Sunday, January 8th, 2012

Chanel Brompton Road Poudre Tissee / Highlighting Powder and Blush
Chanel Brompton Road Poudre Tissee / Highlighting Powder and Blush

Chanel Brompton Road Poudre Tissee / Highlighting Powder and Blush

Chanel Brompton Road Poudre Tissee / Highlighting Powder and Blush ($80.00 for 0.50 oz.) is a limited edition powder from Chanel’s Knightsbridge collection. It’s supposed to “bring a radiant flush and iridescent shimmer to the face.” Like a lot of recent Chanel highlighters, this is one that seems well-suited for lighter complexions. It’s certainly not a blusher on light-medium or darker skin tones–on me, it gives my cheeks a bit of a washed out appearance when I used it as a blush.

The powder has a similar look as Chanel Beiges Ombres Tissees, though the underlying colors are different and set-up in another design. The finish seems subtler, though, as I found Beiges Ombres Tissees to be almost too frosted.  The wear is similar; around seven to eight hours before fading, which is good.

It has a silver glitter overlay, which is actually really, really annoying. I would highly recommend taking a big fluffy brush and really decimating that top layer and brushing it off. The glitter looks atrocious on the skin, even in tiny bits. Underneath, there are two colors: a pink-coral and pale ivory. Both of these have a subtle shimmer-sheen, while the pink-coral has a subtler finish–not quite matte but nearly. It’s not practical to use the colors individually (you would need to use an eyeshadow brush), so the swirled look is a pale petal pink with yellow undertones and a shimmer-sheen.

It is much, much lighter compared to Chanel Blush Horizon de Chanel, though the finish (amount of shimmer/sheen) is the same. I think Blush Horizon de Chanel is more versatile and flattering. Chanel Pink Cloud is yellower. Benefit Hervana is sheerer and yellower. Illamasqua Katie is blue-based but just as light.

This powder is one of the pricest powders I’ve purchased in the past couple of years. Even for Chanel, there was some sticker shock. The compact that’s most similar to this was Beiges Ombres Tissees–and it was $75 in August–four months later, add another $5.  The powder is hefty at 0.5 oz., which is nice, but this is certainly not a wallet-friendly blush/highlighter.

The Glossover

LE
product

Brompton Road Poudre Tissee Highlighting Powder

B+
The color and effect, while pretty, is most suitable for fairer complexions. For light-medium to dark skin tones, I'd recommend looking elsewhere.

Product

9/10

Pigmentation

9/10

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 →

Friday, December 30th, 2011

MAC Too Chic Beauty Powder
MAC Too Chic Beauty Powder

MAC for Iris Apfel: Too Chic Beauty Powder

MAC Too Chic Beauty Powder ($23.00 for 0.35 oz.) is a limited edition (but it is a repromote) shade for Iris Apfel. It’s described as a “soft peachy cream with fine shimmer.” It’s a pale, creamy ivory-beige with a golden shimmer-sheen. MAC Snowglobe is less golden. MAC Lightscapade is whiter. theBalm Mary-Lou Manizer is more golden.

While beauty powders are multi-tasking products, this particular shade will work as a highlighter on most complexions, though it may turn ashy on deeper complexions because of how light it is. I find it lightens my natural skin color, so it almost looks rather unnatural on my light-medium skin (NC25). The texture is extremely soft and finely-milled, so it feels lovely to the touch. There is a lot of shimmer in Too Chic, so it may be too much if you prefer a subtler finish. It does accentuate pores slightly, but it wears for around eight hours without looking faded.

The Glossover

LE
product

Too Chic

A
For lighter complexions, this will work nicely as a highlighter without being too golden. With the right brush, it can definitely work on more medium skin tones, but I worry it may turn ashy on deeper complexions.

Product

9/10

Pigmentation

10/10

Texture

10/10

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 →

Thursday, December 29th, 2011

MAC Redhead Mineralize Skinfinish
MAC Redhead Mineralize Skinfinish

MAC Naturally: Redhead Mineralize Skinfinish

MAC Redhead Mineralize Skinfinish ($28.00 for 0.32 oz.) is described as a “gold to salon pink degrade,” and it’s a limited edition blush/highlighter from MAC’s upcoming Naturally collection. It is a repromote, though, so if you’re an avid mineralize skinfinish collector, you should check your stash first. Like Blonde, there are four (mostly) distinct stripes of color: gilded champagne beige, deepened champagne beige, peachy champagne, and rosy bronze.

