We hope you'll consider supporting Temptalia by shopping through our links below. Thanks!
  • Neiman MarcusTake $50 off your purchase of $200+ or $100 off your purchase of $400+ (includes beauty & fragrance) with code FASHION, starts 2/27 and ends 2/28.
  • TarteFree Shipping and Sample with $40 purchase, ends 2/26.

MAC Earthshine Mineralize Skinfinish

MAC Earthshine Mineralize Skinfinish
MAC Earthshine Mineralize Skinfinish

MAC Earthshine Mineralize Skinfinish

MAC Earthshine Mineralize Skinfinish ($29.00 for 0.24 oz.) is described as a “tarnished bronze with gold pearl and pink reflects.” It’s a red-toned brown with burgundy and gold shimmer. The powder is composed of a dirty gold, peach-orange, and burgundy.  I don’t have Metal Rock, but it might be similar to this (so check your own stash!)–from what I can recall, Metal Rock is browner. MAC Warm Blend has a similar-colored strip in the middle, though it’s not as red-toned. MAC Pressed Amber is much lighter and browner, less red-toned.

This shade is really, and I mean, REALLY intense. Like use a stippling brush with a feather light hand if you have a medium or lighter skin tone. I can’t stress how easy it is to go overboard with this shade, and the texture is extremely unforgiving. It doesn’t want to diffuse at all; it barely blends along the edges, but with enough persistance, it can be blended out to look one with the skin. This color will work well with deeper complexions, and it can certainly work on lighter skin tones, just be prepared for some trial and error.

The texture of Earthshine is dry and powdery, which did make blending more difficult and I ended up cheating a bit by using loose powder around the edges to blend out the edges. Its finish is decidedly metallic; it was extremely reflective, though not glittery, and it did emphasize my pores.  The wear on Earthshine was better than Center of the Universe, as it lasted for seven hours before it started to fade noticeably.

MAC Mineralize Skinfinish Earthshine
8
Product
10
Pigmentation
7.5
Texture
8
Longevity
3.5
Application
82%
Total

We hope you'll consider supporting Temptalia by shopping through our links below. Thanks!

MAC Center of the Universe Mineralize Skinfinish

MAC Center of the Universe Mineralize Skinfinish
MAC Center of the Universe Mineralize Skinfinish

MAC Center of the Universe Mineralize Skinfinish

MAC Center of the Universe Mineralize Skinfinish ($29.00 for 0.24 oz.) is described as a “coral with gold shimmer.” There is absolutely nothing about this that says coral… nothing even suggests it exists in the product at all! Where’s the pink? the red? Even the online “swatch” on MAC’s website shows the same pattern and coloring that my product actually has (thought maybe my veining was causing the problem). It’s a mix of metallic gold, coppery bronze, and orange, which, when swirled together, creates a medium-dark tan brown with gold shimmer. It’s very similar to the lighter side of MAC A Little Bit of Sunshine–swirled, this shade is a bit darker, because half of it has a darker brown color. MAC Sun & Moon is a little darker, less orange. MAC My Paradise looks somewhat similar on, but it can look redder. MAC Glorify is darker, more bronze. Estee Lauder Topaz Chameleon is much darker, browner. MAC Golden Lariat is similar, slightly more golden.

Depending on how heavily you concentrate on the golden shade, you may have a soft shimmer finish or something more metallic.  The shimmer from the golden color doesn’t seem to be too sparkly, though it doesn’t bind together perfectly, so it’s not completely smooth.  This was one of the sheerer shades out of the four from this collection.  It’s very warm-toned, too, with strong orange tones.  I see this working best on light-medium complexions with warm, yellow undertones.

Yesterday was interesting, as I crammed four cheek products on my face, because with eight products needing anywhere from six to eight hours of testing, it’s hard to test all eight and get you reviews the next day!  I went with two stripes on each cheek (going vertically) and left a small gap between the two colors, which made me look a little like a zebra, but it worked out.

The reason I really want to test as many of these as possible is because they don’t wear very well on me typically, but occasionally, there are some shades that wear better than others.  Center of the Universe wore for about six hours before it started to fade and separate.  I have normal-to-dry skin, which is mostly normal now that it’s summer.  Not great wear for me, so it was a let-down, but it is what I typically experience with Mineralize Skinfinishes.

