrait of a young woman, her eyes were following the viewer all over the room, wherever you went, she was looking at you. Scary for us kids. It's a special painting technique apparently.

 

Re: side eyes - some people just didn't center eyes in their dolls. I can remember a couple of members who almost had a trademark of side-glancing eyes on all their dolls. Centered eyes now - when you look at something very close to your face, your eyes tend to not stay centered, but come closer together to focus. So if you have perfectly centered eyes on a doll, then go in for a real close-up, the doll will look kind of out-of-it, not quite attentively focused. Conversely, if you move the eyes slightly inward to emulate a close-up stare and then forget the positioning when you go take distance shots, you'll get a lot of *friendly* reminders that your doll is cross-eyed and you don't know how to position eyes, you're welcome.

Following eyes - early acrylic eyes usually had a high, clear cone-shaped sort of front. What that did to the inside "pupil" often gave the impression of eyes following your position. As glass eyes, silicone/urethane eyes developed with much flatter fronts, the effect was lost.

Re: doll in oversized surroundings. I still would have that. Very early on (and before there was the current selection of items made in 1/3 size) I had to financially choose between having a doll/wig/clothing hobby and a doll/wig/clothing/furniture/utensils/wall decor/etc. set of hobbies. While I wildly admired those who created dedicated sets for their photostories (@Rabbit-moon's fabulous shoots come to mind), it was never going to happen in my house, so my dolls' universe early on was premised on them knowing they were dolls in a human-sized world, and making the best of it. (Also being dolls, they didn't need to eat; little did I know how many - probably - thousands I saved over time in not getting sucked into the replica food hobby--)

 

Oh, thanks a lot for explaining the eye stuff. Those are exactly the little but very important things one has to know. BTW I see a lot of acrylic eyes selling, actually they seem to have better colours.
I also will have to keep minimalistic doll/clothing/photo hobby as there's not that much space in my home.
For quite a while I thought that the poor doll will have to sustain on a diet of cherry tomatoes and gherkins but yesterday shopping did pay attention to the mini versions of food and there was surprisingly many choices. Even mini hamburgers, maybe 5 cm diameter, a human physically could eat such in a single bite although it wouldn't be very polite. And other party snacks, mini croissants, piccolino pizza, etc. Even found an espresso cup already at home. And I volunteer to eat the doll's leftovers after the photo shoot, zero waste.

 

I took a camcorder to Japan in 2008 and I wished I had held onto the camera. The footage I shot looks amazing now.

My first digital camera was a Kodak I bought in 2002. The images were 1800x1200. Honestly digital cameras advanced so rapidly the photos I took back then still look pretty decent. Where they fell down was with the quality of the movies they took. Low light situations weren't amazing either but a couple of years later I bought my first digital Canon EOS and it was an awesome piece of kit.

 

Here's one of the first pictures I took of Umbriel way back in 2006. How does it fill your "early-2000s" criteria?
Umbriel by spih_2, on Flickr

 

Here a couple of mine from back when I first started in the Hobby! oh the nostalgia



Shit with Nikon powershot, really only a good camera when zoomed all the way in.
used filters and boosted colors.



Used black and white filter, background decor from my childhood bedroom.

 

I confess to still being amused by the idea of nostalgia for a 2000s photo style, mostly probably because if there was a Style I don't think I was part of it as far as I can tell. I took this in 2009 with a point and click handheld camera. Plopped him on my drafting table and snapped a shot.