These sticky stylers are ideal for creating a wide variety of hairstyles, from textured and choppy layered looks to short and sassy pixies. They're also terrific for many men's styles as well. This Face-Off pits two leading taffy-like products against each other in what should be an exciting battle, since I have used both of these products extensively for several years but have never judged them in a head-to-head battle...until now.
As always, each product will be judged on a 1-10 scale in the following categories: performance, ingredients, sensory appeal and packaging, and value. Now let's take a look at the competitors.
Kenra's Texturizing Taffy is a mainstay in their Platinum series of products. As one of the oldest manufacturers of professional haircare products, Kenra has experience on its side. Platinum Texturizing Taffy is designed to offer flexible styling without stiffness, providing a pliable hold that does not dry stiff or crunchy.
TIGI's Manipulator is one of history's best-selling styling products and is also one of the mainstays of their Bedhead line of products. This legendary fiber-forming cream can be applied to damp or dry hair for a wide variety of textured styles. Like Kenra's Texturizing Taffy, TIGI Bedhead Manipulator also provides style without stiffness. Both products provide a matte finish.
Buckle up, folks, this should be a terrific battle!
Performance: Both products performed as advertised, but neither product is ideal for super-fine hair. TIGI Manipulator tackled men's hair as easily as women's hair, but the Kenra product didn't seem to excel when it came to men's styling. Manipulator is definitely the more unisex of the products, and it provides a little more "stickiness" than Kenra Texturizing Taffy. In the end, I decided that Manipulator was a better match for highly-textured cuts and styles, whereas the Kenra product was best-suited for less extreme and more conservative styles. Close round, but Manipulator's edge in strength and its ability to style men's hair with ease gives TIGI an early lead. (TIGI:10 Kenra:9)
Ingredients: TIGI Manipulator contains nothing in the way of natural botanical ingredients (propylene glycol, ozokerite, PVP/VA copolymer, petrolatum, oleth-20, mineral oil, oleth-3, oleth-5, PEG-150 pentaerithritol tetrastearate), but it also doesn't contain anything that would present any health concerns. Kenra Texturizing Taffy contains the same main ingredients, but also contains phosphates and parabens, which aren't the greatest things in the world. (TIGI:7 Kenra:5)
Sensory Appeal: TIGI Manipulator has a pleasant fruity fragrance that still manages to be unisex. Kenra Texturizing Taffy has a very 'perfumey' smell. However, the packaging of the Kenra product is some of the best-designed packaging I've ever seen on a haircare product. Very elegant and refined, you'll probably want to keep the container long after the product inside runs out. But Kenra does lose a point on fragrance. (Kenra:9 TIGI:8)
Value: According to the Kenra website, the suggested salon retail price for Texturizing Taffy is $21.00, but I've seen it sell for as low as 12.00 online. Texturizing Taffy comes in a 2-ounce size, which translates into 10.50 per ounce when purchased in a salon. TIGI Manipulator also comes in a 2-ounce size, and prices vary between 5.00 and 20.00. The low-priced Manipulator seems to be sold in very old packaging, which suggests that it has been sitting on a warehouse shelf for several years, so I'd be very cautious when buying any container of Manipulator for under 10.00. Overall, both products are similar in price, so this round is a draw. (TIGI:8 Kenra:8)
And the winner is....
TIGI Bedhead Manipulator, in a very close competition. Ultimately, Manipulator pulled ahead because of its unisex appeal and slightly stronger hold, but both products are high-quality styling taffies that have their place in the beauty world. Manipulator is best for younger clients with edgier styles, and Texturizing Taffy is better-suited for mature women who still want to look modern and stylish. (Final Score: TIGI Bedhead Manipulator-33 Kenra Platinum Texturizing Taffy-31)
Monday, December 26, 2011
Joico ICE Spiker vs. Paul Mitchell Lab XTG (Extreme Thickening Glue)
Today's Face-Off features styling glues designed to provide maximum hold to high-performance hairstyles like mohawks, fauxhawks, and any other style which demands a heavy-duty product. Both products are popular with younger clients, and both have been on the market for several years. Let's take a look at the competitors:
Joico ICE Spiker Water-Resistant Styling Glue boasts the ability to mold any shape and was designed to deliver the firmest and fiercest hold possible, while protecting the hair with vitamins and sea kelp. Paul Mitchell Lab XTG Extreme Thickening Glue is a similar glue designed to offer extreme hold in a quick-drying formula, for maximum results in a minimal amount of time.
As always, each product will be scored on a 1-10 scale in the following categories: performance, ingredients, sensory appeal/packaging, and value. Let the battle begin!
Performance: Although both products are labeled as styling glues, each one had decidedly different characteristics. Joico ICE Spiker's hold was every bit as fierce as advertised, drying rock-hard and holding even medium-length hair up in a mohawk with ease. Paul Mitchell's styling glue dried faster than its competitor, but the hold wasn't as solid, producing a sticky feel. It worked well on short styles, but wasn't powerful enough to spike up longer hair. Unfortunately, the Paul Mitchell Lab XTG glue left a white-ish residue on dark colored hair, while the ICE Spiker did not. This round goes to ICE Spiker. (Joico:10 Paul Mitchell:8)
Ingredients: Neither product claims to be brimming with organic or natural ingredients, but Joico ICE Spiker does contain a fair amount of beneficial ingredients like vitamins and sea kelp, unlike Paul Mitchell XTG. Another round for ICE Spiker. (Joico:7 Paul Mitchell:5)
Sensory Appeal: There's no mistaking Paul Mitchell XTG, since its packaging is identical to a bottle of Elmer's glue. This is a great idea, since a user can easily tell what the product is designed to do. The nozzle also allows precise application to smaller sections of hair. Unfortunately, it smells lousy and it's difficult to dispense large quantities of the product without unscrewing the nozzle. On the other hand, Joico ICE Spike smells wonderful, with an aroma reminiscent of milk and honey. It is easy to dispense large quantities of product with little effort. On the down side, the updated Spiker packaging isn't as nearly visually pleasing than their old packaging. This round is a tie. (Joico:8 Paul Mitchell:8)
Value: Neither product is expensive, and both glues will fit into anyone's budget. A 5.1- ounce tube of ICE Spiker retails for around $13.95, or roughly 2.73 per ounce. Paul Mitchell Lab XTG retails for around $16.49 for a 3.4-ounce bottle, which translates into 4.85 per ounce, which is a significant difference. Joico breezes past Paul Mitchell in this round. (Joico:9 Paul Mitchell:4)
And the winner is....
Joico ICE Spiker Water-Resistant Styling Glue, in a cakewalk. Joico had the edge in value, performance, and ingredients. It also smells much better than its rival. One other advantage is that ICE Spiker is available in a variety of cool and funky colors (as well as uncolored), allowing a user to temporarily add a fun splash of color to their hair. Paul Mitchell Lab XTG isn't a bad product for short hair, but it is definitely over-priced. However, if you can find this product on sale or clearance, it's not a bad purchase. (Final Score: Joico ICE Spiker-34 Paul Mitchell Lab XTG-15)
Joico ICE Spiker Water-Resistant Styling Glue boasts the ability to mold any shape and was designed to deliver the firmest and fiercest hold possible, while protecting the hair with vitamins and sea kelp. Paul Mitchell Lab XTG Extreme Thickening Glue is a similar glue designed to offer extreme hold in a quick-drying formula, for maximum results in a minimal amount of time.
As always, each product will be scored on a 1-10 scale in the following categories: performance, ingredients, sensory appeal/packaging, and value. Let the battle begin!
