Discover your color palette and your style type.

Quick Tricks for Finding Your Style Identity

5/27/2019

When you know your Style Identity, you save time and money because you only buy the clothes that are right for you, and you don't spend unnecessary time agonizing about whether something looks good on you. You also feel more confident, because you leave the house knowing you look your best.

This is beauty for women who want beauty to be quick and easy. :-)

There are seven core style essences, and most people are a blend of two or three of them. For example, I'm an Ethereal Natural, and my sister is a Romantic-Dramatic-Classic.

Figuring out your Style ID can be a little tricky. The Style Identity Calculator has helped many women, but there is an element of art to identifying beauty, and that art eludes some of us.

Also, it can be hard to see ourselves objectively! (Pictures help a lot with this -- I always use pictures instead of a mirror when I'm judging myself in a particular outfit.)

Fortunately, you can often close in on, or rule out, a few essences without too much difficulty, and this can bring you closer to your Style ID.

Having at least a rough idea of your Style ID can significantly increase your confidence, because even if you haven't IDed yourself with 100% accuracy, once you've ruled out the essences that are no good, you know you still look a lot more authentic than you used to.

Here are some tips for ruling out certain essences, or narrowing your Style ID down a bit.

1. Positioning yourself on the masculine-feminine spectrum can help rule out or zero in on certain essences.

If you could pass as a boy in the right clothes, you might have a lot of Gamine.

If you could do drag convincingly, like Glenn Close or Julie Andrews, you might have a lot of Natural or Dramatic.

If you could never do either in a million years, you probably don't have much of those three essences, and that leaves Romantic, Ingenue, Ethereal, and Classic.

Adorable Emma Watson could pass for a boy. She has a lot of Gamine.

Striking Glenn Close passes well as a man. She has a lot of Dramatic or Natural (or, I suspect, both.)

2. How childlike or mature do you look? Have you always looked older than your age, or younger than your age?

If your overall look is rather childlike, and if you're often mistaken for much younger than you are, or called "cute" or "adorable," that can signal that you have a lot of Gamine or Ingenue, the two youthful essences.

If, even as a child, you looked like a little adult, that can signal that you have a lot of Dramatic or Ethereal. (Or, occasionally, a lot of Natural. )

Young Anjelica Huston, who has a ton of Dramatic. Was she ever "childlike"? I doubt it.

Halle Berry is 56, and still adorable AF. She has a lot of Gamine.

3. If your face is impossible to caricature, that's a hint that you have a lot of Classic.

Caricature relies on the existence of a feature that sticks out and can therefore be exaggerated. If you're a Classic, no one feature sticks out. In your less confident moments, you may have called yourself plain or boring -- but you're not. You require a very, very simple fashion context in order for the beauty of your perfect average-ness to be revealed.

This is barely even a caricature! That's because there's nothing to exaggerate; Zhang's feature's are beautifully balanced.

You can't easily caricature a perfectly average face. A caricature should look a little grotesque or bizarre, but that just can't be done with a strongly Classic woman such as Zhang Ziyi. There's nothing to exaggerate.

4. What hairstyles can you never pull off?

If you can't do shaggy or tousled hair, you can probably rule out Natural -- both male and female Naturals look awesome in shaggy layers.

If you can't do big, luscious curls, you can probably rule out Romantic. An extravagant circle is the defining shape of Romantic, and Romantics look great with these circles near their face. (Ingenues get smaller, neater circles, so if curly hair of any kind is really bad on you, you can probably rule out both Romantic and Ingenue.)

If you can't do super-long hair, you may be able to rule out Ethereal, Natural, and Dramatic. All three of these essences are defined in part by elongated lines, so people high in one or more of these three essences are usually flattered by long hair.

If you can't do super-short hair, you can probably rule out Gamine and Dramatic. Gamines, our boyish beauties, are easily identified by how good they look in very short cuts. Dramatics, in addition to being flattered by long and narrow hair, are also flattered by hair that's completely off the face -- whether it's extremely short or slicked back.

As a woman with a lot of Dramatic, Kim Kardashian can pull off both long, straight hair and slicked-back hair.

The Style Identity Calculator, as I mentioned above, has helped a lot of women, and it's pretty affordable. For best results, use it with the input of a brutally honest friend or relative, and use pics or yourself, not a mirror. (A still, frozen image is much easier to analyze.)

If you're absolutely lost, consider investing in a virtual style analysis.

Are any of these tips helpful to you? Please share in the comments!

This post first appeared in July of 2018.

102 Comments

7/9/2018 02:42:02 pm

Great summary Rachel! The hairstyles are such a key way to determine style ID. This really helped me to confirm that I indeed don't have much, if any, Natural (shaggy layers/messy hair are the ABSOLUTE WORST hairstyle on me, as well as big luscious curls, but I knew I didn't have any R). Pictures are so important too. I had been buying a lot of EN clothes (that made me look lost/like I'd run off to a commune but did not really belong there) until I had to go to a family event last month where I slicked my hair back, and while I thought I looked terrible, people's reactions/the photos told a totally different story. It's now one of my favorite hairstyles and I keep taking amazing photos with my hair totally sleek and off my face. This, as well as the awareness that I look really good in high-fashion, avant-grade styles, helped me realize I have D.

Would love some insight as well (and advice!) for style IDs that combine absolute opposites. It's been suggested to me that my ID is DCI, which makes more sense the more I drape myself in those clothes. This is where the hairstyle draping and "initial impression" can become complicated - I would never say I had Ingenue based on looking good in curls or looking cute (I don't), but there is something feminine in me (enough to prevent me from looking convincing in drag - I never would pass as a man) and it needs shortening and structure, and once I draped myself in clothes with a lot of Ingenue (like mini dresses) I saw how it was the only answer.

It would be cool to see a post on style blends that can easily be mistaken for another ID. Like a particular combo of Dramatic-Ingenue looking deceptively Ethereal until you actual take all the structure/shortening away from your clothes and hair and everything just falls to pieces.

Also have to mention that some style IDs, with some seasonal combos (like a soft season D), are only going to be really clear until you put (ID appropriate) makeup on. It's easy to say you're a Natural when you never wear makeup, because you're used to it, and then you put not-Natural makeup on and the upgrade in your looks is so outrageous that you realize you can't really be N. Naturals are the lucky people who actually look stunning with little or nothing. If that's not you, you're probably not very N.

Anon

7/9/2018 04:57:45 pm

That's an interesting post suggestion! I wonder about that too, although I'm not an expert on this at all. I wonder if Keira Knightley is one of those cases? I think it's easy to mistake her for an Ethereal because she's in so many period films, is very slender and chiseled-like, and has many otherworldly roles, but something never clicked whenever I saw her in soft, elongated clothing, and I don't think she has much, if any, Ethereal. I don't know what her style ID is though.

7/9/2018 06:55:24 pm

Keira Knightley is an excellent example of what I mean! I hadn't thought about her potentially not being E, due to her period roles, but now that I think about it, I think she's a great example. I think she has Dramatic and possibly R or I (or both). My favorite movie for her, costume-wise, is Anna Karenina (and Rachel's DI board is called the "Childlike Czarina") which I think has a lot of D, R, and I elements. Out of curiosity, I just looked up a bunch of her other period roles - I don't think she looks great in medieval clothing, which is very Ethereal and somewhat Natural. Her costumes in The Duchess are also great - Rococo styles are often thought of as E, but are they really aside from the "ancient" nod? There's a ton of structure and flamboyance in eighteenth-century fashion. I also revisited the famous green dress from Atonement, which is beautiful, but I'm not so sure it actually harmonizes with her face as much as I thought it did (though it obviously looks beautiful on her)... the best part of the dress is the open back and the fabric, I think, both of which have D and R elements.

7/9/2018 07:19:38 pm

AM,
Yes, I definitely see Romantic and Dramatic in Keira. I think of the period films she's in, she looks best in costumes that are very opulent and have lush detail, including Rococo styles, which are very detailed, but not in a delicate sense that would make it Ethereal. I guess it makes sense that she looked beautiful in all those dresses in Anna Karenina--she has some Romantic!
I adore the green Atonement dress (who doesn't?). It's mostly the minimal and almost structured style of the gown that harmonizes with her, though.

