So, the day before yesterday, I got an IM from a fellow shop-a-holic: “Starley’s new skins are out.”
I cannot tell you the giddy schoolgirl glee with which that single sentence filled me. Not since Ralphie tore open the wrapping on his official Red Ryder, carbine action, two-hundred shot range model air rifle has there been such a heady gush of anticipation and promised joy.
I dashed like a madwoman to the Celestial SIM, mindless of the fact that it brings new meaning to lag-tastic (whoever thought it was a good idea to have ETD and Celestial neighbor each other should be beaten about the skull with a wet feather boa). But what was lag when new Starley skins were to be had? I scouted about and stood shoulder to virtual shoulder with several familiar and unfamiliar faces while, one by one, we grabbed demos and zipped back to our private boudoirs.
Then, not long after, I shot my eye out. I must confess some disappointment. But, let’s take it step-by-step, because there is a lot of good here. Plus Bri beats me when I don’t follow the format and the neighbors are starting to notice the bruises.
What You Get: On paper, the Vogue line of skins give a lot, but they also maintain the high-end price tag of the other Celestial lines, so that’s to be expected. With each skin you purchase you get:
* prim eyelashes in 3 sizes which I didn’t bother with but which are cute and a nice bonus.
* two versions of the skin (one with freckles and one without) that allows you to alter the brow color, and make-up shades.
There are five base skin tones (Pure, Champagne, Cashmere, Amber, Bronzed) and each of those come in 64 possible make-ups. Sixty-four. With the ability to tint and fiddle, the possible combinations make my head spin. I opted for the lightest of the skin tones (Pure) and so the photos in this entry reflect my preference to be beyond the pale.
You can purchase the skins individually (L$1000), in sets of 4 (L$3000), or in “Fat Packs” of 16 (L$9000). Starley is a bit out of touch with the concept of the SL supershopper or else she’d surely have a full 64-pack available for each tone. I give that a week 
Missing from this and, in my opinion, desperately needed, is a notecard to provide basic settings for standard brow colors. I would have also liked to see some variations on and choices regarding “the bits” but more on that below.
The Face: In my humble opinion, no one does make-up like Starley. I can’t help it - I have been her bitch since my first day in Second Life. The faces and make-up on the Vogue line do not disappoint. Each skin tone has the same make-up in 16 color families (Burgundy, Peach, Plum, Rose, Brown, Jade, Noir, Slate, Coral, Fuchsia, Pink, Red, Aqua, Blue, Green, Purple) and each of those color families has offerings in four distinct styles (Light, Mid, Smoky, Glitter). They are fanfuckingtastic as-is, and given that you can tinker with them as you see fit, the faces, on a scale of one to ten rate as…orgasmic.
The brows come default in that horrible witch-black that Starley seems to prefer to work with (but I’m not bitter). However, since they can be altered (as can the muff on the kitty) with the skin settings, I was able to get a ruddy brown brow color by setting Body Parts > Skin > Skin Color to:
Pigment: 75
Ruddiness: 0
Rainbow Color: 30
This still leaves it at a very red-heavy dark brown. If you figure out how to get a lighter brown without a puke-green tone to it, please clue me in.
Honestly, I feel that there should be a notecard included with these skins to give us some basic setting boundaries. Changing settings in Appearance Mode under “Skin” and “Hair” will produce a lot of combinations and it gets confusing and frustrating fast.
As for the freckled versions, I don’t know - it must be a preference thing, but it seems to form an unnatural pattern along the bridge of the nose that makes me want to shriek Cartman-like “Beware the ginger kids!” and it all goes to blurry hell on the chest.
The Body: The body is really where my disappointment of the Vogue line stems from, and it is important for me to note here that nearly everything I don’t like centers on preference and not technical merit. Although, there are some flaws worth mentioning.
The texture of the skin is basically the same base that appears on the Passport and Charmed series, only with additional detailing. There is definition on the belly, clavicle, knees, elbows, rear, etc. It is nice to see the effort that goes into all of these details, but I confess, after seeing a lot of the more realistic skin tone bases that many skin makers are employing these days, I was hoping for more. The Charmed series was a big step forward in tone and definition from the Passports, and the Vogue line feels more like a baby step rather than an advancement. But, then I suppose there is an argument to be made for “don’t fix it, if you don’t feel it’s broke.” I found certain areas to be blurry, even after waiting long periods of time for rezzing. All of that is minor bitchiness, tho.
