Discover your color palette and your style type.

Can I Have More Than Three Essences?

1/2/2018

There are seven basic style essences. People can be pure essences, or they can be blends. If you count two-essence and three-essence blends, there are 63 possible types in the Truth is Beauty Style Identity System.

Most people find that three essences is the maximum needed to account for their beauty. It's rare for people to go beyond that, for two reasons.

One is that 4-plus essences is more visually complicated than most of us get.

The second is that, at a certain point, a combination of five or six or seven essences can start to look like a balanced average, which is itself an essence -- Classic.

But I do see a mix of four occasionally.

In those cases, a woman can usually view one of the four as an "accent" essence, to be sprinkled in with a more typical three-way blend, or as a "fudge factor" essence, to fill in any small aspect of an ensemble that isn't accounted for by one of her other three essences.

I myself have a dash of Romantic and a dash of Ingenue. Most of the time, I ignore them because they're so small. Occasionally, I bring in one or both if the options for the item I'm choosing aren't available in Ethereal or Natural. For example, if my only earring options are tiny and delicate, I can wear them, knowing that my tiny bit of Ingenue gives me room for that.

Not sure of your style identity? Try the Style Identity Calculator, or consider a virtual analysis.

30 Comments

Lena

1/4/2018 02:55:28 am

Hi, Rachel! Can you tell me a definite way to rule out an essence? I'm trying to analise myself, but I'm having a hard time narrow it down. What should I look for? Thank you. :)

Rachel

1/19/2018 01:19:39 pm

Hi, Lena!
This is a good question, and a great idea for a blog post, actually.
It's hard to rule out a type completely, because sometimes a person has just a smidge. I'll think more about it.

Tanja

1/4/2018 07:15:10 am

It makes it a lot easier to stick within only three essences. But I am a still glad I have those little dashes of R/E as further options to get away with. I like to chose accessoires, that give a hint of ethereal, just because I really adore that essence. And the R too gives me a bit more room if needed, as you explained it for your I.

1/5/2018 03:27:30 am

I've been wondering if I have a fourth essence. I discounted Romantic early on because I just couldn't see words like "sensual" and "womanly" applying to me, and hourglass-shaped clothes never seem to fit right on my body (short torso + wide, deep rib cage + flat chest just doesn't do hourglass well :{). However, after practicing the art of style analysis on pop culture figures and realizing that you can't determine someone's style ID just by looking at them, but you have to put images of the styles right next to their face and look for harmony, *and* you have to be sure to check all seven basic styles because sometimes there's a surprise essence hiding in a person's style ID, I realized I needed to go back and analyze myself properly. To my surprise, something about Romantic seems to harmonize a little.

I do love soft, touchable, drapey Romantic fabrics. And having a little Romantic in my style mix would explain why I've always looked great in tank tops with thin or spaghetti straps, which aren't usually recommended for the IDN style ID. I'll have to try the Style ID Calculator again--I got a little overwhelmed the last time I used it, and I know now that I wasn't looking for the right things in trying to figure out which styles flattered me. Thanks for the great post, Rachel!

Katja

1/5/2018 04:18:58 am

KC, maybe you do have a fourth essence. Or maybe you have a smidge of Romantic. Or maybe you have Romantic instead of Ingenue. Have you ever considered that?

1/5/2018 03:39:39 pm

Hi Katja. I definitely have Ingenue and Dramatic in my mix, those have been confirmed and re-confirmed again and again. If anything, I may have been seeing Natural where there was actually Romantic--what I saw as N blunting of the features may have been R rounding and softening, and both styles can add a bit of roominess and comfort when they're not the dominant essence (in different ways, of course--N is unconstructed and built to move in, R provides room for feminine curves and is soft and dare I say nurturing?). I also noticed something curious: IDN textures often looked too rough and dry next to my face, but IDR seemed to match the visual texture of my skin. Has anyone else noticed a similar effect with their style ID?

I now think I might be IDRN or IDR with a smidge of N--I'm not ready to abandon the N aspect entirely yet :). As I said, I'll have to redo the Style ID calculator to be sure, but I probably won't have time to get to that for a few days.