Speaking of beautiful period films, have you heard of Tristan and Isolde? Sophia Myles is stunning in all those Ethereal, ancient gowns. I definitely think she has some Ethereal (with other types, maybe--Classic?), because the gauzy fabrics and flowy gowns look so right on her, and she looks absolutely stunning with that wavy long hair with the elaborate braids and delicate headdresses.

7/9/2018 09:34:17 pm

Yes, I agree completely about the opulence and the Rococo costumes being detailed but not necessarily Ethereal-delicate. I agree about the Atonement dress but do remember always appreciating it the most from the back/side rather than from the front. Maybe it was just a fit issue, but the neckline and bodice area looks too unstructured for Keira in some shots. But it's a fabulous dress.

I *love* Tristan and Isolde!! (Can you tell I'm a huge period film fan?) I agree that Sophia Myles is probably EC - she harmonizes so well with both pure E looks in the film and with more EC looks in other contexts. (Handkerchief hemlines are great on her too.)

I thought Sarah Gadon might be another EC but comparing photos again... maybe she's also D with a feminine essence that isn't necessarily E? I like her in more structured looks than with wavy, floaty hair. She's extremely striking with a sculptural bob but gets a little blurry with longer, messier hair (versus Sophia comes to life).

The more I think about it, the less I am convinced that high E is necessary to convincingly play "period" roles. I think there is a look that lends itself to playing period roles (at least in the view of casting directors) but I think it can just as easily come from C, I, or a particular blend with D or R. (I think a lot of actresses who are very fair in coloring - at least for Eurocentric period roles, though Gugu Mbatha-Raw has the quality I'm referring to - who have a certain refined look that is beautiful but chaste suit period roles, or are at least cast in them. It sounds like E, but they aren't always flattered by E unstructuredness...) I'm thinking of how Scarlett Johansson in convincing in Girl with a Pearl Earring despite not really being E, or on Game of Thrones (not period but similar sort of type casting) how a lot of the cast are not E. Lena Headey strikes me as DN (which, along with the not-harmonious golden blonde wig, adds a great deal of visual discomfort to Cersei's character that serves the show - plus the whole Cersei chafing against female gender roles aspect) and, despite the styling, I don't think Emilia is E. I think she's DRC. I think Sophie Turner and Natalie Dormer actually have E (though Natalie's a tough one... she clearly has a lot of R, and she also looks amazing in that very DG Hunger Games hairstyle... this becomes challenging with very beautiful celebrities who can rock so many looks!)

I think certain periods demand more E than others... Truly ancient (Greek and Roman) films seem to suit lots of DN with E. Renaissance (I'm thinking Holliday Grainger and Lotte Verbeek - who may be one of the most E people I've ever seen - in The Borgias, and the actress who played Jane Seymour in The Tudors) seems to suit a lot of genuine E. Rococo is more structured, yet highly detailed, and so is some nineteenth-century fashion, which again makes room for more masculine women with higher D necklines and straighter, less figure-enhancing lines.

I also may be overthinking this, and virtually all of these actresses might be E blends. But I'm not convinced they all look best in E styles or lines, compared with some other looks.

Charity

5/29/2019 06:00:41 pm

Nice to see Sophia Myles get a mention. I'd be interested in what Rachel thinks her combo is (selfishly, because Sophia and I look almost exactly alike, body and roundness of face wise :P).

7/9/2018 09:49:35 pm

I have an issue with differentiating Dramatic-Ingenue faces from Classic faces at first blush. I think I mistake DI's extreme preciseness and masculine-feminine, mature-youthful balance with C's structure and lack of obvious signifiers of age and sex.

7/9/2018 10:29:45 pm

In some cases, you must drape yourself to see the difference. C versus a balance of extreme masculinity and femininity can be impossible to discern looking at a face without clothing context... this is further complicated when you really do have C, as in my case.

I also think D plus a feminine essence, when it translates to more D facial structure plus softer, more feminine fat distribution (I'm thinking Dita von Teese), can be mistaken for Natural "blunt yang." It only becomes clear that this is not the case when you put yourself in the different clothes, like seasons that are not easily distinguished until you are draped. This too is where Rachel's point about it being an "art" is key. There's a degree of subjectivity here that does not suit overanalyzing a face by itself. You must drape the face in clothes to see the differences. But they can be profound.

7/9/2018 10:39:51 pm

That's really fascinating. I guess I never thought of it that way--Ethereals are associated with being from another time, not necessary a few decades ago, like retro fashion,

I don't think you are overthinking any of this at all! In my experience, identifying ethereal blends is difficult. It's a very distinctive style type, but so delicate that it's easy to overlook in someone who has other essences as well. I find myself struggling with Ethereal-Ingenues--am I mistaking that youthful delicacy with otherworldly delicacy? Or do they just have both?

I definitely think a lot of Dramatic blends can be confused for Ethereal, especially if someone has Dramatic and a feminine type. Ethereal is kind of like if someone took sharp edges and softened them and made them more delicate, and another feminine type like Romantic or Ingenue could also have a softening effect on dramatic features, just in a different way, but confusing enough for plenty of people.

From my experience with people learning about the types, they tend to have the most trouble with Natural, Classic, Ethereal, and Dramatic. Coincidentally, I have been told that I am some mixture of those 4, although I think I can safely rule out Natural. Granted, this is purely anecdotal, and I do have a pretty odd face that's difficult to categorize, but I think it may be the extreme natures of Ethereal and Dramatic, and the lack of extremes of Classic and Natural that tend to confuse people, which is why I think that a lot of blends that are confused for another often include those 4.

7/9/2018 11:44:47 pm

Ethereal and Ingenue can be super-challenging to tell apart. Look even on Rachel's Ingenue page - a Laura Linney type is easy to mistake for another essence, vs. an Alison Brie who is obviously Ingenue. But they are both Ingenue. Hence why draping is more important than just looking at facial features in a vacuum.

Exactly, the difference between D plus a feminine essence and E can be virtually impossible to tell apart without testing out different styles... And then Classic can bring in that sense of "stillness" that Ethereal can have. I think, after having incorrectly typed myself and then looking at a lot of famous examples, that I can see the difference, but it's hard to define. There are so many "types" within types.

"Extremes and lack of extremes, odd face that's difficult to categorize"... sounds very much like me. Typing myself, I picked out NCDE as well, but it only made sense in theory. The total elongation and unstructuredness, in practice, was not really flattering. It took a third party to point out the Ingenue, which now makes sense both looking at my features and considering the degree of shortening I need with crop tops/crop pants/mini skirts. "Crispness" is great too.

I also think N and C are essences people dress as regardless of how flattering they are, so people identify with the styles because they're used to them, while D and E look like cool costumes in their pure form that people aspire to wear. The hardest part for me was distinguishing being "used" to N/liking N and actually having N.

"Blunt yang" vs "chiseled but not sharp" vs "Dramatic but softened" are often impossible to tell apart (until you drape... unless you're a combo!) and seem to change per-photo. I think this is why NDCE are so confusing.

Janet

7/10/2018 01:17:53 am

I've also had some challenges with the Dramatic-Ingenue combination, and I appreciate what everyone has said so far. At this point, I believe I am EDI, possibly EDIC. When I first starting trying to figure out my style ID, I thought I was EG, with maybe a third essence. I don't remember why I first thought I had a lot of G, but I think I noticed that I had youthfulness and masculinity. The E (so I thought) reflected the maturity and femininity of my face. When I did the ID calculator, though, I found that I had a negligible amount of G, although the E was clearly present. My youthfulness came from I, and the masculinity came from D. (At least, if I've got it right now!)

A small clue I had to the wonderfully crazy D-I combination is that when I was a child, when people first met me, they thought I was my actual age or older. Since I've reached adulthood, people consistently think I'm much younger than I really am.

7/10/2018 08:53:52 am

Yes to people thinking I was my actual age/older when I was a kid, but looking potentially younger as an adult. That's why the "cute"/always looking like small child way of judging Ingenue never worked for me. "Demure" or "fresh" is a better description of my Ingenue qualities, which are starting to look younger the older I get (if that makes sense).

7/11/2018 07:09:02 am

Yes! I also looked older than my actual age to many people when I was a child, but when I became an adult, that trend reversed and people suddenly thought I was much younger than my true age (I was once accused of not being old enough to drive *after* graduating from college!). I have Ethereal and Gamine, so maybe this is something that happens when a person has one of the abstract essences plus one of the youthful essences? My Dramatic-Gamine sister was offered alcohol in restaurants by the time she was fourteen, so I'll have to see if this tendency holds true and she starts being mistook for younger as she gets into her twenties ;).