My biggest body gripe is with the feet as well as the default fingernail and toenail settings. I bought two of these skins and tried on a mess of demos and the feet look like a muddy mess on all of them. I have no idea why, but they appear something like this:
Now, we all know that feet are a problematic pain in the ass to start with, but these are really awful and pretty much kill the idea of wearing an open-toe mule without dark stockings. Again, this could have been a rezzing issue, but I asked two friends who also tried demos and bought Vogue skins and they had the same problem, so if it’s a rezzing issue, it isn’t one unique to my system.
Getting back to my preference complaints, I disapprove of this “barely there” nail polish trend that seems to be on so many new skins these days. I understand that skin makers are trying to motivate us to buy their manicure and pedicure sets, but if I am paying L$1000 for a skin, I don’t think it’s so much to expect the nail polish to a) show up and b) coordinate with the make-up. If I buy a minimalist make-up, it’s understandable to have a minimalist manicure. But if I buy a deep red dramatic make-up it should come with a default dramatic nail polish. I resent that I have to use a glove slot and/or a sock slot to make up for this. It’s also very inconvenient because it infringes upon my ability to wear sheer stockings whenever I choose.
So, I’m sure it’s just my opinion, and perhaps there are many others who prefer the minimalist manicure settings at all times, but if I buy a face that looks like this:
It shouldn’t come with a manicure that looks like this:
It is worth noting that with these skins being mod-friendly, you *can* add system nail polish and color but in the hour I played with it, I just couldn’t get it to look as nice as a default “painted on” nail texture.
If I’m going to be completely nit-picking, the shading on the ears was a little harsh to my eye with parts of them appearing way too dark and thus, kind of cavernous and creepy. My hair, however, covered it up completely - and, honestly, how often do you look at the ears?
The Bits: My most bitter disappointment in the Vogue line centers on the bits. The nips are nicely shaped and colored, but they’re just plain blurry. I’m confident this isn’t a rezzing issue because when trying on the demos, the text around the breasts is clear while the nips remain blurry. Nearly everyone I spoke with expressed disappointment with the nipples (those who didn’t were all of the “I don’t really care about the bits” variety). I know the breast-area is problematic for skin and clothes makers, but it’s time to adapt. Somewhere around ninety-percent of the female population of SL prefer larger breasts on their avatars. Why not design clothes and skins that take this into account rather than designing them for a flat surface?
As for the kitty - eh. I don’t hate it, but I can’t say I’m wild about it. On the one hand, I like that it’s a trimmed muff and not some cheap-looking landing strip. I also like that it has realistic shaping and features as opposed to a faux-snatch or the Barbie treatment. I also like that the color alters with the brows so that the drapes always match the carpet.
What I don’t like is that this is the only option. I think if you’re going to offer freckles and no-freckles then offering a choice in kitty isn’t entirely out of line. Many of us have paid thousands of lindens for Passport skins and then thousands more for Charmed skins. It makes it hard to shell out thousands more for the Vogue line and a few more bells and whistles really would make this easier to swallow.
I also found some odd shading issue on the thighs just below the kitty that seemed constant no matter the lighting I used. Again, I confirmed this issue with two other people so if it’s a rezzing issue, it’s not unique to my system.
I know there is a population of SL who only buy for the make-up (or at least who claim so out loud), but there is also a huge adult-friendly segment of SL who want their virtual paper dolls to be hot in and out of their chic threads. Most of the women I know have two sets of skins - those for the make-up and those for the bits simply because it seems impossible to find one that does both really well and fits your personal preferences.
It seems to me that the Vogue line is really going after the modeling and make-up focused market and I have no doubt they’ll do well. Just taking a step back to look at the overall skin shows you that it is still a lovely effort and one of the top on the SL market. If make-up is your focus these skins are out of this world. However, I can’t say that they’re a significant enough change from the Passport and Charmed lines to warrant tossing around a lot of $L if you already have those in your inventory.
*sigh* Of course people like me will toss them around because they’re there and they’re Starley and we *MUST* have them.
