Wednesday, August 21st, 2013

Inglot 27P Eye Brush
Inglot 27P Eye Brush

Inglot 18SS Eye Brush ($21.00) is made out of “squirrel substitute” (I honestly have no idea what that means, but it is listed as a natural brush) and can be used for “eye modeling” and “smoky eye[s].” It’s a dense, dome-shaped brush that’s stiff. The brush head is 9mm tall, 8mm wide, and 8mm in depth. The brush head is like a like a cynlinder with a domed edge, and it’s not too small, not too big, but it is wider and larger than your typical pencil brush. I find that that’s the way I use it most–as a stiffer crease brush to deposit more color. I actually liked it a lot with cream eyeshadows, as it applied them well with good opacity, while still fitting in the crease. Most of the time, it is soft while used, but if I’m doing short, but firm, taps, then there’s a few bristles that feel slightly sharp.

27P Eye Brush ($21.00) is a paddle-shaped brush with a slightly domed and tapered edge. The brush head is 16mm across, 17mm tall, and 6mm thick. The bristles are made out of pony hair, and Inglot simply describes the brush as “multi-functional.” It’s a very large eye brush, so it will lend itself best for things like laying down a wash of color, lightly patting on a primer or base, or as a more precise face brush. I found it most useful to pat on pressed powder underneath the eyes or to really apply highlighter precisely (but blend with something else). The brush felt soft, and it retained its shape after several washes.

32T Eye Brush ($14.00) is made out of Taklon (synthetic) bristles, and it is designed to be used with gel eyeliner or for precise lining. It is a very small brush at a mere 6mm tall, 4mm wide, and 2mm thick. It’s a flat, firm brush that comes to a tapered point. If you have smaller eyes and need something to apply cream or gel products, this might be useful. I don’t have Duraline, but I could see how this would be useful, as Duraline is a liquid product that “transforms any powder into an intense, easy to apply liquid,” so this would work well for mixing.

All three brushes are particular, and whether any of them are useful is going to be down to personal preference. The only one that I might continue reaching for is 32T to apply cream products on the very inner lid, and then possibly the 27P for setting concealer (but I often use a fluffier, more feathery brush for that).

See more photos! Continue reading →

Sunday, August 11th, 2013

Inglot 16BJF Face Brush
Inglot 16BJF Face Brush

Inglot 16BJF Face Brush ($36.00) is made out of goat hair and is recommended for bronzing powder (or “applying large amounts of intense color, ideal for contouring.” The brush measures approximately 7.5 inches (19 centimeters) long in total, with the handle length at 4.5 inches (11 centimeters), ferrule length at 2 inches (5.25 centimeters), and the brush head at 1 inch (2.5 centimeters). The brush head is 1.75 inches at its widest part (the top) and just under 1 inch at its base. It tapers upwards and flares out with a flat top. The brush is soft and dense, and it reminded me a bit of a buffer brush, just with a flatter top and a much longer handle. I like it for buffing and blending out other powder products, but I also liked it for applying loose setting powder. I’ve washed it half a dozen times, and I haven’t had any issues with dye bleeding, funny smells, or shedding. It does widen and spread out after the first wash, so it is not as narrow as it appears when you first get it.

20T Synthetic Face Brush ($24.00) is made out of Taklon (synthetic bristles) and is recommended as a cream foundation brush (or “perfect for contour and highlight”). The brush measures approximately 7.25 inches (18 centimeters) long in total, with the handle length at 4.25 inches (11 centimeters), ferrule length at 1.75 inches (4.5 centimeters), and the brush head at 1 inch (2.75 centimeters). The brush is 1 inch (2.5 centimeters) across and 5mm thick. The edge of the bristles is white, while the majority of the bristles are a black-brown color, so though it looks almost like it has a jagged edge in the photos (because the edge gets lost against the white background), it has an angled edge that goes straight (just at an angle). It’s a flatter, firmer brush with a little give but no floppiness or fluffiness. The synthetic bristles make this ideal for cream products, as the product won’t get absorbed by natural hairs. It is soft against the skin and glides nicely. I didn’t experience any shedding, dye bleeding, or funny smells after washing the brush several times. It does work well for laying down more precise contour lines, and then you can lightly feather it away to blend out the contouring color.