Shawna

7/12/2018 08:36:37 pm

I have had a similar experience in my life. I know I have a lot of Ethereal and no Dramatic but as a child I was often thought to be older and then around age 18 there was a complete flip and I was usually believed to be younger.

7/14/2018 01:45:28 am

It's so interesting to see the common experience! In contrast, my sister's best friend from childhood is predominantly I, with no D or E as far as I can see. She has always looked younger than her actual age.

katherine

6/5/2019 11:55:40 am

I'm probably RDI (I've been officially typed as theatrical/yang romantic, and this seems like the closest translation) and I look basically the same as I did at age 16. I've generally thought of it as "I look both older and younger than I am, simultaneously."

7/20/2018 09:40:59 pm

context also has something to do with it, which is why it's so hard to type Ethereals and Dramatics, especially blends. I think Thomas Middleditch has a lot of Ethereal, but he's a comedian who acts in contemporary shows that would not require him to be in an Ethereal context that would make it more obvious.

Tina

7/26/2018 01:45:43 pm

Apologies for the late reply, but I do agree with you that being an Ethereal or an E blend isn't required to play a period role. As for Sarah Gadon, I see it--she seems to suit sharper styles as well, although I also see some E as well. Her light coloring might confuse some people and make them think she's more E than D--I've seen people mistake Ethereal blends with contrasting coloring for Dramatics, even though they didn't have the sharpness for it. I was surprised to learn that she was only 5'3, just by her face, I thought she'd be much taller. Perhaps she is
E-I-D? I do see a little bit of C though. I'm by no means an expert, though. As for Sophia Myles, I think she is E-I-C. She has this sweetness to her face, which is slightly baby-ish, that makes me think she has some sort of youthful type. There is another E-I-C type, Astrid Berges-Frisbe, who plays a mermaid in one of the Pirates of the Caribbean movies. I've noticed that combination E/youthful types can play roles in movies that often overlap historical and fantasy genres.

Melissa

7/9/2018 03:51:25 pm

This is great, Rachel! I love the clear-cut ways for eliminating different essences.

Miranda

7/9/2018 05:59:38 pm

Lately, I have been considering Natural for myself. I think I have misunderstood this essence for the longest time. Long hair, particularly waves are fabulous on me (short hair a big no no). My face is rather R when it is resting, but when I smile....I fit the criteria of Natural (big time)...I have a large, very toothy smile.

How MUCH Natural is there, if I have this huge julia roberts-esque grin when I smile?

Is the smile more important than the resting face?

Are there other ways to safely determine high amounts of N?

7/9/2018 08:21:46 pm

Yes! Both to the misunderstanding and to the toothy grin. My face turns natural when I smile, I swear. Hearing you so much here, Miranda. I have no idea how to answer those questions, but I totally hear you.

Other Miranda

7/10/2018 02:14:30 am

W. -
That is another Miranda, but I jumped in here late so I am Other Miranda *for now* ;)

I love the hair method - I find that easier than the ID calculator, for the most part. I look great in shaggy layers (N), long hair is good as long as it's in high side pullbacks (what to call them? But they're I, I think), and I always got a ton of compliments with a very short pixie (G), though my hair can go too short (cannot do a buzz cut). I think wispy hair looks good on me, but I'm not sure whether the particular way it is wispy reads E or N. I can't leave my hair down completely around my face, but I think that's because it's heavy and straight and possibly reads D.

Hair that is severely pulled back is a noooo (D), and big curls are a no (R).
I'm not sure what Classic would be flattered by. I think I remember something like a simple chignon? I can possibly do this depending on how soft it is, but it's not my best look.

So probably N and G, likely E, and mayyybe I.

Rachel

7/9/2018 10:55:30 pm

Hi, Miranda!

I think the impression created by the smiling face is most important, because our goal is to look like our most authentic selves, and I believe our most authentic selves are happy selves. :-)

Although they won't necessarily be able to pass as men, women with a lot of Natural can look like men in drag if they surround themselves with too much curl and ruffle.

Women with a lot of Natural are also often compelling with very bare arms and legs. It tends to look cheerfully appealing on them, not seductive. Picture of Gisele Bundchen in a tank top and short cut-off shorts, and compare that mentally to Dita von Teese in the same outfit. Or Marilyn Monroe. The latter two women would look inappropriately exposed in so little clothing; it would seem out of place. Gisele, though, looks very at home walking around with completely nude arms and legs.

7/10/2018 01:30:47 am

Hi Rachel, great post as always! (not sure how to post without replying, so I'll reply to you:-)) I have little to no R, and hairstyles with big luscious curls were always disappointing on me. (On the other hand, small curls around my face look good, another clue that I is part of my style ID). Also, clothes that look appealingly sexy on my R friends either look very awkward or look nice without appearing sexy on me. I excluded N because I found that big, boxy sweaters, chunky knits, and any kind of loose, baggy clothing just doesn't work on me.

7/10/2018 01:42:59 am

Hi, Rachel

Thank you for your thoughts. You got me thinking...

There is a photo of me wearing a mint, sheer, polka dot - ultra girly peasant style blouse, and its almost like my face feels heavy, its the strangest thing? I see all of a sudden hardness in my face that I am not accustomed to.

I feel most confident and myself in fitted leather jackets, thick scarves, jeans and my chuck taylors. I love graphic tees too - if that means anything.

I feel uncomfortable showing a lot of bare leg. My body is quite soft and padded, despite having unusually long limbs!

7/11/2018 07:24:18 am

Miranda, the clothes you say you feel best in sound like Gamine-Dramatic styles, possibly with the addition of Natural or Classic. Have you checked out those Style ID boards? Dramatics and Gamines can also have fairly toothy grins when they smile.

Megan

7/10/2018 12:32:29 am

Miranda, I have a somewhat similar experience--I typed as a Romantic-Dramatic (50/50 split) with a straight face on the style ID calculator. But I have a huge, toothy smile, and also when I smile, my eyes and lips look narrower. So I thought I might become a Natural blend when I smile.

But actually, when I used the calculator with my smiling face, I got basically the same result--about an even split of Romantic-Dramatic and no Natural (based on the calculator results, N is probably my worst essence--I look terrible in flannels, unstructured sillouhettes, etc.)

So based on my experience, I think it's possible that your face might actually change less than you think when you smile?

I will say, though, to be specific, that although I do have a very toothy, seemingly-Natural smile, my chin when I smile narrows almost into a point. When I smile, my pointed chin and wide jaw create a sort of "heart" shape that I have come to see as defining the Romantic-Dramatic essence (i.e., lush curves combined with sharp points).

That is all a tangent to say--I definitely wouldn't assume you have Natural just because you have a big smile. I would look at the shape of your whole face and features, and also at your jaw/chin when you smile--is it blunt, square, round, pointy?

Personally, as an R-D, I look pretty bad in the R-N styles, or even R-D-N. You might want to experiment with what happens when you make your outfits more casual--do you look better, or worse?

And making that distinction can be easier said than done, of course!

7/11/2018 07:19:27 am

Interesting observation about what happens to your chin when smiling. Mine often looks bigger and blunter when I smile, especially with a closed-mouth smile. My chin sometimes looks a smidge thinner and pointier if I remember not to raise my chin when I smile (weird habit, I know). I'm guessing that indicates Natural, with Ethereal as a distant second possibility.

7/9/2018 08:20:37 pm

Great tips! Thank you, Rachel! And such interesting comments/considerations! @ Miranda - I'm with you. I totally misunderstood natural (just like I totally misunderstood light summer when I got draped years ago). @ AM Awesome! I'm so glad you found stuff that works! That sounds really lovely.

For myself, I had gotten really frustrated with trying to style-profile myself -- I kept going around in circles. I realize now that I knew right off what my style was - or highly suspected it. But I wanted to be something else - my personality differs quite a bit from my looks, after all.