Where To Buy
Vogue Skins
Individually - L$1000
Sets of 4 - L$3000
“Fat Packs” of 16 - L$9000
Celestial Studios
Celestial City 36, 219, 26
Wow, thanks for the extensive review. Having been one of those people who mad dashed in there and bought as much as the lag would allow me, I’ve taken a closer look and see your points that you make.
What I do have to argue, is that despite the very minor flaws you point out. Starley still leads the market in details on a skin like no other. I can point out other skins (of very popular designers) who’s nipples look like a plastic surgery gone wrong, but I won’t cause that’s not nice. There are many factors that play into how a skin looks on someone. Most of the designers out there make skins to fit the “average” body, whatever average is. Anyway, gigantic boobs and abnormally large butts or super long or super short hips will make the most perfect skin go completely wrong.
I happen to love these skins. And the details you point out are so minor, especially when I compare them to some of the disasters running around out there in the skin market. As far as prices go, please direct me to a high quality, high detail, skin that is anything less that 1k. Most run around charging L$1250 for a pack and L$4000 for a 4 pack. To me L$1000 less for a 4 pack is all the more reason why i want to buy it. I guess if you and I were skinners perhaps we could understand why designers feel the need to charge L$1k per pack. As a shopper, I’ve come to accept it, because hey nothing changes an appearance more than skin and I’m more than willing to pay for a skin that doesn’t make me look like a facelift gone wrong.
Honestly, this review of skins just goes to show what the designers have been trying to say all along: You can’t please everyone. Everyone I know have done nothing but rave over these skins. Even though I see your points and agree, there are just some things we learn to accept. I for one don’t go running around being naked and I sure as heck don’t check out other women’s crotch areas, so I can live without a variety of cooters to choose from. But hey that’s me and this is your blog and your opinion so I respect that.
Comment by Bright Sun — January 4, 2007 @ 1:10 am
Oh and the thing about the fingernails, I think the whole point of it was to provide a neutral background so you could choose your own color. It’s a plus if you ask me. There’s nothing I hate more than to be stuck with a nail color I didn’t want and not being able to change it.
Comment by Bright Sun — January 4, 2007 @ 1:14 am
Sigh…I could have accepted anything except probs with the bits and pieces…
Comment by Kalia Meiklejohn — January 4, 2007 @ 2:54 am
You know, I love the freckles. But I really don’t love the feet. Those are just *nasty*.
Comment by Elvis — January 4, 2007 @ 4:22 am
Come on “nasty” feet? Take a look at the other major designer’s feet on their skins. It’s not exactly the best in the world. Welcome to SL and the screwed up avatar that messes up everything.
What I don’t like about the skin is probably that crotch shading that Salome pointed out, it is very distracting.
All in all, there are things I wish could be improved, but this skin *IS* well worth the L$1,000 I paid for it.
Comment by Bright Sun — January 4, 2007 @ 4:55 am
OK listen. We do not compare skins to other skins as a metric in this blog. If the feet on a skin are less than pleasing, than we say so wrt that skin. if every foot in SL sucked, well then, we’d say that in every review. Happily for the foot fetishists among us, there are indeed some very lovely feet out there in SL land.
There are so many people who are content to buy a skin simply for the cosmetics, and without doubt, Starley is at the top of that game. But we consistantly review these items as head-to-toe skin. You better look good bald, and you better look good naked.
The nipples are blurry. That is a fact. And it is a fucking tragedy, if you ask me. And there is crotch bleed from the edge of the labia detailing, and that is something that will affect shorts, knickers, mini-skirts, and bathing costumes (not just naked avatars) and is a major issue and a technical flaw.
You may not care. You may wear trousers all the time and nobody but you may ever see your nipples. That’s fine, but just because you don’t rely on the head-to-toe aspects of your skin doesn’t mean that the problems inherent in said skin are not worthy of mention or should not earn a demerit. The face may well be worth $1,000L to many, many people but the bodies have issues, and buyers should be aware so they can make an informed consumer choice and are not disappointed at a later juncture.
Comment by Sabrina Doolittle — January 4, 2007 @ 7:16 am
Dang Sabrina, I was just expressing my opinion just as Salome did. And I did agree with her on many points and definitely saw her point of view.
