Shellac vs OPI?

[pure]

Uh, that's not true. I had a shellac manicure on Friday and it was cured in a uv lamp that wasn't CND. It's cured perfectly. UV is UV. Whoever said that CND uv is better than any other UV is telling a pack of lies just to sell their product. If they were talking about only using their base coat or sanitiser, yes I'd get that, but ultraviolet light is the same across the board.

The same goes for LED. Light is.....light!!

That is totally incorrect I'm afraid. Please read this link and also the Doug. Schoon link within in it so you can learn how and why all UV is NOT equal.
http://www.salongeek.com/nail-geek/172609-uv-product-summary.html

Just because one salon used a different lamp doesn't make it correct - they cannot guarantee a full cure which can lead to problems with chipping, peeling and allergy.

 

[Lilypie]

Uh, that's not true. I had a shellac manicure on Friday and it was cured in a uv lamp that wasn't CND. It's cured perfectly. UV is UV. Whoever said that CND uv is better than any other UV is telling a pack of lies just to sell their product. If they were talking about only using their base coat or sanitiser, yes I'd get that, but ultraviolet light is the same across the board.

How do you know it's cured perfectly? Under curing cannot be seen by the naked eye.

If you've paid for a CND Shellac manicure you should be getting the entire system and that includes the lamp.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using SalonGeek mobile app

 

[Lilypie]

I was told shellac can be cured in an LED lamp?

We think CND are working on making shellac LED compatible but at the moment it's UV cured in their lamp

Sent from my GT-I9505 using SalonGeek mobile app

 

[Charlistar]

light isnt just light, however any light of the same frequency should be fine. if you know what frequencys that CND operates at on the UV and bought one the same, theres absolutely no reason why it wouldnt cure properly.

edit: I should say however, unless you happen to be an expert in the field, I don't think its work risking as undercuring can potentially cause allergys.

 

[Selina]

The misinformation on this thread about "UV is UV" is silly. There are thousands of different variations on the UV spectrum that could possibly come out of a UV lamp. You can't argue with proven science, the vast UV spectrum available is proven fact.

At the end of the day though, as professionals and in order to not invalidate our insurance we are to follow manufacturers instructions. If a company states that you should use their lamp to provide their service properly then that's what we are supposed to do. If you don't want to buy into a complete system and provide the complete system that your clients are paying for then simply chose a different manufacturer that states you can use any lamp.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using SalonGeek mobile app

 

[NancySyd]

light isnt just light, however any light of the same frequency should be fine. if you know what frequencys that CND operates at on the UV and bought one the same, theres absolutely no reason why it wouldnt cure properly.

edit: I should say however, unless you happen to be an expert in the field, I don't think its work risking as undercuring can potentially cause allergys.

This is also not accurate. In addition to making sure that the frequency is correct, a nail lamp also has to be constructed so that all nails receive the proper amount of UV light - that is that the nails are close enough, properly positioned, and in place long enough to cure properly. That means the proper combination of light (both direct and reflected) and hand placement. One reason that CND Shellac is hypoallergenic is that is uses fewer and different photoinitiators, which are what tend to cause sensitivity. That formulation causes CND Shellac to be a bit more difficult to cure than other brands and their lamp was designed to compensate for that. That is why the CND lamp tends to cure anything out there. Remember, there is no easily accessible way to determine a proper cure; gel hardens at only 55% cured. While I might agree that CND has been overly proprietary in saying that Shellac cannot cure in other lamps, it is certainly true that we cannot be sure/cannot guarantee a proper cure in other lamps.

And while we might argue whether other UV lamps can cure Shellac, it definitely does not cure (consistently) in LED.

 

[totalbeautyabz]

Ok, won't be using shellac then! I'm not forking out more money for a lamp! Forget it!!

 

[Charlistar]

This is also not accurate. In addition to making sure that the frequency is correct, a nail lamp also has to be constructed so that all nails receive the proper amount of UV light - that is that the nails are close enough, properly positioned, and in place long enough to cure properly. That means the proper combination of light (both direct and reflected) and hand placement. One reason that CND Shellac is hypoallergenic is that is uses fewer and different photoinitiators, which are what tend to cause sensitivity. That formulation causes CND Shellac to be a bit more difficult to cure than other brands and their lamp was designed to compensate for that. That is why the CND lamp tends to cure anything out there. Remember, there is no easily accessible way to determine a proper cure; gel hardens at only 55% cured. While I might agree that CND has been overly proprietary in saying that Shellac cannot cure in other lamps, it is certainly true that we cannot be sure/cannot guarantee a proper cure in other lamps.

And while we might argue whether other UV lamps can cure Shellac, it definitely does not cure (consistently) in LED.