But all these tips are great, and confirm what I've been thinking. For one thing, I finally did the calculator while using a picture of myself that was NOT a selfie. Wow. That was a huge difference. I mean, I should have realized that selfies wouldn't be a good idea, but I didn't really consider it. Then lately someone snapped a pic of me, saying something like, "You look so great!" - but the pic was like... ?? That's what I look like? (I'm usually behind the camera, not the one photographed.) But then I realized that this picture was far more accurate as to how people see me. I tried doing the calculator without thinking about what I liked or didn't like or wanted to be or didn't want to be. That was SO hard. But this time, I let myself go sort of Zen-like and cross-eyed and just did a gut reaction. I tried not to think so much. And the results really surprised me, but then, they didn't surprise me:

50/50 Natural Classic -- Yep. I'd gotten that result at first, but then went running screaming in the other direction. I was raised as a preppy, so I know this style well. Very, very well. And I had this mental block against it because I was like I don't want to BE the preppy all snobby like and such. I'd convinced myself I wasn't pretty because a lot of prep wear makes autumnal assumptions, and I was looking pretty off in navies and brick-reds. But when I made the adjustment to LSu NC... yeah. Definitely.

I kept wanting to see something ethereal or dramatic, or something more *exciting.* But while I can wear a lot of things reasonably well, I realize it's only because they fit my body. They do not fit my face. (Maybe that's classic just fading away out of the picture? You make a reasonable hanger as a classic.) But in fashion as in life, NC is my home base for sure. All the things I bought these past years that really, really work for me have a strongly NC influence (rolled sleeve oxford shirts, perfect fit trousers, tweed coat, slim jeans, cashmere sweater, etc.)

I do find that I can handle a smattering of other styles though, and again, I wonder if that's the 'negligible' bit? Shimmery ethereal metallics and light, low-contrast colors schemes work well (though I wonder if that's my LSu influence?). And I definitely look best in pixie bobs with side-swept fringe - so that might be gamine? Or perhaps that's classic (neat, tidy, considered haircuts) meets natural (low-fuss hair with a bit of tousle)?

So yeah. I'm owning it: NC. Nothing fancy, nothing flashy. I feel like it's possibly the most low-detail, average, middle of the road style ever. But! That's okay. I'm going to find way to sneak in some funky, subversive, gothic elements because that would be FUN.

7/9/2018 09:43:56 pm

W, so happy you found your style home! Natural Classic has a lot of great elements. Refined yet low-maintenance, and you'll always be in style. Plus there are multiple stores totally devoted to your type! (J Crew, anyone? Plus those G elements?) One way I personally try to "twist" preppy style (I also live in preppy land) is to up the androgyny and play with wearing literal men's preppy clothes. Not sure if this will work for you, but it allows you to be more subversive while also fitting into preppy dress codes. (After a month or so of experimentation, this obviously did not turn out to be my best look, but it's a look I love on others!)

Warning to all - selfies are NOT an accurate lens. They severely distort and elongate your features. Hence why you might be seeing D and E and ignoring width and roundness. The lens draws what is closest in and enlarges it, which makes virtually everyone's nose look larger than it is. Have someone else take a picture of you, and have them zoom in - this makes the lens more accurate.

7/10/2018 02:23:27 am

W. -
Oh the selfie trap! I just sent in pictures for my analysis and didn't have anyone to take a picture, so I used my webcam as far away as possible (though I just realized - I could have used my toes to push the keys), and it made such an astounding difference. Not sure I managed to keep my head level in my smiling pic, but I absolutely *love* my less smiley one and people say it looks just like me. I do look like an alien though :')

I'm so happy you've found what works for you, even though it's a mental adjustment from DE.

7/12/2018 12:09:46 pm

Thank you, AM and Miranda! I'm happy to find stuff that works! And yes, AM, there is a LOT in the NC territory. -- I find that I have to be careful though, because my misconceptions about 'preppy' had me staying away from brands like J Crew and Boden. I realize now that common style labels like "preppy," or say, "boho" can be very nebulous and misleading. "Prep" can take you into adjacent territory of CG or CI and "boho" seems to veer I or R a lot - at least to my eye. That's I find Rachel's classification system SO much more helpful. Much more accurate!

And it's funny how the tiniest misconception can throw a person off. I kept thinking G and I elements (mostly plaids and patterns which are often to high-contrast for me) were a necessary part of 'prep', so I rejected it. It was like with my color season: I thought I looked bad in pastels, until I realized what I was calling 'pastels' were winter's icy hues. Those totally drained me. Summer pastels are great.

In the same way, I realize now that I misunderstood what Natural style would do *in combination* with other styles. Because I need so much neat tailoring, the natural influence can get too rugged very quickly. So I ended up thinking 'I have no natural' instead of, 'I need to balance natural.'

It was actually Rachel's post on men's styles that got me thinking (thanks Rachel!) about NC again. Seeing George Clooney go from pretty good in classic to "Ahhhh!" in natural classic to "Hoo boy" in natural, I realized I do a similar thing. My experience is very like that. So now I'm trying to think "Would George Clooney wear this?" as a style inspo. So far, it's working. :)

7/12/2018 03:43:09 pm

Common style labels definitely can be misleading. When I thought I had N plus C, I started wearing a lot of "preppy" styles... that actually were more like C plus youthful, with D details that I was never really able to eliminate because they're so essential for me. This happened to me to when I jumped from Kibbe's descriptions of D (which always were obviously applicable to me) to the description of D as "edgy," which is accurate, but had me convinced that D was DG, which is really bad on me. Our preconceptions about what different style words mean can really impact our understanding of different style IDs.

It's convenient to have a celebrity who shares your ID (in similar proportions) to look to as an example! And dressing like female George Clooney sounds really suave and awesome. I haven't really found this yet with DCI. I am most often compared to Taylor Swift and have looked to her for style and hair/makeup inspiration for years, and things that are atrocious on her are usually atrocious on me (like some of the shorts and baggy tops she was wearing with her last album release...), but I've got a more androgynous face and I need more understatement, if that makes sense. (I think I also used to confuse Natural "relaxation" for Classic "understatement"/restraint. Classic shouldn't necessarily feel stuffy, just... really simple and elegant, only "showing off" in the quality of fabric/fit/symmetry and neatness, etc.)

anon

7/10/2018 06:16:55 am

What helped me finally decide:

Don't think about how you look, don't try to define your features. Figure out what kind of IMPRESSION you would ideally like to make (cute, sexy, fun, classy...). In my case, I always idealized either elvish, inhuman beauty or wild, exotic, sexy beauty.

Ask yourself: can I pull off my idealized version of beauty?

When you compare your photo to the essences, think, as objectivelly as you can, how those clothes make you look, what do they exaggerate in you. For example, pure classic and dramatic make me look like a child. Ingenue/gamine influences, on the other hand, make me look either ridiculous or cute in an inauthentic way. Cute is not an impression I want to make, though I can. I don't think it is my best look, and it's definitely not "me".

I love Ethereal aesthetic, and I could have sworn I was mostly it, but it simply looks off on me, too delicate.

This way I came to the conclusion that Dramatic/Natural/Romantic is probably my best look. It's making me look sexy in a wild, powerful, exotic way (if I may say so lol), which is one of the things I idealized in the first place. :) I could look "cuter", but I don't want to. These Sexy Amazon clothes turn me into what I think is the most beautiful version of me. They pull out power and sexiness that were hidden behind superficial cuteness.

Just like Seasons, Style IDs are sometimes impossible to guess until you try them out. So don't bother trying to analyze whether your chin is pointy or your nose boxy. Your best features are maybe like your undertones - invisible until you wrap them in appropriate styles and fabrics.

Trisha

6/5/2019 03:20:53 am

Hi anon, I was typed by Rachel as Romantic/Dramatic/Natural and it was a revelation to me! I am a tall hourglass with naturally wild, curly hair and always felt, strangely less feminine, as I wasn't cutesy, like many women. I like the idea of wild, exotic and sexy, but still struggle at times to find the right clothing, especially as I live in the countryside and a fairly casual life style. The couple of pics on Rachel's webpages for R/D/N that have women in laid back jeans and tops, do suit me. Most of the stuff is dresses though, which I seldom have occassion to wear out here. I do agree with much of what you say, and feel more powerful though, since finding the right group, even if still struggle to find things to clothe it is at times. I am a soft autumn, by the way, what are you?

Cheryl

7/10/2018 10:29:33 am

What style type is Kate Winslet? Romantic Classic, maybe?

Nancy

7/11/2018 01:10:54 pm

Cheryl, I think she has Ethereal. And maybe Classic. Possibly Romantic.

