Tamara Bickley Makeup wrote:
Hi, I have searched this subject on here, but can't find previous discussions. I'm a MUA, very passionate about what I do. Honestly, I am not a professional hair stylist and don't pretend to be. I'm a MUA, and that's it. So why do so many people assume I will also do hair? When I tell them honestly that my forte is makeup, they don't seem to care and still want me to do the hair! I've recently added some basic hair items (brush, irons, sprays, etc) to my kit out of neccessity. I definitely can do light hairstyles. But I would much rather do what I do best and leave hair to a hair specialist for the integrity of the shoot, bride, etc. I've spoken to other hair stylists who say that they are sometimes expected to do makeup, even though they don't know the first thing about makeup artistry! Of course there are many who specialize in both, but not everyone. I've begun to build professional relationships with some hair stylists I can bring along with me on a shoot if needed. But why do so many people think the two professions should be wrapped up in one person? Thank you for any input!

In my opinion you've only made matters worse for yourself by even compiling a basic hair kit. Items like curling irons and hairspray are not a necessity for you as a make-up artist, no matter what other people may try and convince you to do. Period.

As a stylist people assume all the time that I supply hair and make-up services in addition to wardrobe. I don't. And in response I politely let them know this and leave them to decide whether or not they're willing to work with someone who has selected a single craft and is good at it or if they'd rather try their luck with someone who can offer them a 3-for-1 deal and may or may not be able to deliver. Under no circumstances though if I'm tapped for the gig do I show up with an eye shadow palette and disposable brushes or hair extensions in addition to the wardrobe. If they want someone who can do make-up they need to get a make-up artist. If they want someone to do hair they need to get a hairstylist. I make it clear that I have a fairly singular purpose on set and unless I'm needed by the photographer to hold a reflector, direct a fan or reposition a light, my sole function is to make sure the wardrobe looks amazing.

If you only want to do make-up there's a simple solution: Only do make-up. Chuck the hairstyling items from your kit and only work with people who'll respect your skill in the area you've chosen to utilize it.

J O H N  A L L A N wrote:
The ability/willingness to do "light hair" can make the difference between using you and someone else. Obviously it's not a prerequisite for working - but more and more MUAs do it because it's a differentiator. Even light styling, particularly when the photographer's testing, can make a difference in which MUA is being chosen. I'm seeing more and more MUAs offering that also.

truth

almost every makeup artist I know can at least do light hair and if you can't or won't you may be passed over for someone who can and will.

I have worked with MUA's that say they only do "light" hair and they were pretty capable of some amazing stuff.

But light hair is helpful -- I don't think it should be expected but I carry hair products and a curling iron in my kit.

J O H N  A L L A N wrote:
The ability/willingness to do "light hair" can make the difference between using you and someone else. Obviously it's not a prerequisite for working - but more and more MUAs do it because it's a differentiator. Even light styling, particularly when the photographer's testing, can make a difference in which MUA is being chosen. I'm seeing more and more MUAs offering that also.

I'm really curious as to why this is. As a photographer you're expected to take pictures, that's it. And while I realize that many photographers do much more e.g. location scouting and set building, on the day of the shoot your primary function, what you've been tapped to do, what you're in some cases being paid to do is take photos because you're the photographer. How many of you are asked to also do hair or pick up wardrobe by people looking to work with you or as a requirement to be considered for a job? How many of you are passed over by jobs because you don't have the ability to do a blow-out or a basic smoky eye or source the perfect wool crepe black dress in addition to being kick ass photographers? I'd wager very, very few if any at all. While I know some photographer do have closets in their studios they're usually last resorts, back-up plans or used for their personal testing. So why disrespect the rest of us working behind the scenes by passing on people for jobs just because they refuse to split their skill set?

I don't do hair, I don't do make-up but I'm damn good at wardrobe styling which is why I'm a stylist. And the quality of a persons skill set should take precedence over the quantity of skills they may be able to bring especially if they're really strong in one area and only so-so in another.

Honestly, if everyone just focused on their specialties there'd be no choice but to hire individuals for each aspect you actually wanted on set...

