Saturday, September 1st, 2012


NARS Satellite of Love Highlighting Blush

Reach to the Stars for a Satellite of Love

NARS Satellite of Love Highlighting Blush ($28.00 for 0.16 oz.) is described as a “sparkling gold sand.” It’s a peachy brown with a hint of orange and pale gold shimmer and sparkle. It adds warmth, a little tan coloring, and noticeable sparkle and sheen to cheeks. Chanel Lucky Stripes is similar but more shimmery than sparkly. NARS Miss Liberty is lighter, more beige. MAC How Beautiful! is very light and beige. Chanel Empreinte de Chanel is more golden, yellower.

The Highlighting Blush formula is supposd to impart a “luminous glow” that can be worn alone or paired with other cheek products.  This particular shade has a bit more sparkle than sheen, though a lot of the sparkle gets lost between the pan, your brush, and your cheek, but it did emphasize my pores just slightly.  It has decent color payoff (it’s about what you see in the pan) and buildable to the color you see in the pan.  Because it is a lighter shade overall, on deeper complexions, it is going to add very subtle warmth but not visible color–more a highlighter than anything else. Lighter complexions can use it as both a highlighter as well as a blusher (well, probably bronzer).  The texture was a bit on the dry side, but it was nice and blendable on the cheek.  It wore for seven hours before there was noticeable fading.

The Glossover

LE
product

Satellite of Love

B
I think the color is a nice pop of warmth for most complexions, but the larger sparkle seems to emphasize pores to a noticeable degree, while the drier texture is less forgiving on cheeks. It is blendable and buildable, though.

Product

8.5/10

Pigmentation

9/10

Texture

9/10

Longevity

7.5/10

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 →

Monday, August 27th, 2012

Illamasqua Aurora Gleam Highlighting Cream
Illamasqua Aurora Gleam Highlighting Cream

A Little Light Goes a Long Way

Illamasqua Aurora Gleam Highlighting Cream ($24.00 for 0.23 oz.) is described as a “champagne.” It’s a soft, warm ivory champagne with a strong shimmer-sheen. The shimmer is fairly fine, but it has a strong sheen that’s almost metallic depending on how much product you use. Benefit Watt’s Up! is similar, though a bit less warm-toned. NARS Albatross is similar in color but a bit lighter because the white base is stronger. MAC Truth & Light is lighter.

The Gleam formula is supposed to be lightweight with an iridescent finish to highlight both the face and body. It’s very creamy and slides right over the skin, and it doesn’t take a lot of product to highlight the higher planes of the face. I used some on the top of my cheekbones, along the bridge of my nose, and above my cupid’s brow. I used a clean spatula to take a little product out of the pan, and then I used my fingertips to pat it on. (Bonus: you can see it live in this video.) It does emphasize pores somewhat, because it does have a strong sheen that almost looks metallic, depending on the lighting.

This is a true cream, as it doesn’t dry down or set over time, so the wear time wasn’t stellar.  I managed about five hours of decent wear (and I have normal-to-dry skin), and after a little over six hours, a lot of it had faded/separated. It’s a product I’d consider setting lightly with translucent powder, which would help to set it as well as tamp down some of the high sheen finish (if you prefer a subtler highlight).

The Glossover

P
product

Aurora

B
If you like more intense highlighters, you might like Aurora, which should work on a variety of skin tones, because it's not an ashy champagne, but it's not too yellow that it becomes gold. The shorter wear time is its biggest downfall.

Product

8.5/10

Pigmentation

10/10

Texture

9/10

Longevity

6.5/10

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 →

Monday, August 13th, 2012

Guerlain Peach Boy Blush Duo
Guerlain Peach Boy Rose aux Joues Blush Duo

Guerlain Goes Two-for-One with New Blushes

Guerlain Peach Boy Blush Duo ($50.00 for 0.21 oz.) contains a vibrant orange-coral with a mostly matte finish and a gold-shimmered peach-coral. Combined, the two work together to create a soft gold-shimmered, light-medium coral-orange. For the dominant shade, the color is more intense than NARS Gilda but less intense than NARS Exhibit A; MAC Modern Mandarin has a soft sheen that makes it appear just a hair lighter, while MAC Out for Fun is very similar. Make Up For Ever #5 is also simimilar in color.

The lighter shade is lighter and less coral compared to Make Up For Ever #153, more golden than Tarina Tarantino Feather, and softer than Tom Ford Lovelust. Together, it reminded me of a pinker MAC Ripe Peach, more shimmered MAC Marine Life, shimmered version of Chanel Tweed Brun Rose, or gold-shimmered Tom Ford Lovelust.

