Becca Amethyst Flashes Geode & Pearl Flashes Gold Light Chaser Highlighters Reviews, Photos, Swatches
Amethyst Flashes Geode
Becca Amethyst Flashes Geode Light Chaser Highlighter ($34.00 for 0.23 oz.) is a medium pink with warm undertones and cooler, lavender sparkle and pearl. This shade had larger sparkles that sat on the skin along with finer pearl that gave a more luminous sheen on the skin. The texture was chunky, dry, and had a tendency to appear patchy without a good deal of buffing. It emphasized my skin’s natural texture, though it was nowhere near as shiny as the brand’s original pressed highlighters. It had good pigmentation, though, and lasted for seven and a half hours on me. I did not detect much of a shift, more that it had a warmer, pink base with a cooler sheen but no real shift or duochrome-like appearance.
The Light Chaser Highlighter formula is supposed to be “more than a highlighter” and have a combination of “kaleidoscopic color and light” that makes it “shift as you move.” There are six shades in the range, and a few of them have more of a visible shift in person (less so in photos) while others just seemed like a typical highlighter. From the brand that seemed to put highlighters back on the market with their Shimmering Skin Perfector Pressed formula, the formula lacked the finesse in texture and blendability I would have expected from Becca. The texture varied from shade to shade with some being drier, looser, and less blendable to smoother, more blendable, and fairly good as a tinted highlighter/subtle blush.
Top Dupes
- Sydney Grace Swinging Vines (LE, $9.00) is less shimmery, cooler (95% similar).
- Cover FX Amethyst (P, $28.00) is cooler (95% similar).
- Wet 'n' Wild Botanic Dream (P, $4.99) is less shimmery, warmer (95% similar).
- Anastasia Sassy Grape (LE, ) is more shimmery, lighter (95% similar).
- ColourPop Angel Food (DC, $12.00) is lighter (90% similar).
- Bobbi Brown Sunrise Glow (P, $48.00) is less shimmery, warmer (90% similar).
- Physicians Formula Pink (P, $10.99) is less shimmery, warmer (90% similar).
- ColourPop Iced (LE, $8.00) is less shimmery (90% similar).
- Wet 'n' Wild Halo Gorgeous (P, $5.99) is less shimmery (90% similar).
- Kosas 8th Muse (High Intensity) (Highlighter) (PiP, ) is less shimmery, lighter (90% similar).
Ingredients
Talc, Mica, Oryza Sativa (Rice) Extract, Zinc Stearate, Silica, Sodium Dehydroacetate, Phenoxyethanol, Sorbic Acid. [+/-]: CI 77891 (Titanium Dioxide), CI 77491 (Iron Oxides), CI 75470 (Carmine).
Disclaimer: Ingredient lists are as available by the brand (or retailer) at the time of publishing. Please always check product packaging, if it exists, for the ingredient list applicable to the product you're purchasing, or the brand or retailer's website for the most up-to-date ingredient list.
Amethyst Flashes Geode
LELimited Edition. $34.00.
Pearl Flashes Gold
Becca Pearl Flashes Gold Light Chaser Highlighter ($34.00 for 0.23 oz.) is a light, white gold with a cooler, white base and a warmer, golden sheen. It had, at most, a slight shift as the white base looked less stark as I tilted my face just so then the gold would reflect more light and make the base appear less white, but it looked very much the same at most angles. The texture was drier, firmer in the pan, though I did not have any trouble blending out the color, I did have to jab at the surface to get decent color coverage. This shade lasted for seven and a half hours on me before fading.
Top Dupes
- Becca Citrine (LE, $38.00) is less shimmery (95% similar).
- Give Me Glow Halo (P, $17.25) is more shimmery, cooler (95% similar).
- Make Up For Ever 2 Frozen Gold (P, $21.00) is more shimmery, darker (95% similar).
- Anastasia Marshmallow (LE, ) is lighter (95% similar).
- Makeup Geek Electrify (P, $20.00) is more shimmery, brighter (95% similar).
- Makeup Revolution Golden Lights (P, $6.00) is less shimmery (95% similar).
- Coloured Raine No Flash Needed (P, $25.00) is more shimmery, darker (95% similar).
- Anastasia Helia (PiP, ) is more shimmery (95% similar).