Before you go chewing my head off my whole point was yes “there are things that I wish could be improved” I’ve-*I*-I am pleased with the skin that I bought, despite it’s flaws.
If you don’t welcome opinions that differ from yours then don’t open comments up to the public. I’m not arguing that Salome is wrong for pointing those things out, I’m saying that to me those things don’t matter and I’m happy.
Comment by Bright Sun — January 4, 2007 @ 7:32 am
Honey if you’re happy, than I’m happy for you. Sincerely. I have no doubt that thousands of people will join you in buying these skins, in droves, and 95% will be totally content with their purchases.
You made specific comments on the points of the post and I responded in order to clarify how we review skins.
You like the skin. You’re happy. We get it, and are happy to provide a forum for you to say so, same as we’ve always been.
Comment by Sabrina Doolittle — January 4, 2007 @ 8:05 am
I could be wrong, but your left foot seems to be stuck slightly under the surface of whatever you’re standing on…it happens to me all the time, no matter what skin I’m wearing. If you hover just above the ground, that darkness at the toes will go away, and you shouldn’t see it in shoes either, unless you hit some misaligned flooring.
Comment by Ann — January 4, 2007 @ 2:37 pm
After taking home 4 demo sets and going over them with a fine toothed comb with my significant other as an audience (hell, he has to like them too), I love the makeup on the skins - simply beautiful. Stunning actually. Amazing. Can you tell I like the makeup?
BUT, however much I would love to buy it just for the makeup, I can’t get them to work on my shape at all
For instance, the area of skin just below and to the sides of my nose and above my upper lip looks like a big triangle (!!!???). Perhaps I have odd shaped lips but this is the only skin this happens to me on so not sure the cause.
I also didn’t love the blurry nipples nor the kitty. I put it on with shorts and it just wouldn’t work for anything except trousers for me. I have a very slight frame and perhaps the shading was just too defined for my small frame? When my significant other stepped back, he said I looked flawless - but stepping in closer, unfortunately it just didn’t work for me or him
I really do think that the makeup is just wowzers…and I would buy a skin just for the makeup as long as the rest of me was sufficiently clothed. But as I said, unfortunately on my shape, even the makeup wouldn’t work due to the lip issue. Maybe I can play with my lip/nose shape a bit and try the demos again to see.
If anyone is morbidly curious as to what the lip/nose issue looks like on me with these skins, e-mail or IM me
Comment by Gillian Waldman — January 4, 2007 @ 3:52 pm
Salome, Sabrina, I am right there with you sisters! If I am going to invest that kind of money in a product, I too will look at the whole package. The fact of the matter is that the nipples, kitty area, and feet are just not the greatest. Most designers offer other options on the kitty…er…carpet, and this one drives me nuts!! I too found the mod ability of the brow color very confusing and could not manage anything but a dark brown or crazy rainbow effect. Directions would be most useful.
For those of us that it matters to, these flaws are a huge disappointment.
The make up is flawless and stunning. I actually prefer the subtle details of the body, but I too would never wear this skin in anything less than pants or a longer skirt….*sigh*….
Sadly still in search of the perfect skin!
Comment by Madison — January 4, 2007 @ 4:24 pm
Ann, yes, you’re correct: on the foot image, Salome’s right foot (on the left in the photo) is indeed featuring foot sink. But if you look at her other foot, I think it illustrates the point. The foot? Not pretty. I think the ends of the toes possibly fall short of the end of the foot (ie, should be placed further out), leaving this weird Ledge of Mangle effect…
Comment by Sabrina Doolittle — January 4, 2007 @ 5:50 pm
Welp, I for one LOVE the freckles, since starley gave me the first one to try i’ve been stuck with it on, like totally glued to me, we all have our likes and dislikes about skins, and honestly the “bits” don’t matter to me, prolly cos I don’t ever look at them lol, but I can see why it would matter to others.
I personally love them, and have done since I saw the beta one, the make-ups are fab and I do love the shading that isn’t as, whats the word.. “harsh”? as Charmed.
