Tuesday, August 7th, 2012

Dior Khaki Design Eyeshadow Palette
Dior Khaki Design Eyeshadow Palette

Camouflage Your Eyes with These Jungle Hues

Dior Khaki Design Eyeshadow Palette ($59.00 for 0.21 oz.) consists of four eyeshadows and one cream eyeliner, and all of these are in hues of greens, khakis, and olives. This eyeshadow palette is designed to be layered, as each shade has a different texture. It comes with a plastic insert that shows the labeling of what each shade is. Four of the shades can be treated as eyeshadows, while the fifth shade is a cream eyeliner.

The first shade, located on the upper left, is a darkened olive green with a subtle gray-tint that gives it that subdued color. It has noticeable brown undertones and a soft dusting of shimmer. The color payoff was good, and the texture was soft and smooth. NARS High Society is duller, grayer. Girogio Armani #25 has a blacker base and a ton more shimmer. Bare Escentuals Speaker Box is more shimmered. Giorgio Armani Green Jacquard is similar but less pigmented. MAC Femme Noir is greener, richer. Make Up For Ever #47 is greener.

The second shade, located on the upper right, is a sheer golden shimmer, which is noted as a “shine.” It can be layered over one of the other eyeshadows to add shimmer/sheen. The shimmer in it is finer than Dior Golden Savannah. Giorgio Armani #1 is more pigmented but similar in color–perhaps a touch browner. Giorgio Armani #18 is yellower. Tarina Tarantino Dreamy is similar but more like a regular eyeshadow, so it is opaque.

The third shade, located in the center, is an olive brown with a hint of green and a golden bronze shimmer. It has so-so color payoff; it’s a bit sheer, and it doesn’t build color well. theBalm Wocka, Wocka is similar but looks richer, as it is more pigmented. Bare Escentuals Spectacular is similar but more metallic in finish. MAC Sumptuous Olive is yellower. Inglot #419 is similar but very frosted.

The fourth shade, located on the bottom left, is a pale white gold with a frosted, metallic finish. The color is semi-sheer–it delivers more payoff than the upper right shade. Dior Couture Gold is chunkier and a smidgen yellower. MAC Carefree is similar in color but has more of matte finish. Bare Escentuals One Hit Wonder is also similar but a bit starker. Bare Escentuals Breathtaking is similar but has a less metallic finish.

The final shade, located on the bottom right, is a cream eyeliner that’s a blackened brown with a hint of teal shimmer.  The cream eyeliner has good color payoff, and it has a creamy consistency once you break through the initial surface.  It had so-so wear; it seemed a little faded and definitely migrated after six hours.

All of the shades had a soft, finely-milled texture that felt like butter and silk.  I liked the variation between finishes and light/dark within the palette, as it is more versatile–though I think it could have done with one more medium-colored eyeshadow instead of two pale/white golds that look more similar than not.  You would think that the Shine finish would have fall out problems, but it’s actually very easy to wear. I patted it over the darkest green eyeshadow, and I didn’t experience any fall out during the day.  When I wore the palette together, the eyeshadows wore for eight hours with very minor fading along the edges.

The Glossover

palette

Khaki Design

B+
If you like layering your eyeshadows, enjoy khaki/olive-toned eyeshadows, and don't mind some sheerer color, then you might like this. I don't think it's a must-have, though.

Product

9/10

Pigmentation

8.5/10

Texture

10/10

Longevity

8.5/10

Application

4/5

Results
Loading ... Loading ...
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, August 7th, 2012

Bobbi Brown Slate Eyeshadow
Bobbi Brown Slate Eyeshadow

Contour with a Clean Slate

Bobbi Brown Slate Eyeshadow ($21.00 for 0.08 oz.) is described as a “medium grey.” It’s a softened gray-tinged taupe brown with a matte finish. MAC Omega is lighter, warmer. theBalm Celebrational is darker and has a satiny sheen. Bare Escentuals Vow is a few shades darekr and has a strong red undertone. MAC Twilight Falls is frosted and darker. MAC EarthlyM is a little browner and has a shimmery finish. Inglot #360 is a bit darker and less gray, but it was the closest I could think of.

This hue is part of Bobbi Brown’s permanent matte eyeshadow range.  The pigmentation is true-to-pan, but it looks soft, almost sheer, but not really.  I think the matte finish, combined with the soft texture and muted color, might give off that impression.  This kind of shade works well as a contouring shade (great for defining the crease or layered to add definition over another crease color) on light to medium-dark skin tones.  Darker complexions may like this has a general lid shade but will not see as much contouring with it as it starts to blend in more with the skin color on the darker end of the spectrum.