Tamara Bickley Makeup wrote:
Thank you! I should get rid of the hair stuff. One reason I added it was because I showed up at this shoot where I was hired to do makeup. Hair was never discussed. When the model showed up, her hair was not styled and it was stick straight. The photographer who hired me asked me to make beach waves in her hair. Kind of hard to do it you don't have a styling iron or clips or spray! I did what I could with my fingers. But I spent way too much effort. I never wanted to be in that position again. I guess because I care so much about each shoot and my portfolio, I figured better to be prepared. Better to tell them no hair though prior so there are no expectations!

Truth if you care about the shoots in your portfolio discuss the details beforehand. I realize I'm totally Type A but for every shoot I coordinate I send out detailed information including the exact expectations for hair and make-up and in some instances even supplying the hairstylists and MUAs with direct contact info for the models (with the models approval of course) if the model has extensions or break-out prone skin or anything else that may interfere with the final look.

If the photographer wants a certain look that needs to be discussed before the shoot and at that time you can let them know that "no" you don't do hair but you're a kick ass MUA and you come prepped to do that

Tamara Bickley Makeup wrote:
Hi, I have searched this subject on here, but can't find previous discussions. I'm a MUA, very passionate about what I do. Honestly, I am not a professional hair stylist and don't pretend to be. I'm a MUA, and that's it. So why do so many people assume I will also do hair? When I tell them honestly that my forte is makeup, they don't seem to care and still want me to do the hair! I've recently added some basic hair items (brush, irons, sprays, etc) to my kit out of neccessity. I definitely can do light hairstyles. But I would much rather do what I do best and leave hair to a hair specialist for the integrity of the shoot, bride, etc. I've spoken to other hair stylists who say that they are sometimes expected to do makeup, even though they don't know the first thing about makeup artistry! Of course there are many who specialize in both, but not everyone. I've begun to build professional relationships with some hair stylists I can bring along with me on a shoot if needed. But why do so many people think the two professions should be wrapped up in one person? Thank you for any input!

I think this all really came about is the economy recession , when I started it was very separated.  One hairstylist , one makeup artist back in the 80 s
But as the economy changed. Clients started trying to see if they can get someone to do both
I've personally have done really well in my career because I can do both well ,  it also depends on your market
I do a ton of commercials and they don't hire seperate hair and makeup.  It's all makeups job

Tiffany_B wrote:

I'm really curious as to why this is. As a photographer you're expected to take pictures, that's it. And while I realize that many photographers do much more e.g. location scouting and set building, on the day of the shoot your primary function, what you've been tapped to do, what you're in some cases being paid to do is take photos because you're the photographer. How many of you are asked to also do hair or pick up wardrobe by people looking to work with you or as a requirement to be considered for a job? How many of you are passed over by jobs because you don't have the ability to do a blow-out or a basic smoky eye or source the perfect wool crepe black dress in addition to being kick ass photographers? I'd wager very, very few if any at all. While I know some photographer do have closets in their studios they're usually last resorts, back-up plans or used for their personal testing. So why disrespect the rest of us working behind the scenes by passing on people for jobs just because they refuse to split their skill set?

I don't do hair, I don't do make-up but I'm damn good at wardrobe styling which is why I'm a stylist. And the quality of a persons skill set should take precedence over the quantity of skills they may be able to bring especially if they're really strong in one area and only so-so in another.

Honestly, if everyone just focused on their specialties there'd be no choice but to hire individuals for each aspect you actually wanted on set...

Well I scout my locations, cast and book the talent, often do the wardrobe pull and styling, and often makeup too. Very, very light hair. I almost always have a hair person on set when shooting an editorial. Sometimes I have stylist -- sometimes not.

Depends on the budget.

But I shoot commercial headshots and most people are not going to pay a separate hair person. So a makeup person might be asked to do some light hair.

It depends on your market. It depends on what you do. I can't think of one makeup artist that I have booked that wasn't capable of at least some light hair.

