microblading - if it needs 3 attempts the therapist is at fault?

[FogDog]

I’ve had semi permanent makeup on my eyebrows and eyes for about 15 years following an illness which caused me to lose hair. I have always had the machine technique without problems. Having moved, I have tried a new therapist who is fully trained and I’ve seen examples of her work. She suggested hand microblading for a more natural finish. After the treatment healed, I had barely any hair stokes - most of the applied colour was totally missing. She did a free top up which is now healing and it’s the same thing again - only a few visible hair strokes and virtually nothing else.

Obviously I’m disappointed and I’d looked after them very very carefully, following the instructions to the letter.

I’ve spoken to her and she’s offered to do a third session, this time with the machine and again free of charge. However, she also said that sometimes microblading ‘just doesn’t take with some people.’ AIBU thinking surely the sole cause of it happening twice must just be her poor technique? It’s never happened to me before and I’ve been having it done for years. Does anyone know if this is a bad sign? Would you go for the third treatment and give her a chance to correct it?

I should probably add that it does cost several hundred pounds so it’s upsetting to think I might have lost it entirely if I don’t take her up on the offer.

My experience is exactly like yours. I had my brows done in June and have had three top-ups because the colour wouldn't hold. It did take some colour eventually but there are no visible hair strokes. The shape is nice but, up close, they look blurry. I have to go over them with powder.
I think it may be the technician. I called somewhere else to ask their advice and they said this only happens on oily skin - which I don't have.

I should add that mine are now fading and are patchy. I don't think I'll go back. A waste of time and money.

There's a few things to consider here, the first is that if you've had many treatments previously you're less likely to see defined strokes when healed. Brow pigment will migrate (go blurry) if tattooed over old work.

Secondly microblading isn't suitable for skin that's had lots of previous treatment, so I'm surprised she suggested this method to you. Machine work definitely holds better in the skin, particularly when working over old pigment.

Disclaimer: I am a permanent makeup artist

Ps for the best result find someone who is confident in producing soft powder brows. These should cover your old work, add definition but still look very natural when healed.

Thank you both. Maia, if anything my skin is dry - definitely not oily. She seemed to go deep enough as it was very scratchy but there’s just nothing there at all apart from a couple of defined hairs. Rest is like it was beforehand. If yours only lasted 6-7 months at best, I can see why you think it isn’t worth it.
Toastgirl, all she said was that microblading would look more natural but would go a bit less deep and might need more frequent top ups. She didn’t tell me it might not take at all or be blurry. I think I might travel to see my old technician for the powder brow you’ve suggested but am wondering if it’s best to let this totally heal and fade first? Otherwise I suppose it’ll be viewed as a correct (despite there being bugger all to correct).

Yes, your technician will probably view is as a correction. I class anything where I'm working over another tech's pigment as a correction unless it's a case of just topping it up.

I think she has badly advised you. Microblading and machine can achieve the same result if you're wanting hairstrokes but microblading is more suitable for virgin skin; it's not really an option to put ontop of machine work.

Definitely consider a soft powder brow though. It should hold if done properly and will give you a nice consistent finish.

I had a similar experience. My (excellent) beauty therapist used the 'nano brow' technique on me - I think this is an actual tattoo needle (or very similar) rather than just the blade.
That worked great and my brows look good 15 months later!

She’s now really angry with me / defensive, saying that because my most recent work was three years old (it wasn’t, it was two years) and there was no visible pigment in the skin (there was a tiny bit) it could be microbladed over which is why she did it. She also told me that she finds me continually questioning her to be very rude. I don’t think I’ve been rude or that it’s unreasonable to be a bit reluctant to agree to a third session - even if it is a different technique and there’s no extra charge - after two failures. I mean, it’s going in the middle of my face so I need to be cautious, right?!

I’ve just had a refund of 1/3 of the cost with a text message telling me to find another brow technician. So, powder brow it is!

It is better to have them tattooed by a semi permanent make-up artist.
Microblading is very reliant on the artist’s pressure and even with a great technique, it won’t be consistent.
Tattooing is more reliable and consistent pressure strokes. They have brought in nano needles now so the standard is even better!
Look at tattooing as digital Microblading. To tattoo usually requires more training than microblading.
I have seen some shocking microblading courses advertised.

If you want, PM me and I can recommend a very good quality company (not mine and I don’t work for them) that hopefully has artist’s in your area.

Thanks Oxymoron - have pmd!