Performance: Although both products are labeled as styling glues, each one had decidedly different characteristics. Joico ICE Spiker's hold was every bit as fierce as advertised, drying rock-hard and holding even medium-length hair up in a mohawk with ease. Paul Mitchell's styling glue dried faster than its competitor, but the hold wasn't as solid, producing a sticky feel. It worked well on short styles, but wasn't powerful enough to spike up longer hair. Unfortunately, the Paul Mitchell Lab XTG glue left a white-ish residue on dark colored hair, while the ICE Spiker did not. This round goes to ICE Spiker. (Joico:10 Paul Mitchell:8)
Ingredients: Neither product claims to be brimming with organic or natural ingredients, but Joico ICE Spiker does contain a fair amount of beneficial ingredients like vitamins and sea kelp, unlike Paul Mitchell XTG. Another round for ICE Spiker. (Joico:7 Paul Mitchell:5)
Sensory Appeal: There's no mistaking Paul Mitchell XTG, since its packaging is identical to a bottle of Elmer's glue. This is a great idea, since a user can easily tell what the product is designed to do. The nozzle also allows precise application to smaller sections of hair. Unfortunately, it smells lousy and it's difficult to dispense large quantities of the product without unscrewing the nozzle. On the other hand, Joico ICE Spike smells wonderful, with an aroma reminiscent of milk and honey. It is easy to dispense large quantities of product with little effort. On the down side, the updated Spiker packaging isn't as nearly visually pleasing than their old packaging. This round is a tie. (Joico:8 Paul Mitchell:8)
Value: Neither product is expensive, and both glues will fit into anyone's budget. A 5.1- ounce tube of ICE Spiker retails for around $13.95, or roughly 2.73 per ounce. Paul Mitchell Lab XTG retails for around $16.49 for a 3.4-ounce bottle, which translates into 4.85 per ounce, which is a significant difference. Joico breezes past Paul Mitchell in this round. (Joico:9 Paul Mitchell:4)
And the winner is....
Joico ICE Spiker Water-Resistant Styling Glue, in a cakewalk. Joico had the edge in value, performance, and ingredients. It also smells much better than its rival. One other advantage is that ICE Spiker is available in a variety of cool and funky colors (as well as uncolored), allowing a user to temporarily add a fun splash of color to their hair. Paul Mitchell Lab XTG isn't a bad product for short hair, but it is definitely over-priced. However, if you can find this product on sale or clearance, it's not a bad purchase. (Final Score: Joico ICE Spiker-34 Paul Mitchell Lab XTG-15)
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
I've Made Shopping Easier!
At the request of several Haircare Face-Off! readers, I've decided to include links after each face-off to Amazon.com where you can purchase the items I review quickly and easily. I cannot guarantee that Amazon has the lowest prices (it never hurts to shop around), but since they are a reliable and trusted company, these links might be useful for those of you who want to "buy it now" without the hassle of shopping around.
No, this will not change the method in which I conduct my reviews. I am still fiercely independent and "not for sale". I am not a "paid spokesperson" for any one brand and I still refuse to bribed by companies who want me to write a glowing review for them. Haircare Face-Off! will continue to give you the most accurate and reliable reviews anywhere, but now with the added option of purchasing items without even leaving this blog!
No, this will not change the method in which I conduct my reviews. I am still fiercely independent and "not for sale". I am not a "paid spokesperson" for any one brand and I still refuse to bribed by companies who want me to write a glowing review for them. Haircare Face-Off! will continue to give you the most accurate and reliable reviews anywhere, but now with the added option of purchasing items without even leaving this blog!
Monday, December 19, 2011
Matrix Biolage Finishing Spritz vs. Bumble and bumble Extra Strength Holding Spray
This edition of Haircare Face-Off! features two non-aerosol sprays which claim to offer firm hold. One is found in exclusive upscale salons, the other can be found in virtually every salon from Anchorage to Zimbabwe. Can the budget-priced spray compete with its higher-priced counterpart, or will the higher price tag equate into better quality? Let's find out.
Here are this week's combatants:
Bumble and bumble is a brand so exclusive that they don't even need to capitalize the second B in their name. One of the top-selling products from this manufacturer is Extra Strength Holding Spray, a must-have product for most of the world's runway and editorial hairstylists.
In an industry where new haircare products come on the market nearly every day, Matrix Biolage Finishing Spritz has been around for over a decade, a testament to Biolage's loyal fans. Biolage Finishing Spritz is beloved by old ladies who want hurricane-proof hold, but can it please this stylist's discerning clientele?
The rules are simple. Each product will be rated 1-10 on its performance, ingredients, sensory appeal, and value. Let the battle begin!
Performance: The name of the game is hold, so I'm not looking for a product that leaves the hair feeling natural, I'm looking for stiff-as-a-board results. That's why I decided to use these sprays on styles which demand long-lasting hold: updos and formal styles. Both products delivered the goods, but neither spray dried as quickly as I would have liked (but that's to be expected with non-aerosol sprays). The Bumble and bumble spray seemed to dry a little faster and hold a little better and even added a respectable amount of shine, but the Biolage spray was more reliable, its nozzle didn't clog up like its rival. However, when it came time to shampoo the hair, I discovered that the Bumble and bumble spray washed out with only one shampoo. Most of the Biolage clients needed two. A valiant effort by Biolage, but this round goes to Bumble and bumble. (Bumble and bumble:9 Biolage:6)
Ingredients: Biolage products are known for containing botanical ingredients, so it was no surprise to see extracts of hops and hibiscus listed as ingredients. Biolage Finishing Spritz also contains sunscreen to protect the hair from sun damage. Bumble and bumble Extra Strength Holding Spray's ingredients read like a chemistry textbook, containing heavy-duty ingredients like vinyl copolymers and acrylamides, but the product does contain pro-vitamin B5. The lack of sunscreen and use of fewer beneficial ingredients gives this round to Biolage. (Biolage:8 Bumble and bumble:5)
Sensory Appeal: Biolage Finishing Spritz comes in a slender bottle that is easy to hold, with a reliable nozzle. The packaging looks a little dated, however, and I couldn't get past the definite "old lady smell". Bumble and bumble's packaging is visually more appealing, but the shape of the bottle isn't as practical and the nozzle is prone to clogging. Since the shape and design of the bottles cancel each other other out, the deciding factor was fragrance. (Bumble and bumble:8 Biolage:6)
Value: Bumble and bumble Extra Strength Holding Spray is sold in an 8-ounce size, and retails for 21.00 on bumbleandbumble.com, which translates into $2.63 per ounce. Biolage Finishing Spritz is available in a 13.5-ounce bottle and retails for 19.49 in most salons, which is $1.44 per ounce. Biolage wins this round easily. (Biolage:9 Bumble and bumble:6)
And the winner is....
Upset alert! In this David-against-Goliath battle, the underdog proved victorious. Even though the Bumble and bumble spray provided better results, the results weren't enough to overcome Biolage's use of botanical ingredients. Biolage was able to deliver respectable results at a budget price, which ultimately won the day. Since top session stylists care more about results and less about value, Bumble and bumble will continue to reign supreme on the catwalk. But when it comes to everyday style, Biolage proves to be the smarter choice. (Final Score: Matrix Biolage Finishing Spritz-29, Bumble and bumble Extra Strength Holding Spray-28)
Here are this week's combatants:
Bumble and bumble is a brand so exclusive that they don't even need to capitalize the second B in their name. One of the top-selling products from this manufacturer is Extra Strength Holding Spray, a must-have product for most of the world's runway and editorial hairstylists.
In an industry where new haircare products come on the market nearly every day, Matrix Biolage Finishing Spritz has been around for over a decade, a testament to Biolage's loyal fans. Biolage Finishing Spritz is beloved by old ladies who want hurricane-proof hold, but can it please this stylist's discerning clientele?
