In its day, Pan-Cake make-up was the most successful line ever produced by Max Factor. Although released as a general make-up, it was originally developed to overcome the make-up problems of Technicolor films.
First used in 1916, Technicolor’s evolution had been patchy, and it was only when the three-strip process (Technicolor Process 3) was developed in the late 1920s – it used a special camera to record red, green and blue light on three separate negatives – that it gained any traction with the Hollywood studios. The first film made entirely with Technicolor Process 3 was ‘The Viking’ which debuted in 1928.
As with the introduction of other new film stocks – like panchromatic – there were numerous technical problems that had to be solved when making films with Technicolor Process 3 – further complicated by the introduction of sound in 1927 – one of which was make-up.
See also: Panchromatic Make-up
When Technicolor Process 3 was developed, the make-up used in films was primarily greasepaint and powder. Despite its excellent qualities – such as its ability to hide facial skin flaws in ‘close-ups’ – greasepaint had one fatal failing when it came to colour film. Under the brighter lights required by Technicolor, the slight sheen greasepaint left on the skin reflected colours from the surrounding scenery so that the actor’s faces collected a red, green or blue tinge depending on what colours were near to them on the set. Film stars were well aware of the issue and many simply refused to appear in Technicolor films.
See also: Greasepaint
The developers of Technicolor were well aware of the make-up problem. Jock Whitney, a major investor in Technicolor, appears to have discussed the issue with his racetrack friend, Elizabeth Arden. In 1935 she purchased the DeLong Laboratories and Make-up Studio in Hollywood and used it to found the ‘Screen and Stage’ division of Elizabeth Arden. The Nuchromatic make-up Arden acquired when she purchased DeLong was used in two Whitney backed Technicolor films, ‘A Star is Born’ (Selznick International Pictures, 1937) and ‘Nothing Sacred’ (Selznick International Pictures, 1937).
See also: Arden Screen and Stage Make-up
Max Factor was also looking for a better solution to the problems associated with Technicolor than the greasepaint make-up line his company had developed in the late 1920s which consisted of Technicolor Grease Paint, Face Powder, Lining Color, Moist Rouge, Under Rouge, Dermatograph Pencil, Dry Rouge, Masque and Liquid Make-up (Factor, 1930, p. 171).
In the late 1930s, the Max Factor company took a different approach to the problem. After nearly two years of experimentation, both at the Factor laboratory and at Technicolor, a new make-up – known in development as the T-D series – was created. Frank Factor had been put in charge of the development of the T-D series after Max Factor had been hit by a delivery truck on Highland Avenue in 1936 and badly injured – an accident that probably contributed to his death two years later in 1938.
The first commercial use of the new make-up occurred in the 1937 Technicolor film ‘Vogues of 1938’ (Walter Wanger Productions). it was very successful and the new make-up – later trademarked as Pan-Cake – was soon adopted by the studios, displacing Arden’s attempt at a solution; she shut down the Stage and Screen division at the end of the decade.
Pan-Cake was the product that defined what came to be called cake make-up. It was water-based, containing a highly pigmented powder incorporated into a dehydrated cream consisting of triethanolamine stearate (a soap), lanolin and water. It was made by adding fillers (e.g. talc) and pigments (e.g. iron oxides) to oils and waxes that had previously been dispersed in water with the aid of a dispersing agent. After blending the mixture into an even paste, it was dried and then pulverised into a fine powder. As the pigment particles had absorbed the oils and waxes they were now water repellent. They were then compressed into cakes using pans (godets). According to Basten, the name ‘Pan-Cake’ came from the fact that it was a cake make-up sold in a pan (Basten, 2008, p. 112). However, given that the make-up was originally made for Technicolor and that the Max Factor Company also released ‘Pan-stik’ make-up in 1947, it seems more likely to me that the ‘Pan’ was short for panchromatic.
The finished cake was said to contain the following components:
Parts by weight Oils and waxes 2.8 Plasticizing and dispersing agents 5.3 Pigments 13.3 Talc 78.6
Procedure: An emulsion is prepared; fillers and pigments are added. The mixture is passed through a colloid mill, dried and formed into cakes.
As the finished powder was water repellent, Pan-Cake – like greasepaint – would also resist perspiration, something that was essential under the hot lights used in Technicolor films.