See more photos! Continue reading →

Tuesday, August 6th, 2013

Tom Ford Cream Foundation (02) Brush
Tom Ford Cream Foundation (02) Brush

Tom Ford Cream Foundation Brush (02) ($72.00) was created to be used with Tom Ford’s Traceless Foundation Stick, but it can easily be used with liquids as well as true creams. The brush is about 6″ long, while the brush head is about 1″ in height and width and is about a 1/2″ thick. It’s made with natural hair, though I haven’t been able to confirm exactly the type of natural hair (likely goat and potentially something else). The brush is made in Japan, and it’s rumored that Hakuhodo manufactures these, but I haven’t seen it confirmed or mentioned in a press release (only that Tom Ford engaged the world’s leading brush maker in Japan to make them to his exact specifications).  The handle is well-balanced, and the brush head is densely-packed and very, very soft. It’s not a small face brush, but it’s not a large one, so it can still maneuver underneath the eye and around the nose without issue.

This brush excels at both cream and liquid foundation application, as it does not take any more product than is necessary to achieve a natural, even finish. It doesn’t soak up the product, which can sometimes result in a heavier application than you really need. Because it’s so densely-packed, it’s not a fluffy brush, but it is soft and holds its shape well and never leaves streaks or brush lines. It’s really as if all you do is apply the foundation, because there’s no need to blend it afterward–it’s already done. It can also be used with cream blush (even powder), but it stands out most for liquid and cream foundations because of the streak-free finish it leaves behind.

I’ve been using this brush for a year and a half, having received in late 2011. Oh, I’m sure you’re wondering why so long, and that’s really because it’s at such a luxury price point that I’ve wanted to not just put it through the paces but incorporate it into my regular routine. I really wanted to see how it held up to consistent, prolonged use. One of the things I was most surprised about was how clean and pristine the brush looks after over a hundred washes (I wash my brushes after each use)–still as white as the day it arrived. I haven’t experienced any shedding or funny smells after washes.  It’s retained its shape well over time, and it really shows no signs of wear.  The ferrule is perfectly in place, bristles aren’t splayed at the edges, and it still looks new and shiny.

The majority of my brushes are MAC, though I do have other brands in there, and my often-used brush for foundation is Hourglass No. 2 Foundation/Blush Brush (which is a nice alternative if you prefer Taklon bristles, rather than natural hair).  Tom Ford’s brush is easier to clean and requires even less attention to get a flawless, even finish in comparison, so between the two, yes, Tom Ford gets my personal vote, though the two are both great brushes.  Tom Ford does, however, easily beat my previous go-to MAC 109 for liquid foundation application.

The Glossover

P
product

Cream Foundation Brush (02)

This brush excels at both cream and liquid foundation application, as it does not take any more product than is necessary to achieve a natural, even finish. It doesn't soak up the product, which can sometimes result in a heavier application than you really need. Because it's so densely-packed, it's not a fluffy brush, but it is soft and holds its shape well and never leaves streaks or brush lines.
Results
Loading ... Loading ...
Login or Register to be able to add this to your Vanity or Wishlist! Plus rate and review!

See more photos! Continue reading →

Monday, August 5th, 2013

Sugarpill Hellatronic ElektroCute Neon Pigment
Sugarpill ElektroCute Neon Pigments

Sugarpill ElektroCute Neon Pigments ($16.00 for 0.19 oz.) come in an assortment of five bold, bright shades. Overall, these are going to be a product some will absolutely love and others will find frustrating and difficult to use (and ultimately not worth the patience). These are designed to be used with some sort of base or mixing medium and shouldn’t be applied straight to bare skin. Over the past week, I’ve tried a rich assortment of bases and mixing mediums, and I’ll lay out my findings below, but suffice to say, expect a fair amount of fall out, some trial and error, and maybe a test of your patience. On the plus side, when I wore these out, I was stopped by no less than five people asking me what I was wearing (in the space of an hour).

First and foremost, these are not considered eye safe in the U.S. due to neon pigments (as “the FDA has not yet tested/approved the use of neon pigments in the immediate eye area,” per Sugarpill’s website), but they are considered eye safe in Europe and Canada. I’ve used them on lips and on eyes, but I reiterate that they are not considered eye safe in the U.S. and by using them that way, I am doing so at my own risk (and if you decide to do the same, it is at your own risk). All shades, except Hellatronic, are listed as lip safe.

