Friday, April 12th, 2013

MAC Shape the Future Extra Dimension Skinfinish
MAC Shape the Future Extra Dimension Skinfinish

MAC Shape the Future Extra Dimension Skinfinish ($30.00 for 0.31 oz.) is described as a “pastel pink with iridescence” and “soft brick with light shimmer.” When swirled together, the resulting color is a darkened orange with reddish undertones and a pinky shimmer-sheen. The lighter color, on its own, is a warm-toned beige with a shimmery finish. The darker color is a darkened orange with red undertones and a frosted finish. NARS Gina is lighter. MAC Fiery Impact is redder, while MAC Blazing Haute is lighter and more orange–if you mixed the two together, you would get close to this (but not as shimmery). Illamasqua Expose is similar in color but is matte in finish. The lighter shade is a bit darker and warmer than NARS Nico. While the darker shade is more shimmery than MAC Fiery Impact but lighter and less red than NARS Liberte.

Of the three Skinfinishes, Shape the Future was the least frosted/metallic, which was a good thing, because it meant that it didn’t emphasize pores as much as the other two did.  There is still some emphasis, but it is subtle and not as noticeable.  Both colors of the product are very pigmented, so there will be no fear for darker complexions on whether it will show up or not.  Lighter skin tones, especially those who tend to fear reddish blushes, may want to use a light hand or stippling brush to apply the color with more control.  The texture is slightly dry but doesn’t appear dry on; and it blends and buffs into the skin nicely.  It lasted eight and a half hours on me (though it is supposed to last for ten) when I tested it.

P.S. — MAC still lists it as coming soon, while Nordstrom will let you order it now but it is backordered (approximate ship date of 4/19).

The Glossover

LE
product

Shape the Future

A-
This shade emphasized pores the least out of the three limited edition Skinfinishes, but it wasn't the most flattering blush/highlighter we've seen. It's very pigmented, though, and it is easy to blend.

Product

9/10

Pigmentation

10/10

Texture

9/10

Longevity

8.5/10

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 →

Sunday, April 7th, 2013

MAC Definitely Defined Extra Dimension Skinfinish
MAC Definitely Defined Extra Dimension Skinfinish

MAC Definitely Defined Extra Dimension Skinfinish ($30.00 for 0.31 oz.) is described as a “silvery pink/soft rose with shimmer.” Swirled together, it is a soft peach with a hint of pink and a frosted, golden champagne sheen. MAC Light Year is warmer, darker. MAC By Candlelight is lighter. bareMinerals The Love Affair is warmer, more peach. MAC Superb is browner. Bobbi Brown Rose Gold is more beige. Laura Mercier Rose Rendezvous is browner. The lighter shade is a pale champagne with a frosted, metallic finish. Chanel Beiges Ombres Tissees is more beige, less golden. The darker shade is a peachy-orange with a frosted finish. MAC Utterly Game is somewhat similar in color but is mostly matte.

The lighter shade has a very, very metallic finish, so as a highlighter is incredibly reflective and emphasizes pores and any imperfections in the skin noticeably. The darker shade has a rather frosted finish (rather than a metallic one), but it does somewhat emphasize pores. On lighter complexions, this will show up as more of a highlighter/blush combination, while on medium to dark complexions, it will be subtler and better as a highlighter (generally). It has a soft, slightly dry, consistency and feel, but it applies with good color payoff and builds up well. It does blend out easily, and it doesn’t look powdery on the skin. When I tested Definitely Defined, it lasted for seven and a half hours well, but after eight and a half, there was some patchiness (MAC says this formula will last ten hours).

The Glossover

LE
product

Definitely Defined

B
On lighter complexions, this will show up as more of a highlighter/blush combination, while on medium to dark complexions, it will be subtler and better as a highlighter (generally).

Product

8.5/10

Pigmentation

10/10

Texture

8/10

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 →

Sunday, April 7th, 2013

MAC Pink Buttercream Pearlmatte Face Powder
MAC Pink Buttercream Pearlmatte Face Powder

MAC Pink Buttercream Pearlmatte Face Powder ($30.00 for 0.42 oz.) is described as a “light silvery pink base with dark pink flowers and periwinkle leaves.” It’s a cool-toned, light-medium pink with a blue-gray cast and a soft, white shimmer-sheen finish. Chantecaille Rose Petals is warmer, less pink. Lancome Moonlight Rose is warmer. Guerlani Cruel Gardenia is less pink and warmer. NARS New Order has a similar base color but has gold shimmer and sparkle. MAC Veronica’s Blush is warm-toned. MAC Full of Joy is more lavender. MAC Unconventional is more lavender and blue-based.

Like In for a Treat, it did emphasize pores somewhat; it wasn’t the worst offender I’ve come across, but it didn’t minimize or soften them in any way (and didn’t leave them as-is, either). There is actually something about the finish that reminds me of frosting (but I can’t actually recollect eating frosty with shimmer!). Pink Buttercream could be used as a blush on very fair skin tones, as it does have more color in its base than the other Pearlmatte. On my medium complexion (NC25/NC30), it adds a little pinkness but mostly shimmer/sheen. The texture is very soft and silky, and it blends out easily on the skin. It lasted seven and a half hours on me, and after eight, there was some very faint fading.

The Glossover

LE
product

Pink Buttercream

B+
I loved the texture--so soft and smooth--but wish it was more flattering on the skin. If it was, it could be really quite lovely!