In theory that would make sense, except clients dont always place their hands in the exact same place. In theory, all uv lights should be created to make sure that each finger recieves the correct amount of light, obviously with cheaper brands you run this risk that they dont, but thats cause they are cheaper brands, not because they cant. All Im saying is, if you do your research its possible to get a much cheaper lamp that does work correctly.

Who told you that shellac formula is more difficult to cure? CND employees? CND? the people making the expensive lamps... well thats a conincidink.

 

[ch-ela]

Ok, won't be using shellac then! I'm not forking out more money for a lamp! Forget it!!

Cuccio is the way to go. Try it.

 

[Charlistar]

also considering the fact a large number of their lamps appear to have a known recurring fault, how do you know their lamps are even curing their own product anyway?

edited bad grammer :s

 

[ch-ela]

also considering the fact a large number of their lamps appear to have a known recurring fault, how do you know there lamps are even curing their own product anyway?

That would definitely put me off. If they are indeed bringing out an LED lamp soon, they will not be investing any money into searching for possible faults in the current lamps.
That said, I have read on here many a time that there is absolutely no time saving by using an LED, that I'm not convinced they will promote its use. Surely people don't have such short memories.

 

[totalbeautyabz]

also considering the fact a large number of their lamps appear to have a known recurring fault, how do you know there lamps are even curing their own product anyway?

Exactly!!! Why on earth would I fork out say £100 for a faulty lamp. Im certain that my very expensive OPI UV lamp is more than adequate. Besides, if Shellac can't be cured in an LED lamp I'm not going to bother. 30 seconds as opposed to 2 minutes. No brainer!

Che-la, thanks for the cuccio tip! xxx

 

[NancySyd]

In theory that would make sense, except clients dont always place their hands in the exact same place. In theory, all uv lights should be created to make sure that each finger recieves the correct amount of light, obviously with cheaper brands you run this risk that they dont, but thats cause they are cheaper brands, not because they cant. All Im saying is, if you do your research its possible to get a much cheaper lamp that does work correctly.

Who told you that shellac formula is more difficult to cure? CND employees? CND? the people making the expensive lamps... well thats a conincidink.

Despite the snark, You've made my point for me! It's not just theory - we've all seen the result of the dreaded "clench," when client grab at the base instead of laying the hand flat. Good lamps are designed to force the proper hand placement for their bulb placement. You can see that in good lamps, both UV and LED. The CND lamp is designed for proper hand placement. Can clients still get it wrong? Of course, but the ergonomic design makes it less likely. I don't want to get into yet another lamp debate, I think CND has not handled the lamp issue properly from the start. And most of the salons I work with no longer use CND, to some extent because of the lamp issue. But the science of how lamps work on gel polish is real and documented.

The difference in the CND Shellac formula is one of its distinguishing features and is likely one of the issues in going LED. Doug Schoon, Jan Arnold, and Jim McConnell all discussed this back in the early days of CND Shellac. And numerous articles in Nails Magazine have covered this topic. The issue here isn't the lamp, its the hypoallergenic claim (lots of people who can't wear other gel polishes can wear Shellac). And (unlike CND) I am not saying that other lamps can't cure CND Shellac - I am saying that you simply can't tell. That's the science, not marketing hype.

also considering the fact a large number of their lamps appear to have a known recurring fault, how do you know there lamps are even curing their own product anyway?

Again, I am not defending or advocating for CND. I feel that they have been overly proprietary in insisting on their own lamp. But, given that there is no mechanism for determining a proper cure (and the legal liabilities that come with that), I grudgingly understand their insistence on using their lamp.Clearly, this debacle with their lamps is a disgrace that will undermine the confidence of those nail professionals who stuck with them. I don't know what CND is thinking in insisting on their own lamp and then not being 110% certain of their quality. But all of that doesn't change the science of UV nail coatings.

Good doesn't equal expensive, but if you can't afford a $120 lamp (in the US), or any other requirement, to stay in compliance with your insurance and manufacturer's instructions and certification, you need to take another look at your business plan.

 

[Charlistar]

and back to my point.... im simply saying you can tell that no other lamp doesnt either.. Im not saying people should use other lamps, Im saying Im reluctant to believe a company that make such an effort on having a monopoly on something....
Ive just noticed that CND and this whole buying into the brand thing is shoved down people throats alot, and my general feelings is when someone has to convince me into something so much is usually cause I dont really want it.

 

[totalbeautyabz]

Despite the snark, You've made my point for me! It's not just theory - we've all seen the result of the dreaded "clench," when client grab at the base instead of laying the hand flat. Good lamps are designed to force the proper hand placement for their bulb placement. You can see that in good lamps, both UV and LED. The CND lamp is designed for proper hand placement. Can clients still get it wrong? Of course, but the ergonomic design makes it less likely. I don't want to get into yet another lamp debate, I think CND has not handled the lamp issue properly from the start. And most of the salons I work with no longer use CND, to some extent because of the lamp issue. But the science of how lamps work on gel polish is real and documented.

