Fenty Beauty Smoky (6) Snap Shadows Eyeshadow Palette Review & Swatches
Smoky (6)
Fenty Beauty Smoky (6) Snap Shadows Mix & Match Eyeshadow PaletteFenty Beauty Smoky (6) Snap Shadows Mix & Match Eyeshadow Palette ($25.00 for 0.21 oz.) is a new, permanent palette featuring three matte eyeshadows, two shimmer eyeshadows, and one glitter shade. The mattes performed well, but the two shimmers were dismal in a way that was surprising to see when I feel like good shimmer eyeshadows are everywhere.
The glitter shade was decent and more unique and complex, but it includes plastic glitter, which may be a deterrent for use, but it is listed as an eyeshadow, and the back of the palette had an “eye” symbol on it as well.
Ingredients
Look Using this Product
Smoky (6)
PPermanent. $25.00.
Explore Temptalia
Sydney Grace x Temptalia
Our collaboration is now available! Get the details! Read now.
That Deep
That Deep is a deep black with neutral-to-cool undertones and a matte finish. The consistency was denser, firmer, though I wouldn’t call it stiff, as the color went on with intensity but diffused fairly well along the edges. It wasn’t the easiest matte black eyeshadow I’ve come across, but if you’re someone who tends to use this type of shade to deepen, I found it particularly nice to work with when building up the intensity. This shade wore well for eight hours before fading noticeably.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- Anastasia D5 (Norvina Vol. 1) (LE, ) is lighter (95% similar).
- Charlotte Tilbury Seduce Glow (Smoke) (LE, ) is more shimmery, darker, cooler (95% similar).
- UOMA Beauty Wake Up (LE, ) is lighter (95% similar).
- Too Faced Decadent (LE, $16.00) is more shimmery, cooler (95% similar).
- Anastasia Beast (LE, $12.00) is lighter (95% similar).
- Make Up For Ever M100 Black (P, $17.00) is cooler (95% similar).
- Anastasia E5 (Norvina Vol. 2) (LE, ) is darker, cooler (95% similar).
- NABLA Cosmetics Nablack (PiP, ) is cooler (95% similar).
- Wayne Goss Pearl Moonstone #3 (PiP, ) is more shimmery, lighter (95% similar).
- Wet 'n' Wild My Glamour Squad #2 (PiP, ) is more shimmery (95% similar).
Formula Overview
-
The formula is supposed to have "rich, blendable color" that is available in "matte, shimmer, and glitter long-wear finishes." There were a few distinctive formulas used throughout the palettes in which the eyeshadows are housed, but generally, they were decent eyeshadows that were buildable, fairly blendable, and had decent wear, but I felt like most of the shimmers were thin, a little dusty, and had a tendency to look less shimmery once applied (almost a faded quality to them).
The matte formula was most consistent and had semi-opaque to opaque color coverage that went on fairly evenly and blended out without too much effort, though some deeper shades took longer to diffuse or went on patchily initially and had to be diffused and blended out to a more even application. The wear ranged from seven to eight hours on me before they showed signs of fading.
The shimmer formula was typically thin, dusty, and more prone to sheering out or looking somewhat "faded" and less shimmery after a few minutes on my lid. There were a few shades that seemed to have a denser, thicker formulation that offered greater intensity in its shimmer finish but had light fallout and looked thicker on the lid, so they did not layer as well with the other shades (which were thinner). The wear ranged from six to eight hours before fading.
The glitters had a gritty feel to them, as one might expect of a glitter-packed product, with decent spreadability. The wear ranged from seven to eight hours with light to moderate fallout.
Browse all of our Fenty Beauty Eyeshadow swatches.
Ingredients
Mica, Zinc Stearate, Caprylic/Capric Triglyceride, Silica, Triethoxycaprylylsilane, Caprylyl Glycol, Ethylhexylglycerin, Iron Oxides (Ci 77499).Chestnutz Ingredients: Talc, Zea Mays (Corn) Starch, Dimethicone, Zinc Stearate, Caprylyl Glycol, Ethylhexylglycerin, Triethoxycaprylylsilane, Caprylic/Capric Triglyceride, Silica, Iron Oxides (Ci 77491, Ci 77492, Ci 77499), Bismuth Oxychloride (Ci 77163).