The rules are simple. Each product will be rated 1-10 on its performance, ingredients, sensory appeal, and value. Let the battle begin!
Performance: The name of the game is hold, so I'm not looking for a product that leaves the hair feeling natural, I'm looking for stiff-as-a-board results. That's why I decided to use these sprays on styles which demand long-lasting hold: updos and formal styles. Both products delivered the goods, but neither spray dried as quickly as I would have liked (but that's to be expected with non-aerosol sprays). The Bumble and bumble spray seemed to dry a little faster and hold a little better and even added a respectable amount of shine, but the Biolage spray was more reliable, its nozzle didn't clog up like its rival. However, when it came time to shampoo the hair, I discovered that the Bumble and bumble spray washed out with only one shampoo. Most of the Biolage clients needed two. A valiant effort by Biolage, but this round goes to Bumble and bumble. (Bumble and bumble:9 Biolage:6)
Ingredients: Biolage products are known for containing botanical ingredients, so it was no surprise to see extracts of hops and hibiscus listed as ingredients. Biolage Finishing Spritz also contains sunscreen to protect the hair from sun damage. Bumble and bumble Extra Strength Holding Spray's ingredients read like a chemistry textbook, containing heavy-duty ingredients like vinyl copolymers and acrylamides, but the product does contain pro-vitamin B5. The lack of sunscreen and use of fewer beneficial ingredients gives this round to Biolage. (Biolage:8 Bumble and bumble:5)
Sensory Appeal: Biolage Finishing Spritz comes in a slender bottle that is easy to hold, with a reliable nozzle. The packaging looks a little dated, however, and I couldn't get past the definite "old lady smell". Bumble and bumble's packaging is visually more appealing, but the shape of the bottle isn't as practical and the nozzle is prone to clogging. Since the shape and design of the bottles cancel each other other out, the deciding factor was fragrance. (Bumble and bumble:8 Biolage:6)
Value: Bumble and bumble Extra Strength Holding Spray is sold in an 8-ounce size, and retails for 21.00 on bumbleandbumble.com, which translates into $2.63 per ounce. Biolage Finishing Spritz is available in a 13.5-ounce bottle and retails for 19.49 in most salons, which is $1.44 per ounce. Biolage wins this round easily. (Biolage:9 Bumble and bumble:6)
And the winner is....
Upset alert! In this David-against-Goliath battle, the underdog proved victorious. Even though the Bumble and bumble spray provided better results, the results weren't enough to overcome Biolage's use of botanical ingredients. Biolage was able to deliver respectable results at a budget price, which ultimately won the day. Since top session stylists care more about results and less about value, Bumble and bumble will continue to reign supreme on the catwalk. But when it comes to everyday style, Biolage proves to be the smarter choice. (Final Score: Matrix Biolage Finishing Spritz-29, Bumble and bumble Extra Strength Holding Spray-28)
Friday, December 16, 2011
Goldwell Superego Molding Gum vs. Schwarzkopf OSIS Fiber Gum
Seeing a Goldwell product in Haircare Face-Off is like watching an ex-girlfriend stepping into a boxing ring. I used to love Goldwell, and even though part of me still loves her, another part of me wants to see her get knocked out. My issue with Goldwell is that they change their retail product lines so much that it's nearly impossible to keep track of what's still being made and what's been discontinued. Goldwell Superego Molding Gum is one such product. Created a few years ago for their now-defunct Trendline line of products, Superego is still sold in just about every Goldwell salon.
Squaring off against Goldwell Superego is a similar styling gum made by another haircare company with German roots, Schwarzkopf's OSIS Fiber Gum. Let's see which gum can git 'er done!
As always, the scoring will be on a 1-10 scale judging each product's performance, ingredients, sensory appeal, and value.
Performance: While both products are labeled as gums, OSIS has a noticeably lighter consistency, while the Superego is thicker and somewhat stickier. This gives Superego an edge when it comes to creating gravity-defying styles. However, the OSIS Fiber Gum's lighter consistency makes it better-suited for medium-length and longer styles which demand texture. Both are best applied to dry hair as a finishing product, and both provide a gloss-free matte finish. The longer the competition goes on, the more I gravitate toward Superego because I can also use it on men's hair. OSIS, on the other hand, just doesn't have the same ferosity in terms of hold. Even though I prefer to use OSIS on curly and wavy hair, I'm giving this round to Superego. Both products lose points though for not being as good as other styling gums or pastes I have used. (Goldwell Superego:7 OSIS Fiber Gum:6)
Ingredients: Since Goldwell Superego Molding Gum has been discontinued (it's been replaced by Goldwell StyleSign Superego Styling Cream), it's nearly impossible to find the ingredients. My tube of Superego lacks a listing of ingredients, except for a line that says it's made with Flexshine technology. As a styling gum, I suspect the ingredients are similar to OSIS, so it most likely contains the same wax, acrylamides, and parabens found in similar products. OSIS Fiber Gum, however, contains honey extract, thus giving it a slight edge in terms of natural ingredients. (OSIS Fiber Gum:6 Goldwell Superego:5)
Sensory Appeal: To be honest, both products smell awful, like something you'd use to caulk around a bathtub. The main difference is that OSIS comes in a stylish round metal can with a screw-off lid while Superego comes in a tube that looks like toothpaste. Because Superego's tube is made of soft metal, it began to leak all over the place when the tube began to crease and crack. The product also gunks up easily around the cap. OSIS wins this round by looking better and making less of a mess. (OSIS Fiber Gum:6 Goldwell Superego:2)
Value: OSIS Fiber Gum comes in a 3.39 ounce can, while Superego comes in a 2.5 ounce tube. Superego retails for around 18.95, but since it's been discontinued you can probably find it on many salon clearance racks for a fraction of that price. OSIS Fiber Gum sells for 14.00 in most salons and online retailers. Since Schwarzkopf OSIS Fiber Gum is over three dollars cheaper per ounce, this round easily goes to OSIS. (OSIS Fiber Gum:8 Goldwell Superego:5)
And the winner is.....
Schwarzkopf OSIS Fiber Gum, by a healthy margin. While both products were slightly disappointing, OSIS came out on top because it's not as messy to use as Superego. I often get asked why I think it's important to grade a product on its container, and this battle proves why packaging is so important. If a product comes in a leaky tube or bottle and is frustrating and messy to use, it's not going to survive very long on the market. And this just might be the reason why Goldwell decided to discontinue this product. (Final Score- OSIS Fiber Gum:26 Goldwell Superego:19)
Squaring off against Goldwell Superego is a similar styling gum made by another haircare company with German roots, Schwarzkopf's OSIS Fiber Gum. Let's see which gum can git 'er done!
As always, the scoring will be on a 1-10 scale judging each product's performance, ingredients, sensory appeal, and value.
