there are no colours that i automatically write off [although browns are generally very difficult for me], which means that i end up with a lot of colours in every range. i will say that one of my natural "advantages" (if you consider being able to spend money on lipsticks an advantage) is that my complexion runs a bit cool, but is pretty close to completely neutral. so there aren't a lot of colours that look "wrong" with my skin tone. one of the results of this is that i've been able to spend quality time figuring out who does what best. so here's a post with my opinions on where you can turn for whatever colour wants you have. and, of course, if there's anything i don't cover, you can feel free to ask. i have deliberately skipped the area of bronze/ brown/ earth tones, because i just haven't sampled enough of them to make a choice. mac probably has the broadest range in that category, but nars seems to have some really rich shades.
WHO DOES WHICH SHADES BEST?
a quick word about the photos :: i took these in a real hurry and you can even see in some of them that i scratched my upper lip while doing so. because i was working quickly, there are some annoying shadows, for which i apologise. i wanted to get this post on line more than i wanted to wait until i had perfect daylight in which to shoot the lip photos.
so here's where to turn if you want...
 |
| dior :: chic pink |
best choice :: dior. i don't know what it is about dior in particular, but pink is their bitch. whether it's their full coverage "rouge dior" line or their newly launched semi-sheer "dior addict" line, no one does pinks like them. in fact, virtually all of their colour line is pink of varying shades. choose your pink poison. whatever shade you need to bring out nature's beauty, they have it for you.
runner up :: chanel. while their range might be narrower, it's hard to beat the subtle elegance of chanel.
reds ::
 |
| chanel :: rouge allure lacque dragon |
runner up :: yves st. laurent. the intensity of their reds is remarkable and they have a nice range of warm and cool shades- they have really paid attention to the different hues you can get within the red spectrum.
honourable mention :: mac. i personally find their range of permanent reds a bit lacking, but when one takes into consideration some of the excellent limited edition reds they've included, they're an absolute winner.
purples ::
 |
| mac :: violetta |
runner up :: none. this is the only category where i did this, but mac's dominance in the field is so complete, it's like comparing pet ponies to secretariat. makeup forever would probably be my second choice, but their offering is limited in range and in finish. inglot have more purples than anyone except mac, but their shades seem somehow bland. everyone else is limited to an occasional "special" colour.
vampy shades ::
 |
| mac :: hang up |
runner up :: bobbi brown. what??? the queen of quiet conservatism? no foolin. mixed in among the subtle nudes, rosy browns and lady-like pinks are some incredible, unsung deep reds and browns. check for shades that start with the word "black"- black raspberry, black cherry, black mahogany, black maple... these are gorgeous, rich shades that would seem at home on the lips of those classical heroines of gothic fiction that are so admired.
honourable mention :: makeup forever. aside from the usual bloody reds and purples, they have a permanent satin black in their range.
neutrals ::
 |
| mac :: blankety |
runner up :: cle de peau. i would have selected them as the winner, but for two things: 1. their range is limited; and 2. their lipsticks are $65cad each. wtf??? still, their neutrals are really, really hard to beat. the quality is there [at that price, it had better be] and their shades are wonderfully nuanced. find one that's perfect for you, spoil yourself that single time and then try to forget that you ever heard about them.
oranges, peaches & corals ::
 |
| ysl :: blood orange |
runner up :: dior. it makes a sort of sense that the rulers of popular pinks would also have an offering of easy-to-wear shades in this range. they lack the intense shades of ysl, but chances are there's still a little something for almost everybody.
hornourable mention :: mac. while the "peaches" and "corals" offering in their permanent collection might be a little lacking, there is no denying that mac was one of the first companies to offer a real variety of orange tones to the discerning consumer.
[addendum :: it has been pointed out to me that, in fact, this post ignores the fact that givenchy's "candide tangerine" is the most beautiful orange shade ever created. it's true. i haven't seen givenchy's other orange offerings, but this is one case where one shade makes an entire company worth watching.]
hot pinks, fuchsias & magentas ::
 |
| mac :: fusion pink |
runner up :: makeup forever. i honestly think they may best mac in terms of the permanent offering of shades, but they don't compete in terms of the variety of formulas.
honourable mention :: yves st. laurent. it's surprising to see some daring bright pinks and fuchsias popping up with increasing frequency in their range. even more surprising is that their colours may be the most daring shades of all.
ideally, i wanted to include an "oddball" category in this piece, a category defined by shades like blue and green, or by strong metallic shades, or just takes on usual colours that defy description. unfortunately, there just isn't enough competition. shu uemura has both a pure white [the most difficult shade to find!] and an intense blue as part of their regular line, but nothing more. mac, in this case, almost deserves a "hall of shame" mention, for having discontinued the shades that added an exclamation point to their entry into the competitive cosmetics market, as does urban decay. makeup forever has shown some inclination towards eccentricity, but has thus far held back. illamasqua, the cult favourite british company, shows some promise, but since i can't get their products without paying usurious british prices, i can't comment. the fact is that there are a lot of women who want to push the boundaries of colour, and who have the innate confidence to carry it off [which is really all it takes] but who can't simply because there aren't options available. *wags finger* bad cosmetic industry! bad!
that said, this is my perspective on which company is the best option for which shades. i would, as an addendum, like to note that these aren't necessarily my choices for highest quality. i think that you'd be hard pressed to beat guerlain's rouge g line for that, but their colour offering [perhaps because they've priced themselves out of reach for many consumers] is frustratingly tame. also stellar in terms of quality is armani and they seem capable of almost unbelievably rich and intricate shades of deep red and purple, but the bulk of their range seems stuck in the usual hues of pink and plum we all grew tired of in the eighties and nineties.
feel free to disagree. in fact, feel free to leave comments telling me how strongly you disagree. that's your prerogative and the nice thing about colours is that they truly do rest in the eye of the beholder.