Caterpillar to butterfly
September 16, 2010 9:53 AM   Subscribe

MODEL-MORPHOSIS A close-up of the makeup looks from this and past Fashion Weeks. A nifty slide bar lets you compare the face before and after.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero (53 comments total) 24 users marked this as a favorite

 
Love these. It's been quite cool watching each model be transformed backstage this week.

Oh, and nice title. :)
posted by zarq at 9:57 AM on September 16, 2010


pretty nifty.

i also see that letting eyebrows grow in is the new look.

i don't care tho, like mine all trimmed up.
posted by sio42 at 10:01 AM on September 16, 2010


It's astounding to me, as a male, how regularly I fall for a well made-up woman.
posted by 2bucksplus at 10:02 AM on September 16, 2010 [4 favorites]


Concealer + Corrector for under-eye really is magic.

That plus eyeliner looks like 90% of the transformation.

What's with all of the nude lip?
posted by leotrotsky at 10:02 AM on September 16, 2010


Caterpillar to butterfly

Eh, I don't know. To me it's more like caterpillar to someone who looks even more anemic, angry, and drugged out than they ever do in real life. I mean, don't get me wrong, some of them are really cool, but I don't understand the point of basically painting the lips off someone.

Oh, and that one chick totally looks like Uma Thurman.
posted by phunniemee at 10:02 AM on September 16, 2010 [2 favorites]


* flip * happy Edita Vilkeviciute ...
* flip * sad Edita Vilkeviciute ...
* flip * happy Edita Vilkeviciute ...
* flip * sad Edita Vilkeviciute ...


It also looks like some of these models got their ears pinned to their heads with superglue (or photoshopping, dunno)
posted by boo_radley at 10:03 AM on September 16, 2010


leotrotsky: "What's with all of the nude lip?"

Vampires are in, says my coworker.
posted by boo_radley at 10:03 AM on September 16, 2010


Those are some eyebrows on the Rochas model.
posted by amro at 10:12 AM on September 16, 2010


For my money, I'd say Rick Owens' model got the short end of the transformation stick.

Fun feature, though I always wonder how they manage to get the exact same pose (down to the position of the eyes) for the "before" and "after". Photoshop, or just very careful arrangement?
posted by missix at 10:13 AM on September 16, 2010


Caterpillar to butterfly

Pfft. It seems to me that most of these women are quite striking and beautiful without the freakishly dramatic makeup.

Also, at the risk of asking a stupid question to which everybody but me knows the answer, where are the men? (I went through the entire thing.) I'm almost certain male models figure into this whole Fashion Week thing somehow, right? Are they all so loin-throbbingly hot that they require nothing more than a quick dab of powder before hitting the stage, and therefore need no "transformation"?
posted by Gator at 10:13 AM on September 16, 2010 [1 favorite]


they manage to get the exact same pose

You realize this is, like, 94.3% of a model's job, right?
posted by phunniemee at 10:14 AM on September 16, 2010 [7 favorites]


Yes, it's clear the trend is highly dramatic eyes, no lipstick and shaggy brows. Weird.

All these girls look fine before, just more intense and dramatic after, IMO.
posted by misha at 10:23 AM on September 16, 2010


Eh, most of them look better without the makeup, IMO, though sometimes it's quite fun to see what they turned into. But doing makeup for runways is different from real life or even regular photoshoots, right?
posted by nomadicink at 10:26 AM on September 16, 2010 [1 favorite]


That was cool.

(zarq, got any stories for us this year?)
posted by rtha at 10:29 AM on September 16, 2010


Well, this just triggered my coulrophobia.
posted by PlusDistance at 10:30 AM on September 16, 2010


Pale lips paired with "smoky" eyes has been an ongoing trend since last season's shows. It's being marketed (generally) as a "younger, fresher" look. If you google "pale lips" you'll see a bunch of articles from this past February discussing it.

The trend has continued throughout the year. Makeup coverage of many celebrities on the red carpet has been filled with references to the look.
posted by zarq at 10:30 AM on September 16, 2010 [1 favorite]


It also looks like some of these models got their ears pinned to their heads with superglue (or photoshopping, dunno)

I watched Greg (the photographer) shoot some of these models backstage at a few shows. I highly doubt the final images are photoshopped in any way.

The thing that always strikes me is how the appearance of the cheekbones and jawline can change drastically thanks to the makeup. The models can look very different as a result.
posted by zarq at 10:35 AM on September 16, 2010


Eh, most of them look better without the makeup, IMO . . .

