Skip to main content

making faces :: little red book, part 3

not what you're looking for?
contrary to popular belief and contrary to what you might have thought from the first two posts in this series, you do not need to be intimidated by red lips. although red is associated with bold, passionate, seductive colours, the fact is that, like every other colour in the spectrum, it can be bright or subdued depending on the intensity of the pigment. eyeball-warping tones are no more prevalent in reds than they are in any other colour, it's just that the brights have come to dominate in the popular imagination.

i admit, i haven't been helping to dispel that myth. the first couple of reds i've featured have been balls-to-the-wall, all-or-nothing reds that kick ass and take names, but that doesn't mean that i don't occasionally enjoy a more muted tone myself. after all, as a die-hard red lip fan, sometimes you want the ambiance, but at a lower volume. fortunately, there are lots of options out there and, while they might not get the attention of their louder, more flamboyant cousins, but they still have their own, quiet, smoldering appeal.

a little more tempting?
i've noticed in the last year that these sorts of shades seem to come naturally to yves st. laurent. while chanel may own the cardinal reds, ysl has developed a nice little stable of understated, extremely wearable red shades, particularly in their "rouge pur couture" line. [and there are more shades being added all the time; apparently the entire "rouge pur" line will eventually be replaced by their "couture" companions, which are, indeed, superior in formulation.] st. laurent, of course, does have some outspoken reds, but they also have something to offer for those who don't quite want to jump into the red kool-aid pool.



one of the nicest examples of this is rouge pur couture #4 "rouge vermillion", which is a cool, antiqued raspberry shade, meaning something on the pink side of red, but with enough warmth that it hasn't crossed the red-pink boundary entirely. i originally looked at this shade as a replacement for my sadly departed "mystic" from mac, but it's softer and cooler than that. it has a slightly dusty quality to it, like the bloom on a grape, or like a tapestry that's been exposed to too much sunlight. it's somewhat faded without looking washed out, a rare sort of quality.

yves st. laurent to the rescue!
because it's not aggressively bold, i find that "rouge vermillion" can go anywhere [and looks very classy wherever it goes]. it's not going to call too much attention to itself, but the lush formula deposits enough creamy pigment that your lips feel like they're royalty. sort of the best of both worlds.

since i first tried it, i've fallen quite in love with the rouge pur couture formula. it's everything a lipstick lover could want- rich and opaque without being heavy, it applies perfectly and has decent lasting power. the shade range is still somewhat limited, but the shades they do have are excellent and, as i mentioned, they keep adding more. about the only drawback, and i'll let you decide how much this is going to bother you, is the packaging. it looks lovely- little ornate gold tubes with filigree details, but the plastic that's used to construct them is dirt-cheap and scuffs if you speak too loudly in its vicinity. touching is completely out of the question. if i look at their closest price competitors, chanel and armani, both have very sleek, sexy black packaging that you can carry in your purse without causing permanent damage. in fact, brands like mac and inglot, which are much cheaper, have packaging that's more durable. i wish they'd skipped the delicate embellishments and concentrated on something that didn't look and feel so cheap [because they're not cheap].

even i'll admit, though, i'm not put off enough by the packaging to deprive myself of lovely lips.

here's a look at "rouge vermillion" in the wild.

products used

face ::
mac prolongwear foundation "nc15"
lush colour supplement "jackie oates"

eyes ::
mac e/s "vex" [greenish ivory with pink sheen]
mac e/s "lady grey"* [soft grey-green]
mac e/s "hazy day"* [deep brownish grey]
mac superslick liquid liner "on the hunt" [black]
guerlain eye kohl "black"
benefit they're real mascara

cheeks ::
mac cremeblend blush "joie de vivre" [bright coral]
mac mineralize skinfinish "perfect topping"* [ivory-mauve highlight]

lips ::
yves st. laurent rouge pur couture "rouge vermillion" [muted raspberry]

*suggested alternates :: lady grey = nars april fools [green side; lighter and more shimmery; this was actually a very tricky colour to match, because grey-greens are surprisingly uncommon. "lady grey" and hazy day" are actually still available from mac if you'd like to get the original]; hazy day = inglot #444 [darker, but a closer match than i found for "lady grey"]; perfect topping = guerlain meteorites beige tint

Comments

as long as you're here, why not read more?

i'm definitely someone altogether different

about a hundred years ago, i remember having a partner who told me that, rather than writing the sort of ambiance-oriented crap [he didn't say crap, i'm saying it] that i was naturally driven to write, i should just compose something like the harry potter books. this wasn't out of any sense of challenging me to do new things but because of the desperate hope that my love of writing could be parlayed into something profitable.

my reaction at the time was "i just can't". and that was honestly how i felt because i didn't believe that that kind of story was in me. for the record, i still don't think that anything like the potter-hogwarts universe is in me. i'm not a fan of fantasy literature generally speaking and i feel like there's a richer experience to be examined in looking at our experience as regular humans being part of the rational, limited, everyday world and at the same time being able to feel connected to something that, for lack of a…

making faces :: a lip for all seasons [winter edition]

it seems oddly canadian to have two posts in a row about winter/ cold/ snow, but they're obviously unrelated. after all, for most people winter is a season, but in colour analysis terms, winter is part of what you are, an effect of the different wavelengths that comprise the physical part of the thing known as "you". this might be getting a little heady for a post about lipstick. moving on...

if you've perused the other entries in this series without finding something that really spoke to you [figuratively- lipsticks shouldn't actually speak to you- get help], you may belong in one of the winter seasons. winter, like summer, is cool in tone; like spring, it is saturated; like autumn, it is dark. that combination of elements creates a colour palette [or three] that reads as very "strong" to most. and on people who aren't part of the winter group, such a palette would look severe. the point of finding a palette that reads "correctly" on you…

making faces :: best [bright winter] face forward

a few years ago, i wrote quite a bit about sci/art colour analysis. i haven't followed up on it more recently because there's only so much a girl can say about three-dimensional colour and what the "hallmarks" of each loose category are without getting super repetitive. i am planning on updating a few of the posts that i made, particularly the "lip for all seasons" posts [springsummer, autumn, winter], as those are out of date and not so useful. the posts on colour analysis continue to be very popular despite being years old, so i figure it's worth following up.

during my journey of colour self-discovery, i determined that i was probably a bright winter, which means i look best in colours that are highly saturated first of all [and sharply contrasting second of all], and which lean cooler and darker. not for me the soft smoky eyes and muted lips, nor the bubbly, light-as-air pastels. as i proved to myself wearing different looks, trying to embrace th…