Product

8.5/10

Pigmentation

10/10

Texture

9/10

Longevity

8/10

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, April 7th, 2013

MAC In for a Treat Pearlmatte Face Powder
MAC In for a Treat Pearlmatte Face Powder

MAC In for a Treat Pearlmatte Face Powder ($30.00 for 0.42 oz.) is described as a “champagne base with matte coral flower and mint leaves.” It’s a pale champagne beige with a barely warm-toned golden champagne shimmer-sheen. MAC Lightscapade is warmer, less shimmery. NARS Nico is more beige, warmer, less shimmery. Chanel Poudre Signee de Chanel is slightly pink in its base. NARS Albatross has a stronger golden sheen (and a whiter base color). Illamaqua Aurora is a cream product and more metallic.

If you’ve never used the Pearlmatte formula, it’s supposed to be a highlighter and a blush with a “rich texture and velvet finish.” Now, I don’t think this is going to be a blusher even on really pale complexions, but it is a highlighter. I think the finish is too shimmery with a stronger sheen/frostiness that it’s better as a highlighter than an all-over powder. If used with a very light hand and the right brush, it could be used all-over–just not as effortlessly as a true finishing powder. There was a slight emphasis of pores when I applied it to my cheeks. In for a Treat lasted seven hours well, and then after eight, there was light fading/patchiness beginning to become apparent.  It has good color payoff, and the outer white is an overspray, but the leaves and flower petal colors go all the way through the power (I chipped out a section in the middle to check).  I thought the best aspect of the powder was its texture, as it was soft, finely-milled, and buttery to the touch.  I wish it lasted longer and was more flattering on the skin.

The Glossover

LE
product

In for a Treat

B+
I thought the best aspect of the powder was its texture, as it was soft, finely-milled, and buttery to the touch. I wish it lasted longer and was more flattering on the skin.

Product

8.5/10

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 →

Friday, April 5th, 2013

MAC Double Definition Extra Dimension Skinfinish
MAC Double Definition Extra Dimension Skinfinish

MAC Double Definition Extra Dimension Skinfinish ($30.00 for 0.31 oz.) is described as a “soft shimmery gold” and “patina bronze.” Together, they create a warm, golden-shimmered bronzed-tan with a frosted, not-quite-metallic finish. The lighter shade is a metallic yellowed gold, while the deeper shade is a pearly gold-shimmered, medium-dark brown with a slightly shadowy cast. MAC Worldly Wealth is warmer, more orange. MAC Glorify and Estee Lauder Topaz Chameleon are both darker, warmer. MAC Light Over Dark is somewhat similar. Guerlain Terracotta Sun in the City is similar to the lighter shade.

The product can be used individually or together, as each section is large enough to accommodate a normal blush brush. The lighter shade has an extremely frosted, metallic finish that’s very, very pore-emphasizing. The darker shade is more flattering against the skin, as it does not emphasize the skin’s natural texture or its pores. Swirled together and then applied, there is still noticeable emphasis of the pores due to the more metallic finish. Aside from the nature of the finish, I think this color will work well on deeper complexions. I feel like if you loved MAC’s Mineralize Skinfinishes with ultra metallic finishes and shades like Metal Rock (which I don’t own, so I can’t compare directly), you’d like this. Double Definition wore seven hours well but showed some patchiness after eight hours.  The texture was soft and blendable, but there was some dryness there–dry in the weird way that this formula can be, such that it feels dry to the touch but doesn’t perform as if it were dry.

The Glossover

product

MAC Double Definition Extra Dimension Skinfinish Review, Photos, Swatches

B
This product is incredibly well-pigmented, but it emphasizes pores and imperfections of the skin quite a bit. It also doesn't wear for a full eight hours, so it could use improvement there, too.

Product

8.5/10

Pigmentation

10/10

Texture

8/10

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 →

Thursday, April 4th, 2013

MAC Lightscapade Mineralize Skinfinish
MAC Lightscapade Mineralize Skinfinish

MAC Lightscapade Mineralize Skinfinish ($30.00 for 0.35 oz.) is described as a “soft candlelight beige with multi-dimensional shimmer.” It’s a pale, neutral-to-warm-toned white with a frosted, shimmering finish. Chanel Poudre Signee de Chanel is more golden but similar. Too Faced Spun Sugar is cooler-toned. Giorgio Armani Moonlight Beige is lighter. theBalm Promiscuous Pearl is more beige. MAC Snowglobe is more frosted. Chanel Beiges Ombres Tissees is more beige and frosted.

Now, last I remember, Lightscapade was supposed to join the permanent range, and it is still available at retailers like Nordstrom but doesn’t exist on MAC’s website when I searched just now. It is set to launch with the MAC x Hayley Williams collaboration on April 9th (but hardcore fans may want to start stalking a little earlier).

What I like about Lightscapade is that it highlights and adds glow wherever you put it, and it doesn’t emphasize the skin’s natural texture or pores. My continuing issue with Lightscapade (and MAC’s Mineralize Skinfinishes in general) is that they don’t wear well or long at all–by eight hours, it’s nearly invisible, and there’s noticeable fading after four to five hours. The texture is soft, finely-milled, but there is a smidgen of powderiness so it doesn’t have fantastic color payoff (it takes some building to get an even layer of color). This year’s Lightscapade is very similar to the one I had in 2012, but it has a lot less veining (more beige/white) than the one I have from 2011.

The Glossover

LE
product

Lightscapade

B-
It's really the lack of wear time that makes this product such a disappointment! If only it lasted longer on!

Product

8.5/10

Pigmentation

9/10

Texture

9/10

Longevity

6/10

Application

4/5

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 →