The difference in the CND Shellac formula is one of its distinguishing features and is likely one of the issues in going LED. Doug Schoon, Jan Arnold, and Jim McConnell all discussed this back in the early days of CND Shellac. And numerous articles in Nails Magazine have covered this topic. The issue here isn't the lamp, its the hypoallergenic claim (lots of people who can't wear other gel polishes can wear Shellac). And (unlike CND) I am not saying that other lamps can't cure CND Shellac - I am saying that you simply can't tell. That's the science, not marketing hype.



Again, I am not defending or advocating for CND. I feel that they have been overly proprietary in insisting on their own lamp. But, given that there is no mechanism for determining a proper cure (and the legal liabilities that come with that), I grudgingly understand their insistence on using their lamp.Clearly, this debacle with their lamps is a disgrace that will undermine the confidence of those nail professionals who stuck with them. I don't know what CND is thinking in insisting on their own lamp and then not being 110% certain of their quality. But all of that doesn't change the science of UV nail coatings.

Good doesn't equal expensive, but if you can't afford a $120 lamp (in the US), or any other requirement, to stay in compliance with your insurance and manufacturer's instructions and certification, you need to take another look at your business plan.

I can more than afford the lamp, make absolutely no mistake, I just think that having to buy yet another lamp is ridiculous considering I have a very expensive UV lamp as it is. Especially with the issues surrounding the CND lamps just now.

 

[Charlistar]

I want to make it clear. I'm not advocating not using the lamp. In fact for insurance reasons its important you do. I'm just saying... All the people who tell you you have to use it are paid by CND or in CNDs back pocket.... With the amount of money they make from the lamps do you honestly this they'd tell you if other lamps could cure it fine?

 

[Jen889]

Ok, won't be using shellac then! I'm not forking out more money for a lamp! Forget it!!

Perhaps look into gelish as well. I started with shellac but got fed up of the bulbs and lamp so I moved to gelish with an led lamp. Never looking back! Its amazing! Stays on for weeks and you can use both UV + led. doesn't have to their brand either, I have an orly led lamp.

 

[NancySyd]

I want to make it clear. I'm not advocating not using the lamp. In fact for insurance reasons its important you do. I'm just saying... All the people who tell you you have to use it are paid by CND or in CNDs back pocket.... With the amount of money they make from the lamps do you honestly this they'd tell you if other lamps could cure it fine?

Who is telling you you don't need to use the CND lamp - other lamp manufacturers! They have at least an equal financial interest as CND. There are no disinterested parties here. Of course the people telling you to use the CND lamp are from CND! Who else would say that? The reason that they say it is clear - if truly over-proprietary - their concern is that using the wrong lamp will cause product breakdown for which they will be blamed.

You are mistaken on the profit point. The lamp is a tiny part of the profit for CND, or for that matter for any gel polish manufacturer. The profit is so small that some gel polish manufacturers don't even bother making a lamp. Like CND, they make their money from the polish. It's not unlike computer printers! They make the money from the ink; they could practically give away the printer.

I find all this conspiracy theory around the lamp rather funny. It reminds me of the old saying, "Never ascribe to malice that which can adequately be explained by incompetence."

 

[hazeleyes]

I agree I'm going to convert to gelish as well. I'm tired of the lamp and bulbs issue. I long for LED so I don't have to keep buying bulbs etc

 

[totalbeautyabz]

Who is telling you you don't need to use the CND lamp - other lamp manufacturers! They have at least an equal financial interest as CND. There are no disinterested parties here. Of course the people telling you to use the CND lamp are from CND! Who else would say that? The reason that they say it is clear - if truly over-proprietary - their concern is that using the wrong lamp will cause product breakdown for which they will be blamed.

You are mistaken on the profit point. The lamp is a tiny part of the profit for CND, or for that matter for any gel polish manufacturer. The profit is so small that some gel polish manufacturers don't even bother making a lamp. Like CND, they make their money from the polish. It's not unlike computer printers! They make the money from the ink; they could practically give away the printer.

I find all this conspiracy theory around the lamp rather funny. It reminds me of the old saying, "Never ascribe to malice that which can adequately be explained by incompetence."

My point is, if I already have a UV lamp, why would I need to buy another lamp?? Why? What makes CND's so special? Because they say so? My shellac manicure cured in a non brand UV lamp on Friday is still intact despite all the housework, washing, washing up and nappy changes I do every day. Plus I've done loads of nail filing on clients, shopping and lifting a 1 and 2 year old. So, again, why do I need the CND lamp?
I'm not getting into another bitch fest. That's all this forum seems to be these days. I'll look into cuccio and gelish.