Each blush duo is designed to have a dominant shade that yields a pop of color, while the smaller shade can be used blended in or used to highlight or contour.  In Peach Boy, I think it’s safe to say that the bottom shade is a highlighter, given it’s shimmering content and finish.  It definitely works that way.  The darker shade was soft, had good color payoff, but was never powdery–it wasn’t as blendable as I’d like, though it was not too stubborn to work with. I’d recommend using a light hand with the color; it builds nicely and doesn’t go on true-to-pan with one touch, but it can look heavy quickly.

The lighter shade was soft, a little creamier in a way, and blended out beautiful on the cheeks. The shimmer seemed large when I swatched, but it came together nicely on the cheek; it didn’t emphasize pores and yielded a beautiful sheen.  I liked them best together, though, as the highlighting shade alone doesn’t have a lot of color, and when they’re used blended together, you get something with a lovely sheen and just enough color.

When I tested the wear of the darker shade, it wore for eight hours and had no fading that I could note.  The lighter shade wore for eight hours with minor fading.  Together, they wore for eight hours with very minor fading along the edges.  The textures of Guerlain’s new blush duos are very reminiscent of their eyeshadow palettes, which have a drier texture–just a bit firmer–but still finely-milled and soft.  The duo comes with a brush, which was soft enough to be usable, though I still preferred to use a full-sized brush. Also worth mentioning is that the powder is lightly perfumed (in line with other Guerlain powder products).

The Glossover

palette

Guerlain Peach Boy Rose aux Joues Blush Duo Review, Photos, Swatches

A-
The concept of a blush duo is great--you get a little more bang for your buck, because you get two colors instead of just one, and because the two are meant to work with each other, so you have a lot of layering opportunities available.

Product

9.5/10

Pigmentation

9.5/10

Texture

9/10

Longevity

9/10

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 →

Sunday, August 12th, 2012

NARS Undress Me The Multiple
NARS Undress Me The Multiple

Please Stay Dressed, NARS

NARS Undress Me The Multiple ($39.00 for 0.5 oz.) is described as a “ballerina pink with silver shimmer.” That should be upgraded to silver glitter–it’s much, much chunkier than sparkle. I don’t think I’d describe it as micro-glitter but regular glitter or a mix of small and large-sized glitter particles. The color itself is a pale, just slightly cool-toned, pink. MAC Lazy Sunday has a similar effect and look on, though it has no sparkle. MAC Full of Joy is much cooler-toned, to the point that it looks almost lilac. MAC New Order has gold sparkle and is slightly darker. Make Up For Ever #303 would have a similar effect on cheeks, though it has a frosted finish and is slightly cooler-toned.

Multiples are supposed to work for eyes, cheeks, lips, and body with a cream-to-powder formula that is creamy, has sheer color, and blends effortlessly. Lots and lots of readers love Multiples, and as much as I’d like to fall in love, I haven’t. Maybe I haven’t tried the right shades–Undress Me certainly isn’t one of those right shades. It’s very, very sparkly in a way that emphasizes pores and has noticeable flecks of glitter that just seem randomly dispersed. The glitter also traveled to places unknown (and known places included my hair line, nose, and chin) while I wore it. One of the problems I have with Multiples is their short wear time; Undress Me looked noticeably faded after four hours (and much of the glitter had tried to escape by that point as well) and was completely gone after six hours.

The texture is a little dry; it’s definitely a cream-based product, but it’s stiff. This was agony on the lips; I took photos, but I had visions of the photos making their way into the bowels of the internet. They were… not pretty and were wrong on so many levels. On the lips, it was unbearably dry, and the glitter was gritty. I don’t like Multiples on the lips, but this had to have been the worst I’ve attempted using on lips.

It’s not disco-ball highlighter–it’s something else entirely. I don’t think it’s flattering, and the problem with glitter is that if it’s not catching the light, it just looks like a chunk of silver.  Without the glitter, I think this might be more manageable, but with it, it’s riddled with problems.  The short wear time, traveling glitter, and dry, difficult-to-blend texture make this a no-go for me.  I kept trying to find ways to make it work over the past few weeks, but it was always the same story.  It’s best on bare skin, because it’s most blendable there, and it tended to just smear my liquid foundation around if I used this over it.

The Glossover

LE
product

Undress Me

D+
It's not disco-ball highlighter--it's something else entirely. I don't think it's flattering, and the problem with glitter is that if it's not catching the light, it just looks like a chunk of silver. Without the glitter, I think this might be more manageable, but with it, it's riddled with problems.

