edit

i read the whole thread, i didnt literally mean that every person jumped down her throat. i speak in generalizations that i usually trust most people will understand. still, some folks have been very inconsiderate of this girls feelings lately.

Mary, I think she did read the other posts because she mentioned how I was able to "keep my cool" through it all.  I think she was simply saying that from the original post alone (and from the quote she took from it), she could see that I was not trying to hurt anyone's feelings.

Glad to see everything got sorted out here. It's a shame that people jumped to conclusions, but all's well that ends well.

xo.

I would say I'll drink to that, but it's almost two in the morning...

I have seen models turn "green"  if their skin has not been properly moisturized. The skin will "absorb" some of the pigment in different places.  Also if you use a model's makeup you may want to ask how long they have had it for...... it can go bad.  Plus if they do not take care of it properly ie excessive heat /cold, not shaking it the pigments can become distorted.


like everyone else I would like to see the pic if possible

Best of Luck
Feme

Thank you for this...I actaully wish I could delete this post now since I got my answer...I don't want to show the "green picture" though because I don't want to embarrass anyone.  but thanks again!

If her tan was really red and her makeup was a yellow/olive based shade in a deep enough tone then it would translate "greenish" on the skin  I hate to use MAC colors as a guide line but a nw35-w40 skintone with nc50 or c40 foundation on would look very green

yes, that would definitely be another good reason!  but no her make-up was not olve based...infact it matched her skin tone quite well.  I believe it was simply due to the fact that the tan was "spray on"  Thanks everyone for your help

I, too, admit I though she meant "which type" of camera ready makeup causes this problem...I think people just pick up on what they want to hear at first glance.  I've been wondering about this subject too, so I was glad she'd asked the question.  It seems like the more seasoned pros out there had already been down this road, learned what they needed to learn, so they didn't necessarily see the same question...?  As an less tested artist, you want to pick up and experiment as much as you can, but maybe once you've become established, you start to read more into the context of the denotations (not conotations) than was stated.  Just my two cents.

I was going through some old magazines yesterday and came across a few shots that the makeup turned green on, this was always a mystery to me  (it wasnt Illuminare it was a tried and true old time product), at the time of the shoot I was using RCMA and Cinema Secrets.  I have always hated those shots because her face turned green in the shots, it was terrible, the magazine didnt even bother to correct them so I never used the shots......  I also recall she had a real red spray on tan and when I tried to put makeup on her face it even streaked a bit, what a mess.    I think now it is the spray tans....  Heres the strange thing..... The photos without flash were fine, only the flash made her face green so now I am beginning to think something is going on between the flash and the spray tan combined with the makeup.  From now on I will  layer the high pigment makeup like RCMA or Cinema Secrets onto these fake tans.  Also, for those of you testing (free) ....I think now that I would refuse to test with someone that does the spray tan on their face.


I had totally forgotten about this until I went through my stuff yesterday.  I'm glad this conversation came up.

I never got the impression the OP was bashing CRC.  I got the impression that she didn't suspect she would have a problem with the product because she had seen it on a reputable site and believed it to be high quality, so she was confused as to why she would have a problem with a good product (even though the problem was that she didn't know how to use the product).
I think she is saying that CRC is reputable and she was surprised that a problem arose involving a product they carry.  I don't see how that is bashing CRC.

"Recently, a Caucasian model I was working with had apparently been tanning a great deal and the foundations I brought with me were not dark enough for her.  Luckily, she had brought along her own makeup, and although I had not used this brand before, I was actually quite excited as I love trying new things.

Well I had no problems with the makeup to begin with.  I actually liked the thickness of it and how well it covered the model’s skin.  Everything went great during the shoot…

   Then a few days later, I got an email from the photographer (a friend of mine, thank goodness) asking what brand of make-up I was using because the model’s face was turning out GREEN!  I looked at one of the photos myself, and sure enough, her face had a greenish- more of a yellow tint to it!  Since you guys are probably wondering now what make-up it was, it was Illuminare.

Does anyone use this brand of make-up and if so, have you had any problems like this?  I am not saying this is a bad make-up…like I said, I like the coverage it gives, but I have to admit, I’m a little confused about what happened. 

