MAC Haute Dogs Mineralize Rich Lipsticks Reviews, Photos, Swatches
MAC Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Barking Gorgeous Mineralize Rich Lipstick ($23.00 for 0.12 oz.) is described as a “light peach.” It’s a light-medium, peachy-orange with warm undertones and fine frosted shimmer. It had semi-opaque coverage at most, and it was somewhat streaky applied. The texture was lightweight, creamy, and hydrating overall, but the color/shimmer pulled into lip lines over the three and a half hours it wore for me. Tarte Skinny Dip (P, $21.00) is less shimmery (90% similar). MAC Tumble Dry (LE, $19.00) is less shimmery, cooler (85% similar). NARS Embrasse Moi (LE, $28.00) is darker (85% similar). Revlon Apricot Fantasy (P, $8.49) is more shimmery, darker, less pigmented (85% similar). Anastasia Orange Blossom (LE, $18.00) is more shimmery, darker (85% similar). shu uemura OB Dream Orange (LE, $30.00) is more shimmery, darker, glossier (80% similar). Tom Ford Beauty Sable Smoke (P, $57.00) is less shimmery, darker, cooler (80% similar). NARS Peloponnese (P, $28.00) is more shimmery, darker, less glossy (80% similar). Guerlain Gracieuse (DC, $58.00) is darker, glossier (80% similar). See comparison swatches / view dupes side-by-side.
MAC Fashion Pack Mineralize Rich Lipstick ($23.00 for 0.12 oz.) is described as a “pale pink nude.” It’s a light, pink-tinted beige with fine pearl. It had semi-sheer to semi-opaque, buildable coverage that applied fairly evenly. I had some issues with the color settling into lip lines after two hours of wear, and the color lasted three and a half hours in total. The formula was comfortable to wear and lightly hydrating. Tom Ford Beauty Alexander (2016) (P, $36.00) is warmer (95% similar). MAC Myself (LE, $19.00) is less shimmery, darker, more muted (90% similar). Urban Decay Earthling (DC, $18.00) is lighter (90% similar). MAC Crème d'Nude (LE, $19.00) is cooler (90% similar). Burberry Gold No. 217 (LE, $33.00) is lighter, less pigmented (90% similar). Urban Decay Walk of Shame (DC, $18.00) is brighter, less pigmented (90% similar). MAC Japanese Maple (LE, $19.00) is darker (90% similar). Cle de Peau Silk Scroll (P, $65.00) is darker (90% similar). MAC Opal Beach (LE, $25.00) is lighter, cooler (85% similar). Estee Lauder Desirable (P, $32.00) is less shimmery, darker (85% similar). Bobbi Brown Uber Beige (P, $24.00) is less shimmery, darker (85% similar). Urban Decay Sheer Walk of Shame (DC, $22.00) is less shimmery, cooler (85% similar). MAC Flair for Finery (LE, $19.00) is cooler (85% similar). MAC Romantic Breakdown (LE, $19.00) is lighter, glossier (85% similar). MAC Sublime Pleasure (LE, $19.00) is cooler (85% similar). MAC Pure Vanity (LE, $19.00) is lighter, less pigmented (85% similar). Bite Beauty Musk (DC, $24.00) is darker, glossier (80% similar). Guerlain Galiane (15) (DC, $58.00) is less shimmery, darker, brighter (80% similar). MAC 2N (LE, $19.00) is less shimmery, lighter, cooler (80% similar). Chanel Intime (93) (P, $37.00) is less shimmery, cooler, glossier (80% similar). Top 20 dupes listed, see the rest. See comparison swatches / view dupes side-by-side.
