A Gold & Plum Look with Bad Habit Arabesque

Posted by Christine

01/05

38

About this Look

Here’s a look using the Bad Habit Arabesque palette, which is supposed to be a dupe for the Anastasia Soft Glam palette, so I wanted to apply each palette side-by-side using the same brushes (but separate ones for each brand) and one-by-one in order to really see and notate any differences in color, finish, application, along with longevity. Bad Habit Arabesque is on your left, while Anastasia Soft Glam is on your right.

(You can view the look details for Anastasia’s version here.)

Step-by-Step Guide

  • Inner tearduct: En Pointe
  • Inner lid: En Pointe
  • Middle of lid: Nutcracker
  • Outer lid: Esmeralda
  • Crease: Releve
  • Deep crease: Leotards
  • Above crease: Pirouette
  • Browbone: Avant
  • Lower lash line: Perversion, Ballet Slippers, Interlude (lowest), Grand Plie (against lash line)
  • Face: Almond + Warm Nude mixed for base, Light (2) on high points, blended over base
  • Cheeks: Cheeky Bits (lightly), Flesh & Fantasy (over Cheeky Bits), Bronze (03) (as highlighter, on cheekbones)
  • Lips: Rebel, Leo (applied on top)
Neutral
Smoky
We hope you'll consider supporting Temptalia by shopping through our links below. Thanks!

Compare Any Two Swatches

Curious how two shades compare to each other? Type in the shades below to get instant side-by-side swatches!

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

37 Comments

Discussion and debate are highly encouraged, and we expect community members to participate respectfully. Comments that include advertisements, self-promotion, insults, etc. may be in violation of our comment policy and subject to deletion. Please see our comment policy for more information.

Leave a Reply

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Those reviews will require donning the thinking cap, even for you! It’s almost as if bad habit has a chemist spy in these companies. They nail the colors. Unsure whether to laud them or pan them. I would never get a back alley knock off, but these look quite decent. Intellectual property rights, though? Hmmmmm

If there is no copyright or trademark, I would consider it the same type of situation as a knock-off of a runway look. Look, you can take any color to one of the big box stores and get paint matched, similar technology must be available for those in the color cosmetic formulary world, right?

Hey Christine, what a change, a wider shot of you with your hair down! You look stunning, and I love the coloured highlights in your hair. Gorgeous! <3

This looks great on you! I have the Bad Habit dupe for Subculture and it works great for my needs. I can’t afford ABH palettes so I appreciate having a good quality, cheap alternative. We all know that an eyeshadow palette doesn’t cost $40 or $50 dollars to produce so we should have an alternative to just paying for a brand name!

Love your looks Christine but I dislike the fact that this is a knock-off made in China. I see some blatant copyright issues here. Also, I watched a while ago an investigative report on the knock-off versions made in China of known cosmetics brands (I think it was a store in LA). They brought the ES and lipsticks to a lab for testing. They found in both the ES & lipsticks enough heavy metals which are toxic once they entered into the bloodstream or ingested. Plus other garbage stuff.

It’s important to note that there’s a huge difference in counterfeit products and dupes, e.g. brands that have recreated colors that other brands have released. This is not new territory – there are brands like Bad Habit that exist and sell through legitimate retailers like Ulta (like Makeup Revolution) that are strongly inspired by mid- and high-end offerings. Bad Habit is its own brand with its own naming system and formulations (the ingredient lists are by no means the same as what brands they’re obviously taking inspiration from). It’s not any different than Wet ‘n’ Wild’s Rose in the Air palette that is very similar to Anastasia’s Modern Renaissance palette or ColourPop’s Yes, Please palette being very, very similar to Natasha Denona’s Sunset palette.

Counterfeits are products produced to be replicas – to have the same branding, packaging, etc. and are sold to people thinking they’re purchasing the original/real thing. Huge, huge difference. Bad Habit doesn’t themselves market their products as dupes of anything – the user base does it for them – but they aren’t perpetuating themselves as Anastasia or Natasha Denona. Bad Habit has its own formulas, its own branding, different packaging, different names, and a different arrangement in colors, but it’s the overall color scheme (depths, undertones, and what is included) that is the part that seems very similar.

