How can you determine your skin type?

The notion of a "skin type" refers to a set of unique characteristics that define the appearance and texture of the skin. The four major skin categories currently recognised depend mainly on the level of sebum secreted by the skin, a phenomenon primarily determined by genetics but which can also be influenced by other factors such as age, temperature variations, and hormones.

We had to wait until the beginning of the 20thcentury before people began to take an interest in specific skin characteristics and to establish categories and subcategories. Different terms then started to be used. Before determining one’s skin type by simple observation, it is, however, important to understand the characteristics common to each type.

Now, identifying your skin type is the first step in being guided towards the most suitable treatments, bearing in mind that each skin type has different needs. Indeed, knowing your skin type is the foundation of any safe and effective skincare routine. It determines everything, from which cleanser to use to how often to exfoliate.

In addition to these four skin families, you may also have to contend with “skin conditions” that can vary according to the season, age, sun exposure, or hormonal fluctuations. These skin conditions can affect all skin types and may occur simultaneously.

There are several tests you can carry out at home to try to determine your skin type. Here are three common, complementary subjective methods that can help you identify it by observing its texture and analysing how it feels to the touch.

Blotting paper method.

Applied to the skin, mattifying blotting papers help to assess sebum production according to the different areas of the face. To perform this test, simply press blotting papers gently onto various parts of the face 30 minutes to one hour after cleansing the skin with a gentle cleanser. Then examine the sebum marks left on the blotting papers by observing how transparent they have become.

The rate of sebum secretion at the skin surface, on the forehead, is 0.5 to 2.5 μg/cm2/min, corresponding to a regreasing time after delipidation ofapproximately 4 hours (100 to 600 μg/cm2).

“Bare face” method or “observe and wait” method

In addition to the blotting paper test, careful observation of your skin after cleansing can provide further indications of your skin type. This involves observing how your skin behaves after cleansing, and examining its appearance and texture in different areas of the face. Start by washing your face, then rinse it thoroughly with lukewarm water and gently pat it dry with a clean, soft towel. Then wait for 30 minutes to an hour, allowing time for the sebaceous glands to resume their activity. During this period, do not apply any products to your skin and also avoid touching it. Once this time has passed, look closely at your skin in the mirror under good lighting and determine what you feel, what you observe, and ask yourself the following questions:

• Is my skin rather smooth, shiny/glossy, or dull?

• Are my pores rather fine or enlarged?

• Is my skin comfortable, or does it feel tight?

Tactile test or touch test.

This method involves palpating different areas of the face to assess its texture and level of hydration. After carefully washing your hands, lightly stroke your skin with your fingertips to evaluate how it feels to the touch.

Although useful, these various tests are rather unreliable and do not in fact allow for a more accurate determination of one’s skin type. Indeed, the skin cannot be assessed on the basis of a single factor; it is more complex than one might think. Daily habits and environmental conditions can influence it. Likewise, many people can be mistaken.

Thus, if you have any doubts, if you find it difficult to choose which products to use, or if you would like a more in-depth analysis of your skin, you can complete an online self-assessment questionnaire developed by cosmetics companies or consult a dermatologist. Furthermore, with technological advances, scanning and “mapping” techniques have been developed as diagnostic tools, increasingly so with the emergence of artificial intelligence.

To establish a more precise skin diagnosis, dermatologists have at their disposal a range of complementary tests: validated questionnaires, visual and tactile assessment methods, non-invasive bioengineering instruments and, more recently, tools based on artificial intelligence.

Self-assessment questionnaires.

Several structured questionnaires have been developed and scientifically validated to classify skin type. They represent the first level of investigation. By collecting self‑reported data on dermatological history, skin reactions to the environment and perceived sensations, they provide access to a subjective dimension that measuring instruments cannot capture.

• The Fitzpatrick classification (1975, revised in 1988), although now dated, remains the international clinical reference for assessing skin phototype. Based on genetic predisposition and the skin’s response to sun exposure — its tendency to burn or to tan — it distinguishes six phototypes. However, it does have recognised limitations: it is better suited to fair phototypes (I–III) than to darker skin, for which it tends to underestimate UV sensitivity, and it does not predict responses to trauma or the risk of abnormal scarring.

• The BAUMANN system, developed by dermatologist Leslie BAUMANN in 2008, is a 64‑item questionnaire that assesses four dichotomous parameters: hydration (O = oily skin or D = dry skin), sensitivity (S = sensitive skin or R = resistant skin), pigmentation (P = pigmented or N = non‑pigmented) and skin ageing (W = wrinkled skin or T = tight/firm skin). The combination of these four parameters has produced 16 distinct skin types, each identified by a four‑letter code. However, the skin type obtained is not static: it can change with climate, stress, pregnancy or menopause, which implies the need for regular reassessment.

Based on a scientific methodology, we have identified 24 different skin types at Typology. To discover your skin type and receive a personalised skincare routine, complete our skin diagnosis by answering a few questions in just 5 minutes.

Methods for visual assessment.

Where questionnaires ask, visual scales allow observation. These tools make it possible to assess appearance, texture and any cutaneous manifestations by direct observation, based on standardised criteria or reference photographs.

