2007-06-18 16:09:17 · 17 answers · asked by naya 1 in Beauty & Style ➔ Skin & Body ➔ Tattoos
In some cases.
The only advice we can offer up here is to speak to an artist, in person. See more than one, if you like, to get a second or third opinion.
A friend of my moms recently had a tattoo done on her stomach to cover strechmarks, but she didn't have very many, and they weren't very deep. Her artist came up with a design of the sun that went along with her specific marks.
A cover-up of anything usually isn't something that a generic design will work for, so it will have to be custom drawn for you.
Another thing you have to think about is whether or not you are finished having children. My strechmarks are from being pregnant with my son, and I'd love to have them covered, but I'm definately not finished having children, so if I covered them now, it would end up being worse. Also, I have quite a few spread out ones, so I doubt a tattoo would work in my case.
2007-06-18 18:58:27 · answer #1 · answered by Queen Queso 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, actually no. I suppose it depends on how bad the stretch marks are and how deep they are. I know for a fact that a tattoo would not cover my stretch marks and look nice.
I mean yes they can tattoo the stretch marked skin, but its just not going to look right.
2007-06-24 22:27:13 · answer #2 · answered by Amanda S 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, but the tattoo looks like the stretch marks raised and flat and raised and flat. Choose wisely and don't pick a portrait or any art that requires a flat back ground and you can camouflage it well. It also depends on how bad your marks are, but you still can camo the problem, just not cover it. If you look closely they are there but we can make them much less noticeable. If someone has their eyeball on your tattoo and says they see a stretchmark, they're to close just smack 'em :)
2007-06-26 03:11:12 · answer #3 · answered by madison134 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I wouldn't recommend it. There are creams that take away visibility of stretch marks.... stomach tattoos are never a good idea if you ever plan to have kids-a stretched out tattoo is FAR worse (and so is a ill-planned one) than some natural stretch marks!!
2007-06-18 23:12:31 · answer #4 · answered by rainspanties 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I highly doubt it because a tattoo is placed on the surface of the skin - with the stretch mark, I believe the tattoo would succome to the texture of the skin.
2007-06-18 23:15:13 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It'll cover stretch marks but they may still be visible under the ink if the marks are a different skin texture to begin with.
2007-06-19 01:05:51 · answer #6 · answered by Kristie G 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm sorry, but... why did you ask the same question 3 times in a row? That's very annoying and rude.
As I'm sure a billion people have told you between your 3 posts, you have to talk to your artist about it. Some stretch marks can be tattooed over, others can't.
Please don't be so inconsiderate next time you come here.
2007-06-18 23:41:37 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
It will look awful. The skin in the strech marks is totally different from the rest of your skin, and won't take ink the same. You'll just be EMPHASIZING your stretch marks. Besides, you've had a kid ... your midsection-baring days are over.
2007-06-19 09:18:06 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Stretch marks will eventually fade, and everyone has some. I don't know if they would do a tatoo on them... but I wouldn't reccommend it
2007-06-18 23:16:07 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
no, your tattoo will have stretch marks and that wouldn't be a pretty tattoo.
2007-06-24 15:35:27 · answer #10 · answered by ? 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