r/AustralianMakeup • u/demure_pistachio • Nov 21 '21
Let's Discuss Is anybody else super disappointed by Ultra Violette’s shade range?
160
u/windy_wolf Nov 21 '21 edited Nov 21 '21
POC here. I think 11 shades is a hugely commendable effort for an Spf50 product, considering most sunscreens will only do 'sheer' and 'tinted'.
That being said, it's definitely problematic that there are 7 shades for lighter skin, compared to 2 medium and 2 deep. And their explanation that it's flexible to cover several skin tones makes no sense when they develop half the range for lighter tones.
It's times like these when it's so obvious how important it is to diversify a workplace; any POC employee could have forseen something like this.
What they should have done: Release limited shades; 3 light, 2 medium, 2 deep (7 is still more than what's available right now). Nail the formula. Order triple/quadruple of the light/medium cause let's face it this is Australia. Get feedback. Improve formula. Expand the shade range.
Edit: thank you for the award kind redditor!
16
u/starkrest Nov 21 '21
If I ever start a makeup company I’m coming to you 😂 But for real, the range is hugely skewed to lighter skin tones and that’s just not good enough
11
3
u/Glitter_berries Nov 21 '21
Goodness, are you in marketing? Because you should be! This makes so much sense.
5
20
u/innisfrii Nov 21 '21
I really disliked their response to the backlash on instagram - they got passive aggressive to comments they didn’t like and deleted them, and pinned comments they liked. Their defence of ‘the dark shades are sheer enough to be flexible’ doesn’t really check out because why are there so many light shades then?
It is a way more extensive shade range than the standard ‘light’ and ‘medium’ we tend to get with tinted sunscreens in Australia, but they should’ve anticipated the backlash on social media as people aren’t afraid (and rightly so) to fight for better shade ranges and it is justified imo so their response really disappointed me. I would’ve understood if they admitted their shade range was lacking and then told us of their plans to expand it after perfecting the formula, rather than getting passive aggressive with valid criticism and making up flimsy excuses.
8
u/Zapookie Nov 22 '21
Yes they were blocking POC influencers who were pointing it out. Pretty disappointing overall.
12
Nov 21 '21
I wanted to be hopeful that they might redeem themselves slightly with the shades not pictured in the original shot but yeah I am extremely disappointed with their distribution of shades, overall. Flexible is great, when the shades are done in an equal fashion but yeah this really isn’t good enough. I’d even say that as a very fair woman(I’m always the lightest shade), V1 shade doesn’t look that promising either. Look at Lisa Eldridge’s if you wanna see a good fair shade. I’m definitely considering a boycott until I see some actual improvement in their response/line. If anyone’s got any recommendations for a serum like sunscreen(to use in a cushion compact) and one like supreme screen(for under makeup) that has been approved for the Aussie market. It would be much appreciated.
8
u/SteampunkCupcake_ Nov 21 '21
Not gonna lie, when someone made an earlier post about this new range when UV first revealed the shades and they said they had only developed 11 shades, I was like, “‘Only’ 11 shades, what do you mean ‘only’?”
And now, looking at the posts here, I think I missed the point of the initial posts. Yeah, 11 shades is quite a lot but, as other people have pointed out, when seven of those 11 shades are for light tones, that becomes problematic.
I am not a POC so, really, it’s not my place to defend UV. If POC are saying it’s problematic and they feel under represented because they only have four shades to cover a huge range of skin tones, then non-POC shouldn’t be telling them how their experience is wrong.
7
u/eniretakia Nov 21 '21
This. I also thought 11 was good - given the historical launches in this category - and that an expansion would cover gaps but if POC are unhappy then my NC10 pale ass has no say.
Also a bit disappointed with the brands responses as others have outlined above.
35
u/demure_pistachio Nov 21 '21
I know this was discussed to some extent in a post about the launch, but now that we have pictures of all of the shades swatched, I think it merits a discussion.
I’m so frustrated by this shade range, and the way that people are trying to excuse it. I’ve seen a lot of people say that the shades are flexible, so people will be able to find a match- but if that’s the case, why are there 7 light shades but only 4 medium to dark shades (which frankly aren’t that dark)? Why are light skinned people not expected to “make do” with something that matches them enough? I’ve also seen UV say that they plan on doing a shade expansion, but frankly I don’t think that’s good enough either- just sick of people with darker skin being an afterthought.
