In every clinic, training session, or conference stage, there’s an unspoken question that lingers before the first injection: to mark or not to mark? It’s a debate that never seems to settle, and perhaps it never will. Some practitioners lean into instinct, skipping the pre-drawn map and trusting muscle memory to guide the needle. There’s a certain elegance to that approach—an artistry forged over years of repetition.

But I’m not here to cast judgment on the freehand faithful. I’m here for those of us who choose precision. For those who don’t just hope for symmetry, but plan for it. Who understand that when the stakes are high—full-face harmonisation, tear trough correction, chin and jawline contouring—clarity isn’t a preference. It’s a responsibility.

And if you fall into that camp, then you already know: the conversation isn’t whether to mark. It’s what you mark with.

Because not all marking tools are created equal. I’ve watched talented colleagues unravel mid-procedure because the pen they trusted couldn’t hold its line. One swipe of anaesthetic cream, one pass of chlorhexidine—and the entire plan vanishes. It’s not just inconvenient. It’s dangerous. In aesthetic medicine, where a single misplaced millimetre can shift a result from flawless to flawed—or worse, to complicated—we don’t get the luxury of guesswork.

I remember one particular training session in the Middle East. A rising practitioner had mapped out an advanced profile balancing case beautifully—cheeks, chin, lips, all with thoughtful proportion. But halfway through, her lines had blurred beyond recognition. She paused, hesitant, recalculating angles from memory. Her technique was strong, but the uncertainty crept in. And that uncertainty? Patients feel it. It changes your energy. It shakes your conviction.

That day, I handed her a SKRYBE marker. The lines stayed sharp through prep, through sweat, through lighting. Her confidence returned. So did her precision.

This is the part too few people talk about: good tools don’t just support your technique—they protect your mental bandwidth. They free your mind to focus on depth, diffusion, and detail, not damage control.

In my own practice, I’ve come to see marking as part of the choreography. It’s the rehearsal before the performance. Especially in multi-zone treatments, markings serve as a visual blueprint. They ensure harmony across regions, help assess balance in real time, and provide invaluable visual feedback during assessment. They also facilitate team communication—whether you're collaborating with another injector, explaining a plan to a patient, or teaching a group of trainees.

For beginners, markings are an educational lifeline. They externalise anatomy. They bridge the gap between textbook theory and tactile practice. And for experienced injectors, they’re a discipline—a way to avoid complacency and maintain high standards, even in procedures you’ve done a thousand times.

So why settle for markers that fade, smudge, or fail under pressure?

In a profession where trust, aesthetics, and safety converge, our tools reflect our priorities. Using a reliable marker isn’t about indulgence. It’s about integrity. It’s about respecting the canvas of the human face—and the hands working on it.

I choose SKRYBE not because it’s trendy, but because it’s designed for this level of care. It stays put under topical anaesthetic. It holds firm under antiseptic prep. It gives me the freedom to focus on the artistry, not the ink.

The marking debate will always resurface. That’s the nature of a craft that blends science with style. But for those of us who choose to mark, let’s close the door on compromise.

Because in this field, where precision is power and reputation is everything, the lines we draw before we inject are the ones that define us most.