I understand Christine. I think there is a difference in semantics; I’ve used “knockoff” as in “copy that sells for less than the original” or “copy or imitation of someone/something popular” (the definitions from the Merriam-Webster dictionary) and not in the sense of counterfeit. Counterfeit is as you said deliberately selling a product under another brand’s name (like assuming another person’s ID). It’s fake and is a crime. A knockoff is a (cheaper) imitation. I know that in North America it’s not illegal per se to use an inspired design/concept but the company that releases an “inspired” product may have legal problems from the IP point of view (if you prove that the copy causes the original owner/brand prejudice). This prejudice can even result from the confusion created by identical/almost identical products. For instance, the two ES palettes from Bad Habit and ABH, if shown without the cover, are almost identical. The fact that the colours are not in the same order is not relevant if it leads to confusion. I’ve seen cases where the original owners win lawsuits for cases more difficult that this one. Now this is in Canada. (IP is federal matter here) I don’t know if the same is valid under the US law.
Now, separate from this, I have my reservation with respect to the ingredients used in any beauty product made in China, if the ingredients are from that part of the world. even if the ingredients are from Canada/USA, they are in most cases diluted. A few years ago it was a big scandal here as the paint used on wooden toys from a big Canadian toy manufacturer was full of lead, way beyond any acceptable norms. They could have caused great harm to the children if ingested. The Europeans sounded the alarm with respect to heavy metals found in cosmetics made in PRC a long time ago. Canada imposed some mandatory testing but not the USA.

Business of Fashion had an article about this: https://www.businessoffashion.com/articles/opinion/are-beauty-dupes-legal-makeup-revolution-charlotte-tilbury

If you’re uncomfortable purchasing products for whatever reason, I always support each person making the purchasing decisions that work best for them.

It seems like the incident that you referred to seems to be a seizure in April by LAPD (https://www.elle.com/beauty/makeup-skin-care/a19831650/counterfeit-makeup-feces/), which was of counterfeit products (different than obvious dupes).

There’s certainly discussion to be had on the ethics of what brands like Bad Habit are doing and how it fits into today’s world but it shouldn’t be conflated with counterfeit products. Similarly, discussion about accessibility and affordability is well-worth having on dupes, too. It would be fantastic to see Bad Habit have a more transparent “about us” that indicates who owns them and more about the brand as a whole.

There is a clear distinction between counterfeit products and knockoff/cheaper imitations as I mentioned.. Arabesque is not a counterfeit product as they sell it under their own brand(Bad Habit). Perhaps because I’m looking at it more from a legal perspective than a consumer’s one, I consider it an imitation/copy. “Dupe” qualification is subjective; as you’ve said, it is from the user’s perspective (some users may not consider a product a dupe based only on colour but based on the formula, ingredients etc. as well). But an imitation/copy has legal value under the Canadian law for instance, as it is objective. I know that you can’t have copyright/trademark on the existing colours , unless you came up with something that never existed before. But a final product like an ES palette involves a design & concept; which colours were selected and why, the layout, shape of the colours, black background, shape of the palette as a whole. These are all objective elements that can be proven and seen. The fact that another company, Bad Habit, took the exact same concept, without any effort and just put a different front cover and the name Arabesque won’t stand in a court of law in Canada if the other brand (the creator) would decide to sue them because it’s the entire creative and conceptual process that is imitated/reproduced. It’s like someone will reproduce the categories of your website, structure & system of reviews, but will use different colours and font. Hard work, creativity and originality need to be protected.I have nothing against affordable products as long as they put some conceptual & creative effort into it. There are so many affordable brands who do that. But just to take someone else’s ideas and efforts… that does not stand an objective and legal scrutiny, imho. It’s more than an ethics issue as it creates confusion and may mislead the cx. Intention to mislead is irrelevant here. Bad Habit could have taken some of the colours and add some new; could have come up with a different layout, background, shape etc.
The report from LA was presented on the ICI Explora TV channel from here, I think a couple of years ago; the fragment I saw concerned ABH & ColourPop counterfeit products as well as “no name” brands (names invented in China) and it was about the heavy metals found in the products, well beyond the accepted toxicity levels.
Sometimes it’s discouraging to look at something from a lawyer’s perspective 🙂

Hi Nicole,

Thanks for sharing your perspective! It would be interesting to see it play out in court. I’m certainly no expert, which was why I referred you to an article about this very topic that did consult some experts since you were talking about it! 🙂

It’s not any different than any other photo… I can’t see myself taking photos of myself (I take all my own photos, and my camera’s screen faces away from me) – I just look down 🙂

These are YOUR colors Christine! I’m a long time reader, and don’t usually comment, but I just had to let you know how beautiful this is on you!

We try to approve comments within 24 hours (and reply to them within 72 hours) but can sometimes get behind and appreciate your patience! 🙂 If you have general feedback, product review requests, off-topic questions, or need technical support, please contact us directly. Thank you for your patience!