Monday, May 25th, 2015

Dior Rouge Brilliant Lipgloss
Dior Rouge Brilliant Lipgloss

Dior Rouge Brilliant Lipgloss ($35.00 for 0.20 fl. oz.) released a few months ago as a new formula from the brand. The new formula is supposed to be a “long-wearing, couture lip balm gloss” that is supposed to “dispense just the right amount” with its “pen-like applicator” that is hydrating. As far as color coverage is concerned, there is a lot of marketing speak, and best I can surmise is… your mileage may vary, since it is the “perfect dose” and “the right touch of vibrant color.” I bought six shades to test out, and across all six, color coverage is semi-opaque, so there’s some translucency but noticeable color on the lips, but the stronger your natural lip color is, the more it may impact how the color translates on your lips. The gloss has a smooth, lightly thickened gel-like consistency that feels plush and covers fairly evenly on average; it doesn’t feel heavy, but it has that jelly-like consistency of balm. They’re moderately hydrating–less than the best balm, better than the average gloss–with a high-shine finish. They’re non-sticky, which makes them comfortable to wear and easier to smooth out. The formula is noticeably rose-scented, though not as intense as the Fluid Addicts, so I don’t normally notice it as a taste, just a scent. The lasting power is three to five hours, which is good for a gloss as non-sticky as this. All six of the shades I tried had a very faint pearl to them, which is definitely there, but it’s hard to really see the impact of the pearl on the lips from a normal viewing distance.

Dior Swan (263) Rouge Brilliant Lipgloss ($35.00 for 0.20 fl. oz.) is a light-medium pink with warm undertones and a fine dusting of gold pearl. It had semi-opaque coverage with minimal settling into lip lines (more noticeable on my upper lip) that lasted for four hours and was moderately hydrating. See comparison swatches / compare dupes side-by-side.

Dior Hollywood (688) Rouge Brilliant Lipgloss ($35.00 for 0.20 fl. oz.) is a slightly muted, medium fuchsia pink with cool, blue undertones and fine gold pearl. It applied somewhat evenly without pulling into lip lines and yielded semi-opaque coverage. It lasted for four and a half hours and was hydrating while worn. See comparison swatches / compare dupes side-by-side.

Dior Rose Harpers (766) Rouge Brilliant Lipgloss ($35.00 for 0.20 fl. oz.) is reddish-fuchsia with slight cool undertones and a fine pink pearl. It settled into lip lines and had a tendency to look almost like a stain at times. It had semi-opaque pigmentation that covered evenly without looking streaky. The gloss wore well for four and a half hours on me and was hydrating. See comparison swatches / compare dupes side-by-side.

Dior Darling (775) Rouge Brilliant Lipgloss ($35.00 for 0.20 fl. oz.) is light-medium, coral-pink with subtle, warm undertones and fine white pearl. It had semi-oapque pigmentation, though it was one of the lesser pigmented shades of the six. It lasted for four and a half hours and was hydrating, but it didn’t apply as evenly as I would have liked. See comparison swatches / compare dupes side-by-side.

Dior Soho (888) Rouge Brilliant Lipgloss ($35.00 for 0.20 fl. oz.) is a brightened, medium-dark fuchsia pink with cool, violet pearl. It had semi-opaque coverage that went on fairly evenly, though there was a little settling into lip lines, but it was hard to notice from a normal viewing distance. The color lasted for five hours and was hydrating over time. See comparison swatches / compare dupes side-by-side.

Dior 999 Rouge Brilliant Lipgloss ($35.00 for 0.20 fl. oz.) is an orange-red with warm undertones and a delicate gold pearl. It had semi-opaque color payoff that went on fairly smoothly and evenly with very slight settling into lip lines. I didn’t find the settling to be noticeable except very up-close. The color stayed on well for five hours, and the formula felt moisturizing. See comparison swatches / compare dupes side-by-side.

The Glossover

P
product

Swan (263)

A-

Product

9/10

Pigmentation

10/10

Texture

8.5/10

Longevity

8.5/10

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!
P
product

Hollywood (688)

B+

Product

8.5/10

Pigmentation

10/10

Texture

8.5/10

Longevity

9/10

Application

4/5

Results
Loading ... Loading ...
Dupes
P
product

Rose Harpers (766)

B+

Product

8/10

Pigmentation

9.5/10

Texture

8.5/10

Longevity

9/10

Application

4/5

Results
Loading ... Loading ...
Dupes
Click to Reveal More Glossovers!

