Try as they might sometimes the person we hope knows us best has no idea what we are hoping Santa will bring. Do you drop hints to save yourself from your partners lack of gift giving knowledge? What is the strangest thing your spouse has given you?

Come join the discussion in the BlogFrog community, log in is quick and easy with Facebook.

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

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

Courtesy Neil Lane; Inset: Kevin Mazur/WireImage

Britney Spears may be a pop-star diva to the rest of the world, but to beau Jason Trawick, “she’s his everyday princess,” says celebrity jeweler Neil Lane, who designed Spears’s dazzling engagement ring to befit Trawick’s vision of the singer’s down-home regality. “Jason is a romantic and when I asked him to tell me about Britney and what the ring would represent to them so I could find inspiration, his response was always the same — she is his princess!”

With that theme in mind, Lane tells PEOPLE he designed from scratch a tiara-motif sparkler with a round, perfect white diamond in a handmade platinum setting that “looks like a mini crown,” the celebrated jeweler says. He also added 90 small round diamonds around the eternity band. “Jason didn’t want an over-the-top ring with a giant stone,” he adds.

Over the last month, Lane and Trawick clocked phone and email minutes as they collaborated while Trawick was traveling with Spears on her global tour. “Texts came from all over the world, from Abu Dhabi, Mexico and I don’t know where else!” says Lane.

But when Trawick stopped into Lane’s Los Angeles store to pick up the ring — less than one week before the proposal! — they both knew the hard work and scheming had paid off. “Oh my god, he loved it,” Lane shares, adding that he could tell Trawick had pre-proposal jitters. “The guy was so excited and nervous. At the end of the day, even with all the fame, he’s still a normal guy who was about to propose to the woman he loves.”

That said, Lane believes this couple is in it for the long haul. “He’s deeply in love with her. Britney is his princess and he is her knight in shining armor,” he says. “Jason’s protective of her. He adores her. Every good fairytale needs a princess, and now Britney has a ring fit for a princess!”

Source

Courtesy Neil Lane