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.
Look Using this Product
That Deep
PiPPermanent in Palette.
Second Date
Second Date is a deep black with multi-colored glitter throughout that was predominantly blue and gold. It was a unique mix of glitter suspended in more emollient, slightly creamy texture, though the glitter pulled away from the base somewhat when applied and blended out. The coverage was opaque in a single layer, and it worked best with flat, synthetic brushes or fingertips. It had light fallout/migration after eight hours of wear–definitely less than the old days of glitter but it wasn’t budge-proof.
It seemed to have more binder to it than Diva Feva (in another palette), but it did contain plastic glitter so those who are concerned about glitter may want to skip this palette or be sure to use it with an adhesive base.
Top Dupes
- Estee Lauder Burnt Anise (LE, $36.00) is less shimmery, darker, cooler (90% similar).
- Terra Moons Darkside (P, $8.00) is warmer (90% similar).
- Natasha Denona Full Metal Black (LE, $28.00) is less shimmery, darker (85% similar).
- Tom Ford Beauty Black Oyster (Cream) (LE, $45.00) is lighter, warmer (85% similar).
- Pat McGrath Black Metal (PiP, $25.00) is darker, warmer (85% similar).
- Melt Cosmetics Gun Metal (PiP, ) is darker, more muted (85% similar).
- Coloured Raine Smoke Screen (LE, $6.99) is less shimmery, darker, warmer (85% similar).
- Tom Ford Beauty Black Onyx (LE, $36.00) is lighter, warmer (85% similar).
- Estee Lauder Black Myrrh (LE, $45.00) is less shimmery, darker, cooler (85% similar).
- Dose of Colors Game Over (LE, ) is less shimmery, darker (85% similar).
Ingredients
Polyethylene Terephthalate, Calcium Aluminum Borosilicate, Squalane, Talc, Hydrogenated Styrene/Isoprene Copolymer, Silica, Polyurethane-11, Caprylyl Glycol, Ethylhexylglycerin, Tin Oxide, Pentaerythrityl Tetra-Di-T-Butyl Hydroxyhydrocinnamate, Titanium Dioxide (Ci 77891), Iron Oxides (Ci 77491, Ci 77499), Yellow 5 Lake (Ci 19140), Aluminum Powder (Ci 77000).
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.
Look Using this Product
Second Date
PiPPermanent in Palette.
Chestnutz
Chestnutz is a muted, medium-dark taupe with neutral-to-cool undertones and a matte finish. It had nearly opaque pigmentation with a soft, lightly dusty texture that was a little thin. I found it easy to work with, though, as the color applied evenly, built up well, and wasn’t prone to fallout, though I felt like it needed a little extra time to really diffuse and blend out. It wore well for eight hours before fading noticeably on me.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- Too Faced Smoked Sea Salt (LE, $16.00) is darker (95% similar).
- Too Faced Sexspresso (PiP, $16.00) is warmer (95% similar).
- Make Up For Ever M619 Espresso (P, $17.00) is warmer (90% similar).
- Persona Maverick (PiP, ) is lighter, warmer (90% similar).
- bareMinerals Fuze (LE, ) is lighter, warmer (90% similar).
- Milani After Hours (PiP, $5.99) is darker, warmer (90% similar).
- Anastasia Mercury (DC, $12.00) is lighter, warmer (90% similar).
- Marc Jacobs Beauty O Snap (610) (LE, $29.00) is darker, warmer (90% similar).
- KKW Beauty Loyalty (LE, ) is warmer (90% similar).
- Natasha Denona Seed (224CM) (PiP, ) is warmer (90% similar).
