Makeup artist against MAC/ MAC pushing independant artists out of the industry

cno64

Well-known member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beauty Mark
Not trying to sway you to be anti-MAC (I'm conflicted for shallow reason- I like Fluidline too much), but a lot of higher end makeup doesn't test on animals. Some of them aren't significantly more than MAC. There are many lists out there; even though PETA is nuts, they have a comprehensive list that I believe is accurate

I think that MUFE is also a no-animal-testing company; I may give them more of my business in the future.
As for PETA, I agree with you that they're kinda nutty, but they get the job done.

P.S. I love Blacktrack Fluidline; it's my HG liner.
 

Andain

New member
RE: Animal Testing

I know there are other high end brands out there that do not do testing like MUFE, Face Atelier, and Smashbox. I'll compile a list and post it up for you guys in the next few days
smiles.gif
 

Beauty Mark

Well-known member
Quote:
Originally Posted by cno64
I think that MUFE is also a no-animal-testing company; I may give them more of my business in the future.
As for PETA, I agree with you that they're kinda nutty, but they get the job done.

P.S. I love Blacktrack Fluidline; it's my HG liner.


Here's the links from PETA

Thinking about it more, most expensive brands don't test. Stila, Hard Candy, Urban Decay, Benefit
 

martygreene

Well-known member
Also, K.J. Bennett recieved this message recently, which is worth mentioning:

Quote:
KJ

Karen, the MAC PR person, is being less than truthful as to MAC's "goodwill intentions".
I just found your site after reading the IATSE's newsletter and doing a Google search. So this may be old news to you and your readers.
Here in South Florida besides Fashion Week and videos, MAC has also been promoting their "goodwill" by bulk emailing photographers offering free artist and make-up in exchange for magazine cover credits.
Many MUAs have noticed the drop in business.
Surprisingly, many MUAs including myself were not aware of the negative impact MAC's practices are having on our livelihood.
I've have forwarded links to your blog and "In My Kit" to every MUA I know.

Keep up the good work! It's a just cause.

GP
 

Dizzy

Well-known member
I don't think that they're saying that the MAC team was doing it for free per se, but I think they mentioned that they had undercut the union MA's by doing the shows for their regular retail wages. In comparison, it'd be practically for free since the shows were using free makeup also. But I could be wrong.
 

lah_knee

Well-known member
ya thats not accurate because my friends who did the mercedes benz fashion show just a couple months ago got paid hundreds of dollars for just a short while of being there :O
 

giz2000

Well-known member
Quote:
Originally Posted by lah_knee
ya thats not accurate because my friends who did the mercedes benz fashion show just a couple months ago got paid hundreds of dollars for just a short while of being there :O

Some MAC artists are also freelancers (work for themselves as well in outside jobs) or belong to an agency...as long as they were working on their own, they would get paid the hundreds of dollars that they did...if they were "working" for MAC that day, they would have gotten paid their regular salary.

I know a few MAC artists here in South FL that do this...I do this myself.
 

martygreene

Well-known member
Quote:
Originally Posted by lah_knee
umm all the artists i know that work for mac doing fashion shows get paid... they arent "free" O__o

They are free to the fashion show. The artists get paid, yes, but not by the client (fashion show) but by MAC. This is NOT how the industry works generally, and this allows MAC to undercut any independant artists regardless of their being represented by an agency or not. Free to the fashion show/designers is really hard to beat for us.
 

giz2000

Well-known member
Quote:
Originally Posted by lah_knee
no they were working through mac... hmmm maybe it varies but ya

I was going to answer this...but then I realized I already did! LOL!
 

martygreene

Well-known member
Worth noting, EL currently owns the following cosmetic/fragrance lines:
Estée Lauder
Clinique
MAC
Aveda
Origins
Prescriptives
Bobbi Brown
Aramis
La Mer
Tommy Hilfiger
Jo Malone
Bumble and bumble
Donna Karan
Darphin
Michael Kors
Rodan and Fields
American Beauty
Flirt!
Good Skin
Donald Trump The Fragrance
Grassroots
Sean John
Daisy Fuentes
 

KayoS

Member
First off, i dont believe they are trashing the BRAND--they are trashing some of the actions. Granted, I am a freelance for MAC, and i won't change that anytime soon- but the point in fact still being that MAC has done some very sneaky things to eek their way into places that previously belonged to local unions or to private makeup artists.

