Saturday, March 14th, 2015

One of my favorite color to wear for spring is a softer version of plum, so I thought I would share some of my favorite more muted plum lipsticks today.

  1. Guerlain Garance — a very warm plum with a soft sheen
  2. MAC Marque — a gold-shimmered plum
  3. Estee Lauder Irresistible — a neutral-warm medium plum
  4. Tom Ford Indian Rose — a neutral pinky-plum
  5. Bite Beauty Rosewood — a lightly warm-toned plum

>> See side-by-side swatches! <<

Monday, March 2nd, 2015

Estee Lauder Ultra Pink Lip & Cheek Ball
Estee Lauder Ultra Pink Lip & Cheek Ball

Estee Lauder Ultra Pink Lip & Cheek Ball ($26.00 for 0.11 oz.) is described as a “translucent berry hue.” It’s a muted, pinkish-red with cool undertones and a subtle shine. NARS Adoration (Right) (P) is a powder. MAC Red Obsessed (LE, $20.00) is warmer. MAC Bred for Beauty (LE) is a powder. YSL Rose Frivole (02) (P, $40.00) is similar. YSL Fuchsia Desinvolte (01) (P, $40.00) is brighter. Illamasqua Peaked (P, $26.00) is more muted. Illamasqua Seduce (P, $26.00) is more muted. See comparison swatches / view dupes.

The formula is supposed to be a “jelly-like gloss” with a “full-throttle shine” that gives a “slight tint to lips while imparting a rosy glow to cheeks.” It’s not at all glossy or jelly-like; it’s more like a very thin, firm balm that offers a satin shine with sheer color. The coverage is as described–translucent–and tints the lips and cheeks with a barely-there hue. It’s extremely uncomfortable to wear on the lips, as it feels dry and is drying over time, while the color lasts about an hour before sliding off. As a blush, it wore for six and a half hours before breaking down, but it imparted no real shine, just a smidgen of color (would be better suited for a fairer complexion than mine).

The Glossover

LE
product

Ultra Pink

C-

Product

5.5/10

Pigmentation

10/10

Texture

6.5/10

Longevity

6/10

Application

4.5/5

Results
Loading ... Loading ...
Dupes
Login or Register to be able to add this to your Vanity or Wishlist! Plus rate and review!

See more photos & swatches! Continue reading →

Sunday, March 1st, 2015

Estee Lauder x Courreges Iridescent Ball Highlighter
Estee Lauder x Courreges Iridescent Ball Highlighter

Estee Lauder x Courreges Iridescent Ball Highlighter ($26.00 for 0.11 oz.) is a sheer wash of champagne sheen. Kevyn Aucoin Candlelight (P, $28.00) is less shiny. Burberry Nude Radiance No. 01 (P, $48.00) is thinner, liquid. NARS 413 BLKR (P, $30.00) is more shimmery. Illamasqua Aurora (P, $24.00) is more shimmery. See comparison swatches / view dupes.

The product’s description is confusing, because in one breath, it’s described as an “iridescent powder gelee,” which is then followed by the term “sensorial cream.” To be totally clear, this is like a very firmly-packed cream–think like a lipgloss that’s been put into pan-form. It’s not at all powder-like, and it doesn’t dry down at all, so it remains shiny and glossy on the skin. If you prefer a more matte finish or lightly luminous highlight, this probably isn’t a product for you, because it is shiny and can look oily as much as it looks glossy. It’s not a product that worked well over foundation and only seemed suitable on bare skin (the latter of which is what I test wear for, but with something like this, I also play with it to see how it would react with base products under it), as over foundation, it tends to break down base products more quickly. It lasts for six and a half hours and migrates slightly over time (so the area that I highlighted got larger as the day goes on).

It doesn’t have underlying pigment in the base, but it has champagne shimmer that translates into more of a sheen, even though in the pan, it looks more beige/champagne. It’s very sheer when used, and the only way to get sheer to semi-sheer coverage is to pat the product onto the skin with fingertips and then only blend the edges with a soft touch. Otherwise, the product sheers out to nothing but a wet-looking sheen. In practice, it is more shine than shimmer, more shine than color. Estee Lauder said it could be used “dotted onto cheeks for an allover polished glow,” which I think would be a very specific look as it would give the skin a wet/oily sheen wherever it is applied (but might be nice for drier skin types), which can work when it’s done on high planes, but it is easy to go overboard if you apply it everywhere! The texture is thin, somewhat spreadable but really benefits from the warmth of fingertips rather than brush for good application. It’s not really tacky, but my hair will get stick to it (as will a stray dog hair, found that out as well!).

The brand could have described the color/coverage of this product better, because I think knowing that is necessary so anyone who purchases knows what they’re getting themselves into. In the press release, Courreges was inspired by his desire to “let the light into my clothes” when making this product. This is absent in Sephora’s description, but the press release seems to indicate that the coverage is something in the sheerer realm (certainly opaque, as light wouldn’t come through), though it isn’t totally clear where it’s supposed to fall, and it falls on the very, very sheer part of the spectrum. Descriptions like these (and lack of more specific ones) are what makes rating more difficult, and I’ve tried to weigh the idea that “this isn’t supposed to be opaque” with “but this is almost clear,” but sheer and clear are quite different to me. (Wouldn’t it be nice if brands used a 1-5 opacity system?!)

