[ QUOTE ]
suncypress said:
[ QUOTE ]
Poohbear said:I agree with you model_chick! Some texturized hair looks the same as some natural hair. Both texturized and natural hair can be straighten to look as if it is relaxed. That hair type system that Andre made up is crap! That's is based on HIS perspective. Plus, I don't see the relevance in knowing your type anyway. So you really can't judge whether someone has relaxed, texturized, or natural hair. Don't hate...appreciate! /images/graemlins/smile.gif
[/ QUOTE ]
wait, i didn't get anything in model chick's post that implied Andre's hair typing system is "crap"--though maybe i misread it. personally i think the system can be very accurate, and to me it's useful to know one's type so you have a better idea of what styles, techniques, and products will work best for you. this is especially true if you combine it with Fia's system for measuring hair thickness and density. obviously hair can be manipulated to look like any "type," but the point of the system is what one's natural/unaltered hair texture looks like.
on the other hand, i do think that hair typing can "go wrong" b/c folks don't really know how to determine what their hairtype is. i have seen quite a few folks on this and other boards who call their hair 4a or 4b whose hair clearly seems like 3c (or even 3b!) to me. so i guess it *is* somewhat subjective... dang, poohbear, i think i've talked myself into your point of view. /images/graemlins/rofl.gif
[/ QUOTE ]
You're right, I wasn't critisizing the hair-typing stuff...I must not have been clear. /images/graemlins/smile.gif