We hope you'll consider supporting Temptalia by shopping through our links below. Thanks!
  • Glamglow25% off with code FF25OFF (has some exclusions), ends 5/01.
  • Macy's10% off beauty with code FRIEND, ends 5/07.
  • UltaUrban Decay Naked Ultimate Basics for $39 (regularly $54), ends 4/30.

MAC for Daphne Guinness Cremesheen Glasses

MAC Japanese Spring Cremesheen Glass
MAC Japanese Spring Cremesheen Glass

MAC for Daphne Guinness Cremesheen Glass

MAC Cremesheen Glass ($18.50 for 0.09 oz.) sees the launch of four shades as part of the Daphne Guinness collection (due in-stores on December 26th). The four shades are: Borealis (pale gray pink with iridescent pearl), Japanese Spring (pale dirty pink), Narcissus (dirty eggplant), and Richly Revered (deep brown plum). They’re all limited edition, though Richly Revered is a repromote and still available online now from when it last launched.

  • Borealis is a milky bluish-white with gold and copper micro-shimmer. It’s semi-sheer–you can see a lot of natural lip color, but it’s still milky enough that it lightens lips. MAC Chillin is similar.
  • Japanese Spring looks like a pale blue-based pink with a milky appearance when swatched. On lips, it doesn’t read quite as cool, but it is very milky, pale, and does settle into lip lines a bit. MAC Viva Glam Gaga is more opaque. Shiseido Pop Life is shimmery and not quite as blue-based.
  • Narcissus is a magenta purple (not sure where they came up with “dirty eggplant”) that’s nearly opaque in color coverage. It’s a creamy color, and because of its opacity and intensity, it doesn’t look like it settles into lip lines. MAC Athena’s Kiss comes the closest, but it is pinker.
  • Richly Revered was reviewed here.

Cremesheen Glass is a formula that glides onto the lips easily, feels comfortable without being thin or thick, and tends to be on the sheerer side in color, though both Narcissus and Richly Revered are rather opaque. It’s non-sticky (as compared to Lipglass, which is very thick and sticky), and it typically wears two hours or so on me before wearing away. Each tube seems large, but it only holds 0.09 oz., which is about half the size of your average lipgloss.

MAC Cremesheen Glass Borealis
Borealis
Borealis
8.5
Product
9
Pigmentation
9
Texture
7
Longevity
4
Application
83%
Total

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

MAC Daphne Guinness Pro Longwear Lipcremes

MAC Approaching Storm Pro Longwear Lipcreme
MAC Approaching Storm Pro Longwear Lipcreme

MAC Daphne Guinness: Pro Longwear Lipcremes

With the Daphne Guinness collection (due in-stores on December 26th), there are four limited edition shades of MAC Pro Longwear Lipcreme ($17.00 for 0.12 oz.): Approaching Storm (deep rose), Red Dwarf (blue pink), Seasoned Plum (mid-tone lavender), and Warp Speed (light silver).

  • Approaching Storm is a dark berry red with a hint of brown. It has opaque color coverage. The shade reminded me of Endless Drama, which is perhaps a touch deeper. It’s also a bit like MAC Musky Amethyst.
  • Red Dwarf is a muted raspberry pink with opaque color coverage. It’s a bit darker and more berry compared to MAC Positively Dashing. It’s not as vibrant as MAC Deliciously Forbidden. It’s just a hint more muted compared to Guerlain Bee. Milani Sexy Rose is similar in color but has a frosted finish.
  • Seasoned Plum is a pinked purple with a cream finish. It delivers opaque color with little product. MAC Goes and Goes is less pink (and I think it’d be the same with Up the Amp).
  • Warp Speed is a pale silver with shimmer. I’d say the coverage is semi-opaque, but it’s hard to judge, because it applies very unevenly and doesn’t sit well on lips. It tends to bunch up in color. It’s not as cool-toned or as opaque as MAC Metal Maven. It’s more silvered and less metallic compared to MAC Bubbles. It’s more silver and creamier in comparison to MAC Eloquent Air.