Take Pirates of the Carribean, for example. Brilliant movie, Originally it was NOT sponsored by MAC--and then in a quick switch, a few of the artists were replaced and became.. voila.. MAC artists and MAC got their name in the credits at the end.

It's amazing what free makeup, or the promise of a massive discount can do for a production. Think of it this way: half of the productions usually come in AT budget, or OVER budget. MAC promising free things can help them come in UNDER budget--which lights up ANY Producers eyes.

Some of the things MAC has done to slip into the spots of localized unions or even private makeup artists in general has been shady. I will say that first and foremost.

Does this change my opinion on MAC at the moment? No. I am a freelance for them, and they are helping me perform the duties that i need to do to get to that level. They provide a good, quality product that i can get at a discounted level and are there for a "quick shipment" (when the right product actually comes).

Mind you, i'm not blasting MAC. Simply opening the point that some of those people are RIGHT. their opinions are just that--opinions--but some people are stating FACT. I didn't know about my Super x girlfriend, but it goes right along with Pirates. I'm starting to wonder if that isn't a trend that has been happening for a while.

We've all noticed a slight slip in product satisfaction, as well as distribution. MAC is coming out with TOO MANY collections, TOO FAST. It's not giving the basic consumer time to spend the money they want on a collection, without pulling them to the next one already. Even at that, MAC wonders why their base line is faultering, or why their lipstick line which was the base starting point for mac has become a lesser selling arena. Granted, with the chrome glasses, plushglass, etc - the lipstick line is jetting back to where it was. The simple fact remains: Most consumers CANNOT keep up with the releases of the LE products, AND still purchase the base lines. Not with the massive back to back releases.

So. There ya have it. Those are my opinions, and i'm sorry if i upset anyone. Just understand that those people that had their jobs ripped out from underneath them are probably a bit burned, upset, and downright disappointed in the MAC word: We are for the artists, by the artists.... It's starting to become a corporate monster, at some points.
 

KayoS

Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by lah_knee
ya thats not accurate because my friends who did the mercedes benz fashion show just a couple months ago got paid hundreds of dollars for just a short while of being there :O

Well, it depends. Were they working through mac? Were they freelance? Were they hired specifically through MB?

A lot of variables exist there.

If you work FOR mac, and get hired to do a fashion show--odds are it will be FREE for the fashion show. Instead of getting paid a regular artists wages (which can be upwards of hundreds of dollars an hour), you'd get your regular MAC salary, maybe with a little bonus.

If you worked FREELANCE, or specifically contracted through MB, you could get any rate of pay they please. Typically for larger shows like that, the price paid can get ridiculously delicious looking.

Just think of it that way.
smiles.gif
 

lovelypinkx

New member
Personally, I don't feel like reading all the pages of drama going on, so sorry if I don't reply to any of going, but I want to get to the point. When I read about the situation going on with MAC and the boycott, I was pretty surprised what I learned about the whole reason of the boycott and just about MAC in general. I think everyone should read Kevin-James Bennett's blog entries on this situation. He was an industry artist that trained MAC artists in the workshops and a professional, highly-experienced, and well-known artist. He shows both sides of the story and what's really going on with MAC(so be prepared to see some negative sides to MAC and comments.) I was a bit shocked by the information I read.

I never knew how much Estee Lauder changed MAC cosmetics. I still love MAC products and loyal to MAC. In fact, MAC is mostly all I've ever had(and I know I really should expand and try other cosmetics lines, especially when it comes to eyeshadows.) However, I wonder how the quality really is in comparison to other cosmetics lines, especially since Estee Lauder changed the original formulas for MAC products. The forums I go to, girls mostly recommend using MAC cosmetics so I feel like I'm manipulated into to just sticking with MAC products, especially with how pretty they look. It makes me disappointed also what Estee Lauder has done with MAC cosmetics, but it won't steer me away from buying some MAC products.

