MAC A Sprinkle of Blues Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad Review, Photos, Swatches
MAC A Sprinkle of Blues Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad
MAC A Sprinkle of Blues Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad ($44.00 for 0.05 oz.) is a cool-toned mix centered around blue. It contained a white with a blue sheen, muted navy blue, medium-dark blue, and a blackened navy. This quad was horrifying across the board–dry, stiff, difficult to blend, splotchy application, fast to fade, and utter garbage. I’ve worked with all six of the quads released in the collection, and none were as frustrating as this one–this performed so much worse than the others; it didn’t even apply halfway decently. It cannot be used damp; the only hope it has is being applied over a slightly tacky, white base. I don’t know why this quad differed so greatly compared to the others, which, with work and a particular technique, I could apply and it would look fine on.
A Sprinkle of Blues #1 is a pale, cool-toned white that flashes blue. It’s very, very sheer and powdery–it was almost chalky–and difficult to swatch, let alone apply. It clumps if you use it wet, so I wouldn’t recommend applying it with a damp brush. Disney by Sephora Sick of Swimmin’ (LE) is very similar. Maybelline Waves of White (LE, $6.99) is greener. MAC Vellum is whiter with a less pronounced iridescence. See comparison swatches.
A Sprinkle of Blues #2 is a smoky, muted navy blue with a satin finish. This was also dry, a little stiff, and can’t be used wet. It clumped and applied unevenly when I used it with a damp brush–it would dry and look splotchy. theBalm Matt Horowitz (LE, $16.00) is bluer. Urban Decay Occupy (LE, $18.00) is more frosted, darker. bareMinerals Private Isle (LE) is bluer. See comparison swatches.
A Sprinkle of Blues #3 is a medium-dark, slightly brightened, blue with a pearly finish. Applied dry, it was sheer and uneven, and then applied with a damp brush, it was more opaque, but it was still uneven–I couldn’t get it to smooth out even when just swatched on my arm (and there was no help for it on the lid). MAC Tonight’s Temptation #1 (LE, $21.00) is very similar, is also Mineralized, and is infinitely better. Sephora Collection My Boyfriend’s Jeans (19) (P, $13.00) is purpler. Buxom Bulldog (P, $18.00) is more muted, cream product. Urban Decay Radium (P, $18.00) is lighter. Urban Decay Evidence (P, $18.00) is bluer. MAC Love Cycle #2 (LE, $21.00) is similar. MAC Deep Truth (P, $15.00) is darker. MAC Switch to Blue (LE, $18.50) is a cream product. Le Metier de Beaute Lapis (P, $30.00) is lighter, bluer. See comparison swatches.
A Sprinkle of Blues #4 is a medium-dark gray with bluish-teal and silver sparkle and shimmer. Applied dry, I could barely get it to show up at all. I had to dampen the brush with two to three times amount of water I normally would to get color to swatch. Urban Decay Redemption (LE, $18.00) is similar. LORAC Slate (P) is also similar. Disney by Sephora Flotsam (LE) is slightly cooler-toned. Urban Decay Asphalt (LE, $18.00) is warmer-toned. Bobbi Brown Gunmetal (LE, $21.00) is similar. See comparison swatches.
A Sprinkle of Blues
PPermanent. $44.00.
A Sprinkle of Blues #1
PiPPermanent in Palette. $21.00.
A Sprinkle of Blues #2
PiPPermanent in Palette. $21.00.
A Sprinkle of Blues #3
PiPPermanent in Palette. $21.00.
A Sprinkle of Blues #4
PiPPermanent in Palette. $21.00.