Gabriella

7/12/2018 03:40:26 am

Kate Winslet has some some masculine essence in her style-ID. I don't know if it is D or N, but i'm guessing D. She also has some feminine essence. It's R or E, not Ingenue. I also think she has C.

Leilani

7/10/2018 02:04:40 pm

What I also find very helpful for Classic blends is the question "am I wearing this thing or is it wearing me?"
My usual complaint when all those statement necklaces and Ethnic prints were modern was "This thing wears me, thats wrong!" long before I ever heard of style essences.

Also important is to ask people that do not follow the idea of forming every woman to a feminine hourglassy shape or hide what is not the idea of common beauty. That does not work at all.
Lots of people tell me to wear more oversized or at least loose clothes cause I am sooo thin. Fake curves and so on. Yeah. I am DC or something in that range. I can embrace it or look like some small child that stole some of mommy's clothes.
I am curious what will change now, while I am gaining some weight, mostly muscles but also some fat.

While I more or less found out what looks good on me I would love to see a post on dressing down for the dressed up essences. I do not want to flatiron all my clothes or wear stuff that makes moving difficult. I want some every day wear which looks at least okay on me.
(Honestly, I dream of having a strong Natural essence. It is so easy to wear every day stuff as a N!)

Lola

7/10/2018 04:24:43 pm

What does the "aha" moment feel like when you are figuring out your essences?

Certain things are obvious to me, others much less so.

Should I look "normal" - as in, you barely notice the clothing because it harmonizes so well? Like being nude in garments, of that makes any sense.

Or is there an instant "I look so much more beautiful" and you pop?

I get different reactions when comparing my face to different combos, that are positive in various ways :/

With certainty, I can say I am not D, G or I based. Long hair, either lucious curls or messy waves are great, though.

7/10/2018 09:34:44 pm

Great question! I found when I saw myself in the right color season, I thought, "Oh. There I am." Putting on the right colors wasn't transformative in the sense that I had a new face. I just looked... All on the same page, maybe. Like all of my face had shown up, and no part got left behind. Everything felt balanced and "there" -- lips, eyes, skin most of all.

Now that I'm seeing what my style ID consists of (not my misconceptions about it) I also am thinking "I'm present here". It's again a bit underwhelming in that I am not transformed, but merely balanced.

Hm... That's pretty vague. I'd be interested in what others found regarding that same question (and maybe can explain it better!)

7/11/2018 12:08:37 am

Hi W.

I am interested in what you said about it being somewhat Underwhelming -can you elaborate? Is it, a "meh alright I get it" type of thing?

Its too bad, I find color seasons easy....Style Id is far more elusive for me!

7/11/2018 01:55:55 pm

When I see my face next to my correct lines, I often feel sort of... calm, peaceful, relaxed. Content. Sometimes my breathing even seems to get slower and deeper. I agree with W. that it is "underwhelming" in the sense that it seems to relax me rather than to excite me or rev me up. (And I find this esp. interesting because I'm an R-D, which is not an inherently "relaxing" style ID at all...)

However--sometimes when I see myself next to my correct lines, I'll involuntarily smile and feel joy because everything just looks so harmonious.

I imagine that for others, what they feel might be very different though...

7/11/2018 08:29:45 pm

Thanks Megan, I'll keep that in mind :)

I suspect, also, that there are a lot of preconceptions about what does and does not look good on me that I must let go of, and start anew.

Such as, I have rather broad shoulders that I always cover up. When they may actually be attractive for me to show. Or that perhaps, my face is not as soft as I may have previously thought.

Thd weirdest thing, is how much your face can "change" when you place it with different style combinations.

I am trying to understand what my face truly looks like. Which is a funny thing to say?

7/11/2018 08:42:24 pm

Thank you, Megan! Yes, that's a better way to put it than "underwhelming." :)

I was out shopping and tried to notice my reactions. So, a couple thoughts I had:

Necklines are the lines closest to the face, and that was the line I found easiest to identify. If a neckline frames a face well, I find the head looks properly sized for the body, the face appears more symmetrical (even if it isn't really). In the right lines, for exactly, I have an oval face and strong bone structure. In the wrong lines, I begin to look lumpen and square. Knowing that, my worst necklines were easy to spot (ruffles, plunging cleavage - high turtlenecks), as were the best: (open men's-style collars, boatnecks, moderate scoops, and crew necks.) Once I realized what ID covered that range of necklines (classic, with some natural influence) I was in the right area.

Photos also helped in the dressing room. I couldn't make up my mind about a button down, so I took a pic to text a friend for advice. The moment I saw the pic, I realized the tiny polka dots on the shirt were what looked so jarring. I appeared enormous in comparison to the print. Didn't even need to text the friend. I just put the shirt back.

I also found I constantly think WTF? when shopping, where W = why? As in, why did they have to add to this item? Why put on that embellishment? Why use a pattern, when a solid would be simpler? Why not leave this plain? That was my other "aha" for classic. I can't handle much embellishment before I look silly.

But yeah! That was really nice to shop with this in mind for once. Even in picking shoes -- I got something that suited my face. Really nicely caps off the whole outfit!

7/11/2018 11:49:20 pm

Great points, W.! I have found photos equally essential with hairstyles, to the point that I do not judge a hairstyle unless I have extensive pictures (with different lenses, preferably a real camera as well as a phone, different angles and distances). For most of my life I was never comfortable unless I had lots of hair around my face, but I've come to realize that my extremely thick, curly hair, even when it's straightened, has an R impression when it's a certain length (especially without bangs, because less structure), and it's not that good on me! It's hard for me to overcome the whole "masculine features on women need ultra-feminine styling so you don't look ugly" conditioning, but the photos don't lie. I think it's almost helpful to completely avoid mirrors when you are adjusting to your correct lines if they contradict what you wore in the past. Relying solely on photos during this phase helps you see yourself as you might see a person walking down the street and try to type them (and probably would be able to do so much more easily than typing yourself).

Patterns are deceptively important. I've always looked amazing in small patterns - gingham, small florals, small buttons - and this was one of the factors that helped me go "aha!" when Ingenue was pointed out to me.

7/12/2018 09:12:00 pm

@AM - I love that idea of using pictures as you're retraining the eye - And yes! I'm finding even best pics from years ago now make sense in light of my style ID. It never fails to surprise me how right "right" looks, and how quickly things can go off the rails.

anon again

7/11/2018 12:04:41 pm

Oh, another trick that helped me train my eye! Trying to guess other people's IDs, not just mine! You'll have a much better understanding of what fits whom. I could easily eliminate my "maybies" after I saw how something that looked okay on me looked so amazing on somebody else. I knew Rachel was a genius, but I had no idea how much until I saw how perfectly her boards fit people who truly seem to belong to that ID.

Agnes

7/12/2018 01:03:58 pm

I'm surprised to read that Kim Kardashian has o lot of Dramatic. I saw her typed as Romantic and I see no D features in her.

7/13/2018 10:21:51 am

It's hard to tell with Kim because of all the plastic surgery and all the dramatic outfits. She looks nothing like her original self. I see R in her anyway.

7/13/2018 02:36:52 am

I attempted to find my style id, with a good, natural smiley photo of myself (that is not a selfie) and compare it against each Pure essence - I cannot say whether this is the best idea in the world, but it really helped me.

I carefully watched my feelings and instincts for each and was pleasantly surprised! I believe I am a Natural base...I felt calm, at ease, "at home", and like I was truly seeing myself (I actually didnt think I had any N to begin with).

To my best judgement, I think I am N>R with maaaybe a touch of G. Oddly enough, on the purely Natural board, I felt I could wear many of them on their own very well. (I do not feel this abot R or any other essence), does this signify that I may have a heavy dose of N??

If I were to sort of take a stab at percentages, any one know how I may do this?

Lena

7/13/2018 09:54:46 am

Lola, maybe your dominant essence is N. Have you tried the RN board? Or the RNG board?
If you have R I think you are supposed be able to wear things on their own from the R board. It may not be optimal, but I think it should be acceptable.
I don't think percentage is so importent. I think the most important thing is to have a rough idea of your Style ID.

7/13/2018 10:56:55 am

Hey Lena,

Yes, sorry I didnt mention earlier, I tried RN, RNG, both are quite good...I am slightly leaning toward RN, I felt the *most* me.