T A R I K wrote:
My MUA charges extra for Hair --

I would too if I was using a curling iron or whathaveyou.

I wouldn't charge to fluff, or do a little hair spray.

I still would charge less than having a full blown hair stylist on set

Oscar Partida wrote:
It's a HUGE plus

+1

I don't ever expect it, but I have found that those who tend to be generally proficient with one aesthetic skill enjoy learning others. Most of the MUAs I work with are "proficient" with hair. Which for 90% of my shoots is more than fine.

Hiring someone who is 100% skilled at hair, and another who is 100% skilled at makeup is better than hiring one who is 100% makeup, 75% hair. But the latter is MUCH easier to find, therefore easier to plan a shoot around.

Makeup + light hair wins over just an MUA any day. Great makeup with hair that is where it needs to be is great. It doesn't need to be full blown coiffure that's meant for high tea with the queen, most often it just needs to look good.

Keila Sone wrote:
People just dont want to pay for a hairstylist thats all,they want you to do hair beause you can't really charge them that much if you are not a hairstylist.People ask me to domake up too,if your not into it,just dont do it...

The last shoot I did, I booked the hair stylist FIRST, and then makeup, model, and everything around HER... your premise is incorrect.

Laura UnBound wrote:
MUAs and hairstylists are predominantly women. Everyone knows youve got the hair gene and makeup gene, all females do.

Um in the pro freelancing world this could not be further from the truth.

Chicchowmein wrote:
Well I scout my locations, cast and book the talent, often do the wardrobe pull and styling, and often makeup too. Very, very light hair. I almost always have a hair person on set when shooting an editorial. Sometimes I have stylist -- sometimes not.

Depends on the budget.

But I shoot commercial headshots and most people are not going to pay a separate hair person. So a makeup person might be asked to do some light hair.

It depends on your market. It depends on what you do. I can't think of one makeup artist that I have booked that wasn't capable of at least some light hair.

Okay location scouting and talent casting are all within the domain of the photographer and I've noted that on your shoots you do some juggling of skills but this doesn't actually answer my questions so let me rephrase:

How many times have you as a photographer been asked to also do hair or pick up wardrobe by people looking to work with you or as a requirement to be considered for a job?

How many times have you as a photographer been passed over for jobs because you don't have the ability to do a blow-out or a basic smoky eye or source the perfect wool crepe black dress in addition to being a kick ass photographer?

I'm willing to bet that this has never happened. Perhaps there was a client that expected you to have a full team to work with but I'm almost certain that the expectation wasn't for you to personally take on the bulk of the behind the scenes work alone.

With all of that said my original point to the OP stands, as someone presenting herself as an MUA she shouldn't be expected to do anything other than make-up. She's upfront in stating her area of expertise and because there are MUAs who also choose to dabble in hair it shouldn't be magically considered the new standard. With all due respect the fact that you may do the wardrobe pull and styling on your sets doesn't technically make you stylist and in looking at your port you don't bill yourself as such so no one should expect to receive these services from you, especially without asking which is apparently what happened to the OP at one point and prompted the building of a basic hair kit.

Laura UnBound wrote:
MUAs and hairstylists are predominantly women. Everyone knows youve got the hair gene and makeup gene, all females do.

Just like all men can fix a leaky sink and know where that god awful sound my car is making comes from. Men have the handyman and mechanic genes.





People assume stupid things all the time. The best thing you can do is just be as up front about it as you can be early on, so if they need a hairstylist they wont just assume the day you show up for the gig that youre going to be doing hair.

This is the most sexists comment ever , really ????
Women weren't even allowed to do makeup in the film industry until 1976 ?  And I'm not mechanically inclined ..   