Formula Overview
-
The formula is supposed to have "rich, blendable color" that is available in "matte, shimmer, and glitter long-wear finishes." There were a few distinctive formulas used throughout the palettes in which the eyeshadows are housed, but generally, they were decent eyeshadows that were buildable, fairly blendable, and had decent wear, but I felt like most of the shimmers were thin, a little dusty, and had a tendency to look less shimmery once applied (almost a faded quality to them).
The matte formula was most consistent and had semi-opaque to opaque color coverage that went on fairly evenly and blended out without too much effort, though some deeper shades took longer to diffuse or went on patchily initially and had to be diffused and blended out to a more even application. The wear ranged from seven to eight hours on me before they showed signs of fading.
The shimmer formula was typically thin, dusty, and more prone to sheering out or looking somewhat "faded" and less shimmery after a few minutes on my lid. There were a few shades that seemed to have a denser, thicker formulation that offered greater intensity in its shimmer finish but had light fallout and looked thicker on the lid, so they did not layer as well with the other shades (which were thinner). The wear ranged from six to eight hours before fading.
The glitters had a gritty feel to them, as one might expect of a glitter-packed product, with decent spreadability. The wear ranged from seven to eight hours with light to moderate fallout.
Browse all of our Fenty Beauty Eyeshadow swatches.
Ingredients
TALC, ZEA MAYS (CORN) STARCH, DIMETHICONE, ZINC STEARATE, CAPRYLYL GLYCOL, ETHYLHEXYLGLYCERIN, TRIETHOXYCAPRYLYLSILANE, CAPRYLIC/CAPRIC TRIGLYCERIDE, SILICA, IRON OXIDES (CI 77491, CI 77492, CI 77499), BISMUTH OXYCHLORIDE (CI 77163).
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.
Look Using this Product
Chestnutz
PiPPermanent in Palette.
Patti Cakez
Patti Cakez is a muted, smoky plum with neutral-to-warm undertones and a satin sheen. It had good color coverage in a single layer, but it did not apply as evenly as I would expect, so it had to be really pressed and gently moved around. The texture was thin, drier, and had light fallout during application. It stayed on nicely for six and a half hours before fading noticeably.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- Cle de Peau Cosmic Aura #3 (PiP, ) is more shimmery, brighter, cooler (90% similar).
- MAC Metalmauve (LE, $17.00) is more shimmery (90% similar).
- Buxom Patent Leather (P, $12.00) is more shimmery, lighter (90% similar).
- NABLA Cosmetics Ground State (P, $8.00) is more shimmery, lighter (90% similar).
- Marc Jacobs Beauty The Free Spirit No. 6 (LE, ) is more shimmery, lighter (85% similar).
- MAC leap #2 (LE, $21.00) is more shimmery, lighter (85% similar).
- Sephora Rockstar (LE, ) is more shimmery, lighter, cooler (80% similar).
- Clinique Grape Pop (P, $17.00) is more shimmery, lighter, cooler (80% similar).
- Cle de Peau Champagne Supernova #2 (PiP, ) is more shimmery, lighter, cooler (80% similar).
- Guerlain Rose Barbare #2 (DC, ) is lighter, cooler (80% similar).
Formula Overview
-
The formula is supposed to have "rich, blendable color" that is available in "matte, shimmer, and glitter long-wear finishes." There were a few distinctive formulas used throughout the palettes in which the eyeshadows are housed, but generally, they were decent eyeshadows that were buildable, fairly blendable, and had decent wear, but I felt like most of the shimmers were thin, a little dusty, and had a tendency to look less shimmery once applied (almost a faded quality to them).
The matte formula was most consistent and had semi-opaque to opaque color coverage that went on fairly evenly and blended out without too much effort, though some deeper shades took longer to diffuse or went on patchily initially and had to be diffused and blended out to a more even application. The wear ranged from seven to eight hours on me before they showed signs of fading.
The shimmer formula was typically thin, dusty, and more prone to sheering out or looking somewhat "faded" and less shimmery after a few minutes on my lid. There were a few shades that seemed to have a denser, thicker formulation that offered greater intensity in its shimmer finish but had light fallout and looked thicker on the lid, so they did not layer as well with the other shades (which were thinner). The wear ranged from six to eight hours before fading.
