Large pores in Busan Seomyeon, and what genuinely reduces them.

Nothing shrinks a pore permanently, and any product or treatment claiming to is describing a temporary effect. What is achievable is a genuine reduction in how visible they are, which is a different claim and a more useful one.

Why can pore size not be reduced permanently?

Because a pore is the opening of a follicle, and its diameter is largely determined by genetics and by the size of the sebaceous gland beneath it. Nothing topical or injectable alters follicle anatomy. What makes a pore look larger is a combination of oil filling and stretching it, loss of firmness in the surrounding skin allowing it to gape, and the shadow it casts under directional light — all three of which are modifiable.

Cause one — oil output

The most treatable component and the one that produces the fastest visible change. A follicle producing large volumes of sebum stretches, and oxidised oil at the opening darkens it further. Microbotox is the most direct intervention available — small superficial doses reduce sebaceous activity for around three months, and patients notice the difference in how their skin looks by mid-afternoon within two weeks.

Cause two — loss of surrounding firmness

A pore in firm skin holds its shape; the same pore in skin with reduced collagen density elongates into a teardrop and reads as larger. This is why pores appear to worsen from the thirties onward without any change in oiliness. The answer is collagen rather than oil control — polynucleotide boosters, PDLLA or fractional treatment depending on severity.

Cause three — shadow and texture

Much of what registers as a large pore is the shadow inside it, which is why they look worse under overhead light and in phone cameras than in a mirror. Surface irregularity around the opening deepens that shadow. Fractional resurfacing addresses this directly by remodelling the surface, and it is the treatment with the largest single effect where pores are accompanied by texture or scarring.

What order should these be treated in?

Oil first, then firmness, then texture. Reducing sebum makes the other two easier to assess and produces improvement within weeks, which is useful before committing to a longer course. Collagen work follows over two to three months. Resurfacing goes last, if still wanted, since the first two steps often reduce how much is needed — and resurfacing carries the most downtime of the three.

Why do pores look worse in photographs than in a mirror?

Because a mirror is lit diffusely and a phone camera is not. Overhead lighting and front-facing flash both throw light at an angle that maximises the shadow inside each opening, and the wide-angle lens on a front camera exaggerates whatever is closest to it — usually the nose and inner cheek, which is exactly where pores are largest. The skin has not changed between the bathroom and the photograph; the lighting has. This matters practically because patients often judge treatment results from selfies taken in different conditions, which is why the clinic photographs under fixed lighting instead.

Where do pores fit alongside other concerns?

Usually as part of a broader skin quality picture rather than in isolation. Oily skin with visible pores frequently arrives alongside occasional breakouts, uneven tone from healed spots, and early textural change — and treating those together is more efficient than treating each separately. Microbotox addresses oil, laser handles residual pigment from old marks, and boosters or resurfacing cover texture. What we would avoid is treating pores in isolation when the underlying picture is acne scarring, which needs its own plan.

What does not work?

Pore strips, which remove surface plugs and leave the opening unchanged. Astringents and alcohol-based toners, which cause a brief tightening and often increase oil production in response. Cold water and ice, which produce a temporary constriction lasting minutes. And most "pore minimising" cosmetics, which blur optically rather than change anything. None of these are harmful; they simply do not do what patients are buying them for.

Does humidity really make it worse?

Yes, measurably. Heat increases sebum production, and humidity means it sits on the surface rather than evaporating — which is why patients moving to a Busan summer from a dry climate describe pores appearing from nowhere. This is a genuine seasonal pattern rather than a perception, and microbotox is the treatment that suits it best because it addresses the oil directly.

How much improvement is realistic?

Noticeable rather than transformative, and worth being clear about. A good result means pores that are visible on close inspection rather than from conversational distance, and skin that photographs better in overhead light. What it does not mean is poreless skin, which does not exist outside of filters and heavy base makeup. Any clinic promising the latter is selling something other than a result.

What suits oily skin with rough texture together?

That combination is common and responds well to sequencing rather than to one treatment. Microbotox for the oil, then fractional resurfacing or a booster course for the texture once oil is controlled. Treating texture while sebum is still high means treating a surface that will re-roughen — see why some treatments need a course.