MAC Labradorable Mineralize Rich Lipstick ($23.00 for 0.12 oz.) is described as a “deep wine.” It’s a dark berry-red with subtle, cool undertones and a luminous sheen. On my skin tone, the red seems to pull forward a lot more than the berry in it, but it may look cooler-toned and less red against pink-toned complexions. It had semi-sheer to semi-opaque coverage, while the consistency had more slip than the other shades so it didn’t apply as evenly as I’d like. This shade didn’t feather on me, but the higher slip may make it prone to feathering on some. It wore for four and a half hours and was lightly hydrating. MAC Cordovan (DC, $21.00) is cooler (90% similar). MAC Diva Antics (LE, $19.00) is more pigmented, warmer (85% similar). Tom Ford Beauty Alasdhair (LE, $36.00) is more shimmery, lighter, cooler (90% similar). Bobbi Brown Plum Brandy (DC, $37.00) is darker (90% similar). Hourglass Warrior (P, $32.00) is cooler (90% similar). Milani Bitten (P, $8.99) is less shimmery, cooler (90% similar). Giorgio Armani #408 (P, $32.00) is more muted (90% similar). Chanel Pourpre d'Or (137) (LE, $45.00) is less shimmery, lighter (90% similar). Urban Decay Bruise (LE, $18.00) is lighter, brighter (90% similar). Bite Beauty Sugared Maple (LE, $24.00) is brighter, cooler (90% similar). Guerlain Orgueil (DC, $49.50) is darker (90% similar). Bite Beauty Mulberry (DC, $24.00) is less shimmery, lighter (85% similar). Burberry Bright Plum (15) (P, $30.00) is less shimmery, less glossy (90% similar). MAC Night Club School (LE, $19.00) is less shimmery, darker (85% similar). Buxom Menace (DC, $21.00) is brighter (85% similar). MAC Out With a Bang (LE, $19.00) is less shimmery, lighter, cooler (85% similar). Laura Mercier Merlot (P, $26.00) is lighter, warmer (90% similar). Inglot #293 Lipstick Cream (P, $12.00) is cooler, glossier (90% similar). MAC Elle Belle (LE, $19.00) is darker (90% similar). See comparison swatches / view dupes side-by-side.
MAC Nose for Style Mineralize Rich Lipstick ($23.00 for 0.12 oz.) is described as a “deep claret red.” It’s a muted, medium-dark coppery-red with warm undertones and a dusting of fuchsia and gold pearl. It had semi-sheer to semi-opaque pigmentation that applied evenly and smoothly. This was one of the better shades in the five released with this collection. It wore well for almost five hours and was hydrating while worn. Buxom Runaway (DC, $21.00) is less shimmery, darker (90% similar). Tom Ford Beauty Bittersweet (03) (LE, $55.00) is more shimmery, lighter, less pigmented (85% similar). Chanel Antoinette (406) (P, $37.00) is more shimmery, lighter (85% similar). Chanel Imperial (DC, $32.00) is darker, more muted (85% similar). Bobbi Brown Plum Shimmer (3) (P, $28.00) is more shimmery, lighter (85% similar). Tom Ford Beauty Eric (P, $36.00) is more shimmery, lighter, cooler (80% similar). See comparison swatches / view dupes side-by-side.
MAC Rare Breed Mineralize Rich Lipstick ($23.00 for 0.12 oz.) is described as a “midtone pinky nude.” It’s a muted, light-medium rosy pink with lighter, ultra-fine gold pearl. The coverage varied from semi-sheer to semi-opaque, so it was buildable as it was supposed to be. The texture was lightweight, creamy without being too slippery, and covered with even color. This shade wore for four hours on me and was hydrating while worn. MAC Marque (P, $23.00) is darker, warmer (85% similar). Bobbi Brown Baby Pink (DC, $28.00) is more shimmery, darker, less glossy (90% similar). Chanel Gardenia (DC, $34.00) is more shimmery, darker (90% similar). Chanel Cecile (432) (P, $37.00) is lighter (90% similar). Chanel Mademoiselle (434) (P, $37.00) is darker (85% similar). Marc Jacobs Beauty Roleplay (110) (DC, $30.00) is darker, warmer (85% similar). See comparison swatches / view dupes side-by-side.
FORMULA SUMMARY | MAC Mineralize Rich Lipstick ($23.00 for 0.12 oz.) is supposed to be a “lightweight” formula that “nourishes lips with maximum moisture” with “long-lasting colour” that is “buildable” with a “medium-shine finish.” The formula has MAC’s signature vanilla scent but no discernible taste. The majority of the shades I’ve tested in this formula have semi-opaque to opaque coverage, last four to six hours, are hydrating, and feel comfortable to wear. Some shades will leave visible “lines” if you press your lips together, but it varies from shade to shade.
Barking Gorgeous
LELimited Edition. $25.00.
Fashion Pack
LELimited Edition. $25.00.
Labradorable
LELimited Edition. $25.00.
Nose for Style
LELimited Edition. $25.00.
Rare Breed
LELimited Edition. $25.00.
See more photos & swatches!
MAC Barking Gorgeous Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Barking Gorgeous Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Barking Gorgeous Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Barking Gorgeous Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Barking Gorgeous Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Barking Gorgeous Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Fashion Pack Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Fashion Pack Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Fashion Pack Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Fashion Pack Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Fashion Pack Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Fashion Pack Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Labradorable Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Labradorable Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Labradorable Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Labradorable Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Labradorable Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Labradorable Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Nose for Style Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Nose for Style Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Nose for Style Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Nose for Style Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Nose for Style Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Nose for Style Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Rare Breed Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Rare Breed Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Rare Breed Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Rare Breed Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Rare Breed Mineralize Rich Lipstick
MAC Rare Breed Mineralize Rich Lipstick
Rare Breed and Barking Gorgeous are really pretty. Will definitely check them out at the counter.