Anonymous

1/6/2018 05:27:24 pm

Maybe, it is easier to style and dress ourselves with three or maybe four essences at most. I know personality-wise; the Myers Briggs Indicator, which is very popular and useful "analyzes" four "essences" but, the choice in each four is either of two choices.
My main question, however, is you are "short" less than 5'4" or "tall" greater that 5'7"; does than mean you can only be a specific "style" or "essence.?" For instance; does "short" mean you are either "gamine" "ingénue" or "romantic" or "tall" mean you are either "dramatic" or "natural?
It seems as someone less than 5"4"; I feel very uncomfortable described as either "spunky", "girly" or "sensuous." I am sure if I were taller than 5'7" I might other issues. Does anyone else either 5'4" or shorter or 5'7" or taller or of any height, etc. feel similarly about this?
I am just curious. Thank you and Have a Wonderful New Year!

Janelle

1/6/2018 07:19:24 pm

Luckily, this style system doesn’t limit people to a certain style type based on height. Rachel emphasizes dressing more for your face and less for your body, and there’s an awesome post entitled just that! https://www.truth-is-beauty.com/blog/archives/08-2016
Example, I have an aunt who is 5’4 but definitely has lots of dramatic and a little Gamine. If she were to be pidgeon-holed into just Gamine, ingenue, romantic, or a combination of the above, this would not be optimal at all. Her angular facial features call for a decent amount of dramatic clothes and accessories. I shudder at the thought of her in romantic ingenue!
I also know another woman, 5’9 who I’m positive has a lot of romantic, Gamine, and possibly ingenue. Dressing her in dramatic/natural because of her height would look way too masculine/severe against her softer facial features. Other style systems have relegated Gamine ingenue, and romantic to the shorter types, but don’t feel like you’re stuck in one of these simply because of your height. I tend to identify more with this system’s approach of leading with the face.

Beth

1/9/2018 01:07:27 pm

This is what is so good about this style system. Other systems would always put me as either dramatic or natural- I’m 5”8 - but that completely discounts the fact that nothing else about me is either of those essences. I have a very hourglass shaped body, and on a two type system, feel very at home in romantic-classic. However, it was only when I found the ethereal essence- which in a way, takes romantic-classic and then elongates it, or takes my curvy hourglass shaped body and stretches the lines so they are longer and sleeker, rather than making them sharp or blunt as dramatic or natural would. I found Rachel’s post about ‘are you lost in soft natural?’ really helpful in this regard. The Romantic-Ethereal-Classic identity feels like it acknowledges what I am- the restraint of classic, the sexy femininity of romantic and the longer fluid lines of ethereal. Definitely not Dramatic in any way. Definitely not natural.

Gitte

3/27/2019 12:39:36 pm

Isn't it rather about how tall you LOOK anyway? I am 1m66, which is average, but most people guess me around 1m72 - 1m75 because of my small head and long neck, and overall narrow bone structure. Anyway, I will always take body in consideration no matter what rachel says. Your head is attached to your body, and is part of your body. Your styletype would therefore be a mix of all features you have, including body and facial features. I Love Rachel's system, but this is one point i disagree about. My face is very feminine looking, nearly romantic, but my very narrow and boney body disagrees with that and I know from experience I look absolutely ridiculous in anything very frilly as I simply don't fill it out, even though I would have to add some frills and extra femininity just based on my face.

Anastasia

1/6/2018 06:06:24 pm

Hi Rachel, a very helpful post. Thanks for sharing it. I do have a question for you, if I ordered the style i.d. analysis from you, would you also mention a fourth essence in my results if I had a fourth one? I would like to know if I had a fourth essence or even a dash of a fifth one. Thanks!