The selection and proportion of ingredients employed was very important. The oils and waxes used would determine the degree of matt or shine the powder had on the skin, while the emulsifying agents, powders and pigments would affect the covering power of the film, its thickness, and how easy it was to apply and remove. (Wells & Lubowe, 1964). The selection of pigment colours also required some adjustment. Previous combinations of reds, yellows and whites looked unnatural in Technicolor, so new blends had to be developed with the aid of a spectroscopic analysis of the skin (Baston, 2008, p. 112). This technique was not something particular to Max Factor; other cosmetic companies had been scientifically analysing skin tones and adding blues and greens to powders for years.
See also: Pond’s Extract Company
The manufacturing method used to make the original Pan-Cake – later known as the wet method – was quickly superseded by what was referred to as the dry method. This used a higher proportion of powder to emulsion to prepare a cake make-up without drying. Rather than mixing all the ingredients together into a paste and then drying and pulverising them, the binders, oils and other liquid components were sprayed onto the powdered pigments and fillers as they were mixed. The damp powder was then passed through a sieve to remove clumps and then compressed. By removing the need to dry and pulverise the paste, the cost of making a cake make-up was dramatically reduced.
Applying cake make-up of the pan-cake type requires a moist applicator such as a sponge. The moisture in the sponge reconstitutes the liquid form of the make-up, which dries to form a film of water repellent powder after it is applied. No foundation cream was needed and the make-up could be touched-up very quickly and easily. However, its use required some training as, unless care was taken, it tended to show streaks that were difficult to smooth over. The solution to this problem was to smooth out the make-up with the sponge or the tips of the fingers while it was still wet.
How to apply pan-cake
The correct application of pan-cake is very important. You can create a satin smooth skin texture, using it properly; or, if applied haphazardly, destroy the skin tone.
Saturate a sponge with water and squeeze out the surplus. Rub it over the pan-cake and apply it to the face. Spread over as large an area as you can before adding more pan-cake to the sponge. In this manner you will not run the risk of getting pan-cake on to heavily.
Cover the eyelids, blend carefully into the corners of the nose, mouth, eyes, and between the eyebrows. Blend well into the throat and back to the ears. When you have applied sufficient pan-cake, turn the sponge to the unused side and with a delicate pressure, blend outward from the centre of the face to insure an even distribution of the film of make-up. Allow it to dry. To speed up the process of drying, absorb the moisture with a tissue by blotting.
When the pan-cake is completely dry, powder by patting over the entire face with a puff. Turn the puff to the clean side and lightly buff the face. This will remove surplus powder and pan-cake and leave the face feeing relaxed and smooth as satin. It will also alleviate the feeling of “drawing” the skin that you sometime experience as the moisture evaporates.
The sponge could also be used to control the amount of make-up that was applied.
For older women or for people who do not like a heavy make-up appearance I would suggest to have the sponge quite wet, holding a great deal of water, then take a little of the cake and apply it to the face still holding an excess of water in the sponge, leaving the face wet. Then remove the excess of water from the face by patting a dry towel of facial tissue. This will definitely leave a more natural appearance. Here, you see, we have diluted the cake evenly, an effect which is hard to acquire by using a little cake make-up and trying to smooth and smear it all over the face.
The Max Factor company did not recommend that Pan-Cake be used in isolation. On normal or dry skins it was to be applied over Invisible Make-Up Foundation (a form of vanishing cream developed around the same time as Pan-Cake) while individuals with oily skins were recommended to use Astringent Foundation (originally called Honeysuckle Cream). To further enhance the complexion, Face Powder of an appropriate shade was normally applied over the Pan-Cake.
According to Basten, the models used on the set of ‘Vogues of 1938’ appropriated large amounts of Pan-Cake for their own use; however, they soon found out they could not use it at night, as the colours were too dark. Max Factor was against releasing it to the general public, but Frank Factor had other ideas. However, it would take some time for the necessary shades to be formulated, and Pan-Cake was not released as a general make-up until February 1938, coinciding with the release of ‘The Goldwyn Follies’, the second Technicolor film on which it was used.
