Overrated! or Things that never worked for you that others deem necessary.

Here's a question: if part of what soap does (here I include shave soap or cream) is remove the oils that normally cover our whiskers, thus enabling them to absorb water and soften, why would adding oil help to soften the whisker? It may indeed make it slicker, but my understanding is the point of the "wet" in "wet shaving" is to overcome the usual copper-wire strength of whiskers by getting them to absorb water.

I once read a related caution against using hair conditioner on the beard before shaving, for this reason: conditioners usually have oils, waxes, etc. which block water absorption, making actual whisker-softening more difficult.

Now, it may be that the oils used for pre-shaves do not block water in this way, or are absorbed into the whiskers to help soften them. I'm not claiming expertise, but this is a good thing to think through.

grim For what it's worth, discussion of packaging is almost always about the tub, tin, or container the soap itself is in, not the box or whatnot it comes wrapped in. You don't throw the tub away; you use it every time you use the soap! So discussing whether the tub or container is high-quality, wide enough for loading the brush, etc., is perfectly valid, and useful.

If you are talking about functionality, I would not have much of an argument with that but there are probably very very few containers you can't get a brush in and there are two problems.

1. ALL attributes are not equal. They are not weighted. There is no way a package is an equal attribute to say cushion, how well it protect your face. Why? If you don't like the package, take it out, dump it in a plastic container from the dollar store, and use it. But, if the cushion is poor, then its a bad soap.

All attributes simply are not equal. They need to be weighted. If you have three attributes, cushion, slickness, packaging, and after shave feel, and weight them equal, well that's problem. For example, while its "nice" to have a good after shave feel, the fact is with a good balm you can get the same effect.

2. Most of the criticism I see of packaging has nothing to do with functionality and everything to do with "how pretty" the package is. I've read criticism of one soap makers efforts, clearly a one or two person company, where the packaging is about is minimum as it gets. Yet, no one ever seems to complain about the technical performance of the soap.

There is a huge disparity here. A pretty package has nothing to do with the performance of the consumable.

And then we have price. You bought a OneBlade, right? What did you do with that pretty box it came in, the leather one. Mine is thrown in some closet never to see the light of day again. Now how much of the $300 cost was for that fancy leather box with the red stitching? It certainly wasn't free. How about instead they sell the razor without the fancy box and charge a lot less for it?

Now I am not talking about those who collect the fancy boxes and stack them up somewhere and look at that from time to time. I'm talking about those who just consume the products and do not view containers as collectibles. If you "collect" them and a pretty box is important to  you, then you should weight your attributes accordingly.

Great points grim! The comments on reviews are very helpful. I'll try to incorporate or comment on some of these in my own review series. It's always helpful to read posts like this.

Yours are fine BTW. I was talking in generalities from all over the internet.

It is interesting to me how many who don't like pre-shave oils say it is a mess and, for them, perhaps it is.  I have never found it so.  Could it be that, in some cases, way too much is being applied?  

Maybe, but I think its more just oil - eww ... whereas some other soak into the skin. So maybe it is operator error!

As a designer I certainly have a particular viewpoint on this, but while packaging and presentation aren't EQUALLY as important as actual performance of the product, I'd say they are indeed important. The entire experience of the product is important, and the packaging is part of the experience. Apple is an example of a company that understands this very well. Say what you will about OneBlade's particular choice of "special" packaging, but it's clear why they wanted SOME kind of special packaging: they're asking you to pay a premium price for a premium razor, and thus they need to offer an entire "premium experience." My own aesthetic would have been for them to just use clean, well-designed paper and cardboard packaging like Apple, or like the Feather AS-D2, but honestly, OneBlade seems to be going after the "affluent bro" contingent, and I suspect that leather box appeals there. In any event, it's meaningful, and most certainly contributes to the whole. (Just the fact that you and others mention the leather box shows that it's part of the OneBlade experience, for better or worse, and certainly relevant to any review of the razor.)

Similarly, the experience of using one of CRSW's tins is quite different from a Proraso plastic tub, or the Tabac porcelain, or the Nuàvia ceramic. The Nuàvia container is absolutely part of the whole Nuàvia experience: it says something about the experience you're about to have with the soap inside. It's a form of communication. Again, as a designer I need to worry about these sorts of signs and communications all the time, and they're completely fair game when reviewing an overall product.

That said, I agree with you that this aspect should be given appropriate weight in a review. If I were evaluating a fantastic soap that happened to come in cheap, unremarkable packaging, I'd point that out, but spend most of my time talking about how great the soap actually is, and I would still recommend it.

Interesting discussion on packaging grim and onethinline! I can see both sides of the issue. One the one hand, packaging has (with some exceptions) almost zero impact on the usability of the product. On the other hand, packaging helps to sell the product in the first place, since it contributes to its overall branding and user experience.

I have seen what grim refers to with reviewers' weighting of packaging as a category. Some reviewers and formats take a quantitative approach to their evaluations which involve attributing a score to multiple categories, then averaging those scores into an overall score that serves as an amalgamated rating. Because I agree with grim that packaging ought not be given equal consideration to something like in-shave or post-shave performance, I eschewed the "quantitative average" approach to reviewing. Mathematically speaking, if one is to average multiple categories in a final score, and if packaging is one category among many, one cannot avoid considering packaging as equally important as other performance metrics. To me, a qualitative approach is more useful to the average person, with a final score (arbitrarily applied) serving as a marker of the subjective evaluation of the reviewer.