Is it the magnesium or the titanium dioxide that causes the strange discolorations under certain lightings?  And if this is what caused this, I have heard that this causes the skin to look blue.  In these photos, the model’s face was more of a sickly yellow shade.  Could this be because of something different?  Also, if it is the SPF that does this (Illuminare has an SPF of 21) how come I haven’t had this problem with other brands I’ve used with an SPF of 16 and higher?  This makes me wonder if it was maybe the actual color of the makeup or the type of lighting we were using?

I’ve learned my lesson, and will definitely come more prepared next time, but I still want to know about these make-up brands. It is time for me to buy more makeup and I don’t want to take any more chances like this as the next photographer might not be so nice about it.  Which brands have you guys had bad experiences with?  Please list them! Thanks!"

Look at that!  Edited out the Camera Ready part and the post still get's it's point across.  That is why people interpreted it as a dig, it could have been left out and she still could have gotten her point across.  Mentioning the store didn't add anything to the post. Don't know why those other two people felt it necessary to post anything else, everybody hugged, kissed and made up. IT'S OVER!  I pray a moderator locks this post.

lol, and I agree I could have not said anything about camera ready, but you have to understabd I didn't know it was a personal things...I used those words just because they came to mind...you know...camera-ready...it was part of the question since I recognized the makeup as one of those.  that's it.  Anyway...yeah I think we're done

Can't possibly read every response right now... but...

did the photographer shoot it digital? If so, I have no idea and it's always best to...

blame the photographer! lol. And the model!!!! roflamo.

No, it's probably a tech thing beyond your control.

1. lab 2. photographer 3. Model's tan 4. bad film 5. something green reflecting

Or a combination of some of those things.

If on film, then it's bad film. I've been on a photoshoot once or twice... (lol watch someone think I'm serious and not SEE I'm exercising my playful sarcasm)... everytime the model turned green it was because of bad film. How to tell is the yellow-green cast (depending on the brand film used I think). I'd say this would be for all areas that the skin is exposed, but sometimes... in the strange chemistry of these blah blahs, it could be one or more main area... like the face.

And then another time when the model's face turned green, it was because she was under a tree or something and the green from leaves reflected on her face.

That's about all I know about "When the model turns into a scary a witch"...


Re: Model's tan. Never seen green from that. An ugly yellow, yes (that could be the tan). But if there is green... kill photographer too.

This may help you ease up on the blame game involving makeup and photography.

1.  Photographers now, and out of necessity, spend hundreds and not infrequently thousands of dollars on color managment technology.  The presentation part has to do with color matching subject reality, recording, virtual prints, and real prints; however, there's a psychological part also that has to do with taking subjective judgment about color calibration out of the editing systems.  Because natural eyesight color corrects what it sees through a variety of circumstances, becoming objective about it requires both knowledge and technology at the systems level.  From there: white balance, light sources, sources of reflected color cast, etc.

2. Films are legend for "personality", with some warm, others cold, some more sensitive to green, altering browns, some more sensitive to blue, also informing browns and tans.  Digital sensors and processing may have less bias in their interpretation of the physics of light, but they too have their own, and here challenging, characteristics.

a. Nothing yet matches eyesight for "dynamic range", but the worst of recording technologies happens to be, and regardless of type, the digital sensor.  The math aggregates values of varying sorts (light intensity, color value), which we loosely interpret, when we see it, as "contrasty", or, because it's so limited, we talk about "muddy blacks" and "blown highs" when light, that may look good to us or even prove about okay for a color negative film, hasn't been managed tightly enough--it's range limited enough--for recording well.

b. Because of the above mechanics (very superficially relayed), which we interpret as heightened sensitivity, which is in fact opposite of what it really is, we cannot see how a picture will record without a systems aid--specifically a tether to a calibrated monitor and absolutely neutral (gray wall) viewing situation with an unbiased, protected technician making the calls.  You get that in higher-end production environments (HDTV, film, broadcasting) but less often on the studio floor for stills photography. 

c. We're better off with chimpy little camera monitors or laptops close by than we were with film, but predictability, especially for color, remains challenging.  Because you cannot see the true effect of what you apply (or I the resulting depth of the fall-off from even a weak sunset light to the shadows behind the girl), we're still guessing some as we go.

It may turn out here that the field has to insist on starting with a clean canvas--the tanning lotions sound awful--and, in the ways that crews can look over a photographer's shoulders, keep aware of potential sources of reflected color casts or off-lighting.  If it's on the subject or in the environment, digital's going to get it--it just won't get it with the spread our eyes do, or with the correcting adjustments to perception our minds make.

--Jim