See more photos & swatches! Continue reading →

Monday, May 25th, 2015

Tom Ford Electric Pink (15) Lip Color Matte
Tom Ford Electric Pink (15) Lip Color Matte

Tom Ford Electric Pink (15) Lip Color Matte ($50.00 for 0.10 oz.) is a brightened, medium fuchsia-pink with strong, cool blue undertones and a mostly matte finish. It had opaque color coverage that glided on evenly and smoothly, as the texture was lightly creamy but not too slippery. It felt lightweight on, and while it lasted for six and a half hours easily, it was lightly drying towards the end. Kat Von D Backstage Bambi (P, $19.00) is lighter, more matte. NARS Michiyo (P, $32.00) is less matte. Too Faced Melted Fuchsia (P, $21.00) is brighter, glossy. Ardency Inn Twist (P, $25.00) is cooler-toned. MAC Flat Out Fabulous (P, $16.00) is darker, warmer. NARS Yu (P, $25.00) is more muted. MAC Quick Sizzle (LE, $16.00) is similar. MAC Pink Pigeon (P, $16.00) is lighter. See comparison swatches / compare dupes side-by-side.

Tom Ford Velvet Violet (16) Lip Color Matte ($50.00 for 0.10 oz.) is a medium-dark, reddish berry with cool, fuchsia-pink undertones and a mostly matte finish. It had fairly opaque coverage that applied evenly and smoothly without emphasizing lip lines. The color was still going strong after eight hours of wear, but I found it to be slightly drying after about four hours of wear. MAC D for Danger (P, $16.00) is warmer. Marc Jacobs Beauty Boy Gorgeous (222) (P, $30.00) is warmer. MAC Acai (LE, $16.00) is darker. Tom Ford Beauty Cooper (LE, $32.00) is lighter, less matte. Tom Ford Beauty Plum Lush (05) (P, $50.00) is warmer, lighter. MAC Fashion Revival (LE, $16.00) is darker. NARS Fanny (P, $32.00) is lighter, more muted, glossier. Marc Jacobs Beauty Headliner (608) (P, $28.00) is brighter. Tom Ford Beauty Pure Pink (P, $50.00) is lighter, less matte. Tom Ford Beauty Violet Fatale (P, $50.00) is more shimmery. See comparison swatches / compare dupes side-by-side.

The Glossover

P
product

Electric Pink (15)

A

Product

8.5/10

Pigmentation

10/10

Texture

9/10

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!
P
product

Velvet Violet (16)

A-

Product

8.5/10

Pigmentation

9/10

Texture

9/10

Longevity

10/10

Application

5/5

Results
Loading ... Loading ...
Dupes

See more photos & swatches! Continue reading →

Monday, May 25th, 2015

ColourPop Most Necessary Super Shock Cheek
ColourPop Most Necessary Super Shock Cheek

ColourPop Most Necessary Super Shock Cheek ($8.00 for 0.15 oz.) is described as a “soft copper with rosy gold highlights.” It’s a medium, orange-toned brown with warm undertones and a frosted pink and gold sheen.
Colour Pop Highly Waisted (P, $8.00) Clinique Nude Pop (P, $21.00) NARS Jubilation (Right) (P) Kevyn Aucoin Starlight (P, $44.00) MAC Uplifting (LE, $27.00) MAC Highlighter (LE, $30.00) Becca Guava/Moonstone (P, $27.00) Becca Fig/Opal (P, $27.00) Maybelline Nude Rebellion (201) (LE, $8.99) Becca Rose Gold (P, $38.00) MAC Trace Gold (P, $21.00) See comparison swatches / compare dupes side-by-side.

Here we are at last: the final highlighter! ColourPop’s highlighter formula is really just a different finish (“pearlized”) of the Super Shock Cheek formula (which initially came out with mostly matte shades). This particular shade could be used as a blush, bronzer, or highlighter, depending on your skin tone. The texture is shimmery enough that the sheen translates to the skin, but it isn’t as metallic as it looks heavily swatched once it is blended out on the cheeks. It doesn’t emphasize pores, but it’s not going to smooth them out either. The texture has a lightweight, lightly creamy consistency that’s thin but pigmented and easily blended on the skin. It can be applied with fingertips or a brush, though I prefer working with brushes (in general), so I’ve been reaching for a stippling brush to apply a lot of these for testing. It lasted for eight and a half hours on me.