I just thought people should read the blog, because it tells you a lot about what's going on with freelance MUAs and MAC cosmetics. It might appear to MAC lovers that KJ Bennett is just hating on MAC, but I think that he's just disappointed with what MAC is doing business wise and what Estee Lauder is doing with MAC products. It's important to look at the sections on the sides to learn about what's going on. I think this can help MAC lovers understand why people are angry and trying to boycott MAC products but at the same time not take the MAC-hating comments so seriously. Everyone has their opinions and you can choose not to care and ignore what they have to say.
 

Villainiss

Well-known member
I've read through this whole discussion, and I'd like to point out a couple of things that made my teeth itch. Unfortunately, because there are SO many posts, I'm not going to directly quote, as it will take me longer to make my points, so I will instead paraphrase.

By the way, I want to make it clear that I am not participating in the boycott, as I still use my MAC products, but I have limited my MAC purchases to things that I cannot find elsewhere, and have greatly diversified my kit since this boycott was issued. I don't want to cut ties with MAC completely, but I am in support of them changing their practices.

It was mentioned that since some of the folks on here aren't FL MA's, then why should they care? What MAC consumers should realize is that because the these products aren't being used by FLMA's any more, the buzz is diminishing about MAC, and quickly. Hence, EL has to create their buzz somehow, so by giving away product and services to productions, be it film, photo or fashion, they get product placement instead. But it's not free; they still have to pay for the manufacturing, the artists still collect a paycheck, and all those people who work in corporate offices, booking those deals, need to get paid. So, what does that have to do with the consumer? YOU end up getting to pay their salaries by purchasing products. You may think it's not a big deal, because there hasn't been a dramatic increase in prices of product, but when EL came into play, they changed the formulas of the product so they would be cheaper to make. Think about it - if the product is suddenly cheaper to make, then why didn't they lower prices? Because they have to pay their people somehow.

Folks have said that they're going to continue buying MAC because of it's humanitarian efforts. If a person is truly concerned about the AIDS epidemic and wants to contribute to it, volunteering with AIDS charities, and straight up donations will get you closer. Buying a tube of MAC lipstick may help donate money to the cause, but you're still reaping a personal benefit. Do I have all of the lipsticks? You bet, but I still donate my time and money to various charitable organizations.

Sure, it's big business, and perhaps it may not be important to the collectors, consumers and/or occasional users, but it's important to the people who make their livings by doing makeup. If it wasn't for the FLMA's, MAC would still be a fledgling little company trying to make it's way.

The truth is, do I blame MAC for what's happening? No. I blame Estee Lauder. They have systematically gone about accumulating smaller, reputable makeup brands and turned them into lower quality, higher priced lines driven only by money.

There is a reason that people who apply makeup are called artists - because it IS AN ART. Sure, you can teach anyone how to do the basics from a face chart and they can pull it off. But people who know how to work with lighting, different skin tones, types, textures, film, print, and who are able to turn a concept into reality - that takes true talent and artistry. Makeup began as an art, and it should remain that way - and not at the cost of daily consumers, and certainly not at the cost of a FLMA's livelihood.

And lastly, what upsets me most, is the people who work for MAC are being treated as indentured servants. I can go do a gig, get paid, and get a tear sheet, and have proof of the work that I do. A MAC artist will do the same gig, get paid FAR less money, and once it's all said and done, they don't get the proof of their work. Once they leave MAC, their proof stays with MAC. So how are they supposed to prove that they did fashion week, or that they worked on such-and-such movie? They can't. And for those of us in the business, it's not about someone "taking my word" for it, it's about proving what we've done.

It's a tough business that's getting tougher and tougher - heck, just the fact that there are tons of makeup schools out there pumping out "makeup artists" by the 1000's who are flooding the market - having a major company scooping up big contracts is making it just that much harder.