The pan is small, and it is hard to get some brushes in it with ease. Something about seeing the pan’s rim combined with the packaging felt cheap to me, but that’s a very subjective observation, so some may love it and others may feel the same. The amount contained in the pan seems small, but there aren’t a lot of products like this on the market to compare size with. I honestly think that a liquid highlighter (like Kevyn Aucoin’s or Becca’s) would be a better investment, but both will give a must less shiny finish.

The Glossover

LE
product

Iridescent Ball

D+

Product

7/10

Pigmentation

6/10

Texture

7/10

Longevity

6/10

Application

4.5/5

Results
Loading ... Loading ...
Dupes
Login or Register to be able to add this to your Vanity or Wishlist! Plus rate and review!

See more photos & swatches! Continue reading →

Sunday, March 1st, 2015

A tried and true favorite of mine, coral lipstick is a shade I reach for throughout the year. If you’ve been looking for a way to warm-up your spring, consider these five beautiful shades:

  1. YSL Peach Passion — a glossy, peachy-coral
  2. NARS Julie — a soft, pink-coral
  3. Estee Lauder Eccentric — a light-medium pink-coral
  4. Urban Decay Streak — a medium coral-pink
  5. Maybelline Coral Burst — a luminous pink-coral

>> See side-by-side swatches! <<

Saturday, February 28th, 2015

Estee Lauder Rosy Future Courreges Super Gloss
Estee Lauder Rosy Future Courreges Super Gloss

Estee Lauder Rosy Future Courreges Super Gloss ($26.00 for 0.20 fl. oz.) is described as a “pink nude,” which makes absolutely no sense. It’s a brightened, fuchsia-magenta with strong, blue undertones. Revlon HD Tourmaline (510) (P, $8.99) is lighter, brighter. MAC Ultramarine Pink (LE, $30.00) is darker. MAC Itchy & Scratchy & Sexy (LE, $15.00) is more shimmery, less pink. MAC Unlimited Style (LE, $15.00) is lighter. NYX Sugar Cookie (P, $5.00) is sheerer. NARS Priscilla (P, $26.00) is brighter, darker. MAC Pink Poodle (By Request) (LE, $15.00) is more shimmery. Urban Decay Crush (P, $19.00) is more magenta. MAC Style Packed (LE, $15.00) is cooler-toned. Buxom Berry Blast (P, $19.00) is more muted, sheerer. See comparison swatches / view dupes.

The formula is supposed to be an “opaque, high shine hint of mod color for lips.” It has a metal, slant-tipped applicator that will squeeze out the product (reminds me of Hourglass’ lip oil applicator). It was nearly opaque with just a hint of translucency where the natural lip color would come through. It had a very smooth, slightly thick consistency that applied somewhat evenly and was comfortable to wear. The texture had moderate tackiness to it that was noticeable after about ten minutes after application (initially, it seemed almost non-sticky). It seemed to have Estee Lauder’s more traditional fig scent (fruity and sweet) but no discernible taste. On me, the color lasted four and a half hours and was neither drying nor hydrating.

The Glossover

LE
product

Rosy Future

B+

Product

8.5/10

Pigmentation

9.5/10

Texture

8/10

Longevity

9/10

Application

4.5/5

Results
Loading ... Loading ...
Dupes
Login or Register to be able to add this to your Vanity or Wishlist! Plus rate and review!

See more photos & swatches! Continue reading →

Friday, February 27th, 2015

Estee Lauder x Courreges Illuminations Face Powder
Estee Lauder x Courreges Illuminations Face Powder

Estee Lauder x Courreges Illuminations Face Powder ($32.00 for 0.24 oz.) is described as a “glowing, otherworldly” powder with a “burst of pure light.” It’s a brightened, golden champagne with a frosted, metallic sheen. Tarte Champagne (LE) is slightly lighter. Becca Opal (P, $38.00) is darker. Becca Moonstone (P, $38.00) is a smidgen lighter. theBalm Mary Lou-manizer (P, $24.00) is slightly darker. Bobbi Brown 24 Karat (P, $42.00) is darker. See comparison swatches / view dupes.

Sephora gave early access to VIB Rouges to the new collaboration collection between Estee Lauder and Courreges, and this particularly product went very quickly (it’s not even listed on the site any more, but I’m hoping that it’ll reappear when the collection is fully launched as well as be available at other retailers and at counters). The texture is a lot like a baked powder product (think MAC Mineralize products) with a soft, smooth, but almost dry, feeling to the touch, though it doesn’t look dry on the skin. It had good color coverage that was easily blended and diffused on the skin, and for a really ethereal look, could be applied with a feathery touch and fan brush for a mere dusting of sheen. Applied with a more traditional highlighting brush, the finish can veer too metallic and emphasize pores slightly, but for as high-shine as it is, I was surprised that it didn’t make pores look glaringly obvious. It lasted for seven hours on me before fading.

The Glossover

LE
product

Courreges

B+

Product

9/10

Pigmentation

10/10

Texture

9/10

Longevity

7.5/10

Application

4.5/5

Results
Loading ... Loading ...
Dupes
Login or Register to be able to add this to your Vanity or Wishlist! Plus rate and review!

See more photos & swatches! Continue reading →