The glitters had a gritty feel to them, as one might expect of a glitter-packed product, with decent spreadability. The wear ranged from seven to eight hours with light to moderate fallout.
Browse all of our Fenty Beauty Eyeshadow swatches.
Ingredients
Mica, Talc, Dimethicone, Octyldodecyl Stearoyl Stearate, Zinc Stearate, P-Anisic Acid, Caprylyl Glycol, Ethylhexylglycerin, Tin Oxide, Titanium Dioxide (Ci 77891), Iron Oxides (Ci 77491, Ci 77499), Carmine (Ci 75470), Ferric Ferrocyanide (Ci 77510).
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.
Look Using this Product
Patti Cakez
PiPPermanent in Palette.
You Up
You Up is a darker, golden peach with warm undertones and a satin finish. It had sheer coverage paired with a thin, firmer texture that was difficult to pick up with a brush, and even application with a fingertip yielded uneven, medium coverage that just looked dry on my skin. It’s incredible to see a brand put out decent matte shades but completely drop the ball on a neutral-hued shimmer.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- Cle de Peau Grounded (Right) (PiP, ) is more shimmery, more pigmented, warmer (95% similar).
- Dior Terra #2 (LE, ) is more shimmery, lighter, more pigmented (95% similar).
- Marc Jacobs Beauty Prim-O (P, $29.00) is more shimmery, more pigmented (90% similar).
- MAC Forward March (LE, $23.00) is more shimmery, darker, more pigmented (90% similar).
- Tarte Rose Golden Rings (LE, ) is more shimmery, darker, more pigmented (90% similar).
- bareMinerals Ball Gown (LE, ) is more shimmery, darker, more pigmented (90% similar).
- Viseart Moonstone (PiP, ) is more shimmery, lighter, more pigmented (90% similar).
- NARS Relight My Fire (LE, $19.00) is more shimmery, lighter, warmer (90% similar).
- Anastasia Gleam (P, $12.00) is more shimmery, lighter, more pigmented (90% similar).
- NARS Shake Shake Shake (LE, $19.00) is lighter, warmer (90% similar).
Formula Overview
-
The formula is supposed to have "rich, blendable color" that is available in "matte, shimmer, and glitter long-wear finishes." There were a few distinctive formulas used throughout the palettes in which the eyeshadows are housed, but generally, they were decent eyeshadows that were buildable, fairly blendable, and had decent wear, but I felt like most of the shimmers were thin, a little dusty, and had a tendency to look less shimmery once applied (almost a faded quality to them).
The matte formula was most consistent and had semi-opaque to opaque color coverage that went on fairly evenly and blended out without too much effort, though some deeper shades took longer to diffuse or went on patchily initially and had to be diffused and blended out to a more even application. The wear ranged from seven to eight hours on me before they showed signs of fading.
The shimmer formula was typically thin, dusty, and more prone to sheering out or looking somewhat "faded" and less shimmery after a few minutes on my lid. There were a few shades that seemed to have a denser, thicker formulation that offered greater intensity in its shimmer finish but had light fallout and looked thicker on the lid, so they did not layer as well with the other shades (which were thinner). The wear ranged from six to eight hours before fading.
The glitters had a gritty feel to them, as one might expect of a glitter-packed product, with decent spreadability. The wear ranged from seven to eight hours with light to moderate fallout.
Browse all of our Fenty Beauty Eyeshadow swatches.
Ingredients
Mica, Zinc Stearate, Octyldodecyl Stearoyl Stearate, Dimethicone, Caprylyl Glycol, Ethylhexylglycerin, Lauroyl Lysine, Talc, Zea Mays (Corn) Starch, Iron Oxides (Ci 77491, Ci 77492, Ci 77499), Titanium Dioxide (Ci 77891), Carmine (Ci 75470).
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.
Look Using this Product
You Up
PiPPermanent in Palette.