I think i’ll always be a starley skin biotch, but well that;s just lil old me
Comment by willow — January 4, 2007 @ 6:47 pm
This has to be the pettiest and stupidest review I read in a long time. Frankly when it came to fashion blogs LL was always at the bottom of the barrel for me because your AVs are so unattractive and you think silks and plaid dike shirts are superb fashion. But this really killed any desire I had to even look at the pictures of your excuse for a review-blog.
The entire review is very negative but when you actually need to say why you don\’t like the skins your reasoning is that you don\’t get a variety of vaginas and that the nail polish isn\’t the specific color you and ONLY YOU want! Frankly I\’d rather not have whore-red nails like you and I\’m glad the nails are left neutral. If someone wants to pimp their nails (like you) you buy nail polish. Buying bare nails because you didn\’t want them red is stupid.
Another thing you mentioned was this invisible line on the thigh? You can\’t be serious. Basically your beef with the skins, if you read the entire review, is that you have serious issues because you spend all day staring at your crotch. I didn\’t see a single point in your review that was worth reading. These days 1000L a skin is beyond reasonable, and this set gives you the innovative option to color your eyebrows and crotch, AND just in case you wanted a freckles version it adds that too. PLUS eyelashes, but you think this skin is awful because ON TOP of all that you don\’t have different vaginas?? are you insane?? Honestly at times likes these I wish there was ban on stupid people writing reviews.
Comment by Linda — January 4, 2007 @ 7:03 pm
I think Salome was pretty clear on her personal preference issues vs. technical/quality issues. Nail preferences? Personal. Blurry nipples? Quality issue. Crotch bleed? Technical issue.
If you don’t enjoy our reviews, please do feel free not to read this website. There are plenty of others.
For the record, we’ve reviewed, umm, two silks in a year, and the plaid dyke shirt is a superb technical achievement even if it’s not your personal fashion preference. And you know, it’s not even all that dykish, unless you live a sadly, terribly sheltered life over there in Stepford.
And just because my inner pedant is 5 years old, I’d also like to point out that there is no such word as “stupidest.” You believe this is the “most stupid” review ever, not the stupidest. And while we’re at it, a dike is an earthen wall and a dyke is a lesbian.
Plus, when you post under a fake username, your credibility is already 90% reduced, so I’m bored with you already. Yawn.
Comment by Sabrina Doolittle — January 4, 2007 @ 7:45 pm
Thanks, Sabrina, I just wasn’t sure what Salome was referring to when she said ‘muddy.’ For the record, I bought a slew of these skins the first night they were out and I really like them. I do think Starley tried to put too much detail on the toes, I’m definitely not a fan of the nipples, the upper ab definition is a bit overdone for my taste, and the freckle application is too liberal to ever see the light of day on my av, but the crotch thing is way too subtle for me to care much about. I had to stand in Appearance and swing the camera around just right to even notice it, and I probably wouldn’t have at all if Salome hadn’t pointed it out. Also, I prefer to wear mani/pedi layers, so I like the minimal polish…it doesn’t interfere with my gloves and socks if I forget to adjust my sliders. As for the brows…well, who decides what the ’standard’ shades are? There are about eighty gazillion hair colors in SL and you know people would be complaining if a brow notecard for their specific color wasn’t included. I think it’s a cool innovation to allow people to fiddle with it at all…but, then again, my avie pretty much only wears black hair, so I’m not really affected. lol
I love the makeups, love the carpet on the kitty (I’m so tired of going bare or sporting a somewhat angry-looking landing strip), and, with the exceptions noted, love the body detailing. One more love…a true ultralight shade. I like being being as light as possible without going white, and so many purported ‘ultralights’ are too dark, too pink, too orangey, or just too something else that causes me to run screaming from the store. All in all, the positives outweigh the negatives for me…but that’s ME. It would be nice if people would just take Salome’s review for what it is and then go out and form their own opinions. Life, second or first, would be dull as hell if we all agreed on everything, but we should still be able to remain civil. *sigh*
By the way, I love that you guys do such detailed reviews. “It’s pretty, go buy it” isn’t really that helpful, but your reviews really assist with your readers’ consumer savvy.