I had the most luck using NYX’s Jumbo Eye Pencil as a base (the one I used for testing was Electric Blue, and I would have chosen Milk, but I actually don’t have it), as it absorbed and took the color mostly evenly and kept the majority of the sparkles that were pressed on… on for the remainder of the day. I was not able to get nearly as much sparkle to stick to the lid as appears in the jar, though, and the sparkles do not apply evenly and tend to stick randomly. In my test, I applied Sparkage on half of the lid with Hellatronic on the outer half, and all of Sparkage’s sparkles wound up in the center of the lid. Be very careful blending the product and only blend around the edges if applied on the skin. Here are my results with other bases:

  • MAC Mixing Medium: slightly uneven color application, only partial adhesion of sparkles
  • Lit Cosmetics Glitter Base: somewhat even color application but was slightly darkened/patchy in places, better adhesion of sparkles
  • Fyrinnae Pixie Epoxy: good adhesion of sparkles, somewhat even application but very imperative to watch the amount of Pixie Epoxy applied and allow to half-dry before applying (it felt far more finicky to use than when I’ve used it with Fyrinnae’s loose eyeshadows)
  • Regular Eyeshadow Primers: some color applied and fairly evenly, but sparkles go everywhere but the lid (I tried Too Faced Shadow Insurance, NARS Smudge Proof, Urban Decay Original Primer Potion)

These can be applied to the brows by using a mixing medium like Illamasqua’s Sealing Gel or Lit’s Glitter Base and a thin, liner or brow brush. For lips, apply a thin coat of clear gloss and then pat on the pigment across the lips, then blend with fingers, brush, or just press and move your lips together. I like applying a little more gloss after that to get more even color. They can be applied to the body and used to accent body painting. I would recommend a creamy, opaque, slightly tacky base to apply the color on the skin and some of the sparkle, and to intensify the sparkle, use a glitter adhesive and a soft, rounded brush to lightly pat on additional product just where you need it. Small, dome-shaped brushes work the best for me for patting on color precisely and to minimize fall out. I also liked to pat and push my brush against the inside of the lid to keep the product “sticking” to the brush, rather than loosely pressed against it. The opaque base helped the most with yielding even color coverage, as invisible/clear bases seemed to highlight that they don’t always go on perfectly even. I spoke with both xSparkage (Leesha) and Queen of Blending (Lauren), and they both recommend a similar application to maximize color intensity and minimize fall out.

I’m sure some of you are thinking to yourself, “Wow, these sound like a lot of work, why would I bother?” To that, I can easily say that these are the easiest neons I’ve worked with. They are certainly a drastic improvement from MAC’s neon pigments, and these can take dampness better than most matte loose pigments. They’re more pigmented than Sleek’s neon eyeshadows and are slightly easier to blend. Sugarpill’s improved on some of the issues with neon pigments, but there is still plenty of room for improvement (in sparkle dispersion/evenness). Of the shades, Hellatronic was the most interesting and complex, as the base color actually seemed to shift (not just the sparkle), and the sparkle seemed finer and more embedded with the underlying color, whereas the others seemed more like a matte neon pigment with sparkle on top.

I looked across the different types of application (brows, body/skin, lips) to assess a rating, and ultimately, it’s hard to have such a varied application and resulting grade. I suspect most will use these around the eye area as eyeliner, eyeshadow, or brow color, so I did weight how they applied on skin (be it my forearm or somewhere else) slightly more than say lips (which was an area that these were easier to use in). I could not fully contain the fall out (even using adhesive bases designed for glitter). They don’t apply perfectly evenly. They do not want to be blended (together or on their own or with anything else).  When they work, they can look gorgeous and totally traffic-stopping, but to get them there is certainly a journey.

Hellatronic is described as a “fluorescent indigo with red/purple/blue color-shifting super sparkles.” It’s a cool-toned, violet-tinged blue with bluish-violet sparkle. Sephora My Boyfriend’s Jeans is bluer, darker, less sparkly. Sugarpill Velocity is bluer, matte. Urban Decay Chaos is slightly darker, less sparkly. MAC Dynamic Duo 2 #2 is darker, matte. MAC Cobalt is matte. Illamasqua Sadist is bluer, matte. See comparison swatches.

Hi-Viz is described as a “blazing neon yellow with blue/green/gold color-shifting super sparkles.” It’s a brightened, warm-toned yellow with goldish-green sparkle. Fyrinnae Banna Mochi is more frosted, less sparkly. MAC Bright Yellow is more matte. MAC Colour Added is more shimmery, less sparkly. Illamasqua Hype is matte. Inglot #370 is matte. See comparison swatches.

Love Buzz is described as a “brilliant neon hot pink with yellow/orange/red color-shifting super sparkles.” It’s a brightened, neon fuchsia-pink with pinky-red sparkle. Fyrinnae Superstar is more frosted, les ssparkly, lighter. Sugarpill Dollipop is matte, darker. MAC Magenta Madness is similar but has no sparkle. Make Up For Ever #75 is darker, matte. See comparison swatches.

Sparkage is described as “radioactive lime green with blue/green/gold color-shifting super sparkles.” It’s a light-medium, cool-toned green with yellow-ish edges–it looks cool-toned overall, but there’s still a yellowness that comes through. It has green-ish-gold sparkle on top. Sephora Picnic in the Park is darker, less sparkly. Sugarpill Midori is much darker and cooler-toned. Illamasqua Fledgling is slightly darker, matte. See comparison swatches.