Performance: While both products are labeled as gums, OSIS has a noticeably lighter consistency, while the Superego is thicker and somewhat stickier. This gives Superego an edge when it comes to creating gravity-defying styles. However, the OSIS Fiber Gum's lighter consistency makes it better-suited for medium-length and longer styles which demand texture. Both are best applied to dry hair as a finishing product, and both provide a gloss-free matte finish. The longer the competition goes on, the more I gravitate toward Superego because I can also use it on men's hair. OSIS, on the other hand, just doesn't have the same ferosity in terms of hold. Even though I prefer to use OSIS on curly and wavy hair, I'm giving this round to Superego. Both products lose points though for not being as good as other styling gums or pastes I have used. (Goldwell Superego:7 OSIS Fiber Gum:6)
Ingredients: Since Goldwell Superego Molding Gum has been discontinued (it's been replaced by Goldwell StyleSign Superego Styling Cream), it's nearly impossible to find the ingredients. My tube of Superego lacks a listing of ingredients, except for a line that says it's made with Flexshine technology. As a styling gum, I suspect the ingredients are similar to OSIS, so it most likely contains the same wax, acrylamides, and parabens found in similar products. OSIS Fiber Gum, however, contains honey extract, thus giving it a slight edge in terms of natural ingredients. (OSIS Fiber Gum:6 Goldwell Superego:5)
Sensory Appeal: To be honest, both products smell awful, like something you'd use to caulk around a bathtub. The main difference is that OSIS comes in a stylish round metal can with a screw-off lid while Superego comes in a tube that looks like toothpaste. Because Superego's tube is made of soft metal, it began to leak all over the place when the tube began to crease and crack. The product also gunks up easily around the cap. OSIS wins this round by looking better and making less of a mess. (OSIS Fiber Gum:6 Goldwell Superego:2)
Value: OSIS Fiber Gum comes in a 3.39 ounce can, while Superego comes in a 2.5 ounce tube. Superego retails for around 18.95, but since it's been discontinued you can probably find it on many salon clearance racks for a fraction of that price. OSIS Fiber Gum sells for 14.00 in most salons and online retailers. Since Schwarzkopf OSIS Fiber Gum is over three dollars cheaper per ounce, this round easily goes to OSIS. (OSIS Fiber Gum:8 Goldwell Superego:5)
And the winner is.....
Schwarzkopf OSIS Fiber Gum, by a healthy margin. While both products were slightly disappointing, OSIS came out on top because it's not as messy to use as Superego. I often get asked why I think it's important to grade a product on its container, and this battle proves why packaging is so important. If a product comes in a leaky tube or bottle and is frustrating and messy to use, it's not going to survive very long on the market. And this just might be the reason why Goldwell decided to discontinue this product. (Final Score- OSIS Fiber Gum:26 Goldwell Superego:19)
CHI Pliable Polish vs. Davines No. 4 Glossy Modeling Putty
This is going to be a very interesting face-off, since it pits two of my all-time favorite products against each other. Both of these products are in my "travel kit" which I take with me to photoshoots and runway shows, but alas, there can be only one winner in this battle of the lightweight styling pastes.
Here's a look at the contestants:
CHI Pliable Polish Weightless Styling Paste is designed for style definition, enabling you to easily mold hair into the desired shape and style. Davines No. 4 Glossy Modeling Putty is the Rolls Royce of styling products, found only in high-end salons. Can trendy CHI Pliable Polish outperform its sophisticated rival? Let's find out.
Each product will be scored on a 1-10 scale in the following areas: Performance, Ingredients, Sensory Appeal (fragrance and packaging), and Value. Let the battle begin!
Performance: Both products are ideal for achieving highly-textured styles while adding a natural shine that doesn't look greasy. Both products are applied in the same manner, by emulsifying a very small dab in the palm of your hand and applying the product to dry hair as a finishing touch. Neither product has an exceptionally strong hold, but that's the whole point. Ultimately, the only area where Davines outperformed CHI was in the shine department, providing a slightly higher level of shine. Hard to pick a winner, but the edge goes to Davines Glossy Modeling Putty. (Davines:10 CHI:9)
Ingredients: The difference in ingredients is marginal. CHI Pliable Polish derives its silky texture from mineral oil, while Davines uses castor oil. When it comes to shine, CHI depends on mica and Davines depends on silica. Both products contain propylene glycol, acrylamides and propylparabens. Since this is like comparing Coke to Pepsi, I have to call it a draw, though both lose points for lack of organic ingredients. (Davines:7 CHI:7)
Sensory Appeal: The fragrance of the Davines product is absolutely delightful. In fact, it may be the best darn thing I ever smelled in my life. It brings back fond memories of my childhood that I can't quite put a finger on (if you can identify that smell, let me know!). CHI Pliable Polish smells alright, it's not strong or unpleasant. When it comes to packaging, the Davines product looks elegant and classy, but the design of the cap makes it impossible for the tube to stand up. CHI's bottle, on the other hand, has a larger cap which allows it to stand upright. Because the Davines product looks and smells great (but can't stand up), and the CHI product stands up but doesn't look or smell as good, this round is also a draw. (Davines:9 CHI:9)
Value: You get 3.3 ounces of product with Davines, and 3.0 ounces with CHI. Does that extra 0.3 ounces justify the price? Let's see. Surprisingly, CHI Pliable Polish retails for around 15.00, while Davines Glossy Modeling Putty sells for around 19.00-22.00, depending on the source, which isn't much of a price differential as you might expect since Davines tends to be found only in snooty upscale salons. Since CHI Pliable Polish is roughly seventy-five cents cheaper per ounce, it wins this round. (CHI:9 Davines:8)
And the winner is....
It's a tie! Well, that must explain why I love both of these products. Both are nearly identical when it comes to ingredients and performance, but the Davines product smells better and adds a little more shine, while the CHI product represents a better value. Davines Glossy Modeling Putty and CHI Pliable Polish both end up with 34 points, battling their way to the first tie in the history of Haircare Face-Off.
Here's a look at the contestants:
CHI Pliable Polish Weightless Styling Paste is designed for style definition, enabling you to easily mold hair into the desired shape and style. Davines No. 4 Glossy Modeling Putty is the Rolls Royce of styling products, found only in high-end salons. Can trendy CHI Pliable Polish outperform its sophisticated rival? Let's find out.
Each product will be scored on a 1-10 scale in the following areas: Performance, Ingredients, Sensory Appeal (fragrance and packaging), and Value. Let the battle begin!
Performance: Both products are ideal for achieving highly-textured styles while adding a natural shine that doesn't look greasy. Both products are applied in the same manner, by emulsifying a very small dab in the palm of your hand and applying the product to dry hair as a finishing touch. Neither product has an exceptionally strong hold, but that's the whole point. Ultimately, the only area where Davines outperformed CHI was in the shine department, providing a slightly higher level of shine. Hard to pick a winner, but the edge goes to Davines Glossy Modeling Putty. (Davines:10 CHI:9)
Ingredients: The difference in ingredients is marginal. CHI Pliable Polish derives its silky texture from mineral oil, while Davines uses castor oil. When it comes to shine, CHI depends on mica and Davines depends on silica. Both products contain propylene glycol, acrylamides and propylparabens. Since this is like comparing Coke to Pepsi, I have to call it a draw, though both lose points for lack of organic ingredients. (Davines:7 CHI:7)
Sensory Appeal: The fragrance of the Davines product is absolutely delightful. In fact, it may be the best darn thing I ever smelled in my life. It brings back fond memories of my childhood that I can't quite put a finger on (if you can identify that smell, let me know!). CHI Pliable Polish smells alright, it's not strong or unpleasant. When it comes to packaging, the Davines product looks elegant and classy, but the design of the cap makes it impossible for the tube to stand up. CHI's bottle, on the other hand, has a larger cap which allows it to stand upright. Because the Davines product looks and smells great (but can't stand up), and the CHI product stands up but doesn't look or smell as good, this round is also a draw. (Davines:9 CHI:9)
Value: You get 3.3 ounces of product with Davines, and 3.0 ounces with CHI. Does that extra 0.3 ounces justify the price? Let's see. Surprisingly, CHI Pliable Polish retails for around 15.00, while Davines Glossy Modeling Putty sells for around 19.00-22.00, depending on the source, which isn't much of a price differential as you might expect since Davines tends to be found only in snooty upscale salons. Since CHI Pliable Polish is roughly seventy-five cents cheaper per ounce, it wins this round. (CHI:9 Davines:8)
And the winner is....