Um . . . what you mean is that most of them look better in their enormous amounts of ordinary makeup that would take any normal human woman hours to apply. This isn't with/without. Its with/with different.
posted by The Bellman at 10:37 AM on September 16, 2010 [9 favorites]


God, I hate make-up. It's the ultimate turn-off for me.
posted by unSane at 10:38 AM on September 16, 2010 [1 favorite]


Yikes! I thought I would like everyone much better "after", but didn't like the "afters" as much as I liked the "befores". Some of those were fun for theatrical drama, some were just garish, but I think only the Versace "after" photo made me say, "Oh, After is pretty."
posted by jeanmari at 10:38 AM on September 16, 2010


I only went through enough of these to confirm that I liked every single woman better without makeup (though it looked like some were wearing makeup even in the 'before').
posted by komara at 10:43 AM on September 16, 2010


The garish, theatrical look makes sense in the context of a fashion show, though, where they're on a catwalk being observed and photographed from a distance. Even "normal" makeup in theater or television can look strange when seen up close.
posted by Sticherbeast at 10:43 AM on September 16, 2010 [1 favorite]


Wow, I didn't expect to be so turned off so consistently by all those make-up jobs. I know it is essentially for stage, but if so, this is way to close. I really thought the models after make-up generally looked freakish (not arty). Guess I just go for make-up that enhances a natural look.
posted by meinvt at 10:47 AM on September 16, 2010


The whole debate over whether they were sexier before or after really misses the point. This isn't about making them look as beautiful or sexy as possible, it's about making their faces complement (or elaborate on) the clothes.
posted by hermitosis at 10:48 AM on September 16, 2010 [11 favorites]


Also, at the risk of asking a stupid question to which everybody but me knows the answer, where are the men? (I went through the entire thing.) I'm almost certain male models figure into this whole Fashion Week thing somehow, right? Are they all so loin-throbbingly hot that they require nothing more than a quick dab of powder before hitting the stage, and therefore need no "transformation"?

I've never checked, but I suspect that male models probably make up no more than 5 - 10% of Fashion Week. The majority of shows are either entirely women or include one or two male models. But that's offset by shows like Robert Geller -- a menswear line.

Male models nearly always have makeup applied, and often body makeup as well as facial. A show I worked yesterday featured one male model, and he was slathered in body makeup. Literally slathered -- the makeup artist put large amounts of the stuff in his hands and rubbed it all over the model's torso.

However, makeup on men in a runway show is used for a different effect than that applied to women. There's usually an effort made to make it seem as if they're not wearing makeup. Subtle effects rather than overt ones are key with men on the runway. In addition, most male models don't have as much done to their hair before a show.

So in a feature like this, it's less likely that a male model will show drastic changes in their appearance between before and after. Which would make for a boring feature.
posted by zarq at 10:48 AM on September 16, 2010 [1 favorite]


The whole debate over whether they were sexier before or after really misses the point. This isn't about making them look as beautiful or sexy as possible, it's about making their faces complement (or elaborate on) the clothes.

Precisely. The trend statements released to the press by the beauty teams deliberately relate the makeup to the designer's clothing, inspiration and vision.

Take Carolina Herrera (I worked backstage at that show):

The show incorporated her signature staples: classic floral prints. But it also incorporated Korean influences -- what looked like obi sashes on the clothes and hair, etc.

The makeup directly reflected this.
posted by zarq at 10:54 AM on September 16, 2010 [1 favorite]


are the models wearing makeup in the before pictures? some of them don't look made up at all, except for maybe a little concealer or something.
posted by sio42 at 11:00 AM on September 16, 2010


I'm almost certain male models figure into this whole Fashion Week thing somehow, right?

BTW -- check out this photoblog regarding the male castings for New York Fashion Week.
posted by ericb at 11:32 AM on September 16, 2010


Fabulous!!!
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 11:35 AM on September 16, 2010


It's really not supposed to look "pretty" or conventionally attractive in some cases, it's supposed to look dramatic or interesting or sometimes even ugly, if that's what's required to complement the garments. The shows are theater, and some designers are more theatrical than others and that will be reflected in the makeup and hair looks they show, as well as how wildly unwearable their runway clothes are in comparison to what will actually end up in stores.

It's worth trying to separate runway looks entirely from "what normal women wear" until you get used to it, and then coming back to try to trace how a trend might trickle from runway to ordinary life (though it happens in reverse just as often, nowadays).

A lot of these pictures do look jarring and strange even to me, and I've been paying rapt attention to this stuff since I was a little kid. But the makeup that looks strange in direct contrast to a fresh face looks totally different in the full context of hair, clothing, and the other models in the show.
posted by padraigin at 11:40 AM on September 16, 2010 [1 favorite]


"It's astounding to me, as a male, how regularly I fall for a well made-up woman."