These resemble shades I feel like we’ve seen recently. I was actually surprised at how similar Approaching Storm and Red Dwarf were to the Pro Longwear Lipcremes that came out with Styledriven just a couple of months ago! I do think that they’re both very flattering shades for both cool and warm complexions, and they’re very appropriate fall/winter shades. They’re not too vampy, either, which should make them more wearable. I can see Red Dwarf being very pretty with a neutral eye.

These lipsticks don’t quite get to the stated wear (12 hours), but they do wear well; I tend to get seven to eight hours of wear with darker shades (think Approaching Storm and Red Dwarf), while lighter shades tend to wear about average or less.  Warp Speed doesn’t seem to wear well, though, and it looks like it needs a reapplication after two and a half hours.  Generally, the formula is creamy and glides on easily without being drying. For a detailed review of the Pro Longwear Lipcreme formula, please see this review.

MAC Daphne Guinness Pro Longwear Lipcremes

B
9
Product
9
Pigmentation
9
Texture
7
Longevity
4
Application
84%
Total

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

MAC Metal-x Cream Eyeshadow Review & Photos

MAC Palladium Metal-x Cream Eyeshadow<
MAC Palladium Metal-x Cream Eyeshadow

MAC Metal-x Cream Eyeshadow Review & Photos

MAC Metal-x Cream Eyeshadow ($20.00 for 0.08 oz.) may sound new to some, but it originally debuted way back in 2007 (see my original “review” here–and I called that a review? For shame!) and were repromoted in 2008 as “Brushed Metal-x.” I kind of think the shades from the first launch were more fun–I still have Plum Electric (vibrant grape purple), though I don’t think I used it but a couple of times, because it looks nearly new. Cyber, Fusion Gold, and Virgin Silver have been relaunched as part of this year’s offerings.

In two separate posts, I will go through the individual shades regarding their pros/cons, possible dupes, and so forth, but I did as much testing as I could in time that I’ve had these, which is about 24 hours by the time this post is published. Lucky for me, because these crease nearly instantaneously, it was easy to test multiple shades.

Worn alone, none of the shades I tested (two are photographed below–Palladium and Venetian Tarnish–but I also tested Fusion Gold, Rusty, and Vintage Coin) could make it from application to camera (and I hurried!) without some creasing, and then, after fifteen minutes or so, significant creasing. Worn over an eyeshadow base (I used MAC Paint Pots and NARS Smudgeproof), it didn’t seem to make much of a difference–still creased within minutes and worsened by fifteen.

I did, however, have luck when I wore a single shade layered over an eyeshadow base with several powder eyeshadows on top. I used all MAC products, for the sake of giving MAC the best chance it could, and for me, everything managed to wear well enough for five hours. There was some fading of the colors overall, but I didn’t experience creasing up until that point. By eight, though, it had faded a bit more and had some noticeable creasing. However, a word of caution, I have drier lids, and I really packed on the powder products.

I also tested the wear on both cheeks and lips. They had a funny taste, so I don’t think I’d wear them again as a lip product, and they are very drying. They’re like a matte frost finish–the drying, clingy feel of a matte coupled with a really high frost finish. On the lips, I tried Red Hot Copper, which only lasted for an hour (no eating/drinking) before fading unevenly.  It’s uncomfortable and doesn’t wear well.

On cheeks, I used Rusty to highlight and Red Hot Copper to add color. Because of the higher frost content, it does emphasize pores somewhat, and depending on the temperature of your workspace, these may be difficult to apply evenly. I found fingers to be the best applicator with these in general, because the cream surface is very hard and almost powdery–it balls up and takes the warmth from your fingertip to be able to work it out into a smooth, even finish. The wear was so-so; it was noticeably faded and, unfortunately, patchy, after three hours of wear without a setting powder and five hours of wear with a setting powder. Of all the ways I tried it, I liked it best on the cheeks, just because I didn’t have to worry about creasing.  It wears similarly on the brow bone and decolletage.

