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 →

Friday, July 6th, 2012

NARS Desire Highlighting Blush
NARS Desire Blush

NARS Desire Blush

NARS Desire Blush ($28.00 for 0.16 oz.) is described as a “delicate bright pink.” It’s a vibrant blue-based magenta pink with a mostly matte finish. MAC Peony Petal is lighter, more bubblegum pink. MAC Florida is very similar, perhaps a little less pink. Tarte Amused is pinker. MAC Amazon Princess is not as vibrant and more purple. Make Up For Ever #3 is pinker, darker.

This is an intensely pigmented product–you will have no problems getting this to show up your complexion. If you’re light to medium, you may have a wee bit figuring how little you actually need for a moderate blusher. This is one of the reasons NARS’ blushes are so famous (their pigmentation), so this is one of those shades to use a lighter touch with. I recommend using a stippling brush or barely tapping a blush brush onto the pan and then tapping the brush against your wrist to shake loose some excess. I then recommend lightly tapping along the area you want the color concentrated on, and then blend out as desired.  If you really go overboard, pat a little foundation (liquid or powder) over to help diffuse.

Desire was more blendable than Amour, but it is a little drier than some of the more shimmery shades (which is common in a matte or more matte finish).  It was soft, finely-milled, and not powdery.  When I trialed Desire on the cheeks, it wore well for seven and a half hours and was slightly faded after eight or so.  I didn’t experience any separation, though, which I think is much worse than just fading–you might be the only one who really knows the blush has faded (rather than you were going for a subtle look), while you can really see separation, which looks just gross.

The Glossover

P
product

Desire

A-
If you have trouble finding blushes that show up on your skin tone, this one definitely will. If you love bolder cheek color, Desire is right up your alley. It wears pretty well, packs plenty of pigment, and blends fairly easily.

Product

9/10

Pigmentation

10/10

Texture

9.5/10

Longevity

8/10

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, July 3rd, 2012

NARS Deep Throat Highlighting Blush
NARS Deep Throat Blush

NARS Deep Throat Blush

NARS Deep Throat Blush ($28.00 for 0.16 oz.) is described as a “flirty, sheer peach.” It’s a warm coral with a hint of pink and a golden shimmer-sheen. NARS Amour is darker, more vibrant, and has no shimmer. MAC Fleet Fast is slightly darker, more orange. Tarte Glisten is very comparable, though it has a stronger gold shimmer. NARS Orgasm is a touch lighter and more shimmery. theBalm Frat Boy is like a matte version–the colors are very, very similar.

Deep Throat is often the recommended alternative to those who didn’t like Orgasm.  It’s not as shimmery, and I think the shimmer is a little more subdued in a way in Deep Throat–more of a sheen than a full-on shimmer.  It’s warm without being too orange or red, so it won’t make cheeks look burnt. It’s an excellent color for everyday wear, because it has buildable color–it can be soft, barely there and used more as a soft warm glow or intensified for a pop of coral on the cheek.  The texture is soft and smooth, and as described, it’s one of the “less” pigmented blushes NARS makes–but you can get to pan color if desired. It’s just not like Exhibit A where you have to use a feathery touch when applying.  Deep Throat wore well for seven hours, and I noticed some fading along the top of my cheeks after seven and a half hours.

The Glossover

P
product

Deep Throat

A
Deep Throat is often the recommended alternative to those who didn't like Orgasm. It's not as shimmery, and I think the shimmer is a little more subdued in a way in Deep Throat--more of a sheen than a full-on shimmer.

Product

9.5/10

Pigmentation

10/10

Texture

10/10

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 →

Monday, July 2nd, 2012

Tom Ford Frantic Pink Cheek Color
Tom Ford Frantic Pink Cheek Color

Tom Ford Frantic Pink Cheek Color ($55.00 for 0.28 oz.) is a subtly gold shimmered light-medium pink with yellow undertones. MAC Stunner is similar but doesn’t have a golden shimmer. Benefit Hervana is slightly pinker. MAC Alpha Girl is more peach/orange. Tarina Tarantino Feather is more coral.