It has a soft texture that’s not too dense or buttery but not horribly dry and stiff and firm. There are two distinct matte formulas:  one is softer, more buttery/dense (but often can be powdery) and the other is firmer, drier, but so long as it’s soft and not stiff, it will work quite nicely and deliver great color payoff, blendability, and wear.  The same is true for eyeshadows, but I’ve noticed the distinction is much stronger within the matte category.  Slate is dry but soft, so it isn’t powdery and blends out easily–but not so easily that you have to go back and add more color.  It wore for eight hours (without a primer as well as with a primer) without creasing or fading.

The Glossover

P
product

Slate

A+
This kind of shade works well as a contouring shade (great for defining the crease or layered to add definition over another crease color) on light to medium-dark skin tones. Darker complexions may like this has a general lid shade but will not see as much contouring with it as it starts to blend in more with the skin color on the darker end of the spectrum.

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 →

Monday, August 6th, 2012

L'Oreal Endless Sea Infallible Eyeshadow
L’Oreal Endless Sea Infallible Eyeshadow

Swimming in an Endless Sea of Disappointment

L’Oreal Endless Sea Infallible Eyeshadow ($7.95 for 0.12 oz.) is a faded cool-toned blue with a hint of aqua-teal. MAC Sky is similar but has a stronger golden sheen. Tarina Tarantino Ozma is much more teal and darker. Urban Decay Shattered is grayer. Guerlain Les Aquas is lighter, bluer. Urban Decay Aquarius is very similar, slightly more aqua than blue. Inglot #413 is more teal.

The shade that most immediately caught my eye when I first received the new shades was Endless Sea, but it was a complete disappointment.  The color payoff is severely lacking, both when used dry as well as wet; as is typically the case, it is more pigmented when used damp–decent pigmentation–it’s still not where it should be. It’s not the rich, intense color that L’Oreal advertises for the formula.

The texture feels a little drier than some of the other shades I’ve tested, which might account for the poor pigmentation.  It doesn’t bind together as smoothly (even when applied dampened), so it has a tendency to look patchy upon application.  I applied Endless Sea on the lid (next to Golden Emerald, which was superb), and it was sad and faded after ten hours.  

Most formulas have a couple of misses, and this one is indeed one of them, but there are some very lovely shades, like Golden Emerald and Smoldering Plum (both reviewed earlier this past week). A cheap product doesn’t mean it’s a bad product–but a cheap product that’s bad is still a waste of your hard-earned money, so I’d avoid this one and opt for one of the better pigmented and better wearing shades mentioned earlier.

For a comparison against Giorgio Armani Eyes to Kill Intense, please see this post. As a quick summary, L’Oreal’s colors can be less nuanced/have less depth, and then the wear seems to be a little more inconsistent with L’Oreal (some wearing fantastically, others creasing/fading more rapidly). The way I look at it (assuming you wear primer, because then the wear is usually fine), the more the merrier!  There doesn’t seem to be a lot of overlap between the color ranges, though–they’re not putting out dupes so much as different shades in a similar formula.

The Glossover

P
product

Endless Sea

D
It seemed like it was going to be a stunning shade, but it just lacked the pigmentation to really make it workable and desirable. Whether you use it wet or over a primer, it looks dull, faded, and patchy.

Product

6/10

Pigmentation

6/10

Texture

8.5/10

Longevity

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 →

Saturday, August 4th, 2012

Giorgio Armani #26 Eyes to Kill Intense Eyeshadow
Giorgio Armani #26 Eyes to Kill Intense Eyeshadow

#26 is More Dazzling Than It Lets On

Giorgio Armani #26 Eyes to Kill Intense Eyeshadow ($32.00 for 0.14 oz.) is muted, golden bronze-brown with a golden shimmer-sheen. It’s warm-toned without reading too orange or too red. Urban Decay Chase is slightly redder. theBalm Seductive is similar, a little lighter. Wet ‘n’ Wild Comfort Zone has less shimmer. MAC Soba is a bit less warm. MAC Tempting is darker, more bronzy.

On the surface, it lacks some of the depth and interplay of colors that makes the formula standout in a sea of eyeshadows. In person, it’s a little different–yeah, the color is dupeable–but the finish is absolutely sparkling with winking shimmer and micro-glitter (it doesn’t even feel or look like glitter).  Very glitzy in a no-fallout kind of way; not sure it’s a must-have, because the color is still more common than uncommon, but it’s something worth swatching if you’re near a counter.

The texture is finely-milled, soft, and smooth.  The color payoff was good both dry and wet, though a little darker and smoother when applied wet.  I tested this shade on the inner half of the lid (with #28 on the outer half of the lid), and the wear was impeccable–no creasing, fading, or fall out over an eight hour period.