It's a tie! Well, that must explain why I love both of these products. Both are nearly identical when it comes to ingredients and performance, but the Davines product smells better and adds a little more shine, while the CHI product represents a better value. Davines Glossy Modeling Putty and CHI Pliable Polish both end up with 34 points, battling their way to the first tie in the history of Haircare Face-Off.
Aquage Finishing Spray vs. Kenra Volume Spray
Two popular hair sprays enter the arena this week: Kenra Volume Spray and Aquage Finishing Spray, but only one will be declared the winner. These two products will be scored on a 1-10 scale on a variety of criteria: performance, packaging, ingredients, and value.
Now, let's take a look at this week's face-off opponents.
Kenra Volume Spray is a quick-drying firm hold finishing spray that has been awarded top honors by the leading salon industry website behindthechair.com, winning a "Stylist Choice Award" in 2006, making it a favorite hairspray among professional stylists.
Aquage Finishing Spray delivers a quick-drying formula that locks in style and resists humidity. This product is also a favorite hairspray among stylists and salon clients.
Let the battle begin!
Performance: Both sprays seemed to dry in the same amount of time, but neither spray dried as quickly as other finishing sprays made by Nexxus, Matrix, or Sebastian. However, both the Aquage and Kenra sprays performed their job as advertised and clients left the salon with beautiful hair. After a few days I noticed that the Kenra spray has a slightly stronger hold than the Aquage. Unfortunately, after about a the nozzle on the Kenra Volume Spray had become clogged and gunked up, while the Aquage Finishing Spray continued to perform flawlessly. Overall, I have to give this round to Aquage. (Aquage Finishing Spray: 9, Kenra Volume Spray: 8)
Packaging: Both are attractively designed, with Kenra Volume Spray in a sleek silver can and Aquage Finishing Spray in a metallic blue can. Both fit comfortably in the hand. However, Kenra's packaging will appeal more to the over-50 crowd, while the Aquage can looks trendy and modern. While the aesthetic appeal of the can alone is no indication of quality, the Aquage can is slightly more attractive and the nozzle doesn't clog as easily as the Kenra. (Aquage Finishing Spray: 10, Kenra Volume Spray: 9)
Ingredients: Neither of these products will appeal to those interested in organic haircare. The Kenra spray contains octylacrylamide and butylaminoethyl methacrylate copolymer- ingredients that coat the hair in a plastic-like resin. The Aquage spray contains a decent amount of natural ingredients. The Kenra spray is also highly-perfumed, which can be overpowering. Aquage wins this round. Kenra loses points for being stinky and chock full of chemicals. (Aquage Finishing Spray: 10, Kenra Volume Spray: 7)
Value: Both products are affordable in comparison to other salon brands and both products are sold in 10 ounce cans, making price comparison easy. The retail price for Kenra Volume Spray is around 12.00, while the Aquage Finishing Spray usually sells for around 15.00. Kenra wins this round. (Kenra Volume Spray: 10, Aquage Finishing Spray: 9)
And the winner of this week's face-off is...
Aquage Finishing Spray. Although both sprays are decent products which deliver reliable results, Aquage Finishing Spray pulled ahead on the scorecard when it came down to the ingredients. As a stylist I would recommend the Aquage to younger clients seeking for a fair amount of hold that won't leave the hair crunchy. The Kenra Volume Spray is a better choice for those with fine or thining hair who are looking for a stronger hold that can hold up in all weather conditions. Final score: Aquage Finishing Spray- 38, Kenra Volume Spray- 34
Now, let's take a look at this week's face-off opponents.
Kenra Volume Spray is a quick-drying firm hold finishing spray that has been awarded top honors by the leading salon industry website behindthechair.com, winning a "Stylist Choice Award" in 2006, making it a favorite hairspray among professional stylists.
Aquage Finishing Spray delivers a quick-drying formula that locks in style and resists humidity. This product is also a favorite hairspray among stylists and salon clients.
Let the battle begin!
Performance: Both sprays seemed to dry in the same amount of time, but neither spray dried as quickly as other finishing sprays made by Nexxus, Matrix, or Sebastian. However, both the Aquage and Kenra sprays performed their job as advertised and clients left the salon with beautiful hair. After a few days I noticed that the Kenra spray has a slightly stronger hold than the Aquage. Unfortunately, after about a the nozzle on the Kenra Volume Spray had become clogged and gunked up, while the Aquage Finishing Spray continued to perform flawlessly. Overall, I have to give this round to Aquage. (Aquage Finishing Spray: 9, Kenra Volume Spray: 8)
Packaging: Both are attractively designed, with Kenra Volume Spray in a sleek silver can and Aquage Finishing Spray in a metallic blue can. Both fit comfortably in the hand. However, Kenra's packaging will appeal more to the over-50 crowd, while the Aquage can looks trendy and modern. While the aesthetic appeal of the can alone is no indication of quality, the Aquage can is slightly more attractive and the nozzle doesn't clog as easily as the Kenra. (Aquage Finishing Spray: 10, Kenra Volume Spray: 9)
Ingredients: Neither of these products will appeal to those interested in organic haircare. The Kenra spray contains octylacrylamide and butylaminoethyl methacrylate copolymer- ingredients that coat the hair in a plastic-like resin. The Aquage spray contains a decent amount of natural ingredients. The Kenra spray is also highly-perfumed, which can be overpowering. Aquage wins this round. Kenra loses points for being stinky and chock full of chemicals. (Aquage Finishing Spray: 10, Kenra Volume Spray: 7)
Value: Both products are affordable in comparison to other salon brands and both products are sold in 10 ounce cans, making price comparison easy. The retail price for Kenra Volume Spray is around 12.00, while the Aquage Finishing Spray usually sells for around 15.00. Kenra wins this round. (Kenra Volume Spray: 10, Aquage Finishing Spray: 9)
And the winner of this week's face-off is...
Aquage Finishing Spray. Although both sprays are decent products which deliver reliable results, Aquage Finishing Spray pulled ahead on the scorecard when it came down to the ingredients. As a stylist I would recommend the Aquage to younger clients seeking for a fair amount of hold that won't leave the hair crunchy. The Kenra Volume Spray is a better choice for those with fine or thining hair who are looking for a stronger hold that can hold up in all weather conditions. Final score: Aquage Finishing Spray- 38, Kenra Volume Spray- 34
Phyto Fiber Paste vs. Bumble and Bumble SumoTech
This face-off can be found exclusively on the Yahoo! Contributor Network:
http://voices.yahoo.com/haircare-faceoff-phyto-fiber-paste-7615382.html?cat=69
http://voices.yahoo.com/haircare-faceoff-phyto-fiber-paste-7615382.html?cat=69
It's A 10 Miracle Shine Spray vs. Redken Vinyl Glam
Author's Note: In case you're wondering why all of these face-offs say "this week" despite being posted on the same day, it's because I'm moving them over from a different site to which I used to contribute. Although my Haircare Face-Off column was wildly popular on the Yahoo Contributor Network, I've decided to create my own blog so that I can maintain 100% editorial control.
This week, two popular shine sprays will do battle in order to find out which product delivers the best results.
These two products will be scored on a 1-10 scale and will be judged by the following criteria: Performance, Ingredients, Sensory Appeal (packaging, fragrance, and texture) , and of course, Value.
And now, let's take a look at this week's competitors:
It's A 10 Miracle Shine Spray claims to do ten different things to the hair in order to improve its appearance, strength, and condition. According to the manufacturer, this "miracle" product claims to: seal and protect hair color, lock in moisture, minimize frizz, protect the hair from heat, soften coarse hair, and a bunch of other things. This product can certainly "talk the talk", but this week we'll see if it can "walk the walk".