I’ve been particularly impressed by Tom Ford’s blush formula in the past, but I was a little disappointed in Frantic Pink. It’s not bad; it’s even really good. It’s just not as amazing as the other shades have been.  The texture is soft but very powdery, so it feels a little dry and doesn’t sit as nicely on the skin as the other shades.  It was still easy to blend, which I’d expect with such a soft texture and light color.  This one is less shimmery, though, compared to some of the other colors in the line-up.  It’s a lighter color, period, so it’s not going to show up well on medium to dark skin tones.  The color is very much what you see in the pan.  I was only able to get good wear out of this for eight hours, which is good, but other shades have yielded longer than that.

On the upside, Tom Ford gives plenty of product for the hefty price tag; it’s higher than average and definitely not skimpy. For reference, MAC blushes are 0.21 oz. and NARS blushes are 0.16 oz. each.  So, if it’s a shade you’d wear everyday, it might be cheaper-per-use, but it’s still an investment.

The Glossover

P
product

Frantic Pink

A-

This one is less shimmery, though, compared to some of the other colors in the line-up. It's a lighter color, period, so it's not going to show up well on medium to dark skin tones. The color is very much what you see in the pan.

Product

9/10

Pigmentation

9/10

Texture

8.5/10

Longevity

9/10

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 →

Saturday, June 30th, 2012

NARS Angelika Highlighting Blush
NARS Angelika Blush

NARS Angelika Blush

NARS Angelika Blush ($28.00 for 0.16 oz.) is described as a “cotton candy pink with gold and silver sparkle.” It’s a blue-based light-medium pink with larger silver sparkle and a very subtle gold sheen. MAC Peony Petal is bluer in undertone and lighter. MAC Florida is more magenta. Tarte Amused is slightly darker and more vibrant. MAC Amazon Princess is more magenta–purpler, less pink.

Even though I have warm undertones, I think this is still flattering, because it has a darker hue overall. Sometimes if it’s a paler, lighter blue-based pink, it can make me look a little dead. The texture of Angelika is soft, silky-smooth, and it’s very easy to blend and apply to the cheek. There’s no stiffness here, but it doesn’t kick up a lot of excess powder, so it is just right balance of softness. It packs plenty of color, so it will show up on darker skin tones, too, even though it’s not a deep pink blush. The silver sparkles get lost between the pan and the face; either they disappear into the ether or get trapped in the bristles of the brush, but very few wind up on the cheek.  Angelika wore close to eight hours on my cheeks with some minor fading shortly after.

For nostalgia purposes, I actually reviewed this blush two years ago here. The way this blog has evolved over the past six years is incredible, but sometimes I’m just amazed at how much can change in a couple of years, too. It always seem “The Best Way” when I do it, but clearly there’s always room for improvement!

The Glossover

product

NARS Angelika Blush Review, Photos, Swatches

A
Don't let the blue undertones fool you--this is one of the more wearable blushes in NARS' line for cool, warm, pale, and dark skin tones (and everything in-between).

Product

9.5/10

Pigmentation

9.5/10

Texture

10/10

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 →

Wednesday, June 27th, 2012

MAC Supernova Mineralize Blush
MAC Supernova Mineralize Blush

MAC Supernova Mineralize Blush

MAC Supernova Mineralize Blush ($23.50 for 0.10 oz.) is described as a “magenta and burnished gold melange.” It’s a brightened raspberry pink with subtle blue undertones and a subtle sheen. It contains swirls of golden peach-orange and neon magenta pink. MAC Weekend Getaway is similar in color when used softly. Tom Ford Wicked is cooler-toned, frostier, and lighter. Tarte Amused is much brighter and bluer-based. Illamasqua Seduce is similar, slightly more plum. MAC Feeling Flush is a bit lighter and cooler-toned. MAC Amazonian Princess is comparable, slightly redder. MAC Full Fuchsia is a bit more fuchsia.

This shade applied smoothly without emphasizing pores or any imperfections of my skin’s texture, but it wasn’t quite as blendable as I’d expect. It’s not stubborn, but I wouldn’t say it’s easily blended and diffused–just so-so there. It’s very pigmented, so a light hand is a must, and if you want something soft and sheer, I’d recommend using a stippling brush like MAC’s 188. Because it’s not super blue-based, it should work well across under tones, and the intense color payoff means it will be viable on the lightest and deepest complexions. Supernova wore seven and a half hours on me before starting to fade noticeably.

The Glossover

LE
product

Supernova

B+
Because it's not super blue-based, it should work well across under tones, and the intense color payoff means it will be viable on the lightest and deepest complexions.

Product

9/10

Pigmentation

10/10

Texture

9/10

Longevity

8/10

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 →