And yes budgets are way smaller than when I started in 1980. 
I was getting about 3,500 a day doing runway fashion shows and not as the head artists , just as one of the team

julietsdream wrote:
*If I am looking for a make-up artist...AND she can do...(or at least 'try' to do) hair if I need it, then she is much more likely to be chosen over someone who ONLY wants to do make-up..I prefer to work with someone who is willing to try new things, even if not her forte..!!..I have done at least 5 recent editorials for publication and everyone involved was doing More then what was expected...not because they 'had' to...because they wanted to, to be a part of the team..!!..No one expects you to do something you don't want to do...but the girl or guy, who can show me that they can offer more then just one thing that they specialize in, they will be chosen over the one who is steadfast on only doing one thing..!!...My most recent make-up artist...when I asked her if she could do hair...her answer, (which I Loved), was that even though she is not a hair stylist per se, she was "More then willing to help however she could, to get the model as Beautiful as possible"...I didn't need her to do hair, I just wanted to know she would TRY, in a pinch, if needed...that's the goal the end result..!!...One of the *Most* Fabulous photogs I have worked with recently, not only does she take Killer pics, she also does Outstanding hair...we got along Great, because we knew we had everything down, if for some reason we had a last minute cancellation for MUAH, etc, between us all..we could make it work..!!..That's who you want on your team...a *mulit-talented* person. I am doing a shoot on Sunday...I was asked to do the styling, but they had a last minute MUA cancellation, I told the model and the photog...I would fill in...do the styling, the hair and the make-up...not because I wanted to, since it's much more work from my end...but because I know I can and it will look *Beautiful*

I'm sorry but this is absurd. If you want to do a little bit of everything and can carry it off with finesse then that's cool but no one should be expected to especially when they're upfront about their skills.

The fact that someone chooses a specialty doesn't mean they're any less willing to be a team player. I style shoots but I also handle a lot of the art direction as well in terms of finding models, scouting locations and providing a general direction for hair and make-up but on set my primary function is to make sure the wardrobe looks awesome.

Are the lines blurred at times? Of course. I generally end up holding a reflector or something similar and that's fine.

But it's not fine for someone to hire me to do styling and they expect that I can also do a full face of make-up and hair without asking me about those things beforehand just because they assume this is the new norm.

TheMakeupMan wrote:

This is the most sexists comment ever , really ????
Women weren't even allowed to do makeup in the film industry until 1976 ?  And I'm not mechanically inclined ..   


And yes budgets are way smaller than when I started in 1980. 
I was getting about 3,500 a day doing runway fashion shows and not as the head artists , just as one of the team

I think Laura forgot to utilize the sarcasm font and I'm sure nothing sexist was meant by her statement

julietsdream wrote:
*Definition of ab·surd (b-sûrd, -zûrd) adj. 1. Ridiculously incongruous or unreasonable.......

*Really..??......I don't think it's unreasonable to...not *Expect*...but *Hope* that I am working with people who are *willing* (not expected) to do more then even they know they are capable of..??...who said anything about someone hiring you to do styling and then *expecting* you to do a full head of both hair and make-up, when no one told you beforehand(who does that?)..??...Not me.!!!..you do what's good for you...and I will do what's Good for me...I seldom answer these forums, because everyone will have a difference of opinion and I am not here to 'fight' with anyone...everything I CAN do is *congruous*(definition-appropriate or harmonious) with what I do...styling, make-up, hair, etc.etc...just because I Can do it, doesn't mean I expect *you* to do it...however...for ME....I am much more willing to take on a person who is *Willing* to try something new, when I am asked to pick a team for a job I am doing..!!..I always try to get people who specialize in their craft, however that isn't always a possibility...so...you pick the person who is 'more then willing to try' to go above what is expected...I am sorry for *you* that seems unreasonable, for others, it's not..!!
  Thanks by the way for the *Images that inspire me* list you just added me too...in that pic, I did the hair, the make-up and the styling, made the clothing and jewelry, picked the model, etc...why, not because I wanted to do everything...but because I was 'capable' of doing it and we didn't have to scramble for a different person, to do just one thing, when the MUAH cancelled..!!...I never said you were not a team player if you ONLY want/can style...however...I WANT someone who is capable of 'no limits' on my team, I see nothing wrong with being able to do more then one thing(no, it's not required, but helpful)..!!

I stand by my assertion that it's absurd. We can agree to disagree here.