I find my straight on serious face is good with R, but not so much my big smiley one.

7/13/2018 04:02:40 pm

A question: What do you do when an iconic element of your style ID does not work for you, but the rest of the style ID does?

I mean, I guess the obvious answer is 'ditch that element,' but I'm curious as to *why* some elements don't work. For example, I'm sure I've got a lot of classic, but pearls have always been ghastly on me. I've tried and tried again - different lengths, styling, shades of white, grey, you name it. Pearls just look bad on me. Like polka dots, I look enormous and heavy in comparison to them. So for a while I thought, that's it - can't do pearls = not classic. But now I'm thinking I've got enough natural to make the pearls look silly? Or say rough, heavy knits overwhem me. I assumed I was not natural - but maybe that's where the classic comes in - I need something smoother.

I guess what I'm saying is I remain curious as to the 'blend' of the IDs, and how you can use that to individually explain what elements work and which don't. A number of systems can name the elements - and this system does so best. Yet I'm finding that I'm still often thrown off of the blend - as in, what's the 'nope' limit? If I can't do pearls, could still be a classic? Or if no pearls, no twinsets, no full skirts... still a classic? But once you pass a line of 'also no x, y, or z' then it's no longer classic? Or is it more about the lines than the items? Or the textures? Is that making sense?

Alex

7/13/2018 08:44:20 pm

That's something I've been wondering about too! I'm pretty sure I'm mostly Natural with some Ethereal, but some Ethereal elements just don't work on me. I need the SHAPES and LINES of Ethereal - the s curves, the drape, the flow - but I need that in plain cotton or linen fabric, not sheer gauze - anything gauzy looks silly on me. That sometimes makes me question the E - but I really do need it - N alone isn't quite right, I really need the bit of E.

So I'm also curious about the why - why some elements work and some don't, what makes a particular element essential - as you ask, are the lines the most essential thing? Or the textures?

7/13/2018 08:50:26 pm

I also can't pull off any shimmer or irridescence. Again, that makes me question the E. But the E lines and drape and s-curves are so, so right on me.

7/13/2018 11:12:04 pm

@ Alex - so interesting! E's willowy silhouette and drape are so good for me as well. I can do some iridescent and shimmer, but the rest of the E stuff is not so good. So what you say is exactly what I was thinking of: how some elements are good, others aren't, and so I'm wondering how to know what to pick and choose out of IDs. Is it more about the overall impression? But isn't the impression created by the items?

7/13/2018 11:16:36 pm

* correction: I meant to say E's willowy narrowness is good, but not the unconstructed drape. I am most flattered by the classic non-sexy hourglass shape, but without a belted waist.

7/15/2018 11:59:58 am

@W. - now I'm wondering if I have some Classic, too! Like you, I'm flattered by non-sexy hourglass - but a subtle hourglass, not overly defined - but I find it confusing because that is an s-curve shape, isn't it? I'm also flattered by willowy narrowness, like you. And as you wrote above, I can't take too much embellishment and often look at a garment and think, "Why did the designer have to add THAT to it?!?"

But most Classic looks so...constrained on me. Anything fitted or tight is just all wrong. (And pearls - OMG just so, so, SO wrong on me!!!)

It's hard, though, to separate preferences. Do I think tight looks wrong on me because it really looks wrong, or because I find it uncomfortable? Ever since I was a little kid I've always flat-out refused to wear any clothes that are uncomfortable - either tight and constricting, or with an uncomfortable fabric. (And now that I think of it - maybe the reason I think gauze looks wrong on me is that it feels wrong to me - I don't like the texture, don't like the way it feels on my skin - maybe it actually looks good, but I can't see it because I dislike the feel so much.)

I love clothes that have a slightly medieval feel (and full-on medieval costumes look great on me) (Jedi Knight costumes do, too). If I dressed like Galadriel in The Lord of the Rings I'd look absurd, but dressing like a Wood Elf is perfect -
a bit other-wordly, but no gauze and no shimmer.

It's hard to separate personality, too. I'm quiet and shy (people keep telling me they want to put a bell on me because I move so quietly!) - anything that draws excessive attention feels uncomfortable to me. I like being able to blend into the background.

It's so hard to separate - personality, personal preferences, what you grew up with, what people around you expect - it's so hard to figure out!

7/17/2018 12:25:41 am

I think there are lots of dimensions for one essence.

Ingenue can be sweet, innocent, youthful.
I have 25% ingenue, I always make people think I'm youger than my actual aged, without adding ingenue element, my look won't be complete, but I still need to choose ingenue items carefully.Sweet detail like a mini ruffle or bow or puff sleeves are so good.But I can't wear Lolita skirt cause it's too youthful and would be against my mature look(Romantic and classic) it would make me look ridiculously childlike.

As for classic, I have 25% of classic, I need eleglance in my dress like a hood tailour cutting.But I can't wear pearl or simple shirt cause they make me look old.I need eleglance side of classic, not simple side.

And for Romantic, I have 50% of Romantic, I can wear almost of Romantic items, large flower print, velvet, big ruffle, big bow, red are so good.But I can't show off my cleavage, it would make me look inappropiated, I think because it againts my classic and ingenue sides.I need Romantic' womanliness, not sexiness.

7/18/2018 02:46:21 am

PJ, thank you very much for that! Rachel just analyzed me as REG - 40% Romantic - but overtly sexy stuff doesn't work on me as far as I can tell (though that may be my own issue). Womanliness though, I can visualize that as the base to ground and grow up the look.

Christy

7/14/2018 07:52:12 pm

I have been reluctant to reply to this post, but feel like I should mention my experience. Rachel typed me earlier this year. I am 50% D, 30% E, and 20 % C. I feel like she has hit the nail on the head with me, and even wrote a testimonial about how helpful I think her professional analysis has been. Even after this "aha" experience, I have struggled with aspects of my type. As someone who is primarily D, I "should" be able to wear my hair slicked back, etc., but it is not my best look. Even Rachel, when I asked her, recommended a long, flowy style (no bangs). I have tried slicking my hair back several times, but it must be the E and C that I need that makes the style not amazing on me. My point is that while some of these points may be a litmus test for some style IDs, don't assume they are the be all and end all.

Jenny

7/14/2018 08:14:28 pm

Thank you Christy, I'm glad you replied to this article.

It makes a lot of sense, that "slicked back hair" would not necessarily be best, despite being 50% D. The half of you, after all, is made up of two other ids - like you said!

May I ask, how you balance them out for yourself when you are putting together an outfit? What things do you consider?

7/15/2018 11:30:13 am

Ok, so I succeeded in pulling off slicked back hair today, so I have to modify my answer. I feel like it only worked because I had a really dark eye. To say that this is a pure power look is an understatement. Had a bit of a discussion about this on another blog post with other EDs. A sculpted or structured hair style seems to work. You can have wisps, but they need to look more like blades of grass than super airy or shaggy, if that makes sense. Game or anime characters can work as hair inspiration. D hair needs to have a smooth finish and be either very short or very long. I really struggled with this idea, because, as others have mentioned, I have been conditioned not to embrace the “harshness” of my D features. Long is still better for me, but it is nice to know I have this slicked back thing in my arsenal.

Zara

7/14/2018 10:34:53 pm

I wonder if someone can answer this, ethereal tend to have long faces, but so many hair advice columns say not to have your hair if you have a long face since it emphasizes the longness of your face, and moves away from the “ideal” of the oval face. Does Alaina Morisette have ethereal?

Katja

7/15/2018 11:09:41 am

Zara, Ethereal, Dramatic and Natural are all essences with elongated lines. Ethereal, Natural or Dramatic women often have long faces. As a D, N or E you need long lines to look your best. Your hairstyle included.
For instance, Alanis Morisette would not look good in short hair. I have not analyzed her, but I suspect she has Natural and Dramatic and possibly Ethereal. She has an oblong face and she needs long lines around her face. She looks great in really long hair.
The hair advice columns often recommend a short bob for oblong faces, but that doesn't necessarily make your face look shorter. In fact, it could be the opposite. And it would definitely make you less attractive if you are a strongly Dramatic, Natural or Ethereal woman who needs long lines to look your best.
If you do want to shorten your face there are other things you can do and still stay true to your style-ID. Avoid middle part, add volume at both side of the face to broaden it and use the right earrings to make the face look wider. You can also make your face look wider and shorter by using makeup.
But remember, a long face can be a part of your beauty if you happen to be an Ethereal, Natural or Dramatic beauty.
I hope this helps!