The Glossover

LE
product

#26

A+
Very glitzy in a no-fallout kind of way; not sure it's a must-have, because the color is still more common than uncommon, but it's something worth swatching if you're near a counter.

Product

10/10

Pigmentation

10/10

Texture

9.5/10

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, August 3rd, 2012

L'Oreal Smoldering Plum Infallible Eyeshadow
L’Oreal Smoldering Plum Infallible Eyeshadow

A Very Sultry, Smoldering Plum

L’Oreal Smoldering Plum Infallible Eyeshadow ($7.95 for 0.12 oz.) is a deep, dark, and wickedly intense red-toned burgundy purple with a subtle frosted sheen. It’s a more intense versino of Urban Decay Rockstar. MAC Young Punk is purpler, less burgundy. MAC Dynamic Duo 4 is reminiscent, but less red-toned and matte. MAC Indian Ink is a matte version. Giorgio Armani #2 is slightly richer, blacker, and has red and blue-violet shimmer–so it translates a bit differently. Giorgio Armani #3 has a very reflective sheen that’s more silvery–the purple is a bit grayer, less red-toned.

I love the intensity of this shade, and it even had a fair amount of darkness even when applied dry.  It’s definitely smoother and richer-looking when applied damp/wet, though, but what’s worth noting is that the color will stay that intense even after it dries so long as you use a damp brush to apply the color initially.  The texture is soft, smooth, and finely-milled. It’s not dry at all, and it really has that creamy-powdery feel that’s a hallmark of the L’Oreal Infallible/Giorgio Armani Eyes to Kill Intense ranges.

Smoldering Plum wore very well–a solid twelve hours without fading or creasing. The newest released shades seem to have a lot better wear than a couple of the other shades I had tried previously (notably, Perpetual Purple, which was more like a perpetual disappointment).

For a comparison against Giorgio Armani Eyes to Kill Intense, please see this post. As a quick summary, L’Oreal’s colors can be less nuanced/have less depth, and then the wear seems to be a little more inconsistent with L’Oreal (some wearing fantastically, others creasing/fading more rapidly). The way I look at it (assuming you wear primer, because then the wear is usually fine), the more the merrier!  There doesn’t seem to be a lot of overlap between the color ranges, though–they’re not putting out dupes so much as different shades in a similar formula.

The Glossover

P
product

Smoldering Plum

A
This is a perfect pick for fall--it's rich, dark, and on-trend for the purple-hued fall/winter season we'll be seeing in the next few months.

Product

9.5/10

Pigmentation

9.5/10

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 →

Wednesday, August 1st, 2012

Giorgio Armani #27 Eyes to Kill Intense Eyeshadow
Giorgio Armani #27 Eyes to Kill Intense Eyeshadow

Oh, Giorgio! That’s Just Mauve-velous!

Giorgio Armani #27 Eyes to Kill Intense Eyeshadow ($32.00 for 0.14 oz.) is a subdued mauve with hints of plum and muted gold shimmer. MAC Universal Appeal is lighter, pinker. MAC Hypnotiznig is grayer, less pink. NARS Lhasa is darker, smokier. NARS Charade has more purple in it, less plum/mauve, and has a matte finish. Tarina Tarantino Fantastical is almost the same, slightly less plum. MAC Circa Plum has more purple, less red tones. MAC Tendersmoke is similar but less plum.

Looking at the color overall, I think it’s less nuanced than some other shades by the brand (but more nuanced than some of their least impressive–color-wise–shades, too). It’s somewhere in-between full of depth and more readily duped. It’s a gorgeous shade, but judging by the number of similar shades I was able to pull out, it’s not uncommon.

I love when these types of products apply with full color coverage both dry and wet. It just makes it a much more versatile product. When it’s used dry, it is lighter, less burgundy-tinted. When it’s applied damp, it smooths out a wee bit more, and it takes on a deeper mauve/plum coloring.

The texture is finely-milled, soft, and applies smoothly both wet and dry, though slightly smoother when applied wet as the product pulls together better.  When I tested it out for wear, it lasted a full twelve hours with no fading or creasing.

The Glossover

LE
product

#27

A+
Looking at the color overall, I think it's less nuanced than some other shades by the brand (but more nuanced than some of their least impressive--color-wise--shades, too). It's somewhere in-between full of depth and more readily duped. It's a gorgeous shade, but judging by the number of similar shades I was able to pull out, it's not uncommon.

Product

10/10

Pigmentation

10/10

Texture

9.5/10

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 →