What prompted the OP to put together a hair kit in the first place was her showing up on set with the belief she was solely doing make-up and then the photographer also expecting her to provide beach waves on a model with stick straight hair. So while you may not have these expectations per se there are people who do and IMHO it's based on the fact that there are an increasing number of people willing to do everything as opposed to just one thing really well.

Here's the thing I could be totally willing to do make-up or hair but that says nothing about whether or not I'd be good at it. In fact I likely wouldn't be good at it. I did a super basic bun for a model on like my third photo shoot ever and the only reason it looked even kind of okay is because I slightly altered the stying to make things look more in line with each other but at this point I'd never show anyone that image because in comparison to the rest of my port it's crap and this is despite the fact that it features a super cute skirt I made and am still proud of.

Does the fact that I know my own limits make me less of a valuable team player? I think not. I know my strengths and I play to them and as such I don't muck things up.

You're personally capable of doing a whole slew of things. Kudos to you (and I say that sans any sarcasm). On my teams though I'd rather have a crew with some limits that they can feasibly work within because I understand not everyone can do everything or more importantly not everyone can do everything well.

J O H N  A L L A N wrote:
The ability/willingness to do "light hair" can make the difference between using you and someone else. Obviously it's not a prerequisite for working - but more and more MUAs do it because it's a differentiator. Even light styling, particularly when the photographer's testing, can make a difference in which MUA is being chosen. I'm seeing more and more MUAs offering that also.

+1

If the needs are simple, there's only one model, and the budget is low to moderate I'd rather have one person on set who can handle both.  I wouldn't expect to do a large commercial shoot with just one person for both jobs, but when shooting model tests, portrait sessions, stock shoots etc. if I can get multiple services from one person, at a rate they are comfortable with, then that's great.

Most of the people who market themselves as MUA that I work with will gladly provide light to moderate hair styling, some assistance with wardrobe styling on set (I or the model provide the clothes, they help with pinning/clipping etc.)  They will even assist with a reflector or hold the fan.  These people are the ones who will continue to get booked by me and others like me who can't afford a full team on set for smaller projects.  If this is the market you are working in then it is useful to have the fullest range of skills.  On the flip side don't market yourself for things you can't do.  You won't get called back for a makeup only job if you botch the hair you said you could do.

There are certainly markets within the makeup field where you will likely never be asked to do anything other than makeup.  This would include most film and TV, and work in major fashion or commercial print projects.  You are free to select any or all of the markets you wish to pursue work in.  Just keep in mind that the jobs coming from Model Mayhem are likely not large commercial work, and those doing the hiring will have a limited budget and look to save money in as many ways as they can.

For editorial I really try to get someone for each job - I did a shoot in June with two hairstylists, in addition to MUA, wardrobe stylist and a photo assistant.  But for me that is the exception, not the norm.

Just my $0.02.

Tamara Bickley Makeup wrote:
Hi, I have searched this subject on here, but can't find previous discussions. I'm a MUA, very passionate about what I do. Honestly, I am not a professional hair stylist and don't pretend to be. I'm a MUA, and that's it. So why do so many people assume I will also do hair? When I tell them honestly that my forte is makeup, they don't seem to care and still want me to do the hair! I've recently added some basic hair items (brush, irons, sprays, etc) to my kit out of neccessity. I definitely can do light hairstyles. But I would much rather do what I do best and leave hair to a hair specialist for the integrity of the shoot, bride, etc. I've spoken to other hair stylists who say that they are sometimes expected to do makeup, even though they don't know the first thing about makeup artistry! Of course there are many who specialize in both, but not everyone. I've begun to build professional relationships with some hair stylists I can bring along with me on a shoot if needed. But why do so many people think the two professions should be wrapped up in one person? Thank you for any input!

In the editorial world I rarely get a budget for both a make-up and hair person. In LA there are amazing artists who do both. Why would I try and get a higher budget on a one model cover shoot, when i can get the job done within budget and still get them amazing results by using someone who does both.

If you want to work, and you want to work a lot, you learn to do what the market is currently requiring.

