MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad Review, Photos, Swatches

MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad
MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad

MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad ($44.00 for 0.05 oz.) is a warm-toned quad that features a gold, light copper, medium-dark copper, and warm taupe. I was disappointed that two of the shades were so, so similar to each other–if this was a palette of twenty eyeshadows, it would be easier to overlook, but when you only have four, it’s completely unnecessary. The wear was surprising (note, I applied all four with a damp brush over bare eyelids), as three of the four shades wore fairly well for eight hours, while the darker copper shade had some fading at the eight-hour mark. I didn’t notice any fall out during wear. The textures were soft but slightly powdery, and applying them dry worked best if I was applying over a good base, as they had a tough time sticking and adhering to bare skin or a more matte eyeshadow primer.

The formula of the mineralize eyeshadows held in the quad is described as a “sheer, lightweight application [that] allows each shade to build lightly, layer after layer, for dramatic colour with a lustrous glow.” It’s supposed to go on with “silky smooth coverage.” But then on some of the Mineralize Eyeshdaow formula descriptions, which follow along the sasme lines, the “sheer” part seems to refer more to the application rather than the color, because under the duos, they’re supposed to yield “easy, rich color.” Under the recently released Divine Night Mineralize Eyeshadows, it says “pairs two rich, contrasting shades.” And then, in the blurb about the new quads specifically, MAC writes, “The rich pigments of Mineralize Eye Shadow are a cult favourite of M•A•C lovers everywhere, because of their bold, blendable shades and gorgeous shimmer.”

It’s been a minute since I’ve looked up the official descriptions for this formula (I’ve been reviewing them for sooo many years now). Generally, they’re a wet and dry formula, which means that applied dry, you’ll get sheerer, softer color, and then applied damp, you’ll get richer, more true-to-pan color. This is typical of most baked formulas, though there have been shades that are quite pigmented no matter how you go about applying them.

Most of the time, I think Mineralize Eyeshadows look prettier in their pots and pans than they do applied. The major downside has always been texture (powdery/grainy, sometimes with fall out) and longevity (prone to fading faster than regular eyeshadow). For anyone who wants richly pigmented eyeshadow, then the tendency to skew sheerer can be a deal-breaker.

I think one thing we should address is the size–the palette contains a mere 0.05 oz. of product. Now, baked (or “Mineralized” as it is called at MAC) products tend to weigh less, even though they seem to take up about as much volume as any other product. To put it into context, Chanel’s baked eyeshadow quads (which is what non-U.S. is most familiar with) contains 0.04 oz. (and the U.S. regular powder eyeshadow quad contains 0.24 oz.).  For reference, a full-sized Mineralize Eyeshadow contains 0.06 oz. and retails for $21 ($350/oz.).  The Mineralize Eyeshadow Duos contain 0.07 oz. and retail for $21 ($300/oz.). This makes the Mineralize Eyeshadow Quads at a price of $880/oz. for the eyeshadow.  You could buy two eyeshadow duos for less than the cost of a quad ($42) and get 0.14 oz. of product–almost three times as much here.  Realistically, I don’t think that one will run through a Mineralize Eyeshadow, quad or single, quickly.

A Glimmer of Gold #1 is a muted, yellow gold with a frosted finish. Applied dry, it’s semi-sheer, and applied damp, it’s mostly opaque. The texture was fairly soft, though when applied dry, it does feel a little loose/powdery. Bobbi Brown 24 Karat (LE, $28.00) is a cream product, less yellow, more metallic. MAC Until Dawn #2 (LE, $21.00) is nearly the same. Sleek MakeUP Meet in Madrid (LE, $9.99) is more metallic. Giorgio Armani #10 #2 (P) is less frosted. MAC Dreammaker (LE, $15.00) is yellower. Urban Decay Blunt (P, $18.00) is similar. L’Oreal Eternal Sunshine (P, $7.99) is yellower. Giorgio Armani #1 Spring 2012 #3 (LE) is warmer. Chanel Intuition #2 (P) is warmer, darker. See comparison swatches.