Redken Vinyl Glam is a mega-shine spray that claims to be light in weight (making it great for fine hair), while providing brilliant shine. One of Redken's top-selling products, Vinyl Glam certainly appears to be a worthy opponent.
Let the battle begin!
Performance: Have you ever seen a drag race where one car shoots from the starting line like a rocket, while the other car sits lifeless on the starting line in a puff of smoke? Well, this round was exactly like one of those races. The Redken Vinyl Glam spray was superb; leaving hair shiny but not greasy in appearance. My only complaint is that it is not as lightweight as some other shine sprays. Nonetheless, Vinyl Glam is a great product which delivered reliable results time after time. It's A 10 Miracle Spray, on the other hand, was a disappointment in every sense of the word. The shine it provided was minimal and short-lived. After a few minutes, the hair appeared damp and worst of all, sticky and disgusting to the touch. I tried to remedy this problem by using less product in the hair, but that didn't seem to help. Redken wins this round in a blow-out. (Redken Vinyl Glam: 9, It's A 10 Miracle Shine Spray: 2)
Ingredients: Reading the ingredients on the bottle of It's A 10 Miracle Shine Spray is like reading the names of items on a shelf in a vitamin shop. It contains camomile, noni extract, ylang ylang extract, hemp oil, and babassu seed oil. Unfortunately, combining all of these ingredients makes for a lousy shine spray, especially since any moisturizing benefits are offset by the product's high alcohol content. However, since Redken Vinyl Glam contains enough synthetic ingredients to tongue-tie a chemistry teacher, this round goes to It's A 10 Miracle Shine Spray. (It's A 10 Miracle Shine Spray: 8, Redken Vinyl Glam: 7)
Sensory Appeal: The Redken spray has a unisex fragrance, making it ideal for both men and women. The Miracle Shine Spray has a very feminine smell that might be overpowering for some noses. Both products fit easily in the hand, and the both sprays are easily dispensed through a non-aerosol pump. The Redken Vinyl Glam bottle is very modern and trendy in design, which is a huge contrast to the It's A 10 Miracle Shine Spray, which would look right at home on a shelf in a Dollar General store. In fact, it's some of the ugliest packaging I've ever seen on a beauty product. (Redken Vinyl Glam: 10, It's A 10 Miracle Shine Spray: 3)
Value: Neither product is very expensive, although for $15.25 you'll get 3.4 ounces of a product that works (Vinyl Glam), as compared to $13.50 for 4 ounces of a product that doesn't (Miracle Shine Spray). Even though the Miracle Shine Spray is cheaper, it is not a good value, since $13.50 is a lot to pay for a spray bottle of sticky plant extract that doesn't leave the hair shiny. After all, you can put some weeds in a blender and pour the juice over your head for free. (Redken Vinyl Glam: 10, It's A 10 Miracle Shine Spray: 4)
And the winner of this week's face-off is...
Redken Vinyl Glam, by a mile. Comparing these two products is like comparing a Toyota Prius to a Ferrari. Much like a Prius, the It's A 10 Miracle Shine Spray may be eco-friendly but when it comes to performance, it leaves a great deal to be desired. While the Miracle Shine Spray may contain ingredients that are beneficial to the hair, this contest was all about finding the better shine spray, and when it came to shine, the product by It's A 10 fell flat, and it certainly didn't perform any miracles. (Final Score: Redken Vinyl Glam- 36, It's A 10 Miracle Shine Spray- 17)
This week, two popular shine sprays will do battle in order to find out which product delivers the best results.
These two products will be scored on a 1-10 scale and will be judged by the following criteria: Performance, Ingredients, Sensory Appeal (packaging, fragrance, and texture) , and of course, Value.
And now, let's take a look at this week's competitors:
It's A 10 Miracle Shine Spray claims to do ten different things to the hair in order to improve its appearance, strength, and condition. According to the manufacturer, this "miracle" product claims to: seal and protect hair color, lock in moisture, minimize frizz, protect the hair from heat, soften coarse hair, and a bunch of other things. This product can certainly "talk the talk", but this week we'll see if it can "walk the walk".
Redken Vinyl Glam is a mega-shine spray that claims to be light in weight (making it great for fine hair), while providing brilliant shine. One of Redken's top-selling products, Vinyl Glam certainly appears to be a worthy opponent.
Let the battle begin!
Performance: Have you ever seen a drag race where one car shoots from the starting line like a rocket, while the other car sits lifeless on the starting line in a puff of smoke? Well, this round was exactly like one of those races. The Redken Vinyl Glam spray was superb; leaving hair shiny but not greasy in appearance. My only complaint is that it is not as lightweight as some other shine sprays. Nonetheless, Vinyl Glam is a great product which delivered reliable results time after time. It's A 10 Miracle Spray, on the other hand, was a disappointment in every sense of the word. The shine it provided was minimal and short-lived. After a few minutes, the hair appeared damp and worst of all, sticky and disgusting to the touch. I tried to remedy this problem by using less product in the hair, but that didn't seem to help. Redken wins this round in a blow-out. (Redken Vinyl Glam: 9, It's A 10 Miracle Shine Spray: 2)
Ingredients: Reading the ingredients on the bottle of It's A 10 Miracle Shine Spray is like reading the names of items on a shelf in a vitamin shop. It contains camomile, noni extract, ylang ylang extract, hemp oil, and babassu seed oil. Unfortunately, combining all of these ingredients makes for a lousy shine spray, especially since any moisturizing benefits are offset by the product's high alcohol content. However, since Redken Vinyl Glam contains enough synthetic ingredients to tongue-tie a chemistry teacher, this round goes to It's A 10 Miracle Shine Spray. (It's A 10 Miracle Shine Spray: 8, Redken Vinyl Glam: 7)
Sensory Appeal: The Redken spray has a unisex fragrance, making it ideal for both men and women. The Miracle Shine Spray has a very feminine smell that might be overpowering for some noses. Both products fit easily in the hand, and the both sprays are easily dispensed through a non-aerosol pump. The Redken Vinyl Glam bottle is very modern and trendy in design, which is a huge contrast to the It's A 10 Miracle Shine Spray, which would look right at home on a shelf in a Dollar General store. In fact, it's some of the ugliest packaging I've ever seen on a beauty product. (Redken Vinyl Glam: 10, It's A 10 Miracle Shine Spray: 3)
Value: Neither product is very expensive, although for $15.25 you'll get 3.4 ounces of a product that works (Vinyl Glam), as compared to $13.50 for 4 ounces of a product that doesn't (Miracle Shine Spray). Even though the Miracle Shine Spray is cheaper, it is not a good value, since $13.50 is a lot to pay for a spray bottle of sticky plant extract that doesn't leave the hair shiny. After all, you can put some weeds in a blender and pour the juice over your head for free. (Redken Vinyl Glam: 10, It's A 10 Miracle Shine Spray: 4)
And the winner of this week's face-off is...
Redken Vinyl Glam, by a mile. Comparing these two products is like comparing a Toyota Prius to a Ferrari. Much like a Prius, the It's A 10 Miracle Shine Spray may be eco-friendly but when it comes to performance, it leaves a great deal to be desired. While the Miracle Shine Spray may contain ingredients that are beneficial to the hair, this contest was all about finding the better shine spray, and when it came to shine, the product by It's A 10 fell flat, and it certainly didn't perform any miracles. (Final Score: Redken Vinyl Glam- 36, It's A 10 Miracle Shine Spray- 17)
Phytocitrus Restructuring Shampoo vs. Alterna Hemp Organics Shine Shampoo
Welcome to another exciting round of Haircare Face-Off, the only online battle royale of beauty where a professional stylist (yours truly) puts competing products to the test by using them on real-life clients. This week's challenge will involve two popular sulfate-free shampoos, Alterna's Hemp Organics Shine Shampoo and Phyto's Phytocitrus Restructuring Shampoo. As always, these products will be scored on a 1-10 scale for: Performance, Ingredients, Sensory Appeal (fragrance and packaging, among other things), and Value.