OK, I’ll shut up now. lol
Comment by Ann — January 4, 2007 @ 8:27 pm
To be perfectly honest, SL avatar feet are hell on wheels to texture — the shape is weird to begin with *and* the obligatory scaling size to 0 isn’t helping it at all … no clue how people manage to make them look any good. The nipple thing, sharpening the look would be relatively simple so am guessing it’s rather style preference expressed by the skin beta testers? And if that’s the case then can’t argue much with your customers -.^;
oh well, just two pointless linden cents ^^;; i was looking for long time to this release and in the end would miss it if it wasn’t for this review… so ran to the store and picked up some demos and well they’re really really nice, i think ^^;;;
Comment by Joannah Cramer — January 4, 2007 @ 8:42 pm
I enjoyed this review very much. I think it takes courage to challenge the quality of a product by somebody as notable as Starley - and I think it lends credibility to your blog. I have not purchased the skins in question and so I cannot vouch for the validity of Salome’s comments. But I think she was balanced in calling the faces and makeup applications “orgasmic” while pointing out technical flaws in the feet and crotch. I also found her final assessment very helpful “If make-up is your focus these skins are out of this world.” For what it’s worth I love Starley’s work and I am sure these skins are beautiful and worth the money being asked. But I also want to know when there are technical issues with a product and I applaud Salome for being courageous enough to point these out.
Comment by Persephone Milk — January 4, 2007 @ 9:59 pm
In Salome’s defense, I totally
Comment by Aenea Nori — January 4, 2007 @ 10:27 pm
…pushed “submit” too soon?
Comment by Sabrina Doolittle — January 4, 2007 @ 10:35 pm
FWIW, I put one of my demos back on and messed around with my lip and nose shape - and now the makeup works perfectly on me like all the other pretty ladies I see wearing these skins (and there are tonsssss)
I am definitely going back to pick up some Smokey ones in Cashmere later on 
As I said, makeup is definitely most important to me since I tend to cover up most often.
As far as feet, I didn’t notice; and unless you really zoom in on the nipples, they work great IMHO. And the manicure? I prefer subtle so this will work great for me.
Comment by Gillian Waldman — January 4, 2007 @ 11:01 pm
I don’t always like things I see on the grid and as reveiwers I have to respect Sabrina and Salome for giving honest reviews of their opinions. One of the important things for me as a designer is listening to people and learning from their comments. I think the review was balanced with good things and things Salome didn’t like. This is her opinion and she has every right to it, if you disagree, do go and try one for yourself but trying to shout down someones opinion it pretty pointless.
With regard to the moddable bit, I think the Sl sliders are pretty poor and hard to work with; so that particular issue may simply be due to that. As a personal preference I like to have my brows painted on etc otherwise I’d probably have rainbow-dirt-yellow brows and purple pubic area!
Comment by sachi Vixen — January 4, 2007 @ 11:42 pm
Okay, so there have been a lot of posts to this thread already, but after reading some of them I just couldn’t help but throw my two cents in. I applaud those of you who have shared your opinion on the skins, your likes and dislikes, and I boggle at those of you who have used this forum as an attack. There should and of course always will be differing opinions on what is important and what is personal preference in any blog which reviews the work of others. As Sabrina’s already said, Salome pointed those out the difference between what was a personal dislike on her part and what were technical flaws; she took her time and was thorough, taking photos so that people could see what she was talking about and have the opportunity to make up their own minds, something which I’m sure was done out of respect for Starley’s reputation as much as anything else.
The negative comments some have posted here would have you think she bashed Starley up and down, spat on her skins and raped her cat. This review wasn’t a bash job, so please quit acting like it was. You just can’t read an article that contains statements like “a lot of good here,” “they are fanfuckingtastic as-is,” “on a scale of one to ten rate as…orgasmic” and then call it a bash job. She was very fair in her assessment of the skins and praised where praise was due.
What so many of you in these comments fail to see is that your responses are littered with exactly the same perspective you’re attacking her for: expressing an opinion. You don’t care about the bits? That’s fine, others do. You don’t care about the feet? That’s fine, others do. You don’t care about the nails? That’s fine, others do.
The flaws in this skin are there, documented by photographs and easily visible by anyone who looks … yes, -you- may not care about those parts of the skin, but that doesn’t mean that the flaws don’t exist. I personally read this blog because it doesn’t always pretend everything’s perfect and it gives solid reasons when it doesn’t like something. There are blogs out there that talk about everything being perfect all the time and blogs out there who bash everything and everyone because its fun. This one gives you honest opinions and supports those opinions with explanations.