Product

6/10

Pigmentation

9/10

Texture

7/10

Longevity

5/10

Application

3/5

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 →

Tuesday, July 10th, 2012

Chanel Lumiere d'Artifices Beiges Illuminating Powder
Chanel Lumiere d’Artifices Beiges Illuminating Powder

Chanel Lumiere d’Artifices Beiges Illuminating Powder ($65.00 for 0.63 oz.) is designed to be a beige-based highlighter with an iridescent finish. It’s a soft peachy beige with a very fine shimmer-sheen. It has a glitter overlay that doesn’t seem to go all the way through, so while you might see some sparkles on the initial swatch or application, they’re not there going forward. NARS Miss Liberty is more shimmery but still similar. MAC How Beautiful is more beige. MAC Rose Ole is slightly darker and less peach.

The texture of the powder is very finely-milled, but it does err on the side of powdery–a lot of excess powder is loosened the moment your brush makes contact with it. The powderiness translated on the cheeks, too, but can be taken down by spritzing water (true with most powdery finishes).  It does feel so soft and silky, though, so I was disappointed by how it did look powdery when applied.  If you like a really subtle highlighter, the way this reflects light is minimal but noticeable–it’s one of the subtler highlighters I’ve come across in the past few months.  When I tested the wear on my cheeks, it managed around seven hours before looking a little faded (it was hard to tell, since this is so skin-colored against my complexion).

The Glossover

LE
product

Lumiere d'Artifices Beiges Illuminating Powder

B+
It does feel so soft and silky, though, so I was disappointed by how it did look powdery when applied.  If you like a really subtle highlighter, the way this reflects light is minimal but noticeable--it's one of the subtler highlighters I've come across in the past few months.

Product

8.5/10

Pigmentation

10/10

Texture

9/10

Longevity

7.5/10

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 →

Friday, July 6th, 2012

Chanel Routes des Indes de Chanel Illuminating Powder
Chanel Routes des Indes de Chanel Illuminating Powder

Chanel Routes des Indes de Chanel Illuminating Powder

Chanel Routes des Indes de Chanel Illuminating Powder ($80.00 for 0.53 oz.) is described as a “golden powder” that acts as a highlighter for cheekbones and eyelids. It’s a light-medium yellow gold with a frosted shimmer-sheen. I couldn’t think of a cheek product that’s quite this yellow. Chanel Shimmering Tweed came the closest, but it is darker, more bronzy. Chanel Empreinte de Chanel is more orange. theBalm Mary Lou-Manizer is a softer, lighter gold with subtler yellow undertones (think more of a white gold). Now, there are several eyeshadows that come close! Chanel Blazing Gold is slightly darker. MAC Goldmine is more orange. Urban Decay Eldorado is perhaps a hint les yellow. Make Up For Ever #10 is a smidgen darker.

It’s a pretty highlighter with strong, yellow coloring, so it will be more flattering on warmer complexions, but it doesn’t run orange and there’s a little paleness to it that seems to neutralize some of the yellowy gold tones.  The powder is surprisingly pigmented–you can really achieve true-to-pan color if you so desire.  It does have a silver glitter overlay that gets swept away after the first use (and I’d advise removing it if you don’t want a few stray flecks of glitter on your cheeks).  Despite the high frost and shimmer in the highlighter’s finish, it didn’t emphasize pores or the natural texture of the skin, like many other frosted finishes do.  The texture is soft, finely-milled, and allows for easy blending during application.  I haven’t been so lucky with the wear on some of the recent powder releases by Chanel, but Routes des Indes de Chanel wore magnificently for eight hours; no fading, separating, or signs of going away.

If you love whoa! highlighters that are all about delivering a full-on glow, I think you might find Routes des Indes de Chanel worth checking out–if you’re able to sneak a peek at it in stores.  I know that majority of distribution is online through Chanel’s website, which makes it a rather spendy item to buy sight unseen.  It’s a bit of a collector’s piece, I’d say, with the price tag and design. You’re not going to see me ever comfortable with pushing something at this price point with a “must have! you will die without it!” (I don’t know if I’ve ever said that about any product!) It’s a very nice powder, enjoyable, and performs exceptionally well. But it definitely comes with a grimace-worthy price tag for most.

The Glossover

LE
product

Routes des Indes de Chanel Illuminating Powder

A+
It's a bit of a collector's piece, I'd say, with the price tag and design. You're not going to see me ever comfortable with pushing something at this price point with a "must have! you will die without it!" (I don't know if I've ever said that about any product!) It's a very nice powder, enjoyable, and performs exceptionally well. But it definitely comes with a grimace-worthy price tag for most.

Product

10/10

Pigmentation

10/10

Texture

10/10

Longevity

10/10

Application

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 →