In acting it is called being a triple threat.

TheMakeupMan wrote:
This is the most sexists comment ever , really ????
Women weren't even allowed to do makeup in the film industry until 1976 ?  And I'm not mechanically inclined ..   


And yes budgets are way smaller than when I started in 1980. 
I was getting about 3,500 a day doing runway fashion shows and not as the head artists , just as one of the team

It was sarcastic. Welcome to MM


Im also surprised we're assuming this is an issue the OP is having in the pro-film and fashion industry. Sounded like the typical MM nonsense to me. Just like people on MM assume a photographer will automatically double as an amazing retoucher, and a model will automatically double as an actress if they feel like shooting video on a whim. MM people love bad assumptions.

Tiffany_B wrote:

Okay location scouting and talent casting are all within the domain of the photographer and I've noted that on your shoots you do some juggling of skills but this doesn't actually answer my questions so let me rephrase:

How many times have you as a photographer been asked to also do hair or pick up wardrobe by people looking to work with you or as a requirement to be considered for a job?

How many times have you as a photographer been passed over for jobs because you don't have the ability to do a blow-out or a basic smoky eye or source the perfect wool crepe black dress in addition to being a kick ass photographer?

I'm willing to bet that this has never happened. Perhaps there was a client that expected you to have a full team to work with but I'm almost certain that the expectation wasn't for you to personally take on the bulk of the behind the scenes work alone.

With all of that said my original point to the OP stands, as someone presenting herself as an MUA she shouldn't be expected to do anything other than make-up. She's upfront in stating her area of expertise and because there are MUAs who also choose to dabble in hair it shouldn't be magically considered the new standard. With all due respect the fact that you may do the wardrobe pull and styling on your sets doesn't technically make you stylist and in looking at your port you don't bill yourself as such so no one should expect to receive these services from you, especially without asking which is apparently what happened to the OP at one point and prompted the building of a basic hair kit.

I regularly pull wardrobe for my editorials. All of them. If there is a designer involved I still do the pull or am heavily involved in the pull.

I don't have to be able to do makeup or hair -- I can hire that. I got certified with makeup so that I have myself to fall back on or so that I get exactly what I want. I still work with makeup artists and I almost always have a hairstylist on set for editorials if we are doing updo's or anything elaborate.

Commercial headshots -- no one is ever hiring a separate hair person.

Being able to do other things makes you more versatile and that's never a bad thing.  I don't know if you have worked on any editorial sets ( I did not see any tearsheets in your book) but I am just telling you my experience and my reality.

Chicchowmein wrote:
I regularly pull wardrobe for my editorials. All of them. If there is a designer involved I still do the pull or am heavily involved in the pull.

I don't have to be able to do makeup or hair -- I can hire that. I got certified with makeup so that I have myself to fall back on or so that I get exactly what I want. I still work with makeup artists and I almost always have a hairstylist on set for editorials if we are doing updo's or anything elaborate.

Commercial headshots -- no one is ever hiring a separate hair person.

Being able to do other things makes you more versatile and that's never a bad thing.  I don't know if you have worked on any editorial sets ( I did not see any tearsheets in your book) but I am just telling you my experience and my reality.

You're still evading my very simple questions and I'm certain it's because both you and I know that the answer to them is "no, that as a photographer you're never going to be asked, let alone expected by a client to be able to do any of the extra things that you may choose to do and that you're damn sure not going to be passed over for a job because you're not "versatile" enough to do more than come to set and take images."

The issue is that the OP even had to ask this question at all.

I agree with you that being able to skillfully do more than one thing on set is a good thing but I'll never understand why it only seems that there's an expectation (or hope, or desire or whatever the heck you choose to call it) about this when it comes to stylists, MUAs and hairstylists.

AJScalzitti wrote:
It's like expecting a photographer to do video; Some may but that isn't what you hire them for.

Respectfully it really isn't. It is part of the new reality in editorial work. Heck even in commercial work sometimes there is only a budget for a single artist.

Right now I only work with artists who can do make-up and hair