Commercially the product was a tremendous success for Max Factor. After going on sale, income from Pan-Cake would soon outstrip the revenues from all other Max Factor cosmetics combined (Basten, 1995, p. 161). Its success encouraged Frank Factor to get more deeply into general cosmetic sales after his father’s death. It also led to the release of similar products by other companies. Surprisingly, given the patents taken out by Frank Factor (US: 2,034,697 & US: 2,101,843), most of these new products went unchallenged.
About three years ago when dry cake make-up grew up to become one of the most important make-up items, cosmetic manufacturers began to call on their chemist to create something that would not infringe on the patent. But it was at that time, too, that another California company put their dry make-up on the market. Everybody waited for a law suit to follow; it never came (gossiping comments all gave the same reason, although this reason has never been published). This left the door open to other manufacturers.
Max Factor did however vigourously defend his trade-mark, even going so far as to post notices in trade journals.
Fortunately, for those companies worried about copyright infringement, it was a relatively easy to formulate a cake make-up that was sufficiently different from the Factor patents to avoid problems.
[M]any manufacturers told their chemist to formulate something new and different which would not infringe on the patent.
The first thing was to review the raw materials which the patent didn’t include in its exhaustive list. In addition there were new ingredients and here I give a brief account of the same:
For alkaline bases we have: Triisopropanolamine; the aminoglycols, etc.
For binders we have, instead of quince seed mucilage, the following much superior ones: Methyl cellulose, aluminium gels, sorbitol borate, potassium caseinate and casein derivative binders, glyceryl borate, sodium alginate, methacrylate gums, etc.
For plasticizers instead of diethylene glycol, we now have propylene glycol which I mention alone for its safety and for its pharmaceutical endorsement.
In the patent formula, we can dispense very well with beeswax (now we have synthetic waxes) and cetyl alcohol and replace their presence with stearic acid or any fatty acids.
There was therefore plenty of room for cosmetic chemists to develop their own forms. Indeed, some companies, such as Helena Rubinstein, took out additional patents to cover their own formulations of cake make-up.
Parts by weight Talc 50 Colloidal kaolin 40 Color pigments 4 Dehydrated skin milk 10 Sodium lauryl sulfate 1 Mineral oil 8 Lanolin 3 Glycerin 10 Methyl p-hydroxy benzoate 0.125 Propyl p-hydroxy benzoate 0.125 Perfume 0.311
Procedure: The talc, kaolin, pigments and sodium lauryl sulfate are mixed together and passed through a pulverizer. The remaining ingredients are then placed in a suitable mixer and the batch is again passed through the pulverizer, after which the mixture is compressed into cakes.
Although Max Factor still sells Pan-Cake today, the excitement over cake make-up did not long outlive the 1940s. The fad lasted longer than it probably should have due to limits on the release of new cosmetics that came into effect during the Second World War.
Older women, with reduced oil in their skin, found cake make-up rather drying and were much happier with the newer compressed powders – with their higher oil content – released after the war. In addition to being less drying, they had the additional advantages of not needing a moist sponge applicator – they were applied with the fingers or a puff – and being easier to get an even finish from. Frank Factor – who changed his name to Max Factor Jr. after his father’s death – was well aware of these issues, and developed Pan-Stick in 1947 and Cream-Puff compressed powder make-up in 1953.
Updated: 18th August 2013
Basten, F. E. (1995). Max Factor’s Hollywood. Glamour, movies, make-up. Los Angeles: General Publishing Group.
Basten, F. E. (2008). Max Factor: The man who changed the faces of the world. New York: Arcade Publishing.
deNavarre, M. G. (1962). The chemistry and manufacture of cosmetics (2nd. ed., Vols. I-IV). Orlando: Continental Press.
Macias-Sarria, J. (1944). Process of manufacturing cake make-up. Perfumery & Essential Oil Review. Nov, 43-44; Dec, 47-48.
Factor, M. (1930). The art of motion picture make-up. In Hall, H. (Ed.). Cinematographic Annual (Vol. 1) (pp. 157-171). Hollywood: The American Society of Cinematographers.
Wells, F. V. & Lubowe, I. I. (1964). Cosmetics and the skin. New York: Reinhold Publishing Corporation.
Westmore, E. & Westmore, B. (1947). Beauty, glamour and personality. New York: Prang Company.
Wilkinson J. B., & Moore, R. J. (Eds.). (1982). Harry’s cosmeticology (7th ed.). New York: Chemical Publishing.