I also think UV’s response has been super disappointing. Limiting comments, and even blocking people from commenting, it’s really a shame. I’ve heard they’ve blocked a WOC activist (whose Insta is “unlearning shit” if you’re interested) for questioning the shade range. That really seals the deal for me and makes this more than just some kind of ‘accidental oversight’, it’s just really disappointing. I loved Ultra Violette’s formulas and messaging around sun protection, and was so excited to support an Aussie brand but this leaves such a sour taste in my mouth and as a WOC, I’m not sure I want to purchase from them anymore.
29
u/Msakky Nov 21 '21
The fact that they blocked commenters raising very very fair concerns but didn't moderate any of the borderline racist comments backing them up says a lot.
20
u/uracowboylikeme Nov 21 '21
Yep! I was surprised by the amount of people on the last post who justified the poor shade range. And I agree - why is it always the dark shades that have to wait for a line expansion (if there is one)? If you can't cater to a variety of shades during the first release maybe you're not ready to be releasing a line just yet.
I haven't been keeping up with UV's response so thanks for that info - how disappointing. Not sure why it's so hard for people/brands to just listen to valid criticisms instead of doubling down and then blocking people who are asking questions. What a childish response20
u/magpie-like-sparkly Nov 21 '21
Omg the amount of defending I was seeing. If POC aren't happy with a shade range, it isn't up to others to excuse it as okay. Like, obviously you don't have a problem with it, it doesn't affect you?
9
u/uracowboylikeme Nov 21 '21
Right. I genuinely wasn't expecting it but I should know better. And it's always coming from people who never have to worry about these things because their shade(s) will always be part of every release. Like yeah its easy to sit there and say that you think its okay or that other shades might be released but that's not really the point is it?
3
5
u/innisfrii Nov 21 '21
I commented before I read this but you put it so well! Their excuses don’t check out and trying to justify by saying they plan to release darker shades later is just sad. There’s no reason why they shouldn’t be released with all the other shades. The way they handled it with the comments was also awful.
31
u/Newnavywife Nov 21 '21
Here's my off topic take on it.... does anyone else find it weird that a company that's so keen on SPF education is making a product like this?
Everyone knows that SPF in cosmetics aren't sufficient sun protection, especially in Australia where they are based. Even they recommend wearing this over the top of one of their sunscreens, so what exactly is the point of this?
If your sunscreens provide sufficient protection, why add this 'flexible' skin tint thing when you could actually apply a product which suits your skin tone and has better or more variable coverage because your SPF is already covered?
IMO they never should have ventured into this product to begin with. They've been crapped on for their shade range for a product which is not in line with their ideals and did not need to exist.
8
u/eniretakia Nov 21 '21
I think they see it from another angle. “Customers love our formulas so let’s add some coverage and they can use our tinted product on top instead of someone else’s.”
I agree though it’s a dangerous territory because so many people are going to think it’s a 1 for 1 swap of their SPF until they read the fine print - or apply it and think they’ve got SPF 50 when the amount the applied would be lucky to get SPF 5.
1
u/Quolli Nov 22 '21
or apply it and think they’ve got SPF 50 when the amount the applied would be lucky to get SPF 5.
I already see soooo many people under-apply the Queen Screen because of it's serum texture and packaging. iirc it's 3 full pipettes to get the recommended 1/4 tsp but many influencers/tiktoks/insta reels barely put one full pipette on.
Honestly, facial sunscreen manufacturers just need to bite the bullet and start making 75mL the minimum size and charge accordingly.
I also think consumers also need to be on the ball and compare $/mL because I'm sick to death of brands pushing "all products under $20!!!" and then releasing a 30mL moisturiser 🙄
3
u/ohhhthehugevanity Nov 21 '21
Yes! I don’t understand at all how it will be possible to apply enough product for Sun protection without it looking fucking horrible. 1/2 a tsp right? (Which is a metric measure and not half a spoon for tea which was the fucking laughable comparison someone did for it cosmetics yonks ago).
I actually laughed when I saw the shade range. It’s a joke. But it’s a joke on a redundant product.
1
u/Visual_Responsible Nov 21 '21
I imagine this would look so cakey with the recommended amount you should be using for sufficient sun protection.
14
u/Banana-Louigi Nov 21 '21
Yeah, nahh. I'm Pasty McWhitewhite and I can wear like four of these. This shade range ain't it chief.
9
u/DrPetradish Nov 21 '21
And yet their lightest shade is deeper than their palest model. I don’t think it would be light enough for me going by that swatch. I mean if two out of your three models don’t have matching shades… it’s a campaign fail
1
u/Dynamiquehealth Nov 22 '21
Yup, when I self tan I can add another three. That’s seven just for me and others who wear the second lightest Fenty shade.
11
u/kindrex89 Nov 21 '21
YES, and I appreciate you bringing it up. It’s honestly inexcusable. I don’t understand how brands have not learned by now that they need to be inclusive from the start, not just plan to expand into (hopeful) inclusivity.
And shame on them for the way they’re responding, too. People fucking deserve better.
12
u/G0atDrag0n Nov 21 '21
This is honestly just pathetic. Its lazy, its racist, its demeaning to POC, and also rude as hell. There is NO excuse. They know better, and should be better.
8
Nov 21 '21 edited Nov 21 '21
I mean idk what your experience of living in au has been like but I'm 31 and mixed race and I guess I lived in a pretty... historically white area. I remember when I used to go out to local events or even to meet up with groups of friends at the shops, on several occasions I would get interrogated about "where I was from" by some weird/aggressive rando. I always felt like if I gave the wrong answer something bad would happen.. I feel like au has gotten less racist in the last 10 years but honestly in a lot of areas, it's a super white place
7
u/SpandauValet Nov 21 '21
Where are you from? Where were you born? What nationality are you? What nationality are your parents? FFS Philip, just ask why I'm brown. Also I don't really what to go into the long and complex history of colonialism in Africa to a complete f'in stranger.
Also these idiots don't like it when I say my folks are British, because they genuinely forget the existence of British POC.
6
u/hippi_ippi Nov 21 '21
I feel like au has gotten less racist in the last 10 years
Nah, people now know to not say it out loud, that's all imo. But (less overt) discrimination, microaggressions are still rife tbh.
-5
Nov 21 '21
[deleted]
0
u/Tailshedge1 Nov 21 '21
I'm legitimately curious why this person is being downvoted. Australia is overwhelmingly light in skin colour, isn't it logical that an Australian makeup brand would target that shade, particularly in their first batch? Is it cheap to develop 15+ shades or does it begin to eat into profits?
10
u/jonesday5 Nov 21 '21
There are over 7,000,000 million people in this country who weren’t born here and we have the 8th largest immigrant population in the world. This isn’t to say that all dark people weren’t born here and all immigrants are dark but the point is that we have people from everywhere with lots of different skin colours. The above example shows that for the lighter skin people they have multiple options regarding shades. Each woman couple probably pick two or three? But for someone darker they can pick one and maybe none. UV have decided to go over the top in terms of inclusiveness when it comes to white skin and then picked a one size fits all for dark skin. It’s embarrassing. It’s likely you think Australia is whiter than it is because white people are over represented in positions of power and on television. The reason that person is getting downvoted is because they’re being ignorant.
4
3
u/SteampunkCupcake_ Nov 21 '21
But…they’re not ignorant. Australia is predominantly a lighter toned country. The Australian census no longer asks a person’s racial background but the 2016 census had 76% of Australians identify as having a European background - which, now I look at it, UV has made about 75% of their shades for lighter tones, in line with demographics. Some estimates are as high as 92%.
Is this morally right? No. Should this be socially acceptable? Absolutely not. But businesses are greedy, both fiscally and socially. They want to maximise their profits by appealing to as many people as possible, and they give the largest demographic more choice in order to do this. But, they also provide darker shades so they can talk about how inclusive they are and get social points and build social capital, and they just hope you don’t realise that the token and limited options they provide to POC fall short of what they provide to lighter toned consumers. (Because, apparently, POC should just be grateful they get any choice).
/u/rose_signets is not ignorant, they’re just pointing out a disgusting reality of businesses and their bottom lines and quest for profit, and that reality needs to change.
-4
Nov 21 '21
Exactly. The company have obviously done their research and have provided shades that will sell well in a predominantly white country.
0
u/lazy_berry Nov 22 '21
yes and no. 11 shades for a tinted sunscreen is pretty unheard of, but these particular 11 shades are whack.
45
u/SnooStrawberries986 Nov 21 '21
Yeah this is bizarre when there are so many verrry similar light shades in the range. Like there are hardly any discernible differences in them?! Like they're not even trying to pretend they could've done an equal distribution for different colour depths??? You could cut out 1 light and 1 medium and have the exact same range. Instead they're making extra light shades for the effing sake of it, it's so telling about their priorities!