Let's meet this week's competitors.
Alterna Hemp Organics Shine Shampoo is a sulfate-free shampoo for all hair types, and is intended to prevent color-treated hair from fading with its certified-organic ingredients. Phytocitrus Restructuring Shampoo is one of the top-selling shampoos manufactured by Phyto, a company considered by many to be the leader in organic haircare products. Both products are sulfate-free shampoos infused with citrus promising to add shine to the hair while protecting haircolor, and both manufacturers are industry leaders in organic haircare. This should make for a very interesting battle!
Let the Haircare Face-Off begin!
Performance: My big complaint with most sulfate-free shampoos is that they do not lather very well (sulfates are responsible for producing suds), but the Alterna shampoo lathered so well I had to double-check the label to make sure that is really was sulfate-free (much to my satisfaction it was). The Phyto shampoo, however, did not lather well at all. The company recommends shampooing the hair twice, which is not only a waste of money but also a waste of time. Both shampoos left the hair shiny (when used with their accompanying conditioners), but the Alterna shampoo left my red-haired clients with vibrant color, while repeated shampooing with the Phytocitrus shampoo caused red to fade on other clients. This round goes to Alterna Hemp Organics Shine Shampoo. (Score: Alterna- 9, Phyto- 5)
Ingredients: Alterna shampoo contains extracts of hemp, cucumber, avocado, fennel, cranberry, orange, carrot, sunflower, and even mushroom. The Phyto shampoo's "secret" ingredient is wood cellulose. The idea is that the same sugar which gives a tree its structure should also provide structure to the hair. Unfortunately, trees and hair are not even close to being the same thing. Phytocitrus does contain grapefruit and almond extracts. Both products contain the preservative methylchloroisothiazolinone, but Phytocitrus also contains ethyl and butyl parabens, which are not good. This round goes to Alterna as well. (Score: Alterna-9, Phyto- 7)
Sensory Appeal: Both shampoos are citrus-scented, but in my opinion the Alterna Hemp Organics Shine Shampoo smells better. Phyto smelled vaguely of a rotten fruit basket. The Alterna products also feature much better (and convenient) packaging. The shape of the bottle is so unique that it would look great just sitting on a manlte above your fireplace. The Phyto bottle, on the other hand, looks like something you would find in your grandmother's medicine cabinet. I initially thought Phyto's metal bottle was rather cool, until I realized why 99% of shampoos are in plastic bottles- you can squeeze a plastic bottle. It was nearly impossible to get the last 1/3 of the shampoo out of the Phyto bottle. Alterna wins this round in a blowout. (Score: Alterna- 10, Phyto- 1)
Value: Alterna Hemp Organics Shine Shampoo is reasonably priced at around $23.00 for 10.1 ounces when purchased online. Phytocitrus Restructuring Shampoo retails for $24.00, for a measly 6.7 ounces. The clincher? You only need to shampoo the hair once with the Alterna, while Phyto recommends shampooing twice, so you'll go through the bottle of shampoo twice as quickly. Because of this, Alterna wins this round without question. (Score: Alterna- 10, Phyto- 3)
And the winner is...
Alterna Hemp Organics Shine Shampoo in a cakewalk. Alterna breezed past Phyto, sending the organic haircare giant home with its tail between its legs. Alterna has a better lather, better haircolor protection, a better look, a better fragrance, better ingredients, and represents a much better value. (Final Score: Alterna Hemp Organics Shine Shampoo- 38, Phytocitrus Restructuring Shampoo- 16)
Let's meet this week's competitors.
Alterna Hemp Organics Shine Shampoo is a sulfate-free shampoo for all hair types, and is intended to prevent color-treated hair from fading with its certified-organic ingredients. Phytocitrus Restructuring Shampoo is one of the top-selling shampoos manufactured by Phyto, a company considered by many to be the leader in organic haircare products. Both products are sulfate-free shampoos infused with citrus promising to add shine to the hair while protecting haircolor, and both manufacturers are industry leaders in organic haircare. This should make for a very interesting battle!
Let the Haircare Face-Off begin!
Performance: My big complaint with most sulfate-free shampoos is that they do not lather very well (sulfates are responsible for producing suds), but the Alterna shampoo lathered so well I had to double-check the label to make sure that is really was sulfate-free (much to my satisfaction it was). The Phyto shampoo, however, did not lather well at all. The company recommends shampooing the hair twice, which is not only a waste of money but also a waste of time. Both shampoos left the hair shiny (when used with their accompanying conditioners), but the Alterna shampoo left my red-haired clients with vibrant color, while repeated shampooing with the Phytocitrus shampoo caused red to fade on other clients. This round goes to Alterna Hemp Organics Shine Shampoo. (Score: Alterna- 9, Phyto- 5)
Ingredients: Alterna shampoo contains extracts of hemp, cucumber, avocado, fennel, cranberry, orange, carrot, sunflower, and even mushroom. The Phyto shampoo's "secret" ingredient is wood cellulose. The idea is that the same sugar which gives a tree its structure should also provide structure to the hair. Unfortunately, trees and hair are not even close to being the same thing. Phytocitrus does contain grapefruit and almond extracts. Both products contain the preservative methylchloroisothiazolinone, but Phytocitrus also contains ethyl and butyl parabens, which are not good. This round goes to Alterna as well. (Score: Alterna-9, Phyto- 7)
Sensory Appeal: Both shampoos are citrus-scented, but in my opinion the Alterna Hemp Organics Shine Shampoo smells better. Phyto smelled vaguely of a rotten fruit basket. The Alterna products also feature much better (and convenient) packaging. The shape of the bottle is so unique that it would look great just sitting on a manlte above your fireplace. The Phyto bottle, on the other hand, looks like something you would find in your grandmother's medicine cabinet. I initially thought Phyto's metal bottle was rather cool, until I realized why 99% of shampoos are in plastic bottles- you can squeeze a plastic bottle. It was nearly impossible to get the last 1/3 of the shampoo out of the Phyto bottle. Alterna wins this round in a blowout. (Score: Alterna- 10, Phyto- 1)
Value: Alterna Hemp Organics Shine Shampoo is reasonably priced at around $23.00 for 10.1 ounces when purchased online. Phytocitrus Restructuring Shampoo retails for $24.00, for a measly 6.7 ounces. The clincher? You only need to shampoo the hair once with the Alterna, while Phyto recommends shampooing twice, so you'll go through the bottle of shampoo twice as quickly. Because of this, Alterna wins this round without question. (Score: Alterna- 10, Phyto- 3)
And the winner is...
Alterna Hemp Organics Shine Shampoo in a cakewalk. Alterna breezed past Phyto, sending the organic haircare giant home with its tail between its legs. Alterna has a better lather, better haircolor protection, a better look, a better fragrance, better ingredients, and represents a much better value. (Final Score: Alterna Hemp Organics Shine Shampoo- 38, Phytocitrus Restructuring Shampoo- 16)
Redken Spray Starch vs. TIGI S-Factor Seriously Straight
This week's face-off will feature two popular salon products that can be used for flat-iron styling. These two products will be scored on a variety of criteria, including: Performance, Ingredients, Sensory Appeal (fragrance, packaging convenience and design), and Value. To ensure precise results, I will be using the "gold standard" in flat irons, the CHI Original.
Now, let's meet the competitors.