MAC A Sprinkle of Blues Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad
MAC A Sprinkle of Blues Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad
MAC A Sprinkle of Blues Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad
MAC A Sprinkle of Blues Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad
MAC A Sprinkle of Blues #1 Mineralize Eyeshadow
MAC A Sprinkle of Blues #1 Mineralize Eyeshadow
MAC A Sprinkle of Blues #2 Mineralize Eyeshadow
MAC A Sprinkle of Blues #2 Mineralize Eyeshadow
MAC A Sprinkle of Blues #3 Mineralize Eyeshadow
MAC A Sprinkle of Blues #3 Mineralize Eyeshadow
MAC A Sprinkle of Blues #4 Mineralize Eyeshadow
MAC A Sprinkle of Blues #4 Mineralize Eyeshadow
MAC A Sprinkle of Blues #1 on inner lid, #2 on middle of lid, #3 on outer lid,
#4 in crease, Â Clinique Cobalt Eyeliner on lash line
MAC A Sprinkle of Blues #1 on inner lid, #2 on middle of lid, #3 on outer lid,
#4 in crease, Clinique Cobalt Eyeliner — this is how it looked after one hour
I don’t think I have ever heard you call a product “utter garbage.” lol. Love your candor!
I’m sure I’ve used something similar before, as any high-end product that performs so abominably will earn some harsh language for me! I think my first words were less printable, though 😉
damnnn that sucks. that blue is very pretty
You could just get the duo from Divine Night – way nicer!
OHHH, that F really hurts.
That´s really disappointing… I was looking forward to reading your review and hoping it would get a super grade, but now I´m kind of sad. But I might just create my own quad with some similar shades 🙂
Good idea!
Oh, boy! I rarely see an F around here, but this quad definitely deserved it.
I thought these were so pretty in the promo photos, but thanks to your review these are an absolute pass!
You’re welcome! 🙂
Oh wow. I expect a much higher standard from MAC, so this is disappointing to say the least.
When I heard these were coming out, I questioned why Mac would make a product that has historically been underperforming, permanent to its line. Reading your reviews of these quads, especially this one, I’m even more baffled. It doesn’t make economic sense.
I don’t know… for years, all I heard were raves for the Mineralize Eyeshadows… I always felt like the odd one out until maybe the last year or two! I remember having to do a big “disclosure” about how historically I have had trouble with these, others like them, etc.
Me too!!! I was like yay Christine for bold honest truth. Something about blue MAC LE palettes. I am still pissed at the Glitter and Ice Snowglobe palette (blues) and how sucky it was!
Those were pretty disappointing palettes, LOL!
This is why your reviews are so helpful! It just goes to show just because one product by a particular brand is a hit, doesn’t mean everything will be the same quality. And that just because something is an expensive brand – that doesn’t ensure quality either!!
Yes, I was VERY surprised at how poorly this one performed compared to the others! I mean, I applied this and A Waft of Greys within minutes of each other (did one eye with A Sprinkle of Blues, and then I did the other with A Waft of Greys right after), and just the application was totally different.
Super disappointed that this is such low quality because I love the colours!
Too bad this was so horrible. The 3rd color looks amazing on the pan, good thing there are dupes, I’ve been looking for an eyeshadow like this for some time. It’s such a pretty bright, blue!
This review made me laugh 😀 Get your ish together MAC!
Sorry this was a disappointment! My Chanel Fascination quad is like this one, but super pigmented and fun 🙂
That makes me sad. The colours in the quads are lovely, but to see such poor application.. yikes. I hope they step it up. Thanks for the honest reviews!
My pleasure, Ashley!
*falls to knees, rends hair*
WHYYYYYYY?!?!
Seriously, MAC! This was like the ONE eyeshadow product of yours in recent times that I saw and held out secret hope for. Even if the palette probably will have cost $120 here, I might have considered it, for shades #2 and #3 alone. Not a happy rogue.
*gets up, straightens clothes* Er, sorry for the outburst 😛
I can’t even imagine shelling out that money for this!
You get kind of used to it here (the cost, not the low quality!) 😛
A MAC lipstick costs NZD 45-56, and the exchange rate is usually around 0.8 with the USD or better.