I was just thinking the opposite. Looking between the unmade up and the made up women, I find myself almost always preferring the less done version. Perhaps this is some sort of social vanity on my part, but I find that a lot of the women look garish or unattractive with the makeup. Perhaps this looks better at a distance while they are strutting on the catwalk, like stage makeup, or the makeup of silent films.

There are bits of the made up versions that might be prettier, finer hair, slightly concealed flaws. But the overall deal seems a bit of a turnoff to me. That, and there's a few of the women that once made up look like men in drag. Especially this one.
posted by X-Himy at 11:46 AM on September 16, 2010 [1 favorite]


Another thing that makes model makeup different than regular makeup is that it has very little to do with the model. When you put makeup on for a night out, you're trying to highlight your best features, accentuate your eyecolor, look your best.

When they put makeup on a model, it's part of an overall concept design. If concept is gold fake eyelashes and giant black kabuki splotches, that's what everyone gets, even if it does nothing for any particular model's particular features.

It's the first kind of makeup the models are likely wearing in the before shots, so you'd expect that they look amazing -- they're going to know all the secrets to applying makeup to accentuate their own bone structure, eye color, skin tone, etc. Afterwards, all they need to do is look like they fit the concept.
posted by jacquilynne at 12:01 PM on September 16, 2010 [1 favorite]


are the models wearing makeup in the before pictures?

Sure they are. All of them. Look at their eyes, cheeks, and lips. Aside from the lips, Keke Lindgard has on more makeup in her before picture.

A lot of (most?) women (in America) will not leave the house without makeup.

on preview: Looking between the unmade up and the made up women, I find myself almost always preferring the less done version.

Just echoing The Bellman here, but before and after are both heavily made up.

there's a few of the women that once made up look like men in drag

Hey now. Women can have cleft chins too.
posted by mrgrimm at 12:03 PM on September 16, 2010 [2 favorites]


This crazy stuff you're seeing, some of it, will show up in totally different form for real-world application. That vivid pink lipstick will end up playing out as a glossier, less garish trend. Those kind of dead-looking nude lips will be expressed in beauty tip stories as softer, warmer. It will all get translated into something you won't notice as being anything but women wearing a little makeup, as it always does.
posted by padraigin at 12:03 PM on September 16, 2010


(zarq, got any stories for us this year?)

This was a very low-drama year, thankfully. I do have some stories I could relate. But I'm not entirely sure how I'd tell them without putting myself into a dicey position wrt my job. Let me think about it over the weekend?
posted by zarq at 12:48 PM on September 16, 2010


Fantastic, thanks for this. I also think the Rodarte model looks a lot like Uma Thurman (and I love the gold themed look).

Nth the whole comment that this is not about women looking sexy/'attractive'/better to the male gaze. Think of it as art - the make-up is transforming them as part of a whole look, and that look is not necessarily 'attractive woman on the street'. It is an artistic vision. And as many others have also said, so much of what looks dramatic in regards to on the runway, or a spread in a publication such as 'Vogue' will trickle down to 'the masses'. Just as most women don't wear couture, most women won't wear these looks. But elements of it will influence most women, eventually.

And if that doesn't work for you - look on it as a technical exercise and you can marvel at how a little shading or colour can dramatically change the shape or whole appearance of a face.

Zarq - I really hope you find a way to tell those stories :)
posted by Megami at 1:10 PM on September 16, 2010


>>>BTW -- check out this photoblog regarding the male castings for New York Fashion Week.

I AM IN THE WRONG BUSINESS.
posted by spec80 at 1:12 PM on September 16, 2010 [2 favorites]


Fair enough, zarq. I'm glad there was less drama for you this year, though!
posted by rtha at 1:15 PM on September 16, 2010


That, and there's a few of the women that once made up look like men in drag. Especially this one.

Funny - I thought she looked less androgynous (i.e., more female) in the runway makeup than in the before shot. Very Elizabeth Taylor.
posted by rtha at 1:18 PM on September 16, 2010


I'm almost certain male models figure into this whole Fashion Week thing somehow, right?

Petey and the Boys -- "The wandering days and bunk-bed nights of Fashion Week’s handsome rookies."

Previous FPP.
posted by ericb at 1:34 PM on September 16, 2010


I'm glad there was less drama for you this year, though!

ME TOO! Thanks. I wound up hearing about more drama than actually experiencing any directly.

Betsey Johnson backstage was apparently a madhouse. But I am reliably informed by everyone I spoke to that attended that they were willing to give leeway to any designer who supplied candy (M&M's) backstage. ;)
posted by zarq at 2:02 PM on September 16, 2010


Betsey Johnson backstage was apparently a madhouse.