- Kaleidos Solar Sailor (P, $14.00) is lighter (90% similar).
- ColourPop Extra (LE, $12.00) is more shimmery, lighter (90% similar).
Ingredients
Talc, Mica, Oryza Sativa (Rice) Extract, Zinc Stearate, Silica, Sodium Dehydroacetate, Phenoxyethanol, Sorbic Acid. [+/-]: CI 77891 (Titanium Dioxide), CI 77491 (Iron Oxides), CI 75470 (Carmine).
Disclaimer: Ingredient lists are as available by the brand (or retailer) at the time of publishing. Please always check product packaging, if it exists, for the ingredient list applicable to the product you're purchasing, or the brand or retailer's website for the most up-to-date ingredient list.
I could tell from swatches that these would be dry, which is odd because if Becca is known for anything, it’s creamy highlighters.
Yeah, the texture of this formula is just nowhere as smooth/creamy as the SSPs!
Which is disappointing, because if these had performed like those, these would have been smash hits! The SSP are very sophisticated-shiny (although still smooth and creamy), which would have made these even more on-trend for the holographic/rainbow fad, especially since they released so many colors for so many skintones (one of Becca’s biggest selling points, in my opinion).
They also seemed like they were designed with the SSP lines in mind – they seemed to use the base colors for their SSPs with a shifting element (Rose Quartz, Amethyst, Opal, Topaz, and Pearl… they used Champagne Dream instead of Pop, not sure if that’s a Jaclyn Hill contractual issue or not…). To me, this means that the texture should be similar, just now with a duochrome shift.
Sad to say, we finally got the same product (Amethyst) and they’re both disappointing! I agree with you completely on your reviews of these. I feel like while the case is lovely, $34 is a bit high for the quality and quantity of product you actually get.
Well, $34 for anything less than great is certainly not a good deal, but the pricing is on par (with quantity) for their blush range, so it seemed like a reasonable price (within the line).
Excellent point; I hadn’t thought about that. I think i was comparing it to other options “out there”! (Like the Gerard Star Powders I got at 2 for $29 which are much, much better!)
At the price point for Becca, they should be A+ (to the user, whatever A+ means to them! based on their wants) – but yeah, the price itself didn’t jump out at me like it was crazy to ask for based on their blush range! (Though you could argue their blushes are more expensive than you’d expect since the highlighters are much larger and are only a little higher.)
I’m so disappointed that Amethyst Flashes Geode looks so chunky.
So was I!
I have both of these and have been wearing for last few days, both have good staying power.
*Pearl x Gold–really love this one, it’s a stunning yellow gold. In sunlight, swatched on the arm, I can definitely see a shift, as the light chases the gold shimmer up and down a silver white base. The shift isn’t that apparent on the face, but it’s a gorgeous gold spotlight on my cheekbones, and the light “chases” the gold sheen up and down my cheeks, creating cheekbones that I never had. It’s not the most buttery smooth highlighter I have, but it’s good quality, decently smooth and pigmented, I didn’t have to jab at mine. I love the effect so much, this is going to be one of my top fave highlighters.
*Amethyst x Geode – the first couple of times I swatched it, I was unimpressed – dry, sheer, patchy, about ready to return it. But after I got thru the top layers, it got much smoother and more pigmented, it’s not as good quality as Pearl x Gold, but it’s workable, recommend a dense brush to apply and buff out. It’s not a true amethyst purple, more of a purply pink. This didn’t have much of a shift on my arms, but if I layer it heavily on my cheekbones and look in sunlight, I can see a shift between purply pink base and fucshia pink shimmer. Not sure if this one is worth $34, but it’s very pretty, will go well with many purple and pink lippies, so will keep unless I can find a cheaper dupe.
Glad you’re enjoying yours, Katherine! My Amethyst Flashes Geode did not get better with use, unfortunately!
The price (and quantity) is on par with the blush range, so it did not seem particularly high or low.
I may be a total dodo, but I really love how lovely Amethyst Flashes Geode looks on you! Realizing, of course, that this shot is taken at a normal viewing distance, not a close-up.
Pearl Flashes Gold looks far better than its dupe in Coloured Raine, No Flash Needed. Either of which could be a fantastic inner lid shade for me for my less subtle neutral eye looks!