Lena

1/7/2018 04:33:25 am

Hi, Anastasia! I asked Rachel the same question before and she said that she will let you know if you have a fourth essence or a smidge of some essence. :)

Anastasia

1/9/2018 09:10:56 pm

Thank you Lena! : )

Katja

1/7/2018 04:14:44 am

A style analysis is mainly based on facial features. Height is not so important. If you are a blend of Gamine and Natural you can be tall, but you can also be short. If you are tall it comes from your Natural and if you are short it comes from your Gamine essence. If you are petite you are not limited to the Romantic, Ingenue or Gamine style type. If you are short you are likely to have Gamine, Ingenue or Romantic in your style blend along with some other essences. Audrey Hepburn was a tall Gamine for instance.

Katja

1/7/2018 05:42:47 am

Anonymous,Happy New Year to you too! To all of you: A very Happy New Stylish Year!

1/16/2018 03:00:25 pm

Coming to this post a bit late --

I find this very interesting. The first time I took the style calculator, I definitely got a 4-way tie. I have tried time and again to narrow things down (dumping an element I'm less fond of, trying to merge 2 style IDs into a third), only to 'lose' an important element along the way. It's definitely ECNI for me. :/

The tip about 4 elements starting to edge classic is very helpful - because that is exactly what I do. Classic is a good place to build a 'base' from, I find. But beyond that, I need the other 3 elements: Need to classic for a streamlined, balanced base. Need the natural relaxation to 'unfussy' things (like you, Rachel, I hate constraining anything). Need ethereal lift, delicacy and peace, but need it to stay 'fresh' and cheerful, with the ingenue.

I feel like ethereal & ingenue tend to overlap at the 25% level? At least with the color palette & detail.

Fascinating post, and definitely giving me some new ideas for how to just try and make 4 work.

1/17/2018 10:56:01 am

I would add that even in having a 4-way blend, it's still hella useful to know what DOESN'T work.

When you get that 3 elements are completely no-go, you can avoid the heck out of them. For me it's DGR, which is such a pity, because I adore dramatic elements. But it does explain why some things just 'ruin' an outfit for me. It won't give me the green light to *get* a piece, but I can quickly rule stuff out: nothing too stiff, nothing too spunky, nothing overtly sexy. It at least lets me set a perimeter over 'these looks might work' and 'these will absolutely not.'

Rosetta

1/17/2018 06:25:13 am

I for one *need* four essences to properly describe my style ID (R-E-I-N, though the N is the smallest), with even a small dash of fifth (C), though the last one's not strictly necessary. :)

Kim

1/18/2018 03:50:31 pm

I find this post very interesting, because Rachel determined me to be 35% Dramatic, 30% Romantic, 20% Natural, and 15% Classic. Four types! But I know it's accurate.

The Kibbe test defined me as a Soft Dramatic (Romantic Dramatic), but I felt there was something missing. And a Color Me Beautiful course taken at age 16 determined me to be a Classic, and again, at age 16 I knew there was some truth in that, but something was missing.

Several years ago I was looking at a book of fashions through the decades and pointed out two photos to my husband: one of a very glamorous woman in the 1940s who was wearing a black cocktail dress, and the other of Ursula Andress on the beach in the '60s wearing slacks. I said to him, "I like both of these, but they don't work together." He said, "You ARE both of those. You combine them." I was surprised by this.

When Rachel did my style analysis I figured it out. I like glamorous, sexy clothes and hair (Romantic Dramatic) that is either slightly messed up or undone (Natural) or classed up or simplified (Classic). But straight Romantic Dramatic makes me feel like I'm in a stage play and not quite being myself. On the other hand, if I follow my instincts, I go to Dramatic, Romantic, Natural, Classic every time.

Nancy

1/19/2018 04:55:37 am

Kim, didn't Rachel write that 10-15 % was only a smidge? And that you can ignore your smidges? If your Classic is a smidge you are a blend of 3.

Kim

1/19/2018 10:46:58 am

Hi Nancy. Yes, I can definitely ignore the Classic since it's only 15%, but she said it's something to use for more professional occasions. Much of the time, I'll use a touch of Classic for my job. And also, I LIKE Classic, so I'm happy to have that option.

Nancy

1/20/2018 04:56:37 am

That is a good idea!