It was kind of a looney bin on the runway, from the pictures I saw ;) I wouldn't have Betsey Johnson any other way though.
posted by padraigin at 2:04 PM on September 16, 2010


My son chose me some new shoes lately (yeah, my six year old is my stylist. Welcome to my world) that I described to Australia friends as if Vivienne Westwood and Betsey Johnson had a craft night this would be the end result. No-one got the reference. Do people in the US who are remotely interested in fashion know who she is?
posted by Megami at 2:24 PM on September 16, 2010 [2 favorites]


Do people in the US who are remotely interested in fashion know who she is?

Betsey Johnson? If not knowing her before, a large number of 'regular people' know her now, as she was a guest judge on the hit television series, Project Runway, this current season on Episode 3 (w/ video).
posted by ericb at 2:38 PM on September 16, 2010


Just echoing The Bellman here, but before and after are both heavily made up.


I completely disagree. Nearly all are just wearing foundation and lip gloss beforehand; a few have some eyebrow color or blush. That's very basic. Not a single one is wearing mascara, because it's a pain for the makeup artist to remove it. It doesn't count as "heavily made up" if you don't need to spend an extra ten minutes with the eye makeup remover trying to remove three coats of mascara without filling your eyes with black pigment. Afterward, they've got blush, highlighter, concealer, and brow makeup, even for the most "natural" looks.

Sure they are. All of them. Look at their eyes, cheeks, and lips. Aside from the lips, Keke Lindgard has on more makeup in her before picture.

Nope: sculpted cheeks, cool silvery champagne shade in the tear ducts, possibly some contouring in the crease, groomed brows, lined and colored lips, some sort of mattifying face powder. A lot more time, effort, and makeup went into the after than the before, even if it's not obvious.
posted by oneirodynia at 4:42 PM on September 16, 2010 [2 favorites]


Do people in the US who are remotely interested in fashion know who she is?

Definitely! Edie Sedgewick was her house model when she opened hr first boutique in NYC. I remember Betsey Johnson stuff from the 80's.
posted by oneirodynia at 4:46 PM on September 16, 2010


Pale lips paired with "smoky" eyes has been an ongoing trend since last season's shows. It's being marketed (generally) as a "younger, fresher" look. If you google "pale lips" you'll see a bunch of articles from this past February discussing it.

I read somewhere (and have noticed on myself) that bright color makes the lips look thinner, and that as we age, our lips become thinner. I wonder if this is a conscious or subconscious factor behind the rising popularity of the "younger, fresher" nude lip? Either way, it's great, because I am a total slob with bright lipcolor, but I love me some eyeshadow. Now I'll look fashionable instead of off-balance.

Also I am a total makeup geek, even though I don't wear makeup most days, and these pictures are inspiring and fun! Hopefully the pretty colors will trickle down to the retail stores, if not the more dramatic elements.
posted by Fui Non Sum at 4:56 PM on September 16, 2010 [1 favorite]


That is totally hypnotizing. I wonder how my co-workers would feel if I started coming in with those gold Rodarte lashes on. Hmmm...

Also, I am now jealous of zarq's insider knowledge!!
posted by grapesaresour at 5:48 PM on September 16, 2010


I preferred every single before picture over the after. Except the asian girl. I have no idea why and that bugs me to pieces (being an asian guy who grew up in the west).
posted by porpoise at 10:15 PM on September 16, 2010 [2 favorites]


Yep, they all look much worse slathered in greasepaint.
posted by tehloki at 2:21 AM on September 17, 2010


It doesn't count as "heavily made up" if you don't need to spend an extra ten minutes with the eye makeup remover trying to remove three coats of mascara without filling your eyes with black pigment.

OK, we differ semantically. That's what I meant to imply - they're all wearing what most women wear everyday - 3-4 makeup products. To me, that's heavily made-up. But I certainly agree with your point - they are much MORE heavily made up afterwards.

I generally prefer all the after pictures, except Keke and Jac.
posted by mrgrimm at 10:45 AM on September 17, 2010


Not a single one is wearing mascara, because it's a pain for the makeup artist to remove it.

It looks like Ginta Lapina has mascara on. (Also: why can't the makeup artist just slather more on over? (That looks like what he or she did with Ginta.))
posted by mrgrimm at 10:46 AM on September 17, 2010


This doesn't really seem like the right feature to look at to decide whether you prefer people with makeup or not, since both sides are artificial. The before has a basic level of cover-up, on models with great skin anyways. The after is theatrical. Neither one is very representative.
posted by smackfu at 11:45 AM on September 17, 2010 [1 favorite]


« Older Two galleries of fluid motion - one from the journ...  |  Is the United States becoming ... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments