Archive: $0 – $25.00

Luxe gifts from Julep‏

I love the Julep nail line, the long bottles are easy to hold during application and the colors have so much shine even without a topcoat. I am wearing Catherine a beautiful red, one of my favorite Julep colors by far.

If you suffer from dry skin in winter the Julep Essential Cuticle Oil is a life saver.  I keep it by my bed and roll it over my nail and cuticle at night before bed. Keeps my manicure and fingers soft smooth and looking good.

The Girlfriend’s Essential Nail Vernis Gift Set, $28
Celebrate with two of the most popular Julep Nail Vernis shades along with our decadent Essential Cuticle Oil.

· Jennifer Nail Vernis: Beautiful, sheer polish with just a hint of pink. Effortless elegance.
· Catherine Nail Vernis: THE classic, go-to red. Perfect for date night
· Julep Essential Cuticle Oil: All-natural blend of essential oils and Vitamin E hydrates and strengthens nails and cuticles

Deck the Halls Holiday Polish Collection, $36

Vanessa: Glitter in a clear base. A touch of sparkle for girly fun. Wear alone or as a topcoat to add glitter over any color.
Helena: Ultra-saturated fuchsia. Looks great on all skin tones. A favorite of Seattle Magazine’s beauty editors.
Julep Nail Therapy: Use alone or as a basecoat for strong, beautiful nails. Hydrates and protects dry, brittle, peeling nails. Nourishes nails with Vitamin E. Dramatic results in just three days.

Glowing Hands Gift Set, $48
Share this ultimate treatment set for complete age defying nail and mani care. Exfoliate, protect and moisturize hands finishing with ultra-pigmented color.

· Julep Makeup Bag: Essential for every season
· Facial for Hands: Potent glycolic acid combined with apricot seeds provides powerful double exfoliation that leaves your hands feeling noticeably softer and looking younger after just one use
· Jennifer Nail Vernis: Beautiful, sheer polish with just a hint of pink. Effortless elegance.
· Catherine Nail Vernis: THE classic, go-to red. Perfect for date night
· Julep Essential Cuticle Oil: All-natural blend of essential oils and Vitamin E hydrates and strengthens nails and cuticles
· Julep Crystal Nail File: Simply the best nail file because it lasts forever

 

All Julep Nail Vernis features 4-Free formulas developed without carcinogens such as formaldehyde or formaldehyde resin, toluene and DBP. Julep’s Holiday Gift Sets are available beginning October 2011 at www.julep.com. Follow Julep at Facebook.com/Julep.

 

Disclosure: MHU was sent complimentary samples to review the above mentioned products, our opinion our 100% own.

MUST SEE: This Taylor Swift CoverGirl Mascara ad was banned!

Take a look at this new ad by CoverGirl. Can you figure out why the US’s National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus Claims (NAD) has chosen to ban it?

Excessive photoshopping!

Business Insider reports that the NAD has banned print ads for CoverGirl NatureLuxe Mousse Mascara, including the spots featuring celeb spokesmodel Taylor Swift. According to the NAD, the ads made “superior performance claims” such as “2X more volume” and “20 percent lighter” that simply couldn’t be substantiated.

The NAD specifically noted that the Swift ad had a disclaimer printed on the bottom that clearly stated, “lashes enhanced in post production.”

“You can’t use a photograph to demonstrate how a cosmetic will look after it is applied to a woman’s face and then — in the mice type — have a disclosure that says ‘okay, not really,’ ” NAD director Andrea Levine told Business Insider.

RELATED: Check out Dakota Fanning’s BANNED Marc Jacobs ad!

I think it’s about time something was done about this. This issue of false advertising has bothered me for YEARS. As beauty bloggers, Erin and I are CONSTANTLY being sent products to try out with the promise of this – and that. We see the ads, we read all the claims of “longer lashes” or “fuller lashes” and 9 times out of 10, nothing ever really lives up to the promise! It has gotten to the point (with me) that I really don’t pay much attention to beauty ads at all, because who really believes that stuff anymore? Don’t we all just see it as fake?

Maybelline was made to address an similar Photoshop issue earlier this year, when an ad for its anti-aging “Eraser” product used Photoshop instead of the product itself to erase spokesmodel Christy Turlington’s dark circles. Britain’s ASA banned the ad for misleading consumers.

In fact, Business Insider notes that in banning the Taylor Swift spot, the NAD is specifically trying to follow the ASA’s lead. Does that mean we should expect a banned-ad-of-the-week in the US to match Great Britain? Could this be the end of Photoshopping Disasters?

I’m really happy something is finally being done about this trend in advertising. You should not be able to photoshop results.  The UK has been banning ads for years, and they take a much more critical stand on false advertising. Hopefully the U.S. will crack down on ads here as strongly!

Who’s with me?

Katherine Heigl’s favorite Make Up!

She may be one of the many top tier names in New Year’s Eve, but for her day-to-day routine Katherine Heigl likes to keep it simple. Before she rushes out the door, she uses Aubrey Organics Silken Earth Powder Blush. This NPA certified silk-based blush is super safe for the healthy living power mom, but it’s also extremely effective. Katherine said, “The Aubrey Organics Blush is very sheer and light weight. I love the color and feel of it.” The blush comes in an array of colors and provides a natural glow with mica, iron oxides, and hints of beet and radish!

Silken Earth Powder Blush, $11.95, Aubrey-organics.com


Covergirl ad banned for “enhanced post-production” and “photoshopping”.

 

Procter & Gamble has agreed to never again run an ad for its CoverGirl mascara because it used “enhanced post-production” and “photoshopping” to make eyelashes look thicker than they were in real life. P&G agreed to the ban even though it disclosed in the ad that the image was enhanced.

The move is the latest in a series of baby steps that U.S. and international advertising regulators have taken to ban the use of Photoshop in advertising when it is misleading to consumers.
The company’s decision was described in a ruling by the National Advertising Division, the U.S. industry watchdog that imposes self-regulation on the advertising business. NAD is part of the Council of Better Business Bureaus. Its rulings are respected and followed by most advertisers because it enjoys a close relationship with the FTC, from which it has historically drawn some of its senior staff. Recalcitrant advertisers who refuse to withdraw or amend misleading ads are referred by the NAD to the FTC, which has the power to fine, sue or bring injunctions against companies.
When asked whether this was a de facto ban on Photoshop, NAD director Andrea Levine told us:
“You can’t use a photograph to demonstrate how a cosmetic will look after it is applied to a woman’s face and then – in the mice type – have a disclosure that says ‘okay, not really.’”
The ad in question was for CoverGirl NatureLuxe Mousse Mascara, which promised “2X more volume” on women’s lashes. After reviewing the ad, P&G agreed to yank it. (A different CoverGirl ad is shown here.) The NAD ruling said:
“… [P&G] advised NAD it has permanently discontinued all of the challenged claims and the photograph in its advertisement. NAD was particularly troubled by the photograph of the model – which serves clearly to demonstrate (i.e., let consumers see for themselves) the length and volume they can achieve when they apply the advertised mascara to their eyelashes. This picture is accompanied by a disclosure that the model’s eyelashes had been enhanced post production.”
In a footnote, the NAD said it was following the lead of its sister body in the U.K., the Advertising Standards Authority, which in July banned cosmetics ads featuring Julia Roberts and Christy Turlington because they used Photoshop. The NAD said:
“Advertising self-regulatory authorities recognize the need to avoid photoshopping in cosmetics advertisements where there is a clear exaggeration of potential product benefits.”
“… the picture of Ms. Roberts had been altered using post production techniques (in addition to professional styling, make-up, photography and the product’s inherent covering and smoothing nature which are to be expected), exaggerating what consumers could expect to achieve through product use.”
The U.K. ruling found the use of photo retouching misleading per se.

In the U.S., the FTC has has also tightened rules to hold celebrities accountable if they make claims in ads they know cannot be true.
And in France, in 2009, 50 politicians asked for health warnings to be imposed on fashion ads if they showed retouched models’ bodies.

Source