• The Glogau scale (1994) classifies photoageing into four stages according to the presence and severity of wrinkles at rest and in motion. Its main limitation lies in its subjectivity and in the fact that it does not take into account the specific manifestations of photoageing in mixed-heritage or darker skin types (dyschromia, malar sagging, pigmented dark circles).

• TheGRIFFITHS photo-numeric scale (1992) is a nine-point visual scale based on reference photographs illustrating increasing degrees of facial photodamage, from 0 (none) to 8 (very severe).

• More comprehensive than previous ones, the SCINEXA score (Score of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Aging), developed in 2008, differs from other scales by separating intrinsic ageing (genetically programmed) from extrinsic ageing (linked to the exposome). Each component is assessed on the basis of specific clinical signs, for a maximum score of 69 points (15 for intrinsic ageing, 54 for extrinsic ageing). This tool has notably been used to measure the impact of atmospheric pollution, chronic sleep deprivation and ethnic differences on skin ageing. However, its validation was carried out on relatively small samples and in a limited number of populations; its reproducibility on non-Caucasian skin still needs to be strengthened.

• The Roberts system is a multi-dimensional classification, developed by dermatologist Wendy ROBERTS in 2008 to address the growing diversification of skin phenotypes. It combines four existing scales into a single profile, expressed as FZx · Hx · Gx · Sx. Each letter corresponds to a specific question: FZ (what is the skin phototype?) using the Fitzpatrick scale from I to VI; H (does this skin tend to become pigmented after inflammation?) using the Roberts scale for hyperpigmentation, i.e. the probability of developing post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation, from H0 to HVI; G (what is the degree of photoageing?) using the Glogau scale from I to IV; S (how does this skin heal?) using the Roberts scale for healing, i.e. the tendency to form scars, from S0 (atrophy) to SV (keloid nodule).

The lactic acid tolerance test (LAST).

To identify sensitive skin with greater precision, dermatologists may use the Lactic Acid Stinging Test (LAST). A lactic acid solution is applied to the right nasolabial fold — with a saline solution used as a control on the left — and the patient rates the intensity of the stinging sensation on a scale from 0 to 3 at three specific time points after application. An overall score greater than or equal to 3 indicates sensitive skin.

Non-invasive instrumental methods.

Beyond visual and self-reported methods, dermatologists have at their disposal instruments capable of objectively measuring the biophysical parameters of the skin. These tools make it possible to validate subjective assessments with measurable and reproducible data, and are particularly useful for monitoring cutaneous changes over time.

• The corneometer measures the water content of the stratum corneum by dielectric capacitance. The more hydrated the skin is, the higher its electrical conductivity.

• The tewameter measures transepidermal water loss (TEWL), that is, the amount of water that passively evaporates through the skin surface — a key indicator of epidermal barrier integrity.

• The sebumeter quantifies sebum production by photometry. A translucent matt cassette is applied to the skin; sebaceous lipids render it opaque in proportion to their concentration, and this change in opacity is measured by an optical sensor.

• The cutometer assesses skin elasticity and firmness by means of suction. A slight negative pressure is applied to the surface, and measurement of the tissue displacement makes it possible to calculate several viscoelastic parameters.

• The mexameter measures the erythema and melanin indices by spectrophotometric reflectance, emitting specific wavelengths whose absorption by the skin provides information on its level of pigmentation and redness.

Instruments based on artificial intelligence.

More recently, artificial intelligence‑based analysis systems have broadened the scope of skin diagnostics. Applications now allow a comprehensive assessment of the skin surface (pigmentation, wrinkles, texture, pores, redness, etc.) using standardised photographs. Neural networks have also been trained to classify skin type from biophysical parameters measured in the consultation room. These approaches, however, are still undergoing clinical validation. Their reliability depends on how representative the databases used for their training are, which is still insufficient to cover the diversity of phototypes and ethnic groups.

• GRIFFITHS C. E. The clinical identification and quantification of photodamage. British Journal of Dermatology (1992).

• SENDAGORTA E. & al. Evaluation of cutaneous photodamage using a photographic scale. British Journal of Dermatology (1994).

• PARK K. C. & al. Evaluation of facial skin type by sebum secretion: Discrepancies between subjective descriptions and sebum secretion. Skin Research & Technology (2002).

• GOTTLIEB S. & al. The wrinkle severity rating scale: a validation study. American Journal of Clinical Dermatology (2004).

• BAUMANN L. Understanding and treating various skin types: the Bauman skin type indicator. Dermatologic Clinics (2008).

• ROBERTS W. E. Skin type classification systems old and new. Dermatologic Clinics (2009).

• GOODMAN R. & al. SWIRL, a clinically validated, objective, and quantitative method for facial wrinkle assessment. Skin Research and Technology (2013).

• LOBO D. N. & al. The pathophysiology of fluid and electrolyte balance in the older adult surgical patient. Clinical Nutrition (2014).

• MIOT H. A. & al. Development and validation of a clinical scale for the evaluation of forearm skin photoaging. Journal of Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery (2015).

• SAURAT J. H., LIPSKER D., THOMAS L., BORRADORI L. et LACHAPELLE J. M. Dermatologie et infections sexuellement transmissibles. Elsevier Masson (2016).

• ALMEIDA I. F. & al. An overview of methods to characterize skin type: Focus on visual rating scales and self-report instruments. Cosmetics (2023).