Beauty

[Luttie]

When a make up item is on the TV either it is blush, eye make up, lipstick , eyeliner etc. I can't stand it when the before picture is a model without any makeup on and the after picture the model has a full makeup face and they only selling lipstick.  Ridiculous.

They should hire to do the before and after with ordinary people, not just gorgeous models.  I bet if they used ordinary woman, nobody would buy their overpriced makeup or would they?

[Kachina624]

@Luttie.  I don5 think they'd sell much if they just showed a woman from the laundromat with only mascara.

They know what they're doing to sell a product.

[Icegoddess]

They're selling hope.  Nobody hopes to look like your average Jane. 

[SharkE]

Those IT products make a believer out of me.

Poor females with birth marks that take up their whole face on one side.  That pretty blonde gal who looks perfect then takes off the foundation and she's all

red and splotchy.

Live presentations is what makes me grab the phone

Sure if you get a 18 yr old with baby perfect skin and something just makes them look prettier that don't mean a thing, but, people who look really bad I'm so happy knowing they can cover that up. Maybe they can't afford Dr. treatments, laser, etc.

[cjm61]

@Luttie I really don't find it ridiculous. More often than not they are selling lipstick then the next item might be the mascara then they move on to the blush, etc. 

In my opinion, many of the models "before" pictures look like your average "ordinary" women. I think the make up turns them into "gorgeous models" as you state.

I believe the viewers are well aware that the models have a full face of makeup. I don't find it misleading. In addition, I wear a modest amount of makeup but I find the more expensive makeup is far superior to cheap drugstore brands. I've tried both and there is a definite difference. It's just a matter of preference and your budget. 

[skatting44]

  My beef is that the camera is not focused on  the Rep who is supposed to be demonstrating the makeup application  or using eyebrow stencils ect . There needs to be better coordination .

It seems  the camera is most often on the Host. I don't want to see how  the Host, mostly Shawn is applying  products.  QVC used to do a better job at this .

 Example , Laura Geller was explaining   how to use products in her gift sets  but the camera is not  staying on the models long enough or on Laura Geller   or the lady with eye brow stencils . It's the same  with Tarte ect .

[wagirl]

No, that type of before and after is fine--I can actually see a difference--the ones I have issues with are the before/afters that display the supposed-- life altering, world shattering , remarkable change of lines and wrinkles or skin texture or brightness in ONLY 8 weeks---blah, blah, blah-- which I can rarely if ever see ----skincare products!!! All hype---

[bonnielu]

Not a constant watcher anymore.  I  check in as I look for other programs. When I do see the cosmetic commercials I am a bit concerned.  Before and after.... camera tricks are out there.  And some of the  hosts and or vendors may have had extensive cosmetic surgery or procedures.  Should be a disclaimer for that one.  

I did ask my dermothogist  about all the products being offered in stores, on TV and on the Internet and he had a negative comment about them. 

[shy bobcat]

I think the before pics look like ordinary people. 

[snipsnapsnur]

Tarte may cover the blemishes but, for the life of me, I could never get it all off!  As for the camera staying on the person demonstrating the products, I can't stand the camera operators.  It always seems like they're on a delay and we never get to see what is being explained -- no matter what the product is.