Value Added?

I have very different priorities in life than a lot of people in my industry. I think  that's what you might call my "unique selling point". Check out my business speak.

Perusing the Sunday Times this week, as you do, (I haven't for an age but I thoroughly enjoyed it and plan to do it again on Sunday) I fell instantly in love with an article about how procrastination is good for you.

That's why I haven't written a blog post since then. It's good for you. Some might say I take things too literally.

Another that jumped out was this one...

Alright, not an article as such, but you know.

Seriously, you can't live without a primer that costs £50?!?!? "This Tom Ford primer makes my skin feel softer and gives it a welcome glow".

What exactly is a welcome glow? And my primer makes my skin feel softer and boosts the performance of my foundation (gathering that's what a welcome glow is). It's this one.

Costs about £3. From Superdrug. I use it every day.

Alright, I have a couple  of other primers I use for special occasions, photo shoots, fashion shows that sort of thing and it is a superior product. My fave is the Smashbox Oil Free Photo Finish primer and it cost £25. I like a quality product, I like a luxury product. This primer is quality and worth the price tag.

But just because something has a high price tag, it does not mean it is a superior product.

Value is about much more than the price. I have some fabulous quality products with the hefty price tag and I have some make up concession products that are of equal quality. For instance I LOVE Bourjois  blushers. Just love them.

I'm sure this Tom Ford primer is a very high quality product but I can't help thinking is there a ceiling on quality? Once you get past a certain level is it not academic? And all that money you're paying for the packaging? I'm not interested in doing the make up for my recycling bin.

And really? "Couldn't live without it"? Hmmmm.

Literal Translation

I've been buying magazines for years. We all have. But now I know one or two things about make up.

Up until now I've always thought that my inability to create the exact same look they flaunt under our noses enticingly, was down to my inability to apply make up.

So I thought I'd have a go now I know a little. They do say that a little knowledge is dangerous.

So, this is the look:

Off of the current copy of Marie Claire (at £2, that's why I chose it)

I don't mind telling you I fell in love a little bit with it, So I enrolled the help of the bezzie to  try it out. I can confirm that the success was limited.

Very pale foundation can only be so pale without you looking anaemic, even when you are really pale. I can only deduce that this particular model has actual porcelain skin because I couldn't get a finish like that or even anything that alluded to it to be fair.

My bezzie is very tolerant. I know her make up preferences and there is a decided preference to a "strong eye". I was grateful that she allowed me to photograph her (don't get me started on lighting when all I wanna do is take a quick snap to illustrate a point) sans "strong eye". In the first photo the hologramatic quality of the turquoise eye colour I used made her look distinctly Alexis Harrington.

I didn't use that photo.

So yeah, in a nut shell, I learned loads from trying to replicate this exact look. Predominantly that you can't without a teenage flawless model and a highly skilled photographer/lighting specialist/photoshopper, but the essence of it is a nice look.

Spring-like. Next time I won't use any contouring, that wrecked it. I'll be a shade braver with the concealing and the foundation, and even lighter on the eyes. But then will it not just look washed out? Hard to tell until I try.

I love trying out new things, new looks, new ways, but they don't always translate as straightforwardly as you might think.

The majestic Darren Hayes said "I believe that beauty magazines promote low self esteem" and I can kinda see what he means. You can't directly emulate the exact image you see on the page, but  I think that maturity allows us to be inspired by what we see rather than exactly copy it. 

But how do the very young and the very naive fare with that concept?