7/15/2018 01:05:06 pm

I have found for myself that a lot of hair advice columns repeat the same information -- and it's typically very unhelpful. They seem to be obsessed with the oval face shape (occasionally heart shape) - and make really unhelpful (and frequently hurtful) statements about how more square shapes are masculine and thus need to be disguised at all costs (never mind that you can find knockout women in any of the face shape categories). Their goal, then, is to try and make the face look more oval like - so all hair decisions are based around the outline of the face - not inner lines, hair texture, or anything else - and most major sites/magazines totally ignore curly or natural hair. And if you actually have an oval face, you're told 'yay! you can do whatever you want!' which is patently not true. The inner lines of your face - your bone structure, symmetry and so on may not allow for 'any' hairstyle.

I've found most hair guides very misleading (as you can see!) and that a good stylist is a far better bet. If you can find someone who can give you advice as to how to make something work for your own face and lifestyle and so on. Rachel has a hair post I've looked at many times, too: https://www.truth-is-beauty.com/blog/style-identities-your-best-hair -- the theme there seems to be echoing your facial lines, to create a fitting 'frame' for your face, rather than trying to use your hair as a disguise.

Jane

7/19/2018 02:49:04 am

Very interesting. It makes me wonder: my face looks terrible when my hair is longer than shoulder length, but ultra short makes my face look too harsh. Seems like I can only wear bob styles (if they aren’t passing shoulder length), could that be an indecation for my style type?

7/19/2018 03:32:16 am

Hard to say. I don't know what you look like. Have you considered Classic ? A Classic has to stay away from extremely short or long hair. Gamines are usually flattered by a bob, but if very short hair doesn't suit you maybe you don't have Gamine.

Kat Confused

7/19/2018 07:38:41 am

For me it's the same thing. I've got sleek hair naturally, but a pixi looks off, and very long hair looks narrowing. A long bob looks good, and I have an oval face. :-)

7/19/2018 12:33:23 pm

Thanks for your reply! I have considered C because I look rather plain (although that might have something to do with my summer colouring) and need fitted and tailored clothing but C clothes seems too ‘grown up’ for me, although I’m 30. I have always looked a lot younger than I am (estimated 23/25) but anything girly makes my face look very heavy so no ingenue I suppose.
So yes, maybe G? I look best in very skinny jeans or short shorts, fitting top and tailored demin jacket and I can wear shorter hair (I actually never received more compliments than the time I had a pixie cut) but I had to make sure to keep some volume at the sides. So short but not very short.
The only thing is: ‘funky’ prints easily overwhelm me. So maybe partly C, but with dominant G?
Too many doubts here...

7/20/2018 03:01:54 am

Jane, do you want to link some pictures of yourself? It is impossible to tell without seeing you.

8/2/2018 12:54:21 pm

Hi Katja, I understand you need some pictures but I prefer not to link them. Done some more research lately and I'm definately not 'perfect' enough for Classic, so now I'm considering Natural Gamine.
Anyway thanks for your help!

12/15/2018 11:52:31 am

Hi Katja
I’m quite similar to the comments above (age 27), can I ask your opinion?
https://ibb.co/X2KW2CR
https://ibb.co/xzmhYTS
https://ibb.co/1n2p25Y

Kat confused

7/19/2018 07:36:03 am

Hi everyone,

I know I have youthfull essence (all my life I've been judged younger than I am). I have small eyes, a small thin lipped mouth. So Ingenue seems out - but....when I had short hair, people though I was a boy, but not an attractive boy. I actually look more pretty with long hair. Shortest I can wear is a long bob. I actually thought I was an ugly looking child until I compared pictures of me with long hair and short. I was pretty with long hair. I also look best with hair framing my face instead of slicked back or up in a ponytail. Hair is sleek naturally. So I am not sure wether G or I - also: the longer the hair, the younger I actually look - Is that an indication? Also, the more blond I go, the more compliments I get. Being blond(er) is preceived by some to be more youthfull, but which one? G or I?
Body is a weird mixture of broad shoulders, thin arms and small, narrow hands, and small waist with bigger hips and thighs. Feet are normal size but small (not fleshy)
I'd like to dress for my face, I just cannot seem to make up what it is that would look attractive, as I am confused.

7/19/2018 11:53:32 am

Hi Kat! It is possible that you have both Gamine and Ingenue. But it's difficult for me to say since you didn't link any pictures of yourself.

7/20/2018 06:17:27 am

Here are some pictures taken by a friend; I'll see if a can get a good one where you can see my face.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10160586282860613&set=a.10160586280995613.1073741841.626915612&type=3

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10160586282880613&set=a.10160586280995613.1073741841.626915612&type=3

7/20/2018 06:25:00 am

Some face pictures:

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10155554969969802&set=pb.640099801.-2207520000.1532082056.&type=3&size=1392%2C1392

https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/10171098_10153114452824802_8145723203280216453_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=032a59879d626b5ba49105ff56adb3b7&oe=5BE6FDF4

7/20/2018 09:14:08 am

Kat, I can't see the photo on this link: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10155554969969802&set=pb.640099801.-2207520000.1532082056.&type=3&size=1392%2C1392
It says: this content is not available right now.

7/20/2018 09:15:59 am

Kat, how tall are you?

7/20/2018 09:29:55 am

I am 5'5 or 165 cm

7/20/2018 09:55:40 am

Kat, I'm thinking ECG. This is not an analysis, it's my first impression of you. Check out the ECG board and tell me what you think. You could try some ECG outfits and see how it feels.

7/22/2018 03:56:19 am

Kat, not a word from you. What do you think about my suggestion?

7/22/2018 04:53:53 am

Hi Katja, I was surprised about the etheral. But some things do seem to click. Like wearing things with a bit more drape, or that have a bit of shine. I usually don't gravitate to that, so I'll keep it in mind. It also explains the contradictions in my face and body. I cannot do pearls or twin sets, I look like I'm trying to dress like a grandma. But classic lines, with a playfull twist do work. So I'll try and play with that.

Jessica

7/21/2018 04:51:07 pm

How about hair pulled up/back? Which identity really can’t?

Melina

5/30/2019 06:30:20 am

Jessica, IMO those with lots of Romantic and/or Ingenue. I have both and I can't.

(Or, I do wear my hair up a lot, but mainly when at home, as I don't myself like the way I look like that, it's just for convenience. ;))

8/9/2018 03:09:01 pm

I came back to this information and used it to help confirm what I was seeing. I look great in a pixie cut but it does have to be soft around my face. I have no dramatic in me and do not look good with slicked back hair or very short and off my face. Oddly I looked older as a child but switched at age 18 to looking younger than my age. Ethereal and Ingenue combined! It's difficult to understand how a person can look both ageless or as old as time and yet also youthful but it seems to be something I do. I can do very long hair-ethereal but it's too much of a pain to grow it out. I find the combo of Ingenue and Gamine interesting too. Gamine is too sharp, bold, high contrast for me but Ingenue on it's own is too sweet and young. Still, I need the delicate details near my face and the lightness and sweetness to sort of soften the Gamine. Rounded edges and curved lines are needed. Natural overwhelms me and Classic looks a bit stiff and I start to look like a child in her mother's clothes. Any of the boards that have either Ethereal and Ingenue or Ethereal and Gamine usually have one or two examples on them that I could wear. I have a pretty good grasp on which aspects of Gamine and which of Ingenue are working for me but find it harder to pinpoint what Ethereal adds though it definitely adds something. Lightness, is what I think it is.

5/28/2019 11:04:57 pm

It's fun to revisit this and read through the comments! I have changed my mind somewhat in a year, and where I once thought I had no D I know think that I do have some. I now suspect either ED or EDG though the G is in the face and not the body. I think Kibbe might type me as a D but I think my face is the problem with being pure D. Pure E doesn't work for the same reasons N is my worst option. I definitely need body skimming clothing and some amount of structure in the fabric. Anyhow, I am mainly popping in to say that the type I thought I had none of is looking more like my dominant type but it sure is difficult to be objective about myself.

