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 main skin categories currently recognized depend primarily on the level of sebum secreted by the skin, a phenomenon mainly determined by genetics but which can also be influenced by other factors such as age, temperature changes, and hormones.

It was not until the beginning of the 20th century that people began to pay attention to specific skin characteristics and to create categories and subcategories. Different terms then started to be used. Before determining one’s skin type by simple observation, however, it is important to understand the characteristics common to each type.

Determining your skin type is the first step toward choosing the most appropriate skincare products, since each skin type has different needs. In fact, knowing your skin type is the foundation of any safe and effective skincare routine. It guides everything, from which cleanser to use to how often you should exfoliate.

In addition to these four skin families, you may also have to deal with"skin conditions"that can change depending on 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 perform 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 analyzing how it feels to the touch.

Blotting paper method.

When applied to the skin, blotting papers help assess sebum production in different areas of the face. To perform this test, gently press blotting papers onto various parts of the face 30 minutes to one hour after cleansing the skin with a mild 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, at the forehead level, is 0.5 to 2.5 μg/cm2/min, corresponding to a re-oiling time after delipidation ofabout 4 hours (100 to 600 μg/cm2).

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

In addition to the blotting paper test, carefully observing your skin after cleansing can provide further information about your skin type. This involves looking at 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 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 more smooth, shiny/glossy, or dull?

• Are my pores rather small or enlarged?

• Does my skin feel 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 thoroughly washing your hands, lightly stroke your skin with your fingertips to evaluate how it feels to the touch.

Although useful, these various tests are not very reliable and do not actually make it easier to determine your skin type. In fact, the skin cannot be evaluated on the basis of a single factor; it is more complex than we tend to think. Daily habits and the environment can influence it. Likewise, many people can make mistakes.

Therefore, if you have doubts, if you find it difficult to choose which products to use, or if you want a more in-depth analysis of your skin, you can complete an online self-assessment questionnaire developed by cosmetics companies, or you can consult a dermatologist. Moreover, with technological advances, scanning and mapping techniques have been developed as diagnostic methods, especially with the emergence of artificial intelligence.

To establish a more precise skin diagnosis, dermatologists can draw on 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 skin history, skin reactions to the environment, and perceived sensations, they provide access to a subjective dimension that measurement instruments cannot capture.

• The Fitzpatrick classification (1975, revised in 1988), although old, 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 differentiates six phototypes. However, it has well‑recognized limitations: it is better suited to lighter phototypes (I–III) than to darker skin types, 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 aging (W = wrinkled skin or T = tight/firm skin). The combination of these four parameters yields 16 distinct skin types, each identified by a four-letter code. However, the resulting skin type is not static: it can change with climate, stress, pregnancy, or menopause, which means it needs to be reassessed regularly.

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

Visual assessment methods.

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

• The Glogau scale (1994) classifies photoaging into four stages based on 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 specific manifestations of photoaging in mixed or dark skin types (dyschromia, malar sagging, pigmented dark circles).

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

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

• The Roberts system is a multidimensional classification, developed by dermatologist Wendy ROBERTS in 2008 to address the increasing diversity of skin phenotypes. It incorporates four existing scales into a single profile, recorded in the form 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 hyperpigmentation scale, i.e., the probability of developing post‑inflammatory hyperpigmentation, from H0 to HVI; G (what is the degree of photoaging?) using the Glogau scale from I to IV; S (how does this skin heal?) using the Roberts scarring scale, 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 can 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 theintensity of the stinging sensation on a scale from 0 to 3at 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 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 changes in the skin over time.

• The corneometer measures the water content of the stratum corneum using 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 matte cassette is applied to the skin; sebaceous lipids make 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 suction. A slight negative pressure is applied to the surface, and the measured displacement of the tissue makes it possible to calculate several viscoelasticity 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 enable a comprehensive assessment of the skin surface (pigmentation, wrinkles, texture, pores, redness, etc.) using standardized photographs. Neural networks have also been trained to classify skin type based on biophysical parameters measured in a clinical setting. However, these approaches are still undergoing clinical validation. Their reliability depends on how representative the databases used for training are, which is still insufficient to fully encompass the diversity of skin 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).