When mixed together, the resulting hue is a lightened champagne beige with warm undertones and a nearly metallic finish. It is similar to MAC Belightful. On my skin tone, it adds a light warmth but mostly a shimmer/sheen without too much color. I expect on fairer skin tones, this could work as a very subtle bronzer with a heavy sheen.

The texture of the powder is soft and smooth, but the finish does tend to accentuate pores, skin imperfections, and the skin’s natural texture, so for those who are concerned about pore size, this may not be the right product for you. It’s not the product I’d reach for to look my very, very best in photos, but the effect is still pretty that it might be worth the sacrifice in the appearance of your skin from time to time! When I tested out Redhead for wear, it wore for around six hours before noticeably fading on my normal-to-dry skin.

The Glossover

LE
product

Redhead

B
If the wear was improved, and perhaps if it didn't accentuate skin imperfections and texture, this would be a really nice product to pull out to highlight (and blush for fairer skin tones).

Product

8.5/10

Pigmentation

9/10

Texture

10/10

Longevity

7/10

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 →

Thursday, December 29th, 2011

MAC Blonde Mineralize Skinfinish
MAC Blonde Mineralize Skinfinish

MAC Naturally: Blonde Mineralize Skinfinish

MAC Blonde Mineralize Skinfinish ($28.00 for 0.32 oz.) is described as a “soft pink to rose degrade,” and it’s a limited edition blush/highlighter from MAC’s upcoming Naturally collection. It is a repromote, though, so if you’re an avid Mineralize Skinfinish collector, you should check your stash first. There are four “stripes” of colors with the lightest being a pale beige-y pink that moves to a medium beige-rose then to rosy pink and finally to a medium-dark rose.

Realistically, it’s a product you’ll swirl and use in combination than in individual strips (unless you used an eye brush to do so). You can go lighter/darker by staying on one half of the product with a blush brush, though. When swirled altogether, it yields a soft rosy beige with a high, not quite metallic, sheen. On fairer skin tones, it may add a bit of rosy color in addition to highlighting, but for medium to dark skin tones, you’ll find this works primarily as a highlighter. The overall mix of color reminded me of Chanel Pink Cloud, which has a subtler finish and slightly pinker appearance.

The powder feels very soft, silky smooth, which would normally make for a product that lies naturally against the skin, but the nearly metallic finish does emphasize the texture of the skin, whether it is pores or imperfections. While I didn’t test out the wear of Blonde (I tested out Redhead on one cheek with Subtle Breeze on the other), other M S tend to wear six hours or so before they begin to fade on my normal-to-dry skin.

The Glossover

LE
product

Blonde

B
If the wear was improved, and perhaps if it didn't accentuate skin imperfections and texture, this would be a really nice product to pull out to highlight (and blush for fairer skin tones).

Product

8.5/10

Pigmentation

10/10

Texture

9/10

Longevity

7/10

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 →

Tuesday, December 27th, 2011

Chanel Blush Horizon de Chanel
Chanel Blush Horizon de Chanel

Chanel Spring 2012: Chanel Blush Horizon de Chanel

Chanel Blush Horizon de Chanel ($58.00 for 0.53 oz.) is a new and limited blush for springtime. It’s described as an “elegant highlighting face powder” with “subtle gradations of rose, coral, and peach.” Though Chanel says you can apply them on their own or applied together, you’ll tend to use at least a few strips at a time, as they are very skinny and won’t accommodate most blush brushes in just one of those little strips!

If you stay on the upper half, you’ll get a pinker look, and if you stay on the bottom half, you’ll get a peachier look. When you swirl, it’s a pink-coral with a peachy sheen. Tarina Tarantino Parasol is a more pigmented pink-coral. MAC Stunner doesn’t really have any coral to it, but it is similar to the upper portion of this blush. Chanel Pink Cloud is similar but less pink and subtler on. Benefit Bella Bamba is pinker but with a light hand, similar enough on.

At first glance, this was very reminiscent of Guerlain’s Blush G Serie Noire, and for the most part, it is. The strips in this product are much, much skinnier, so it’s difficult to focus on particular shades, but the shades of each strip are very similar to Blush G. Chanel’s doesn’t have the darker orange shade (which you’ll find at the top of Blush G), but everything else is similar, so the end result can be similar. If you tend to prefer a darker, more coral blush, then you’ll prefer the Blush G, since you have that darker orange shade to yield those results. Chanel’s is more of a pink-coral to pink-peach. The other major difference is Guerlain’s has a stronger golden sheen, while Chanel’s appears a bit softer. Blush G has more pigmentation overall, due to that darker orange shade, and Chanel’s is less intense. If you missed out on Blush G, this is a good substitute, though.