So we pay, at today’s rate… about US$ 37 for a MAC lipstick.
From my (superficial) investigation, we pay about 3x US price for MAC products (before exchange rate), which is odd, because we only pay about 2x US price for Chanel, Dior etc. So it can’t be *all* taxes on imports, now can it, MAC? 😉
*gets off soapbox*
Every time I hear about the differences, I wonder how MAC can do well globally. Obviously, I’m used to a higher discrepancy between MAC and Chanel, so my perception of MAC has a luxury brand is skewed, since it is more mid-end here.
Heh, sorry, you probably hear a lot of people rant about this! I did hear a neat quote from an Australian consumer once, who jokingly observed that things were more expensive in Australia because it was part of their ‘having the nicest beaches tax’! 😀
I remain slightly bewildered as to why MAC is so relentlessly popular when they regularly release relatively mediocre products – and that goes double (or should I say 3x?) in this country. Whatever their secret is, I’m sure a lot of companies would like to know!
Oh yeah, definitely hear about the pricing differences between U.S. and everywhere else quite frequently! 😉 It’s all good – as long as no one blames me for it!
F…..holy carp! I’m actually sort of pleased in that these are all going to be easy for me to pass up and with the amount I have spent on makeup (mostly but not only eye shadow) recently, passing up is a good thing.
There are definitely better palettes out there, and at this level, enough baked products by other brands to consider if you want a fix!
An F on a limited edition product is disappointing, but on a permanent product it’s just ridiculous. How does this get through the quality control process?
Wow I did not expect to see an F! I still can’t believe these are going to be permanent.
L O L this is amazing. my goddamn wet ‘n’ wild shadows I got for $2.99 are better than this bullshit.
wow I don’t think I’ve ever seen you rate a product with an F before! It looks pretty but after that review definitely saving my money!
You can see all the products I’d given an F to by looking at reviews by rating 🙂 It’s not the first and I’m sure won’t be the last, lol!
This was the mineralize palette I was most looking forward to, I love blue palettes. Glad I didn’t already order it.
What a shame the product turned out so poorly, it has such lovely colors.
What a shame. They looked so nice in pan.
Ouch! Thanks for your honesty and candor Christine. The truth is the light……
Shame on MAC! There will be a lot of people wasting $44.00 plus tax/shipping on this. That’s a good amount of money. They should pay more attention to quality. Thanks for the review 🙂
Always my pleasure, Valerie! 🙂
We’ll the look you put together with it is so pretty!!! Too bad the quality of the product is abysmal.
A few years ago, I started having allergic reactions to Mineralize shadows and I’ve avoided them ever since, so these particular products wouldn’t have been much good to me even if the performance had been fantastic, but I have to say that I love the colour combinations they’ve come up with in the pan. Every review you’ve posted, I’ve checked to see what I have that could duplicate the way the shades *should* look based on their appearance in the pans. I still feel badly for Mineralize fans, though, that these seem to be so lacking across the board, especially here.
Oh no! Sorry to hear that they gave you a reaction, Kate. I’m glad you were at least able to narrow it down to the formula, though 🙂
Whoa, I haven’t seen an F in quite a while. This must be really really horrible. o_O;
Is it wrong of me to like when a product get an F simply because I know the comments will be entertaining? Yes? No? *grabs popcorn anyway*
This looks like it would suit me perfectly! It would be great for my brown eyes.
Lol! I just read the review, too bad, I love to wear blue and grey.
How awful! Why would MAC even sell a product so pants? It’s a shame that these shadows are so terrible, because I really love the look of #1. Thank goodness for dupes!
What a pity…the colors are so pretty.
oh man and this was the one i was most excited about [other than the easily dupable greys/silvers, that i already have 49857039485 of since i use those colors the most] i love blues D: the le kat von d palette in metal orchestra suits all my needs for blues though, that’s for sure. but still, high hopes and let so so down.