A Glimmer of Gold #2 is a coppery orange with a golden shimmer and sheen. It had semi-opaque color coverage when applied dry, and then more opaque color coverage when applied with a damp brush. The finish also became more metallic when applied damp, as is often the case. The texture was fairly soft and smooth, not too powdery. This type of color is done frequently by many brands, so there is no shortage of similar shades available (past and present). Too Faced Jingle All the Way Eyeshadow #7 (LE) is similar. MAC Exquisite Ego #2 (LE, $21.00) is brighter/warmer but still similar. Too Faced Honey Honey (LE) is also similar. Guerlain Crazy Paris #1 (LE) is more orange. Sleek MakeUP Sunset #10 (P, $9.99) is slightly warmer. Maybelline Breaking Bronze (P, $6.99) is warmer, less frosted. MAC Brownluxe #3 (P) is yellower. theBalm Manic Maribel (LE, $16.00) is less orange. Urban Decay Chopper (P, $18.00) is less orange. MAC Retrospeck #2 (LE, $15.00) is darker. bareMinerals Hoopla (LE) is darker. See comparison swatches.

A Glimmer of Gold #3 is a slightly muted, copper with stronger brown tones than the shade before it and a frosted sheen–but it is less metallic. The texture on this one was powdery, almost grainy at times, with little bits of powder clumping together. When I applied it with a damp brush, this resolved a lot of those texture issues. The color payoff was semi-sheer when applied dry (but be careful, there will be excess fall out during application), and when applied damp, it was fully opaque. Too Faced Jingle All the Way Eyeshadow #7 (LE) is a touch lighter. Clarins The Essentials #6 (LE) is darker, browner. MAC Exquisite Ego #2 (LE, $21.00) is more orange. LORAC Gold (P) is warmer. Maybelline Breaking Bronze (P, $6.99) is slightly more golden. NARS Isolde #1 (P, $24.00) is less metallic. MAC Retrospeck #2 (LE, $15.00) is similar. bareMinerals Louder (LE) is slightly warmer. bareMinerals Hoopla (LE) is less metallic. See comparison swatches.

A Glimmer of Gold #4 is a medium-dark, taupe with subtle warm, brown undertones and a pearly sheen. It was the least frosted shade in the quad. It had semi-sheer pigmentation applied dry, and then mostly opaque coverage when applied with a damp brush. MAC Silver Dawn (LE, $19.50) is lighter. Anastasia Antique (LE) is grayer. Urban Decay Nameless (LE, $18.00) is a bit darker. Edward Bess Dusk (P, $30.00) is browner. Urban Decay MIA (LE, $18.00) is darker. MAC Twilight Falls (LE, $21.00) is cooler-toned, less brown. MAC Satin Taupe (P, $15.00) is darker, cooler-toned. See comparison swatches.

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

MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad
MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad

MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad
MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad

MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad
MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad

MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad
MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad

MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad
MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad

MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad
MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad

MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad
MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad

MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad
MAC A Glimmer of Gold #1 Mineralize Eyeshadow

MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad
MAC A Glimmer of Gold #1 Mineralize Eyeshadow

MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad
MAC A Glimmer of Gold #2 Mineralize Eyeshadow

MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad
MAC A Glimmer of Gold #2 Mineralize Eyeshadow

MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad
MAC A Glimmer of Gold #3 Mineralize Eyeshadow

MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad
MAC A Glimmer of Gold #3 Mineralize Eyeshadow

MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad
MAC A Glimmer of Gold #4 Mineralize Eyeshadow

MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad
MAC A Glimmer of Gold #4 Mineralize Eyeshadow

MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad
MAC A Glimmer of Gold #1 on inner lid, #2 on middle of lid, #3 on outer lid,
#4 in crease, Urban Decay Scorch Eyeliner on lash line

MAC A Glimmer of Gold Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad
MAC A Glimmer of Gold #1 on inner lid, #2 on middle of lid, #3 on outer lid,
#4 in crease, Urban Decay Scorch Eyeliner on lash line

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

Product Availability

MAC Mineralize Eyeshadow Quad $46.00/0.07 OZ.
When you purchase through our links above, you help support Temptalia. Thank You!

About the Reviewer

Reviewer

Christine has normal-to-dry skin with areas of dryness (cheeks, nose, and under the eyes). She has a light-medium skintone with subtle, warmer yellow undertones. Her best foundation matches include: Tarte Rainforest of the Sea in Light-Medium Neutral (best match), Estee Lauder Double Wear Stay-in-Place Makeup in Desert Beige 2N1, Giorgio Armani Maestro Glow in 4.0, Hourglass Warm Ivory Vanish Seamless Finish, Laura Mercier Candleglow Soft Luminous in Dusk, MAC NC20/NC25, Make Up For Ever Ultra HD Liquid in Y305 (140). For more matches, please read our full Foundation FAQ. For more information on our review process, please read our Review FAQ.