Linden Lifestyles and Salome had nothing to gain with this review. They already have a huge readership so it wasn’t an attention stunt and there’s no money to be made in advertising or freebies for giving an unfavorable review. This was a big release to the SL fashion market, it needed to be covered and Salome covered it entirely honestly.
As for the nail polish issue, I agree with Salome entirely. I think the nail polish should fit the makeup. If I buy natural looking makeup then I agree the nails should be au natural; if, however, I buy a skin with a non-natural lip colour (be that coral, pink, red, or electric blue), I think the nails should match. That’s just common sense in my book. Lipstick matches nail polish … that’s why the cosmetics companies sell them in the same shades and why the drug stores place them side-by-side (really … have you ever been to a Shiseido or Clinique or Smashbox counter and not been able to find a polish to perfectly match that shade of lipstick you found on one of its spindles? I haven’t!). I object to having to use glove and sock slots to simulate polish when one of the first rules of makeup we girls learn from our mothers is to make sure your polish matches your lipstick! Having to fool with the colours myself rarely generates the exact shade as comes with the skin and is undeniably an exercise in severe frustration. I don’t buy lipstick from Clinique then polish from Shiseido … where I buy one, I buy the other; I’m not guaranteed an exact match otherwise.
I also think that the notecards Salome mentioned would have been a very considerate inclusion. I bought a pack of tintable skins recently and spent DAYS fiddling trying to find the right shades (in truth I don’t think I’ve found the perfect one yet). A notecard with some base shade settings would have saved me oodles of time. Obviously, I don’t think that Starley (or anyone else) should have a notecard listing every possible combination (that’d be slightly ridiculous), but I do think it’s entirely reasonable to expect an inclusion of basic brown, basic blond, and basic red to help people move in the right direction. Also, its possible Starley just didn’t think of this idea, but I fail to see why -that- in and of itself makes it a bad suggestion.
Whew … ok so I have more than just two cents. I can’t help myself when I get started. All in all this is a beautiful set of skins in terms of the makeup, but although I’m not wandering around in the buff all the time, I do go to the beach in bikinis etc, and appreciate when -all- of the skin looks as good as the makeup does … I’ve just had my boy look over my shoulder and say “My god, it’s like virtual Sex in the City” so I think it’s about time I finish up here.
Thanks for putting up with my rambling opinion!
Comment by Iliyana Carillon — January 5, 2007 @ 2:43 am
Wow, amazing comments here! Normally, I keep my mouth shut about skin reviews because I’m a skin maker myself but I just had to throw in my two cents about a few small details. 1-the feet SUCK in SL, the only way Starley could have done better is if she we went with much more subtle shading which wouldn’t have been in synch with the rest of her skin. So I don’t blame you for not liking the feet, but I don’t think she could have done anything else with them really. 2-matching manicure is a nice option but I personally don’t want to have to wear nail gloves just to cover up nails I don’t want. I’m with her all the way on the natural choice. Personally, I’m a huge fan of wearing colors on my fingernails that I would never wear on my lips and toenail polish that I would never wear on my fingernails. 3-The price is crazy good. 1k for ALL that???I sure as heck have no intention of ever charging so little for so much and I can think of one of at least one skin maker that charges more than 1k a skin. I may soon be one of them because I feel that our skins are getting good enough and we spend enough time on them that they warranta higher price. 4-I love the reviews done here, they are critical and distinguish between subjective and objective so pfft to anyone who dared give Salome a hard time about this review.
Comment by Roslin Petion — January 5, 2007 @ 7:33 am
I have spent an inordinant amount of time this morning thinking about feet. Yes, feet are very hard to deal with and I understand that the shape is smushed hell on a mesh. But what is particularly interesing to me about the comments wrt the Vogue feet is that as difficult as the foot is to do well, Starley’s Passport skins had some the best bare feet I’d ever seen in SL, even with the smushed big toe foot shape issue. Even though I never migrated to the Passports, the feet were truly adorable.
