¨Cover/blastover

[Blian]

Hi!

It's been a while since my last post but here it goes:

I was wondering about your experience with blastovers without the use of laser, and how does it look after a few years? Has it all been moshed to a giant black mess or does the blastover still look as good as it did when you first got it?

I'm wondering because I have an arm I would like to cover/blastover/laser, and I don't know what to do about it.

See pictures of my arm below.

[mtlsam]

Is that the Grey Britain tudor rose? You can't blast over that! haha

[CABS]

Hi!

It's been a while since my last post but here it goes:

I was wondering about your experience with blastovers without the use of laser, and how does it look after a few years? Has it all been moshed to a giant black mess or does the blastover still look as good as it did when you first got it?

I'm wondering because I have an arm I would like to cover/blastover/laser, and I don't know what to do about it.

See pictures of my arm below.

I may not be qualified to speak on this because I don't have any blast overs myself, but from what I understand it is best to laser a few sessions before blasting over. Depends on the look you're going for. Do you want the old tattoo to still peak out, or do you want it completely non existent.

[Blian]

I'm gonna get Frank Carter to do a new and BETTER one, so I don't really care! Haha.

- - - Updated - - -

I may not be qualified to speak on this because I don't have any blast overs myself, but from what I understand it is best to laser a few sessions before blasting over. Depends on the look you're going for. Do you want the old tattoo to still peak out, or do you want it completely non existent.

Yeah, I don't mind the old tattoo to peak through, I was really wondering how it will look in a few years. Stiil good or will itt all "merge" together?

[Mike Panic]

The point of a blast over, typically speaking, is to put a piece of art over-top what's there and not care about the previous tattoo / use it as "ascent" to the new tattoo. Personally speaking, and not professionally, it's a trend I really hope doesn't stick around long.

Professionally speaking, the dermis can only hold so much pigment. That pigment is of a particle size that is essentially too large for your body to process and dispose of it as the true contaminate that it is. Over years and years though, the immune system will indeed "chip away" at that pigment and that's why tattoos start to look a little faded / blurry / out of focus.

When you do a blast over, you're now cramming more pigment into the dermis, which will ultimately settle and any trauma from the first tattoo will most likely show through, via raised line work is the most common sight. Over time, it will settle down and become muddy. This of course will vary depending on who did the first tattoo, with what colors and how saturated it is.

Since the blast over trend is just now picking up steam, I doubt we'll see any 'long term' photos for another few years. But in the meantime, I'll point you to those who got heavy black work done with the intention of putting white over it. Looks killer when first done but 2-3 years in, it's all muddy.

At the end of the day, it's your skin, you need to decide what you're acceptable living with.

[marley mission]

OP - i kinda like what you got there already - i say leave er go

[pidjones]

OP - i kinda like what you got there already - i say leave er go

Agreed.

[Synesthesia]

^ I also like it. Especially the skull. Maybe touch it up a little to bring back some vibrancy, but otherwise, I would leave it alone.

[Blian]

The point of a blast over, typically speaking, is to put a piece of art over-top what's there and not care about the previous tattoo / use it as "ascent" to the new tattoo. Personally speaking, and not professionally, it's a trend I really hope doesn't stick around long.

Professionally speaking, the dermis can only hold so much pigment. That pigment is of a particle size that is essentially too large for your body to process and dispose of it as the true contaminate that it is. Over years and years though, the immune system will indeed "chip away" at that pigment and that's why tattoos start to look a little faded / blurry / out of focus.

When you do a blast over, you're now cramming more pigment into the dermis, which will ultimately settle and any trauma from the first tattoo will most likely show through, via raised line work is the most common sight. Over time, it will settle down and become muddy. This of course will vary depending on who did the first tattoo, with what colors and how saturated it is.

Since the blast over trend is just now picking up steam, I doubt we'll see any 'long term' photos for another few years. But in the meantime, I'll point you to those who got heavy black work done with the intention of putting white over it. Looks killer when first done but 2-3 years in, it's all muddy.

At the end of the day, it's your skin, you need to decide what you're acceptable living with.

Thanks!

[Dianne]

I would recommend laser. I am planning to get a laser done on myself. I got a small tattoo of my boyfriend's name (John) written on my right wrist, and we had a bad break up. I just can't stand to see it anymore. After a lot of research and I finally made an appointment at a laser skin care in Port Coquitalam, called Beautimed. I will definitely post pictures after the treatment. Looking forward for it.

[kvaz]

What is the difference between a blastover and laser?

[joakim urma]

@kvaz

This is easy to google...

Laser removes ink from the original tattoo. Normally you'll still see traces of the tattoo though.

Blastover is just putting a new tattoo on top of it. The old tattoo will be visible in places.

Cover up is sort of like a blastover but is done to obscure the original tattoo as much as possible. It's better if you done a few laser sessions before so the ink from the first tattoo is not so visible.