MAC Mineralize Skinfinish Center of the Universe
8
Product
9
Pigmentation
9
Texture
7
Longevity
4
Application
82%
Total

MAC Heavenly Creatures Collection – Photos & Swatches (Preview)


MAC Heavenly Creatures Collection – Photos & Swatches (Preview)

MAC Heavenly Creatures launched online late yesterday. I purchased everything from the collection and overnighted the order, so I just received it today. I’m working as quickly as I can to get through everything 🙂  Here are some preview photos/swatches to hold you over.  Please hold questions until I’ve had a chance to post reviews — thanks!

We hope you'll consider supporting Temptalia by shopping through our links below. Thanks!

Clarins Enchanted Summer Color Quartet & Liner Palette

Clarins Enchanted Summer Color Quartet & Liner Palette
Clarins Enchanted Summer Color Quartet & Liner Palette

Clarins Enchanted Summer Color Quartet & Liner Palette

Clarins Enchanted Summer Color Quartet & Liner Palette ($40.00 for 0.17 oz.) contains four eyeshadows and one eyeliner shade. Each eyeshadow has a subtle design on top, which does disappear with the first use. There are two dual-ended sponge-tipped applicators. The entire palette is encased in a “gold” plastic compact–it looks more luxe than it feels as a result. There is a full-sized mirror on the interior.

The first shade is a warm gold with strong orange tones and a metallic sheen. It had pretty good color payoff, and it applied very smoothly. Giorgio Armani #1 has a similar gold in the palette, though it doesn’t have as smooth of a finish. Dior Couture Gold is lighter. Bare Escentuals Golden Iris is darker, more orange.

Next to the gold shade is a violet purple with subtle red undertones and a blue-violet iridescence. It had decent pigmentation, but it was a little dry in texture. Make Up For Ever #26 has a stronger pink-red base. Tarina Tarantino Violet Storm is similar but doesn’t have any iridescence. MAC Violet is less pink-toned. Wet ‘n’ Wild Dancing in the Clouds is sheerer and less pink-toned.

The third eyeshadow is a warm, medium-dark bronze brown with orange and gold shimmer. This shade had excellent pigmentation and applied very smoothly. I thought this was the best performer in the palette. Buxom Golden Retriever was the closest shade, but it’s not quite as warm/golden. Urban Decay Baked isn’t as dark or as brown–it’s warmer/more golden!

To finish off the eyeshadows, the final shade is a pale silvery white shade–it looks warmer, almost peach/champagne in the pan, but it looks silver/white when swatched. It was very sheer, and it was mostly sparkle rather than a solid color; the texture reflected both things, as it wasn’t as smooth, and it was very prone to fall out both during application and later, as the day wore on. Chanel Fantasme is similar but more silver. Dolce & Gabbana Jewels is similar in color but has a less sparkly finish.

A deep, dark chocolate brown with gold and ruby shimmer eyeliner completes the palette; it’s essentially cream/gel eyeliner. The base color reminded me of CoverGirl Brown, which has a shimmer-free finish, while the overall color was closer to Urban Decay Corrupt. It applied only so-so–I really had to go over it a few times to build up the color.

I wasn’t thrilled with this palette, because the color payoff of all of the shades except the darker brown were just decent to good but not excellent.  I had a lot of fall out with the sparkly silver/white shade–it just didn’t want to stick around; there were tons of little sparkles underneath my eye and on my cheeks after a few hours of wearing the palette.  The eyeliner smudged and migrated within four hours, which was another let-down.  The whole palette wore about six hours without creasing, but it was a little faded at that point, and then I had some creasing after eight hours, along with additional fading.

Clarins Enchanted Summer Color Quartet & Liner Palette

C-
7
Product
7.5
Pigmentation
8.5
Texture
5
Longevity
3.5
Application
70%
Total

Tom Ford Illicit Cream Color

Tom Ford Illicit Cream Color
Tom Ford Illicit Cream Color

Tom Ford Illicit Cream Color ($40.00 for 0.21 oz.) is a bronze and burgundy shimmered medium-dark brown with warm, red undertones. When it’s sheered out, it’s less red-toned. NARS Surabaya is similar but less metallic. Make Up For Ever #14 is slightly darker. Le Metier de Beaute Bordeaux is redder.