The texture is really nice–soft, smooth–and the finish looks lovely on the skin, as it’s luminous and glowy without being frosted or emphasizing pores or imperfections on the skin.  Given that it’s not supposed to deliver a lot of color, it’s true-to-form; it gives a subtle flush but tends to yield more luminosity.  I expect on fairer skin tones, you’ll see this as more of a blush and highlighter combination, while deeper skin tones will find it works mostly as a highlighter.  A nice bonus is–despite the high price tag–it’s a good value, because it’s over half an ounce of product (most blushes are between 0.15 to 0.30 oz.). On me, it wore for around seven hours and started to fade; it was noticeably faded after nine hours.

The Glossover

LE
product

Blush Horizon de Chanel

A
Given that it's not supposed to deliver a lot of color, it's true-to-form; it gives a subtle flush but tends to yield more luminosity.  I expect on fairer skin tones, you'll see this as more of a blush and highlighter combination, while deeper skin tones will find it works mostly as a highlighter.

Product

10/10

Pigmentation

10/10

Texture

10/10

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 →

Thursday, December 8th, 2011

Laura Mercier Rose Rendezvous Face Illuminator
Laura Mercier Rose Rendezvous Face Illuminator

Laura Mercier Rose Rendezvous Face Illuminator

Several readers asked me how this compares to Guerlain Cruel Gardenia, in terms of the overall grade/rating. This product is available, but you won’t find it online; you’ll have to track it down in stores. Saks seems to be the only distributor (at least in the U.S.) that has some stock left. If you click the link above, it’ll take you to the defunct product page on Saks, but it will allow you to “find in store.”

Generally, if a product is hard to find or sold out, I don’t review it (my order for this arrived only two days before it sold out everywhere). There are always exceptions, but it’s definitely something I try to avoid doing–same with discontinued or really old limited shades. This is an exception and not a change in the rule! :)

Laura Mercier Rose Rendezvous Face Illuminator ($42.00 for 0.20 oz.) is a gilded bronze with a champagne-bronze shimmer. MAC Rose Ole is a bit more peach but looks similar when applied. It’s also a bit like MAC Crystal Pink, depending on how you combine the two shades.

The texture is soft but firm, and the frosted metallic sheen goes all the way through. It’s not as frosted on as it appears in the pan or in a heavier swatch. It’s more than just a subtle glow, but it’s less than a full-on frost. I call it a shimmer-sheen, because there is noticeable shimmer within the overall glowy sheen. It doesn’t emphasize pores, though.

For me, the major difference between the two formulas is in the wear–with Rose Rendezvous, it wears great for around six hours, but it’s faded by eight.  When I bought the product, I was initially really hopeful about it, because it seemed to be getting great reviews, but the way it looked at the end of the day wasn’t ideal.  Guerlain Cruel Gardenia wore for a shocking ten hours without fading, which was far more than I expected and longer than average. I wore them both over the same foundation (Guerlain Lingerie de Peau). On a very minute scale, Guerlain’s is a little more refined–a smidgen more finely milled, softer, finer shimmer–but it’s such a close call.

They are really different shades (Cruel Garenia is pink, this shade is warmer, more champagne-bronze), even though the products are similar in formula, so it’s more about the kind of shade you prefer and would find more flattering against your skin tone. The price for Guerlain’s Cruel Gardenia is $67, but you’ll get 0.31 oz. worth of product (50% more than Laura Mercier’s), so on an ounce-by-ounce comparison, Guerlain’s costs $216/oz. and Laura Mercier’s is $210/oz. I would expect this shade to flatter warmer skin tones more, while Cruel Gardenia will work well on both skin tones (as it is more neutral in undertone).

The Glossover

coming-soon

Laura Mercier Rose Rendezvous Face Illuminator Review, Photos, Swatches

B+
If this wore longer and better on me (say eight hours), this would be more of an A- product, but unfortunately, the mere six hours of wear impacts the product's overall rating quite a bit. I do think the two products are comparable in texture and composition, but the shades and wear are significantly different.

Product

9/10

Pigmentation

10/10

Texture

9.5/10

Longevity

7/10

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 →