It's a lot to think about, but it's worth the thought - for all of us.
 

Beachgrl07

Well-known member
I am not a MUA so I obviously cannot sympathize with these people but I can understand how switching from something for pro's only to something that straddles the fence can lower the bar. Lately I've even been hearing about some of the new quads with LE colors that basically suck while the other colors (staples) are excellent. I can't understand the mad dash for new stuff either (look at the Barbie craziness). Most of my stuff is primarily MAC and until things get really ugly, I'll keep on using it. I guess I do feel bad that their jobs are being taken away but what is business if there's no drama?
 

MAC Beau

Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by KayoS
First off, i dont believe they are trashing the BRAND--they are trashing some of the actions. Granted, I am a freelance for MAC, and i won't change that anytime soon- but the point in fact still being that MAC has done some very sneaky things to eek their way into places that previously belonged to local unions or to private makeup artists.

Take Pirates of the Carribean, for example. Brilliant movie, Originally it was NOT sponsored by MAC--and then in a quick switch, a few of the artists were replaced and became.. voila.. MAC artists and MAC got their name in the credits at the end.

It's amazing what free makeup, or the promise of a massive discount can do for a production. Think of it this way: half of the productions usually come in AT budget, or OVER budget. MAC promising free things can help them come in UNDER budget--which lights up ANY Producers eyes.

Some of the things MAC has done to slip into the spots of localized unions or even private makeup artists in general has been shady. I will say that first and foremost.

Does this change my opinion on MAC at the moment? No. I am a freelance for them, and they are helping me perform the duties that i need to do to get to that level. They provide a good, quality product that i can get at a discounted level and are there for a "quick shipment" (when the right product actually comes).

Mind you, i'm not blasting MAC. Simply opening the point that some of those people are RIGHT. their opinions are just that--opinions--but some people are stating FACT. I didn't know about my Super x girlfriend, but it goes right along with Pirates. I'm starting to wonder if that isn't a trend that has been happening for a while.

We've all noticed a slight slip in product satisfaction, as well as distribution. MAC is coming out with TOO MANY collections, TOO FAST. It's not giving the basic consumer time to spend the money they want on a collection, without pulling them to the next one already. Even at that, MAC wonders why their base line is faultering, or why their lipstick line which was the base starting point for mac has become a lesser selling arena. Granted, with the chrome glasses, plushglass, etc - the lipstick line is jetting back to where it was. The simple fact remains: Most consumers CANNOT keep up with the releases of the LE products, AND still purchase the base lines. Not with the massive back to back releases.

So. There ya have it. Those are my opinions, and i'm sorry if i upset anyone. Just understand that those people that had their jobs ripped out from underneath them are probably a bit burned, upset, and downright disappointed in the MAC word: We are for the artists, by the artists.... It's starting to become a corporate monster, at some points.



DITTO!
 

martygreene

Well-known member
A few pieces of news on this, one of which is very sad.

Quote:
It seems that someone is very intent on removing all references petaining to the MAC Cosmetic Boycott at the MAC Cosmetic Wikipedia page.
It seems strange/suspect that the person who is continually editing/deleting the content is rather obsessive compulsive about removing any reference to the existence of the boycott including external links that have been there for months and a link to the scanned copy of the Local 798 Union Newsletter verifying their participation:

Take a look at this person's editing history...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special...s/24.46.89.151

Notice that the individual has also edited many pages pertaining to "airbrush" information.
Wow...I wonder who this could be? Possibly the same person who vehemently claims no ties to MAC Cosmetics on many forums but denounces anyone who utters the word MAC Boycott?

Also, from KJ Bennett himself:
Quote:
My blog got hacked and deleted. 1 year of information, comments, links... totally wiped out.

I know that the girl who runs the macboycott page is going to try and pull as much from google cache as possible, KJ is just frustrated by the whole deal. I would be too. I can't believe someone did that to him.
 
Top