5/29/2019 08:06:01 am

You can also do what I did -- find out what style of dress each type wears, visit a department store, and try them on. I took photos. Photos reveal the truth. Some things I thought were okay on me, after taking a photo showed how bad they looked. I had a feeling I was a classic and sure enough, clean, simple dress lines suit me the best, in straight colors (not patterns). The only draping (natural) I can do is with a defined waistline and otherwise clean lines. Gamine dresses overpower me with their bold, bright colors and make me look disproportionate by hugging my hips so much. I can pull off a little bit of ethereal (it makes me look super tall) if the portion of the dress closest to my face has -- you guessed it -- simple and clean lines. Romantic's plunging necklines? BAD. I must have a little Ingenue, because it makes me look like a little girl playing dress up. ;)

5/30/2019 06:38:54 am

This is probably a matter of opinion, sure, but I would never say that "photos reveal the truth", in fact mostly the opposite..! A *still image* of reality can never, ever be equal to actual reality. Seems obvious, but it's astonishing how many people seem to forget that and claim otherwise (as Charity just did). I know, too, that the current generation is largely an instagram & facebook generation, but I was lucky to have grown up when those didn't exist, and would *never* substitute reality for photos. ;) Just my 2 cents.

5/31/2019 08:51:30 am

I don't know that you can get a realistic assessment of how something looks on your body lines in a cramped dressing room mirror, though. A photo taken by a friend (not a selfie, that flattens you too much) from a short distance away gives you a better look at how something looks from head to toe. If you're looking in a mirror, you are looking down your own reflected image. *shrug* But do what you want.

5/30/2019 06:27:20 am

Hmm, I have to say that unlike a few other articles here, this does not really help me confirm whether I have any Dramatic (as I now believe I do) or not... For example, I can pull off (very) long hair, but not short nor slicked back - but it may be because my Romantic and Ingenue essences are stronger (as combined) than my D, so they override it here. The earlier article regarding facial features and other parts of appearance was more helpful in this respect, at least for me, as it was when I got kind of confirmed about having at least some D. :)

Mokuren

5/31/2019 09:45:59 am

Thanks for the style calculator. It turned out that I am a Romantic Ethereal Ingenue. In your board, there is many lace and roses: it remind me of pre raphaelite paintings. But to me, this style also make me think of a mermaid (sensuous, innocent and overwordly). I think I will try to explore this style a bit more.

6/1/2019 04:12:43 am

If you look better with tank tops than with short sleeves or spaghetti straps; and rolled up/3 quarter sleeves work better than long sleeves, which style id’s are more likely?

6/1/2019 05:19:17 pm

Hard to tell but--a lot of people here have commented that Naturals look great with bare arms, and tank tops tend to--not always, but tend to--give off a pretty casual vibe. Short sleeves could fit with several IDs but are probably most characteristic of Gamine. Spaghetti straps often have a sexiness that feels Romantic. So I definitely wouldn't rule out Gamine or Romantic based on this, but based on looking best in tank-tops, it may be more likely that your Natural is higher than your Gamine or Romantic.

Naturals also look good with rolled sleeves (again, it gives off a casual vibe)--although as an elongated essence, they would also look good with full-length sleeves. So you could have Natural and a "shortening" essence, like Ingenue or Gamine. Or Romantic; Romantics look good in styles that show off the wrists.

Dramatic is an elongated essence and looks good with long sleeves. Same with Ethereal. So those may be less likely, although I definitely wouldn't rule them out just based on this information.

KK Slider

6/1/2019 05:41:59 pm

This is really helpful and useful. Thanks.

6/2/2019 02:04:54 am

Thanks a lot Megan, very helpful indeed!
What’s your opinion on classic id and sleeves?

6/3/2019 12:22:57 pm

Hm I think classic sleeves would be pretty "unremarkable," not in a negative sense, but just meaning not overly long, not having lots of details or unique shapes. Basically sillouhettes that have very simple and somewhat formal lines. Any sleeve that reads as rather casual or rather sexy probably wouldn't be purely classic

Oasis

6/2/2019 07:02:23 am

"An extravagant circle is the defining shape of Romantic, and Romantics look great with these circles near their face."

Rachel, do you mean :extra large hoop earrings? Is it pure Romantic or RN?

6/2/2019 03:48:06 pm

"Also, it can be hard to see ourselves objectively!"

I have found this to be true (understatement). As I was reflecting on the post "What do they say about your beauty?" I realized I get *wildly* differing comments. I've heard 'striking' but also 'cute' -- 'classic' but also 'unique.' And I find I can wear a lot of different styles reasonably well. There are few things that look truly awful on me -- and the ones that do? I could never figure out why they were so bad.

I finally got a trusted friend to help me with the calculator. I was so worried I'd be seen as frivolous asking about it. But my friend took time to consider each board and if it would work. What *they* thought was flattering sometimes surprised me. For example, they looked at the RED board and said, 'That's good.' Meanwhile I'd rejected it over and over because it looked so impractical to me. They did not use a picture, but looked at me. In the end, their assessment of EDC did not surprise me -- that's a possibility I looked at and rejected because it seemed 'too fancy.' I'd even gone so far as to get the style guides and then run away, because I didn't think I was 'cool' enough to pull off such a polished look.

In retrospect, I ought to have asked for help or a consult from day one. I really needed a second opinion to find a starting point.

10/21/2020 04:10:35 am

In all fairness, instead of "you can probably rule out Dramatic" I think this should say "you can probably rule out Dramatic *as major essence*", or something the like. I believe I have D as one of my minor essences, and yet I could never pass as a male or otherwise do drag convincingly, neither does super-short or totally slicked-back hair suit me, so if I went by this article, I'd mistakenly rule out any D... (As I did before.) But I have two very feminine essences as my main ones (R & I), and it totally affects the aspects above. So, your total blend should be considered too! (Of course, this probably goes for all the other essences mentioned here, too.)

9/6/2021 08:42:46 pm

Oh this is such a helpful page! I'm already fairly confident that I'm Ethereal-Classic, but have been struggling with whether I have Romantic/Ingenue in there too.

Hard to let go of 'Romantic' because I'd be a theatrical romantic under Kibbe if not for his height cutoff that leaves me a "soft dramatic" (I'm basically all curves except for parts of bone structure, and with hourglass hips it just feels weird to jettison 'Romantic' from my consideration). But I also can't shake the feeling that I have 'Ingenue' in my face (large eyes and a narrow chin, and I've been told all my life I look "adorable").

But maybe my struggle with these two yin essences is related to my strong Ethereal type, and when people have said "cute" or "adorable" they just didn't know how to place non-romantic yin? Because the elongated 'S' shape, agelessness and movement definitely seems to be my primary. It's just that my agelessness seems in the direction of youthful-feminine... and I have those very curved hips.

Anyway, this page prompted me to test myself for the R/I markers: and if large/small circles are the test, large works better than small for me! (My hair doesn't curl at all (is wavy but refuses to hold a curl-curl), so I just took a photo of myself laying next to circles of various sizes, haha. If that counts though, large were better then smaller, so...) I guess if I were to pick a third type to qualify my first two, it'd be Romantic?

... oh no. Then I decided to double-check it, and took a pre-existing facial photo, and added the shape tool of a circle many times to two versions (one with small circles one with large) and the image with the small circles looked better.

Has anyone else struggled with this?

Basically Ethereal seems unavoidably one of my primary types (with my elongated frame but gentle features: I'm visually approachable to the point of social quicksand so not an 'intimidating' Dramatic (I'm the first sucker a person with a clipboard b-lines for on the street), but not a Natural because messy hair and boxy clothing leave me looking like a slob: my hair has to be sleek and narrow). I seem to REALLY need the clean lines of a classic type: a form-following pencil dress actually suits me well, and an elegant updo is one of my best hairstyles.

But what to do about picking between Romantic/Ingenue as a third subtype (or dropping both)... I don't know. Because both seem unavoidably relevant to me but I think that must be ridiculous: at that point I'd basically just be saying "I'm tall but all kinds of yin" and surely there are elements of the various yin types that actually rule OUT other types. And four types seems too many. Yes?

Or maybe at this point I'm overthinking the concept of 'category names' and should just make up words myself that connote the partially-romantic partially-ingenue ethereal classic essence that seems to be so much a part of my body that I can't bring myself to jettison one part. Whatever on earth that means.

Truth is Beauty

Quick Tricks for Finding Your Style Identity

Leave a Reply.

About Me...

Categories