Thank you, Nancy! Hey, even subpar products can be pretty from afar ;P
I have the Anastasia Sassy Grape dupe for Amethyst flashes Geode and I have 3 dupes for Pearl flashes Gold Anastasia Helia and Marshmallow and Makeup Geek Electrify.I have been searching Utube and Sephora for reviews and swatches of these since the day they released them on Sephora.The Peach flashes Bellini was the one I was drawn to the most but I have been hearing that these are subtle highlighters and I prefer the more metallic glow.I wish these were more similar in texture and sheen to Becca’s original formula.
Sounds like you are well-covered for these two shades 🙂
I thought for sure I’d fall in love with Amethyst to use as a blush, but reading your review and seeing how it looks applied, this wouldn’t work for as a blush or as a highlighter. “Pearl Flashes Gold” looks just too much like so many other highlighters I already have.
Pearl Flashes Gold is definitely the most dupable out of all six, I think!
FYI on the main page it lists Amethyst flashes Geode as an A+…
Hi Slf!
It says C+ for me – what browser/device are you using?
This was on Safari on my iPhone – it’s fixed now!
Christine, on the homepage the grade for Amethyst is A+ (of course in the actual review it’s C+). And there’s a similar situation with the lip glosses you reviewed earlier today. Just thought you’d want to know.
The swatch of Amethyst looks dry but I really like it on you!
Hi Ginny,
I’m on the homepage in Google Chrome (incognito window so I’m not logged in), and I’m seeing C+ for Amethyst Flashes Geode and B, B-, and B for the three glosses. What device/browser are you using?
Safari on iPhone 7. I’m seeing the right grades now, though!
Pearl Flashes Gold is pretty but seems darker than Becca Moonstone which is my new HG Highlighter. But that could be just how harsh the contract of the shine is on the skin, because the texture of Moonstone is a very natural looking on the skin by comparison.
I could see Moonstone possibly looking more natural with how it is less stark on the skin!
Now I’m super glad I’ve waited for your reviews before purchasing them. I’m sorry to hear Becca’s original highlighter formula hasn’t really been transferred to these. For the price point I was expecting higher quality!
Definitely not much of the original highlighter’s texture is present here – I can see some of the base color present but the formula itself is different.
These are OK, but not great – Becca has done lots of these in the past and they are beautiful.
It’s a bummer!
I wrote a comment on the new glosses too a moment ago about how they remind a lot of very old launches from Becca. These too remind a lot of Becca original highlighting products that they released back in the beginning of this century… Those came both in a loose and a pressed format and though not attempting to be shifting or duo chromed back then they were following this colour scheme with some pinkier shades and one resembling the opal jade one in this collection a lot. The old ones were buttery smooth though… and I believe paved the way for the more famous highlighting collections from the brand.
With this in mind this collection puzzles me a little… From a brand point of view launching new highlighting products ought to be a very thought through thing since making excellent highlighters has been their ticket into the world market. So coming up with a collection that partly consists of chunky glittery not so much shifting products that are supposed to shift seems a bit inconsistent to me. They have never skimped on their staple kind of products before, that I consider their highlighters to be… So I wonder if this is not a consequence of the influence from the new Lauder mothership that we see here… IMO I don’t think going further on this route is going to prove successful for the brand in the future… What I mean is, nostalgia can be awsome sometimes, but when you try to make use of old good ideas because things are too time pressed to make it possible to be creative and innovative then you very easily get I to Meh-territory… It would be sad to see such a great brand like Becca fall into the pool of the mass produced where so many brands unfortunately are swimming in already…
These do give the sense of milking their highlighters’ popularity without as much thought. I think one of the selling features of the SSPs is that creamy texture that makes them feel more high-end, so the lack thereof in this formula was a surprise.
I don’t think this is Estee Lauder’s influence since they only inked an agreement last fall, so these would have been planned already and a lot of the choices made, I’d think.
I love a shimmery gloss, but these don’t seem that shimmery. On the plus side, I love your makeup look, especially, the highlighter, blush and eyeshadow! LOL all of it!!
Thank you, Bella!
Oh wow. These are a pass for me. I must say, I did also expect more from Becca
Bummer 🙁
EH, not as good as I was hoping.
Pearl Flashes Gold looks like a good summer highlight! Nice and golden!