Kelsie

1/28/2018 02:43:34 pm

Seems like I see tons of REI folks on here and have never seen a Dramatic Natural Gamine, or even anyone claiming to know one. Is the DNG #Elusive? If I meet one in the wild, what should I do? I feel like that must be a particularly striking and rare blend?

Kim

2/8/2018 08:38:07 am

I wonder if Keira Knightly might be the elusive Dramatic Natural Gamine you speak of...

Lena

2/8/2018 10:33:08 am

Maybe Ruby Rose or Erika Linder? I'm sure that if you googled something along the lines of "androgynous woman models" you will find more. Linder might have Ethereal instead of gamine, though.

I'm Gamine Dramatic Ethereal, but might have Natural as an accent. For a long time I thought I was DNG because I looked masculine in comparison to basically everyone I knew and being asexual, I never tried to appear sexy even once. My only experiences with feminine fashion were trying Gothic Lolita and a bunch of other Ingenue focused styles and looking like I was in drag, especially that i never put the full effort the looks required. So, after that, I cut my hair and gave up on feminine clothes entirely because I couldn't figure how they worked. Even now, I don't wear any dresses or skirts.

Style analysis and paying attention to what clothes looked on me made me unconfident and anxious at first because I was hoping to discover my femininity and even now, after all these times, I still have trouble getting Ethereal cuts to work. This essence seems to compliment me just in color and fabric (I'm an extremely mousy, low-contrast soft summer).

Kim

2/8/2018 10:51:52 am

You sound really cool looking to me, Lena. Very modern and maybe avant-gard.

Kelsie

2/9/2018 09:06:05 pm

Sounds IDEAL. I think Lori Petty is DNG as well. It's def a cool look. :3

Miranda

2/14/2018 01:49:58 am

You sound a bit like me! (Though I'm a mousy soft summer ENI.) I'm also asexual, but since I didn't know that for a lot of years and kept trying to be "mature" and "grow up" (because not experiencing sexual attraction makes you an immature child *eyeroll*), I kept trying to make Romantic blends work. I'm rather androgynous and was expecting Gamine, but Ingenue it is. I was a bit upset because I really despise being treated like a child and dressed specifically to avoid it, but I've found elements to incorporate that add sweetness without childishness.
I'm ridiculously enthusiastic about this system in part because it allows me to express beauty while honoring who I am.

Lilac

2/8/2018 05:18:06 am

I have four essences. I am 25% classic, 25% romantic, 25% ingenue and 25% ethereal. Neither can be ignored :-)

Circé

2/21/2018 10:34:10 am

Thank you so much for this post, it helps me make sens of my results. I took your Style Identity Calculator (great tool, totally worth the money). I did it two times. The first time, I was a bit overwhelmed, and convinced I had at least some dramatic, and that I would not have much Romantic. I tried my best to clear up my forethoughts, though, to get a more accurate result. I ended up with 20 % Dramatic, 20 % Ingenue, 20 % Romantic, and 20 % Ethereal. I was surprised, but it did resonate strongly (with my face, because my body is obsviously Ingenue, perhaps with a put of E in my long arms and fingers). Still, I changed some results to get to three, and ended up with IDE.
But I had a restlessness. Some R outfits looked so great for me that I could not overlook this essence. So I tried again. And this time, knowing the tool a bit better, I avoided the trap of noting D too high and R too low because of my self-image. Aaaand what did I get? DIRE, all 20 %, again. I also tried some changes to get to three, and I got IRE.
But I think that the fact that I got the four essences every time tells a lot. And when I changed some things to get to three, I felt like I cheated, that I purposely left out something that should have been there. I feel that I have some Dramatic and Romantic, though perhaps a bit less than Ingenue and Ethereal (these are undeniable). And if I do not include them, something is missing.

I guess my palette has also a say in the matter, as a DA. Ingenue and Ethereal only are too light, and the depth certainly speaks for Dramatic and Romantic. I also do DR textures (velvet, leather etc...) very well.

Thank you again for the insight your blog provided to me Rachel!

Truth is Beauty

Can I Have More Than Three Essences?

Leave a Reply.

About Me...

Categories

Archives