Supercharged is described as “flaming neon orange with blue/green/gold color-shifting super sparkles.” It’s a light-medium tangerine orange with golden sparkle. Fyrinnae Pyromantic Erotica is darker, more shimmery, less sparkly. Wet ‘n’ Wild Newport Nights #5 is les ssparkly. Maybelline Fierce & Tangy is darker, brighter, cream product (might work well as a base for this shade). MAC Chessa is less sparkly, more shimmery. Illamasqua Vulgar is a bit darker, matte. See comparison swatches.

The Glossover

P
product

ElektroCute Neon Pigment

C-

I could not fully contain the fall out (even using adhesive bases designed for glitter). They don't apply perfectly evenly. They do not want to be blended (together or on their own or with anything else). When they work, they can look gorgeous and totally traffic-stopping, but to get them there is certainly a journey.

Product

6/10

Pigmentation

7.5/10

Texture

9/10

Longevity

7/10

Application

2.5/5

Results
Loading ... Loading ...
Login or Register to be able to add this to your Vanity or Wishlist! Plus rate and review!
P
product

Hellatronic

C+

Product

6.5/10

Pigmentation

8.5/10

Texture

9.5/10

Longevity

7/10

Application

3/5

Results
Loading ... Loading ...
P
product

Hi-Viz

C-

Product

6/10

Pigmentation

7.5/10

Texture

9/10

Longevity

7/10

Application

2.5/5

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

See more photos & swatches! Continue reading →

Friday, July 19th, 2013

MAC Illustrated Brush Kit
MAC Illustrated Brush Kit

MAC Illustrated Brush Kits ($49.50) are available in two selections, one for just face, one for face and eyes. Both kits come with a brush roll, which holds five brushes with a clear plastic flap that protects the brush heads. The brush roll itself is made out of a vinyl-like material. If you recently purchased any of the Illustrated bags, it’s made out of the same material as that. Smooth, slick plastic that’s not quite as shiny as vinyl. The brush roll has a 3/4″ wide black strap that ties the roll together. Each brush has a shiny black handle with a matte black ferrule.

All Over Brush Kit features the 168SE, 287SE, 224SE, 219SE, and 266SE. The 168SE is not as dense or as soft as the full-sized version, but it wasn’t scratchy. I actually felt like the 219SE was softer here than the one I have in full-size, but the 266SE is very scratchy and would work better for brows than on the lid. The 224SE seemed a bit floppy, but it wasn’t scratchy. The 287SE wasn’t scratchy and was soft when I patted and brushed it across my eyelid.

Face Brush Kit features the 129SE, 188SE, 190SE, and 195SE. The 129SE is a big longer and floppier compared to the full size version, which felt slightly denser, too, but it was as soft as my full-size (which isn’t my favorite brush, as it is somewhat scratchy at times). The 188SE is less dense and a bit floppy–seemed narrower at the base. The 190SE and 195SE seemed comparable to my full-size brushes.

Both kits are available exclusively at Nordstrom, as part of their Anniversary sale.

See more photos ! Continue reading →

Wednesday, July 3rd, 2013

MAC 159 Duo Fibre Blush Brush
MAC 159 Duo Fibre Blush Brush

MAC 159 Duo Fibre Blush Brush ($35.00) is a new brush with a blend of natural and synthetic bristles that launched alongside MAC’s Tropical Taboo collection, which featured many Mineralize Blushes/Skinfinishes. It will be added to the permanent range as well. It has a tapered, dome-shaped edge, with the white bristles coming out just a bit further than the black ones, so the edge has a softer, fluffier feel and less density compared to the rest of the brush, which was dense and firm (but not too firm). At its widest point, it’s just under an inch wide and about an inch tall. It’s somewhat similar in size to the 109 brush, but this is flatter and not as circular (and of course, the shapes are different), but they have a similar height and width, just not a similar depth or circumference.

I’ve been using it for about a week now, and it’s definitely one of the better and more versatile brushes that MAC has put out recently (a lot of them have felt more like uni-taskers!).  It works well with any face product that is incredibly pigmented or too glittery, as it seems to apply product very softly and evenly, while allowing for easy blending because of the fluffiness of the bristles at the edge.  The brush also felt very soft, and I didn’t have any issues with it shedding unnecessarily (there were two or three after the first wash, none on the subsequent four washes) or the dye bleeding.  For reference, this brush was made in China as many of the recent duo fibre brushes have been.

See more photos! Continue reading →