Redken Spray Starch is a non-aerosol spray designed to protect hair from heat while using a potato-derived starch to hold the style in place, much like using a starch spray when ironing laundry. Since human hair can technically be categorized as a fabric, it makes sense. TIGI's S-Factor Seriously Straight is a maximum-strength aerosol spray which is designed to straighten, tame frizz, and protect the hair from heat.
Let the competition begin!
Performance: When TIGI refers to their Seriously Straight spray as maximum-strength, they are not joking. This is some heavy-duty stuff. This product had no trouble straightening the hair of my ethnic and multi-cultural clients when applied to the hair prior to ironing. However, this product is way too heavy to use on those with fine hair. It is very easy to over-apply the spray, which may leave the hair feeling greasy, and it will make your floor quite slippery (as one unfortunate client found out the hard way). But when used correctly, Seriously Straight can tame even the kinkiest and frizziest hair. Redken Spray Starch delivered awesome results, but only on those with fine to medium hair. This product just wasn't strong or heavy enough for those with ethnic hair types. It is, however, one of the few flat-iron sprays that can be used on those with super-fine hair. Since both products delivered the results they promised (albeit on different hair types), this round is a tie. (Redken Spray Starch: 8, Seriously Straight: 8)
Ingredients: Redken Spray Starch utilizes an exclusive Bonding System which transports potato starch extract to the hair to protect against heat damage and cuticle damage. Unlike most heat-protection products, Spray Starch leaves hair feeling clean and residue-free. TIGI Seriously Straight contains fewer eco-friendly ingredients, and gets its results from propylene glycol, cyclopentasiloxane, and dimethicone. Although none of these ingredients are particularly harmful, this round goes to Redken for their novel use of the common potato. (Redken Spray Starch: 8, Seriously Straight: 6)
Sensory Appeal: Redken's product smells like fresh laundry, and I mean that as a compliment. It's a light pleasant fragrance that is not overpowering or overly-feminine. Redken's packaging has changed a zillion times over the past decade, but they hit on a winner with the red plastic bottles for all of their heat-protection products. Like most other products made by TIGI, the Seriously Straight has a strong fruity smell which is sickeningly sweet and a bit too overpowering for my tastes. The sleek silver can is very trendy and modern in design, however. (Redken Spray Starch: 10, Seriously Straight: 8)
Value: Redken Spray Starch is available in five-ounce bottles, and shopping online can be tricky because the prices range from 10.00 to over 25.00. If purchasing online, make sure you choose the new packaging (red bottle), since some of the products for sale feature the very old white bottles, and the somewhat newer silver bottles. You're not really getting a deal if you pay for a product that is half a decade old. Expect to pay around $12.99 if purchased from a reputable seller. TIGI S-Factor Seriously Straight is available in 6.31-ounce cans, and online prices also range from 10.00 to over 25.00. A reputable online seller might offer this product for around $14.99. Because of the wide gap in online prices for both products, and because the salon price is virtually the same per ounce, this round is a tie. Both products do earn a full 10 points for being affordably priced compared to other similar products. (Redken Spray Starch: 10, Seriously Straight: 10)
And this week's winner is: Redken Spray Starch. Even though TIGI S-Factor Seriously Straight performed better on super-curly and frizzy hair, it does leave a slight residue on the hair, the floor, and the flat iron. While Redken Spray Starch is not as strong, it does have a pleasant unisex fragrance while leaving the hair feeling clean and soft. Ultimately, both products do work, and both are affordable. Use Spray Starch for fine to medium hair, and use Seriously Straight for thick, coarse, and super-curly hair. (Final Score: Redken Spray Starch- 36, S-Factor Seriously Straight- 32)
Now, let's meet the competitors.
Redken Spray Starch is a non-aerosol spray designed to protect hair from heat while using a potato-derived starch to hold the style in place, much like using a starch spray when ironing laundry. Since human hair can technically be categorized as a fabric, it makes sense. TIGI's S-Factor Seriously Straight is a maximum-strength aerosol spray which is designed to straighten, tame frizz, and protect the hair from heat.
Let the competition begin!
Performance: When TIGI refers to their Seriously Straight spray as maximum-strength, they are not joking. This is some heavy-duty stuff. This product had no trouble straightening the hair of my ethnic and multi-cultural clients when applied to the hair prior to ironing. However, this product is way too heavy to use on those with fine hair. It is very easy to over-apply the spray, which may leave the hair feeling greasy, and it will make your floor quite slippery (as one unfortunate client found out the hard way). But when used correctly, Seriously Straight can tame even the kinkiest and frizziest hair. Redken Spray Starch delivered awesome results, but only on those with fine to medium hair. This product just wasn't strong or heavy enough for those with ethnic hair types. It is, however, one of the few flat-iron sprays that can be used on those with super-fine hair. Since both products delivered the results they promised (albeit on different hair types), this round is a tie. (Redken Spray Starch: 8, Seriously Straight: 8)
Ingredients: Redken Spray Starch utilizes an exclusive Bonding System which transports potato starch extract to the hair to protect against heat damage and cuticle damage. Unlike most heat-protection products, Spray Starch leaves hair feeling clean and residue-free. TIGI Seriously Straight contains fewer eco-friendly ingredients, and gets its results from propylene glycol, cyclopentasiloxane, and dimethicone. Although none of these ingredients are particularly harmful, this round goes to Redken for their novel use of the common potato. (Redken Spray Starch: 8, Seriously Straight: 6)
Sensory Appeal: Redken's product smells like fresh laundry, and I mean that as a compliment. It's a light pleasant fragrance that is not overpowering or overly-feminine. Redken's packaging has changed a zillion times over the past decade, but they hit on a winner with the red plastic bottles for all of their heat-protection products. Like most other products made by TIGI, the Seriously Straight has a strong fruity smell which is sickeningly sweet and a bit too overpowering for my tastes. The sleek silver can is very trendy and modern in design, however. (Redken Spray Starch: 10, Seriously Straight: 8)
Value: Redken Spray Starch is available in five-ounce bottles, and shopping online can be tricky because the prices range from 10.00 to over 25.00. If purchasing online, make sure you choose the new packaging (red bottle), since some of the products for sale feature the very old white bottles, and the somewhat newer silver bottles. You're not really getting a deal if you pay for a product that is half a decade old. Expect to pay around $12.99 if purchased from a reputable seller. TIGI S-Factor Seriously Straight is available in 6.31-ounce cans, and online prices also range from 10.00 to over 25.00. A reputable online seller might offer this product for around $14.99. Because of the wide gap in online prices for both products, and because the salon price is virtually the same per ounce, this round is a tie. Both products do earn a full 10 points for being affordably priced compared to other similar products. (Redken Spray Starch: 10, Seriously Straight: 10)
And this week's winner is: Redken Spray Starch. Even though TIGI S-Factor Seriously Straight performed better on super-curly and frizzy hair, it does leave a slight residue on the hair, the floor, and the flat iron. While Redken Spray Starch is not as strong, it does have a pleasant unisex fragrance while leaving the hair feeling clean and soft. Ultimately, both products do work, and both are affordable. Use Spray Starch for fine to medium hair, and use Seriously Straight for thick, coarse, and super-curly hair. (Final Score: Redken Spray Starch- 36, S-Factor Seriously Straight- 32)
Welcome to Haircare Face-Off
This blog is designed to give you expert impartial reviews of popular salon products. As a former Beauty Editor, believe me when I say that 90% of the "reviews" you read about in blogs and magazines are fake. Manufacturers pay bloggers and beauty editors to write good things about them. But I am one blogger and beauty expert who's NOT for sale! Beauty Face-Off is your source for unbiased reviews, written by a REAL stylist who tests the products on REAL salon clients.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)