Tan Linez
Tan Linez is a medium-dark, taupe-brown with subtle, warm undertones and a matte finish. The eyeshadow had rich pigmentation with a smooth, soft, and blendable texture that wasn’t too firmly nor too softly pressed into the pan. It was easy to work with and lasted well for eight hours before fading visibly.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- Persona Maverick (PiP, ) is lighter (95% similar).
- Sydney Grace Enjoy the Ride (P, $5.00) is darker, warmer (95% similar).
- Urban Decay Defy (LE, $19.00) is cooler (90% similar).
- Natasha Denona Tor (225CP) (PiP, ) is more shimmery, lighter, warmer (90% similar).
- Marc Jacobs Beauty O Snap (610) (LE, $29.00) is darker, warmer (90% similar).
- NARS Bali (P, $19.00) is lighter, warmer (90% similar).
- MAC Drama in the Snow (LE, $17.00) is darker, warmer (90% similar).
- NARS Belladonna (DC, $25.00) is lighter (90% similar).
- ColourPop Baubles (PiP, $4.50) is darker, warmer (90% similar).
- MAC Mystery (DC, $17.00) is lighter, warmer (90% similar).
Formula Overview
-
The formula is supposed to have "rich, blendable color" that is available in "matte, shimmer, and glitter long-wear finishes." There were a few distinctive formulas used throughout the palettes in which the eyeshadows are housed, but generally, they were decent eyeshadows that were buildable, fairly blendable, and had decent wear, but I felt like most of the shimmers were thin, a little dusty, and had a tendency to look less shimmery once applied (almost a faded quality to them).
The matte formula was most consistent and had semi-opaque to opaque color coverage that went on fairly evenly and blended out without too much effort, though some deeper shades took longer to diffuse or went on patchily initially and had to be diffused and blended out to a more even application. The wear ranged from seven to eight hours on me before they showed signs of fading.
The shimmer formula was typically thin, dusty, and more prone to sheering out or looking somewhat "faded" and less shimmery after a few minutes on my lid. There were a few shades that seemed to have a denser, thicker formulation that offered greater intensity in its shimmer finish but had light fallout and looked thicker on the lid, so they did not layer as well with the other shades (which were thinner). The wear ranged from six to eight hours before fading.
The glitters had a gritty feel to them, as one might expect of a glitter-packed product, with decent spreadability. The wear ranged from seven to eight hours with light to moderate fallout.
Browse all of our Fenty Beauty Eyeshadow swatches.
Ingredients
Mica, Talc, Dimethicone, Zinc Stearate, Octyldodecyl Stearoyl Stearate, P-Anisic Acid, Caprylyl Glycol, Ethylhexylglycerin, Tin Oxide, Titanium Dioxide (Ci 77891), Iron Oxides (Ci 77491, Ci 77492), Ultramarines (Ci 77007), Carmine (Ci 75470).
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 think of all of these “Snap” palettes, this was the one that appealed to me most in terms of the colour assortment. Sad that it’s such a loser but as this wouldn’t be a “stand alone” for me anyway, I’m not heart-broken and it’s money saved. These poorly rating shadow palettes are making it much easier for me to stick to my low buy.
I think the term “dismal” is a bit unwarranted here and would urge you to try it yourself. I have 6 of these palettes including this smoky one and they are really nice. The shimmers are not as pigmented as they could be, it’s true, but an F rating is not what I would rate them. More like a C. They go on smooth and blend easily, they’re just a bit subtle which I’m ok with as I don’t want an overly shimmery eye look anyways. The mattes are really pigmented and nice. Anyways I would suggest testing it in store and checking other reviews =)
Hi Kriss,
Unfortunately, the shade that was rated an F was sheer, uneven in application, and did not apply well. I’m glad that your experience is different, so it is great to hear and have you share that, but I didn’t give it an F without reasoning — since it seems like you might have missed that part of my review 🙂
I was most interested in this and the khaki one. I searched them in store but of course performance can vary wildly. Thanks for the review – money saved!