The Glossover

P
product

Most Necessary

A

Product

9.5/10

Pigmentation

10/10

Texture

9/10

Longevity

8.5/10

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 →

Sunday, May 24th, 2015

ColourPop Mondays in Malibu Super Shock Shadow Set
ColourPop Mondays in Malibu Super Shock Shadow Set

ColourPop Mondays in Malibu Super Shock Shadow Set ($30.00 for 0.35 oz.) is a set of six cream eyeshadows that range from gilded bronze to warm green to red-brown. The set is limited edition, and the shades aren’t available individually. Overall, it was high-performer set of shades, and they worked well together. The set does run on on the shimmery side, so if you prefer more matte shades, then this might not be a good fit for you. I did notice that a few of these are similar to other shades from the brand, so you may want to check your stash.

Gecko is described as a “soft opalescent silvery green with pink duochrome finish.” It’s a muted, light gray with a flash green to pink duochrome, which is subtle on its own. It can get amplified when blended over a deeper shade or layered over a black base (as duochromes often play well with). I couldn’t tell you why, but I have found great difficulty in capturing in the duochrome finishes of ColourPop’s cream products, no matter what angles I’ve tried to twist my arm, the duochrome is hard to see in a photo. It’s a weaker duochrome in person, but it is visible in person, just not a strong one. The texture was smooth, lightly creamy, and blendable on the skin and lasted for ten hours. See comparison swatches / compare dupes side-by-side.

Snakebite is described as a “mid-tone warm gold with an ultra-metallic finish.” It’s a brightened, light-medium golden copper with warm undertones and a metallic sheen. It is extremely reflective and one of the more metallic shades I’ve tried from the brand. The color payoff was true-to-pan and intense, while the consistency applied with smooth, even coverage that blended well. It wore for ten hours without fading or creasing. See comparison swatches / compare dupes side-by-side.

Sand Swoon is described as a “true pastel pink softly sprinkled with gold flecks in a satin luxe finish.” It’s a light-medium, warm-toned pink with a mostly matte finish and then a dusting of gold sparkle that sits more on top of it. It had good color payoff that went on smoothly and evenly. The texture is a smidgen drier compared to the more metallic shades like Snakebite, but it wasn’t dry. The color lasted for ten hours without fading or creasing, but it seemed like most of the glitter had dropped. See comparison swatches / compare dupes side-by-side.

Prickly Pear is described as a “warm-toned plum with tons of gold and pink glitter in a metallic finish.” It’s a muted, pinky plum with warm, brown undertones and gold, mauve, and copper flecks of shimmer and larger gold and pink glitter. It had semi-opaque coverage from its base color with a healthy dose of glitter, which did have some fall out when you worked with it (particularly when blending out an edge — if I patted it on, I didn’t see fall out). The texture was a little more emollient, and this shade sheered out a bit more readily than others. It lasted for nine hours without fading or creasing, but there was a little bit of fall out over time. See comparison swatches / compare dupes side-by-side.

Mirage is described as a “soft sage green with a champagne gold sheen in a pearlized finish.” It’s a medium, golden green with a pearly shimmer-sheen finish. The texture was lightly creamy with some slip and felt more emollient (or “wet” to the touch) as seems to be a trend with the pearlized/ultra-metallic finishes. It had nice pigmentation that was easy to blend and apply to the lid. It stayed put for ten hours with no fading or creasing on me. See comparison swatches / compare dupes side-by-side.

Hot Tamale is described as a “reddish brown with soft copper sparkles in a satin luxe finish.” It’s a rich, dark brown with warm, red undertones and a soft dusting of copper and gold shimmer. It was intensely pigmented with a beautifully creamy, easily blended consistency that covered well and lasted for ten hours without fading or creasing. See comparison swatches / compare dupes side-by-side.

The Glossover

LE
palette

Mondays in Malibu

Temptalia Recommends
A

Product

9.5/10

Pigmentation

9.5/10

Texture

9.5/10

Longevity

9.5/10

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!
LE
product

Gecko

A

Product

9.5/10

Pigmentation

9.5/10

Texture

9.5/10

Longevity

10/10

Application

5/5

Results
Loading ... Loading ...
Dupes
LE
product

Snakebite

A+

Product

10/10

Pigmentation

10/10

Texture

10/10

Longevity

10/10

Application

5/5

Results
Loading ... Loading ...
Dupes
Click to Reveal More Glossovers!