So yes, they are difficult and a pain in the ass, and yes, different skin makers exhibit different approaches and skill levels in foot design, but this skin maker previously made superlative feet and the new ones are, IMHO, not nearly as good.
Obviously, people produce all kinds of different feet. Some are clearly better than others, but since it *can* be done well, I think its fair to look for them to *be* done well, you know?
Comment by Sabrina Doolittle — January 5, 2007 @ 9:21 am
Ok, I do have to say where a certain previous poster’s argument fell apart (besides everything else she posted) was when she said that Salome’s and Sabrina’s avys were “ugly”. My goodness … have you really looked at them? I would feel honored to have either next to me in bed … or the couch … or the floor … or the … well … you get the idea. *blush*
Comment by Animetia Bellman — January 5, 2007 @ 4:26 pm
I love the skins Starley makes, but I have one problem. Every time i put one on I see nothing but lines, but when I see them on other people they look fabalous. I have tried altering my shape, getting different colored skins and nothing seems to work. But I did want to write and say Starley they are lovely and I hope one day to figure out what im doing wrong and get to wear one.
Comment by Sammy Barrett — January 5, 2007 @ 5:33 pm
As a beta tester for these skins I can say that Starley really listened to what I had to say. I think all of my concerns were “fixed”. IMO the feet, crotch shadow, bits, blurry nipples (I seriously doubt any beta tester asked for blurry nips) and plain nails are not problem for me. Not really a fan of the freckles (I have yet to find the perfect freckled skin for my avi). Starley outdid herself in makeup choices and packaging. Looking at them on the wall for the first time was a bit confusing, but it was very easy to figure out how things were packaged by just looking at her signs. Regardless of how Salome feels about the skin that last pic (full body shot) of her is beautiful.
Comment by Dorra Debs — January 5, 2007 @ 5:43 pm
Now I’ve got the urge to look at my av’s feet.
I love the skin reviews by Sabrina and Salome, they’re better than mine! I do have to say that nipples seem tough to get “perfect” I thiink every skin I own has blurry nipples. I don’t mind that so it’s no big deal to me as long as I have my red brows.
Comment by CronoCloud Creeggan — January 5, 2007 @ 5:52 pm
I just found this in ETD for 1L and thought I’d share…as well as the ‘cheat sheet’ notecard, the pack includes demo skins with all of the colors preset for your review.
(Notecard content deleted - please do not repost content to which you do not own the copyright. Thanks, Sabrina)
I don’t know if Starley has this up as well, since I gorged on the Vogue skins when they were first released and haven’t checked back since. lol
Comment by Ann — January 23, 2007 @ 2:30 am
Whoa, sorry about that…it didn’t occur to me there would be an issue with something which is basically a freebie.
Comment by Ann — January 23, 2007 @ 5:16 am
I just checked out Starley’s blog and noticed the following entry as of today:
Vogue Goes Brazilian (http://www.starley.com/2007/01/vogue_goes_braz.html)
This is a $50L set of underpants to provide a brazilian look with the new vogue skins only.
I thought I’d pass it on as this new offering satisfies in part your voiced dislike that the kitty on the skin “is the only option”.
Comment by Korali Galland — January 26, 2007 @ 7:07 pm
Just read back and found out what the hoo hah was re: “Linda”’s post… I’m glad you found her boring, Sabrina, and left off responding to her. For myself, I discovered LL about a month ago and have both greatly enjoyed your detailed reviews and have shamelessly used LL as a shopping guide. I love shopping on my own, but when I have someone out there already pretesting—what a great first filter! Sincere and enthusiastic thanks so much for the time you put into Lifestyles, Sabrina and Salome. Korali.
Comment by Korali Galland — January 26, 2007 @ 7:20 pm
I enjoy reading your blog, but I have to say I was surprised when you told your critic that “stupidest” isn’t a word. As a blogger/writer, you should know that it most certainly *is* a word.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/stupidest
Regards,
k
Comment by crystal — February 1, 2007 @ 4:20 pm
I’m surprised no one has mentioned the over-defined abs. They’re not necessarily a dealbreaker for me, but in the 1st and 4th pix above they look like nothing you’d see outside a bodybuilding contest.
Comment by Tuffy — March 5, 2007 @ 8:20 pm