Compare Any Two Swatches

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

31 Comments

Comments that do not adhere to our comment policy may be removed. Discussion and debate are highly encouraged but we expect community members to participate respectfully. Please keep discussion on-topic, and if you have general feedback, a product review request, an off-topic question, or need technical support, please contact us!

Please help us streamline the comments' section and be more efficient: double-check the post above for more basic information like pricing, availability, and so on to make sure your question wasn't answered already. Comments alerting us to typos or small errors in the post are appreciated (!) but will typically be removed after errors are fixed (unless a response is needed).

We appreciate enthusiasm for new releases but ask readers to please hold questions regarding if/when a review will be posted as we can't commit to or guarantee product reviews. We don't want to set expectations and then disappoint readers as even products that are swatched don't always end up being reviewed due to time constraints and changes in priorities! Thank you for understanding!

Comments on this post are closed.

I like this product, but it just seems like the most generic of all color combinations that I’ve seen from every brand from drugstore to high-end.

Dare I say, despite the size of the individual pots and the similarity of shades 1 and 2, this is a quite pretty palette. That taupe-pewter shade in particular is lovely.

These seem like a totally miss for me. Aside from the lackluster performance, the shades aren’t anything spectacular. Plus, the packaging looks cheap to me (especially for something that costs nearly 50 bucks) and is super bulky for something that doesn’t contain much product.

Meh.

These are supposed to be permanent! You can always look at the Glossover, as the image of the product will have a P, LE, or DC – indicating the product’s status.

I LOVE the packaging for these quads, but the quality has just been a let down with previous mineralized eyeshadows and I doubt I’d ever try them again – there are too many good eyeshadows out there to waste my money on something I’m unlikely to use.

It looks fine but for the price-and how difficult mineralized eyeshadows are- I just can’t see myself getting any of these. Now, when mac comes out with an extra dimension eyeshadow quad I’ll be excited 😀

Ooooh! THAT sounds like a great idea. I wish they’d have done the same with the Pro Longwear shadows. Those shadows are SO HUGE that there is no likelihood I’ll ever finish any of the ones I have. Smaller sizes and a quad would be divine!

Pretty colors. Shame about the issues. Maybe Mac should concentrate on quality over quantity. Seems like a new collection every week.

#2 and #3 are so much alike (even most of the “dupes” are the same) that it seems a bit of a rip off that MAC put them both in one quad. Really not nice for us customers, if you ask me!

Interestingly, I’m not sure how well the last shade fits with the rest of these, for me. I do love me some gold eyeshadows, though!

The last shade (the bottom right one) is the shade I like most from this palette. I commented elsewhere that I wish that shade had been included in the green toned quad (though having seen the review and comments on that one, I’ve decided to pass on that one). But I like the bottom right one.

Really pretty versatile shades that I can see being very popular. Totally not unique in any way, but I imagine it’ll be popular anyway

This is the only quad that interested me and realistically I can’t see myself parting with money for it! I’m disappointed! I always hope for the best from MAC.

So pretty but I already have loads of shadows that are similar that perform a bit better. I can pick up another YSL Glossy Stain that you now have me hooked on Christine :p I picked up the fuchsia 109…love!!!

There is a mauve one…I can’t remember the number :p I couldn’t wait to try it out so I put it on after dinner and let it set a little. I did a hand kiss and all that came off was clear gloss…yay 🙂 Lol, the color was still on in the morning with a bit of fading. Way worth the $$$.

Wow, thanks for the price break-down; it was eye-opening and really useful! Everything about MAC Mineralize eyeshadows seems like a con to me – the nebulous product description, the name (why aren’t they just called ‘baked’? It seems like trickery!), the price, and now the fact that two of the shades in this palette are incredibly similar. This is one of those times I feel like MAC are just coasting along on their reputation.

No prob, Georgiana! Baked stuff is usually more expensive, but sometimes it helps to see just how much more expensive they can be – and if they don’t perform as well as regular powders, why bother?

While I like golds, it seems ridiculous to have 2 nearly identical shades in 1 quad. Good wear time on bare eyes for you, though!

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!