Based on the types of eyeshadows you seem to rave most about, I’d be surprised if you were overly impressed by Fenty’s formula!
Ha, true that 😉
I didn’t miss anything. I just have a very different experience and the last I checked that’s perfectly ok 😉
As always, I welcome differing opinions but always ask people to respect each person’s experience, including mine – for example, saying that using the word dismal is “unwarranted” but that was true in my experience. My assumption was that perhaps the part about my application issues was missed, which would give a better sense of why it rated so poorly in my experience, as your comment said that “shimmers are not as pigmented as they could be, it’s true, but an F rating is not what I would rate them” – it didn’t seem like you had noted my experience with the actual application, hence me clarifying in my response to you (though to be fully accurate, I gave one shimmer shade an F; the other received a C). (edited for clarity)
Some comments offend me on your behalf, Christine!
Not that you need anyone to defend you but less than satisfactory products get put out by all makeup companies at one point or another. we should not take it so personally, if a makeup product we like does not rate so well.
A) makeup is always obviously You mileage may vary
B) you have been doing these evaluations for years, in a transparent objective quantitative way. You have never failed me with a product review, and even if our appraisals of a product would diverge, I would trust you 100% to be representing your honest opinion.
in other words, thanks for making this community so friendly and engaging. and you have my vote of confidence°
One thing I’ve learned here is that the ratings are more precise than “this feels doesn’t feel like an F and it feels more like a C across my experience of the shadows in my collection”.
Christine has developed a precise algorithm to try and evaluate products objectively. She has distilled product variability to 5 parameters, and her ratings across each one are based in part on the brand’s marketing promises.
Further, Christine has the biggest e/s collection of anyone I’ve ever met or come across online, so she has the personal statistics to back up her claims. For instance, would you rather see an MD who has treated 50 patients or one who has treated 50,000? Having been both, I can tell you I’m a better (and certainly more confident) MD now because of my stats and respect anyone who has taken the time to accumulate personal stats to back up any claims they make.
If you see a rating you disagree with, try first to understand why she rated it that way. Read the particulars of the individual e/s review. For instance, she and I had a disagreement about the white shimmer shade in the PMG Midnight Sun Mothership. The brand promised one thing (opaque pigmentation) and delivered another (sheer), and that affected both the shade rating and the overall rating of the palette. She took the time to explain to me her process, and then it made sense, even though I thought that shade was the best one in the palette.
And that is precisely why I return here daily. Christine has standardized her ratings, which lends her reviews a kind of scientific precision. I appreciate her desire to be both useful and objective, as well as the gargantuan effort and sheer output of her reviews. And having been a critic about that PMG shade when I wasn’t fully informed, I surely understand why someone might feel a rating is unwarranted in their subjective experience but it is very much warranted by Christine’s method.
Thanks for being willing to listen and understand, Valerie! 🙂 That really means a lot to me!!
Sometimes, I swear brands are allergic to the word “sheer” when they really should be using it!
I don’t believe I used the term “dismal”, but I do put a great deal of faith in Christine’s reviews, as well as her photos and swatches. As I don’t need yet another black eyeshadow (and it was one of the better performing shades), the overall rating for this drops even lower. Truth to tell, I can’t even see myself mustering up the energy to bother trying this out in-store. While it was the one that interested me most, I wasn’t all that keen on any of these.
Smoky bites the dust. The only truly beautiful shade in here is one I would strongly hesitate to use, even with glitter glue; Second Date. The other 5 shades do absolutely nothing for me.
I really like these colors; it’s a shame that You Up didn’t perform better.
Coming after Tom Ford’s abysmal effort yesterday, here we have the Fenty one. Apart from a 6 pan having two black shades (one with plastic glitter), the shimmer shades are awful, especially You Up.
What are the brands thinking?
This was the one I had my eye on…so glad I waited for your review! :o) Thank you as always!
I breezed along passing on these and I don’t see anything that would change my mind. I’m not even fond of the shade arrangements for my tastes.