Hair color and hair cuts
 

Okay, I'm home sick and watching a makeover story..so here's my question...may sound kind of stupid, but hey, I'm sick;) :p

If a stylist KNOWS that the client is about to get a haircut, esp. a major one....

why do they color the whole hair instead of cutting it first and then coloring??

Seems like less hair to work with would make it easier.

Thanks...

Perhaps when I feel better, my questions will be less stupid...NAH!!;) :D

I don't know why this happens. I think it is better to cut the hair first, then color it instead of the other way around. It is a waste of coloring if it color first, then cut.

http://www.handykult.de/plaudersmili...son/ballet.gif

My guess would be that, since color can often damage hair, it's better to color first then cut because then the damaged ends are cut off. I could be wrong though. Also, it's best to color hair that hasn't just been washed, and most stylists cut wet, freshly washed hair -- so it makes sense to color the dirty hair, wash, and then cut.

I think Valkyrie is probably right, but if I remember, I'll ask my daughter who is a colorist and her husband is a cutter. Actually, she cuts also.

The work in a high end "spa" hair place in a hotsy totsy big time area of Denver.

OK, talked to son-in-law. The real reason is that the hair has to be dry before you start the coloring process.

So, it makes more sense to color the hair, then shampoo, then cut -- since you shampoo just before cutting.

If you did it the other way, you would have to blow dry and wait until the hair was absolutely dry.

At least that's the way I understood his explaination.

Any time you want your hair cut or colored in Denver, I'm sure my kids would love to charge you lots of money for it. And expect big tips.

Thanks, but I'll keep mine in Georgia! :)

Don't blame you, although they're pretty good as what they do!

Hope you're feeling better.