See more photos & swatches! Continue reading →

Sunday, May 24th, 2015

ColourPop Smokin' Whistles Super Shock Cheek
ColourPop Smokin’ Whistles Super Shock Cheek

ColourPop Smokin’ Whistles Super Shock Cheek ($8.00 for 0.15 oz.) is described as a “cool-toned pink champagne with silver highlights.” It’s a light beige with a hint of pink and a metallic sheen. I think on cooler-toned skin with stronger pink undertones, this will actually look more pink-based. It’s only when I look at it against more distinctively warm-toned shades side-by-side that the pink comes through against my undertones. It had excellent color payoff that was easily sheered out if desired. This is one of the more metallic finishes in the range, but it didn’t emphasize pores (I was really surprised). It is a strong sheen, so it may not be everyone’s cup of tea. It lasted for eight hours on me. MAC Mystery Princess (LE, $26.00) is more sparkly. Cle de Peau Delicate Pink (14) (P, $55.00) is less metallic. NARS Devotee (LE, $29.00) is a touch pinker. Urban Decay Luminous (P, $29.00) is warmer. Kevyn Aucoin Candlelight (P, $44.00) is less metallic, more beige. MAC Snowglobe (LE, $26.00) is less shimmery. See comparison swatches / compare dupes side-by-side.

ColourPop Stole the Show Super Shock Cheek ($8.00 for 0.15 oz.) is described as a “light cool-toned gold with luminous flashes of pink, silver, and gold.” It’s a cool-toned white with a light gold shimmer-sheen finish with pink and gold sparkle. This shade had a more noticeably sparkly finish, so there was some visible sparkle applied, but I didn’t notice actual emphasis of pores or the skin’s natural texture. The texture was a little drier compared to most shades in the line-up, though it was still lightly creamy and applied easily to the skin without being difficult to blend. It lasted for eight hours on me before fading. Tarte Champagne Pink (LE) is similar. Becca Pearl (P, $38.00) is whiter. Chanel Camelia de Plumes (LE, $76.00) is cooler-toned. NARS Albatross (P, $29.00) is a powder. Illamasqua Aurora (P, $24.00) is warmer. See comparison swatches / compare dupes side-by-side.

The Glossover

P
product

Smokin' Whistles

A

Product

9.5/10

Pigmentation

10/10

Texture

9.5/10

Longevity

8.5/10

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!
P
product

Stole the Show

A-

Product

9/10

Pigmentation

9/10

Texture

9/10

Longevity

8.5/10

Application

5/5

Results
Loading ... Loading ...
Dupes

See more photos & swatches! Continue reading →

Sunday, May 24th, 2015

OCC Cosplay Lip Tar
OCC Cosplay Lip Tar

OCC Cosplay Lip Tar ($18.00 for 0.33 fl. oz.) is described as a “teal-toned green.” It’s a muted, medium-dark green with very subtle, cool undertones and a satin finish. It had rich pigmentation that covered the lips evenly and smoothly without turning patchy/streaky, which is what I have found many green-based shades suffer from in the past. The color sits in lip lines slightly, but it didn’t seem to worsen during wear. It wore for seven and a half hours and left behind a bluish stain. It is mint scented, like other Lip Tars, and it was a little drying towards the end. Colour Pop Bunny (P, $5.00) is darker, more shimmery, warmer. Colour Pop Charm (P, $5.00) is lighter. NYX Risque (P, $6.00) is darker, more shimmery. See comparison swatches / compare dupes side-by-side.

OCC John Doe Lip Tar ($18.00 for 0.33 fl. oz.) is described as a “pale ash-toned taupe.” It’s a gray-ish, light beige with subtle, cool undertones and a satin finish. It had good color coverage that went on fairly evenly. The color pulled into some of my most obvious lip lines, and after about five hours of wear, the color settled more noticeably into lip lines, though the color lasted about six and a half in all. It was neither drying nor hydrating for me. MAC Obviously Bare (LE, $15.00) is sheerer, glossier, warmer. MAC Peach Beige (LE, $16.00) is lighter. Obsessive Compulsive Cosmetics Sebastian (P, $18.00) is much darker. MAC Angel’s Kiss (LE, $16.00) is lighter, warmer. See comparison swatches / compare dupes side-by-side.

The Glossover

P
product

Cosplay

A

Product

8.5/10

Pigmentation

10/10

Texture

9/10

Longevity

10/10

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!
P
product

John Doe

A-

Product

9/10

Pigmentation

9.5/10

Texture

9/10

Longevity

9/10

Application

4.5/5

Results
Loading ... Loading ...
Dupes

See more photos & swatches! Continue reading →