MAC Dazzlepink Dazzle Highlighter Review & Swatches
Dazzlepink
MAC Dazzlepink Dazzle Highlighter ($34.00 for 0.34 oz.) is a light-medium peach with pink-to-peach shifting glitter. As described, the base was transparent, but there was plenty of “coverage” in the form of sparkle and flecks of flatter glitter particles. This translated into a noticeably glittery, highly reflective finish that was sparkly but not dirt-like at some angles (an issue with some glitters) due to the flat shape. The powder felt smooth, dense and more cream-like, but it picked up well with a tapered, highlighting brush and adhered evenly to bare skin. It wore well for eight hours with minimal migration/movement of the glitter over time.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- MAC Wrapped in Gold (LE, $42.00) is less shimmery (95% similar).
- Becca Spanish Rose Glow (LE, $38.00) is less shimmery (90% similar).
- Looxi Beauty La Belle (P, $7.50) is less shimmery, warmer (90% similar).
- Melt Cosmetics Iluminacion (P, $39.00) is less shimmery, cooler (90% similar).
- ColourPop Chiffon (LE, $8.00) is less shimmery, warmer (90% similar).
- Makeup Geek Luster (P, $20.00) is less shimmery (90% similar).
- Marc Jacobs Beauty Showstopper (81) (LE, $49.00) is less shimmery, warmer (90% similar).
- BH Cosmetics Carli Bybel Deluxe Edition #16 (LE, ) is cooler (90% similar).
- Haus Labs Pink Amethyst (P, $40.00) is less shimmery, cooler (90% similar).
- Kaja Prizm (DC, $19.00) is less shimmery, lighter, less pigmented (90% similar).
Formula Overview
$34.00/0.34 oz. - $100.00 Per Ounce
The formula is supposed to "reflect light with a shock of sparkle over translucent colour" with a "cream-powder" base that has "minimal fallout" and can be layered over "blush and eye shadow." It is supposed to wear for "8 hours." They had a dense, but smooth, consistency with lots of fleck-like sparkle and glitter--flatter but very reflective particles that adhered better to the skin and did, in fact, have "minimal fallout" and some travel/migration of sparkles over time but a lot of stayed in place over the eight hours it lasted for. The pigmentation was as described: lots of glitter and a transparent base, so it had "coverage" but in the form of sparkle and glitter. For all the reflective qualities of the finish, it didn't emphasize my skin's texture. They were easy to apply and blend out without losing the "coverage" or initial placement of the product.
Browse all of our MAC Dazzle Highlighter swatches.
Look Using this Product
Dazzlepink
LELimited Edition. $34.00.
MAC Dazzlepink Dazzle Highlighter
MAC Dazzlepink Dazzle Highlighter
MAC Dazzlepink Dazzle Highlighter
MAC Dazzlepink Dazzle Highlighter
MAC Dazzlepink Dazzle Highlighter
MAC Dazzlepink Dazzle Highlighter
MAC Dazzlepink Dazzle Highlighter
This is the thing that will get me off the MAC sidelines. Haven’t purchased from them in probably a year, but anything called Dazzlepink is coming home with me. (Yes, I have eleventy million dupes. Buying anyway.)
I do have ABH Forever Young. However, this does appear to be more “refined” glitter. Not the obnoxious, in-your-face type that screams “teenager or twenty-somethings need only apply!” Meaning this could possibly work for a far greater age/skin texture range.
I think the transparent base might be responsible for that!
What a soft and subtle shade this one is – very, very pretty.
It’s both subtle and intense, I think! Just depending on the light/angle.
That looks SO pretty! And the glitters you describe don’t seem all that evident in the photo so they must be “nice” glitters! Definitely going to check this one out.
They’re flatter, so they sit better on the skin and never seem to look like grit/dirt like some glitters can!
Der Christine,
do you think this is a good dupe for the past Dior Holo luminizer gold 002 of this winter?
I’m looking for something that can have quite the same sparkle 😉
Thank you!
This is much more sparkly, IMO!
My, but that’s pretty. The finish is perfection.