Contour and Highlighting Makeup: Improving Perceived Facial Form
Jonathan A. Schwitzer, MD, Youna Choi, MD, Stephen B. Baker, MD, DDS, FACS.
MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA.
NESPS Abstract
Background: Contour and highlighting makeup (CHM) incorporates powder/cream formulations a few shades darker or lighter than natural skin tone. Contour shades simulate shadows on the face, resulting in a receding effect, while highlighting simulates reflective points of light to create a projecting effect. For example, to create the appearance of a slimmer dorsum, the desired width is outlined with a contouring shade with vertical lines to simulate the lateral ridges of the dorsum. The purpose of this study was to identify the use of CHM on perceived anatomy of facial structures.
Methods: A retrospective analysis of 200 publicly available Instagram posts was performed. Inclusion criteria were captions with the terms “#nosecontour”, “#facecontour”, or “#contourandhighlight, visible CHM application, and clear display of the subject before and after CHM. Posts that appeared to utilize facial distortive applications, or suggested prosthetic use or surgical intervention, were excluded. We assessed the frequency and effects of CHM techniques, and investigated for cross-racial conformity in CHM preferences.
Results: 95.5% featured females. The most frequently utilized CHM techniques to the nose included lateral dorsum ridge contour (frequency of 95%) and dorsum highlight (85%). Significant cross-ethnic conformity included contour of lateral ridges of the dorsum (>90% of all ethnicities, SD 6.41). The most popular CHM technique of the upper face was glabellar highlight (frequency of 79.65% across all ethnicities), while the least frequently observed was radix highlight (41.8%). The most popular technique in the mid-face was cheek contour (87%), while the least was palpebral bag highlight (4.1%). The most popular technique in the lower face was chin highlight (81.9%), while the least was lip contour (19%). Cross-ethnic variance within each of the included CHM techniques for each facial zone was statistically significant per Kruskal-Wallis test (p < 0.0001), suggesting ethno-specific CHM preferences.
Conclusions : This study demonstrates the presence of cross-ethnic conformity as well as disparity in CHM use. The predominant CHM maneuvers employed across all ethnicities were primarily focused at accentuation of the center of the face, particularly the nasal dorsum/tip, glabella and chin. Understanding the ability of CHM to optimize existing facial anatomy can serve as a guide to enhance results and be used for practice improvement. For example, assessing changes to perceived anatomy made by makeup artists can serve as a guide for the use of fillers to alter facial form across ethnic groups. 
Back to 2020 Abstracts