Now, I can also see completely what onethinline is pointing out. Packaging serves to draw attention, and will cement the product's overall branding. In addition to the better performance, it is why - for instance - PannaCrema is able to charge a significant premium for Nuavia when compared to its normal line of shaving soaps. Everything from the ceramic jar to the personalized card in the quality box signals that Nuavia is a premium product. I think it's important to note these purely aesthetic things (without necessarily letting them impact a review score) because they are matters of product positioning - the nicer packaging is an attempt by PannaCrema to signal that Nuavia is a premium product that is "better" than their normal line. As Orwell said (in approximation), "all art is propaganda". Packaging is one means (without actual product modification) by which manufacturers can communicate ideas, position products, and enhance user experience.

For me the most interesting contrasts involve great soaps in middling packaging, and middling soaps in great packaging. It is entirely possible that a reviewer might observe positives about the presentation while being totally underwhelmed by performance. This what I have done with a few brands.

Here's another way to think about it. Some soap containers are nicer to look at, or nicer to hold, or hardier, or whatnot. So the container is indeed part of the overall experience (notably, the sensory experience), even though it can be separated from performance.

Just like scent.

And most of us tend to care a great deal about the soap's scent.

Now, I'm not saying they're the same thing, because I'd agree that scent is more important than packaging (it's there for the whole shave, and sometimes after!), but we can talk about soaps that have great performance with mild, poor, inoffensive, or not-notable scents. The scent is a non-performance factor that contributes to the whole experience.

As is the packaging and container. Even how a soap looks sitting there on your shelf is, however less a consideration than performance, definitely part of the whole experience.

Agreed onethinline, but I also agree with grim and his concern that some reviewers tend to give equal quantitative weight to packaging and performance. While it's fine to take that approach, I don't think it is particularly helpful and I wouldn't do it personally. But I definitely think packaging is an important category and worth the mention (after all, some care more or less than others for non-performance things like packaging and scent).

We might be saying the same thing in different ways.

Yes, Apple focuses on looks, simple, clean. And then you throw the box in the trash. Some people LOVE apple. I am typing on a Apple. Others HATE apple. But Apple computers just work.

Yes, I mentioned the oneblade box. Its in a closet. I view it a waste of money. Yes, if they are going after the 1% to buy it, then maybe its part of marketing. But the average guy might want a cheaper price and a cheaper package.

For soaps/cream, I look at the holistic viewpoint and when judging things, look at what I use to get the job done. Yes, scent is very important. Its a journey. If the final result is perfect, but the scent terrible, I don't care how good the technical performance. IMO, its terrible. But so isn't the visible. I've seen a few soaps where the bowl water or sink water is brown. To be frank, it looked like sewage to me. I don't care if it smelled great and had perfect technical attributes. It looked like .... sewage.

Yes, I am sure a fancy $120 bowl for C&S make the owner feel good about using it,  but in the end ... its soap. So I bought  a refill C&S and when I use it, I'll put it in a cheap plastic bowl and I wont throw away $120 for a container.  Thats 4 more refills,  simply not worth the money to me.

Yes, Tabac has a cheaper looking container. I got it for $2 on sale. I figured why not over the refill.  But I don't like the way it clanks around, took out the refill, and stuck in a generic container.

I can see if you are a designer, this is important because its your world. And I agree that the journey is important. HOW you get to the end is part of the entire process. But weighting the attributes means somethings just aren't just important than others.  Here is an analogy I think everyone can understand..

When you buy a new car, it will accelerate, have nice styling, get good gas mileage,  have a good stereo/gps, etc. Each of the attributes will have different level of importance to different buyers. Some might want performance and want the car to accelerate quicker. Some might want better mileage. Everyone wants what they want and for some people, styling (the package) is very important. But is it more important than say the brakes?  Now that is one thing many people don't think much about but the car BETTER brake very very  well because it might mean your life. The other things are more luxury or fluffy. Sure, the car can have a great stereo but if the brakes aren't very good, then you die.

The same is true here. All attributes are not equal. Some will be more important to others. But, for example, if a shaving cream has poor cushion, then you might bleed. OTH, if the tub of a shaving soap is an ugly plastic container with logo printed on a home computer?  Then you won't bleed. It might be ugly but you will be fine.

You have to decide which attributes are important to you, and certainly scent is in there, but some involve your health, and some are "style" and not substance.  

Even how a soap looks sitting there on your shelf is, however less a consideration than performance, definitely part of the whole experience.

For some, yes. For others no. And this is why all attributes are not weighted the same. I, for example, could care less when it looks like tucked away in a closet. Its not like I take it out and admire it. OTH, I can see if a collector displays them publicly in some way, then its important to them. And that just verifies that all attributes are not equal.

Try one of the darker soaps one day (no names), look at it looks in your sink as you wash over the blade. I don't care how good it might smell or how perfect the technical performance, it just looked "bad". So in that case, the look mattered to me. And that is why all attributes are not weighted the same where normally I would never think twice about how the soap "looked".

grim, I've definitely agreed the whole time that all of these elements should be weighted differently. Mostly I was making the point that there are reasons to take into account packaging, and that some packaging isn't thrown away. That's really all I was saying. It shouldn't be a main point in a review, and reviews that weight it the same as performance (or scent) are silly to me, but I don't think packaging/container should be dismissed outright.

Overall, I think we're on the same page.

Some highly acclaimed soaps are overrated but I won't name names, YMMV as they say. What's awesome for me may not be so awesome for others and vice versa.

Alum. Never liked it, I feel it's too drying. I use a styptic pencil when needed, otherwise witch hazel and a good aftershave balm is all I need.

Aftershave Splashes. Hehe not an alcohol guy so I'm going to list this.

Hot water shaving. I'm a cold water shaver, so I guess I'll list this.

Never used a pre-shave oil before so I don't really know what to think about that.