Surratt Beauty Glamour Eyes Prismatique Eyes
Surratt Beauty Prismatique Eyes ($38.00 for 0.12 oz.) is a two-part compact that twists to reveal a glittery, more powder-like eyeshadow on the lower level, and then on the upper level, the lid twists off and reveals a cream eyeshadow. The brand states that the cream eyeshadow is a long-wearing, “water-proof shadow base” that can be used underneath the glittery eyeshadow or as an eyeliner. The glittery eyeshadow is called a “prismatic top coat.” The two only work well when used together, but neither works that well alone. Together, they’re pretty, but the cream eyeshadow is fussier than ideal for a cream-based product, so blending and getting even coverage were quite challenging.
Based on the fact that the cream eyeshadow is the long-wearing part and has the most claims, I rated this as a standalone product plus how well it did hold the glitter eyeshadow, but the wear considers it on its own as well as when worn with the glitter eyeshadow. On the other hand, the glitter eyeshadow’s wear is based on how long it wears over the cream base (there seem to be next to no claims made for the eyeshadow, other than calling it a top coat and it designed to be very sparkly!). The cream eyeshadow worked decently as an eyeliner without the glittery eyeshadow on top of it, but on the lid, it had a tendency to crease before it had a chance to set due to a longer dry-down time. If I applied the glittery eyeshadow on top of the cream base as it was drying down, the glitter was fairly locked on and seemed to prevent any initial creasing. Then the whole layer cake of product lasted for nine hours before I noticed faint creasing. The cream eyeshadow was fairly crease-resistant, but the longer dry down time meant keeping the lid close and lightly patting the cream eyeshadow back into place after 15-20 seconds until it was fully dried at about 45 seconds. I recommend a flat, slightly narrow, synthetic brush to pat on the glitter eyeshadow for best results.
The glitter eyeshadow will get everywhere without the cream base to lock on, and the glitter seemed like flecks, which were a pain to remove from the skin (it is always amusing that glitter won’t stick to the lid, but it’ll stick to your nose no problem!). The cream eyeshadow was generally pigmented but had a fair amount of slip to it without being really thick, so it tended to look patchy and uneven on the lid, especially the more I blended out the edge. It is the type of product that is easier to use as a base on the lid and then use traditional powder eyeshadow to do crease work. The packaging felt flimsy to me, and I’ve too often swiveled open the lower level and nicked the edge of the pan as a result. I had consistent results across the three shades I purchased inasmuch as wear and application went, but this particular duo had the least pigmented cream shade–but since these are intended to be layered on the lid, it did not really make a difference once the glitter eyeshadow as patted on top. It was, of course, noticeably sheer and even more muted on than in the pot when used as an eyeliner.
Glamour Eyes (Cream) is described as a “royal plum.” It’s a subdued, medium-dark lavender purple with subtle, neutral-to-cool undertones and a natural sheen. It had sheer, streaky coverage unless really piled on, but this made it extremely difficult for the product to dry down evenly without gathering into the creases. When used as a base, I really did not find it to be an issue that the coverage was sheerer or uneven, as patting the glitter on top hid it entirely while still acting as an adhesive for the flecks of glitter. Makeup Geek Fairytale (P, $6.00) is lighter, cooler (90% similar). MAC Nearing Dark (LE, $16.00) is more shimmery (90% similar). Makeup Geek Motown (P, $6.00) is darker, cooler (85% similar). Bobbi Brown Mulberry (LE, $22.00) is darker (85% similar). NARS Charade #2 (P, $25.00) is warmer (85% similar). MAC Purple Haze (DC, $16.00) is cooler, better quality (80% similar). See comparison swatches / view dupes side-by-side.
Glamour Eyes (Glitter) is described as a “brilliant blue-violet duo-chrome.” It is more of a medium, pink-mauve base with blue-to-violet shift with a very glittery, chunky consistency. I think the chunkiness is actually due to how soft the product is, so a lot more product gets dislodged from the surface of the pan than you’d expect, so a very light touch is best. I might even consider using a slightly dampened brush as well. It looks cooler-toned once layered over the cream eyeshadow, and you can start to see the duochrome come through, but on its own, it just seemed like a warmer shade with a lot of glitter. Urban Decay Horizon (P, $20.00) is warmer (90% similar). Too Faced Passion (P) is less shimmery, lighter (90% similar). MAC Smoky Mauve (P, $20.00) is less shimmery, darker (85% similar). Makeup Geek Halo (P, $12.00) is lighter (85% similar). Urban Decay Glitterrock (P, $20.00) is less shimmery, lighter (85% similar). NARS Parallel Universe (Left) (LE, $25.00) is warmer (85% similar). Too Faced Mauvelous (LE, $16.00) is lighter (80% similar). Giorgio Armani #7 (P, $33.00) is less shimmery, lighter (80% similar). Anastasia Blossom (LE, $12.00) is less shimmery, lighter (80% similar). See comparison swatches / view dupes side-by-side.