Tom Ford describes the formula as “highly reflective,” “ultra-pigmented”, “non-creasing”, and “long-wearing.”  This shade has a shimmery, sparkly finish that does reflect light, but not to the same degree as Platinum.  The pigmentation is so-so; it is buildable, but it was difficult to get really opaque color, because the color kept slipping around, so it looked more smeared on and opaque in some places but sheered out in others.  I had noticeable creasing after six hours (as compared to minor creasing after eight hours with Platinum), which was a major bummer.

The consistency is a lightweight cream, almost more like a mousse because of its airy quality, that spreads and smooths out easily and evenly.  To apply, I tried using a few different brushes but still went back to MAC’s 242, which is a firm, flat bristled brush, because it gave me the “best” results.  The product stays wet for hours, though for as wet as it feels and seems (if you pressed your fingertip against your lid, there would be transfer), it stays on longer than you’d expect. It’s not great, and it’s not worth the $40 price tag for something that’s supposed to be long-wearing and isn’t.

It’s packaged in a screw-top glass jar and holds a little more than the average cream eyeshadow does. I’m a little surprised to see that the TF logo is a sticker pressed on top. At first, I thought it was just a clear sticker over the actual TF, but I peeled it all the way off and the entire thing came off.

Tom Ford Beauty Cream Color for Eyes Illicit
Illicit
Illicit
7
Product
8.5
Pigmentation
10
Texture
5
Longevity
3.5
Application
76%
Total

L’Oreal Glistening Garnet Infallible Eyeshadow

L'Oreal Glistening Garnet Infallible Eyeshadow
L’Oreal Glistening Garnet Infallible Eyeshadow

L’Oreal Glistening Garnet Infallible Eyeshadow

L’Oreal Glistening Garnet Infallible Eyeshadow ($7.95 for 0.12 oz.) is a berry-tinted pink with a soft, frosted finish. When applied dry, it has a slightly more subdued, redder appearance–it’s not quite opaque. When applied damp, it takes on a pinker hue and the frosted finish is more pronounced, and the color itself is opaque. At a glance, you’d think it was similar to MAC Cranberry, but it’s not at all–Cranberry is much, much darker, more of a burgundy (so it has more brown in it than pink). MAC Moon Rose is pinker. Milani Pink Twice is pinker as well.

If you’re familiar with Giorgio Armani Eyes to Kill Intense, these are very similar. I found the biggest difference between the two was in the texture of the formula and the overall appearance of the colors–L’Oreal Infallibles are more one-dimensional, less nuanced, whereas you’ll see an interplay of colors with the Eyes to Kill Intense. L’Oreal owns both brands, so I imagine there was some trickle-down effect in the technology once Giorgio Armani rolled it out.  It’s not really a negative that these are more what-you-see-is-what-you-get in color.  The Eyes to Kill Intense shades can look really stunning in the pot and look a little less complex when swatched.

The texture of Glistening Garnet is soft, smooth, and finely-milled.  It’s a compacted loose powder–you could break it up if you really wanted to, but it arrives already pretty solid, and there’s a little topper inside that you can use to press and compact the powder should it loosen over time.  It can be used wet or dry, though the payoff was significantly better when used wet–but other shades in the line-up were better dry than this one, so it seemed like it fell a little short as far as pigmentation went for dry use.

I originally tested a few shades of the formula that the lovely ladies at Beaut.ie sent me from Ireland, because these weren’t available in the states at the time (and L’Oreal told me they weren’t going to be released here). A few months later, L’Oreal did end up releasing them state-side. I had some trouble with the original shades I tried, so I can’t say that all of the shades perform consistently or as well as this shade did.

Glistening Garnet, however, did perform well, and I didn’t have any trouble using it. Even after 16 hours (without primer!), I didn’t have any creasing, though there was some slight, but noticeable, fading along the outer corner. The only thing I have to note is that I needed to use it wet to make an impact; if you use it over a primer, you might be able to skip that step, but I still preferred applying with a damp brush. I used a small eyeshadow brush (like the MAC 239) to apply it to the lid.

L’Oreal does state that these are supposed to wear for up to 24-hours, which is the same claim Giorgio Armani made. I’m not really comfortable wearing makeup that long personally, so it will take me some time before I work up the courage to test it for that long! The longest I’ve tested these has been 16 hours.

L'Oreal Infallible 24-Hour Eyeshadow Glistening Garnet
9.5
Product
9
Pigmentation
10
Texture
9.5
Longevity
4
Application
93%
Total

On Instagram