This is really not a consumer-friendly formula; it will take some effort, work, practice, and the right skin type to get these to work well. In 2007, maybe it was acceptable, maybe other brands hadn’t created technology to yield this kind of finish and color payoff, but in 2011, I don’t think it is. If you have drier lids or tend not to have problems with your cream products creasing on you, these may work out for you. If you have oilier lids, I really do recommend–if these are just tempting you beyond belief–to try one and see how it works for you or else buy from a store with a good return policy. These weren’t well-received in 2007, so I’m kind of baffled as to why MAC would bring thes back without some reformulation. Sure, they bring back a product that seemed to receive mostly negative reviews, but last year’s Mega Metals (just as metallic as these) were a complete homerun and those remain a one-time wonder.

At $20 a pop, if the only way I can use it is as an eyeshadow base, it’s not the most useful product in my stash. When you use a translucent powder on top, while you retain some of the original shade, you do mute it a bit and definitely tone down the frosted/metallic finish, so it seems to defeat the purpose of these–which is that really high-shine, metallic-like finish (though some of these read frosty, less metallic).  I could see picking up one or two for editorial work, though I think MAC’s Metal Pigments have a much better metallic finish and work better, plus some of their pigments that have more of a frosted/metallic shine.  Like Big Bounce, I don’t know why these are marketed towards consumers, because realistically, I’m not sure how one would wear it except if you 1) wanted your eye makeup to crease or 2) you were only going somewhere for an hour or so.

We’ve seen MAC put out metallic fluidlines and paint pots, which work fantastically alone or as an eyeshadow base. I’d much rather put my money towards products with similar textures, finishes, and even shades, that perform better like Giorgio Armani Eyes to Kill Intense Eyeshadows, Chanel Illusion d’Ombres, Bare Escentuals Stay-There Eyeshadow, or L’Oreal’s Infallible Eyeshadows (which finally hit the states!)–the latter two don’t wear as well as the first two, but they’ll manage to six hours to eight hours or so without an eyeshadow base.  Even Estee Lauder’s new eyeshadows have a really cool, metallic-like finish, but they’re powder (and I suspect we’ll see something similar by MAC in the next six months).

So while MAC doesn’t tout these as long-wearing, they still fall short of just wearing.  I thought long and hard about that one, but if it takes both an eyeshadow base, plus packing of powder eyeshadows on top, to make it more than fifteen minutes–we’re just not functioning.  I’d let it slide if it just didn’t wear to six or eight hours, because long-wear tends to be more like eight to twelve hours, but I can’t even achieve eight with all the bells and whistles without both fading and creasing on the eyes; fading and patchiness on the cheeks (after four hours) and lips (after an hour).  A C- feels generous to me, personally, but that is how the numbers worked out–I’m sure you can sense my disappointment and frustration on this product.  Did we really need two collections of crease city products this year?

MAC Metal-x Cream Eyeshadow Review & Photos

C-
6
Product
9
Pigmentation
8
Texture
5
Longevity
3.5
Application
70%
Total

MAC Metal-x Cream Eyeshadow Photos & Swatches

MAC Cyber Metal-x Cream Eyeshadow<
MAC Cyber Metal-x Cream Eyeshadow

MAC Metal-x Cream Eyeshadow Photos & Swatches

Review coming soon, please hold all questions until then! 🙂 I spent all of yesterday and last night photographing, swatching, and testing, but I wasn’t able to get everything done before it was bedtime (midnight!). So for now, please take a gander at these eyeshadows but know two things 1) these have not been reformulated, so they have the same formula as the ones released in 2007 had; 2) they are NOT long-wearing and MAC doesn’t give any guidance on wear (read between the lines: it will crease).

On Instagram