Hope you find one you like, Lily!
Rare Breed is a little too sheer for me, but some of the dupes (MAC Marque) might work -love the gold shimmer.
Marque is SO nice!
Mineralized is not one of my favorites. They feel heavy, don’t blend, look patchy, & don’t last. Also, they cost more than the other formulas. I usually buy most of the Fall collection, this one is disappointing.
Oh, that is too bad! I find myself personally liking the Mineralize formula better than a lot of their regular line 🙁 I’m sure MAC has plenty more collections for fall around the corner for you!
I don’t know about the quality, but I really like the colours pretty much all round in this mac collection. Nose for Style in particular looks really pretty on you. It’s weird I used to own the Chanel Imperial (I miss the Rouge Allure Laques…) dupe and I remember it looking quite a bit darker and less red-toned on me – strange how colours vary from person to person.
Nose for Style is a more interesting color than anticipated, I think! You see ones like it a lot.
Rare Breed is such a close dupe for Marque, same color, just lighter! No wonder it looks great!
I love Labradorable, but having just purchased UD After Dark, I wasn’t too sure that I need it. Until I looked at the dupe list and saw that these two are different enough to justify both, I think?
The finish is pretty different! 🙂
I thought I’d like Labradorable best, but I actually prefer the color of Nose for Style. The others are pretty, but too light and sheer for my use
Nose for Style is a good one for a fall launch, I think!
I ordered Rare Breed when I saw your initial swatches. I’m glad it did so well! I really love The looks of all of them except Fashion Pack. I love Barking Gorgeous too. But, I hate the lip line-pulling thing. So, I will pass on that one too. I already caved on Nose For Fashion too earlier when I glanced at the reviews as I don’t believe I have anything similar in my stash. I am teetering on Labradorable. But, I may have to wait for when this hits the counters (if it comes near me- I am thinking it will because it seems like a popular collection). It seems like a color I may have a lot a like. But, it has that sheen, ya know?. .Ugh. These Fall collections and BTS shopping for my daughter and fall sports ..agh.My wallet is about to jump off the bridge!
Rare Breed is one of the more interesting ones, I think! 🙂 It should be at counters everywhere (regular MAC collection) – and it doesn’t seem too popular so you probably won’t have major issues with it selling out instantly.
Still love Nose for Style and Labradorable. Just gorgeous. As the for the nude lips – isn’t that getting old fashioned now?
I don’t think they’ll ever go out of style!
Am I missing where the rest of your makeup is listed, or is that something that was cut? I love your eyeshadow in these pictures.
Listed in the sidebar!
“Haute dog” when spoken aloud sounds like some sort of granola hippie invention designed to try and convert people to veganism, haha.
I love the look of these, and the Mineralize formula is one of the few from MAC’s line that I can wear. Rare Breed is probably my favorite of the bunch, though I’m curious if it would pull too warm on me. Rosy pinks have a bad habit of going sallow on me.
I’ll be curious to hear if you end up trying Rare Breed!
Can I just say that Labradorable is the BEST name ever? The shade is pretty great as well, but the naaaaaame.
It is a nice play on labrador (or even labradoodle!).
I must say that three out of five going on the wish list is quite a good result. I’m not sure I’ll buy them all, but I really like them. I’m skipping Labradorable and Fasion Pack. Barking Gorgeous might be wrong for me, but it looks so good on you, Christine I at the very least have to try it.
Aw, thank you, Helene!
Thank you for your swatches but i want to comment about your eyes! You have lovely color and these eyeshadows you are wearing make them even more beautiful! You don’t write anymore the rest of your makeup do you? If it is somewhere written and i haven’t seen it i apologise!
Sorry, I just forgot – I’m a dummy! I have included it now.
Rare Breed is an interesting shade, maybe I’ll try it!
Awesome!
Yep, probably going to pick up Rare Breed. 🙂
It’s an interesting color!
Rare Breed looks like a really pretty nude! I like Labradorable too but mostly for the name. It’s just too cute lol!
That was my fave name out of the collection!
I love the color of Labradorable!
It’s pretty!
Does anyone know of a drugstore dupe for Rare Breed? Thanks!
I wish I could help!
How close are Rare Breed and Viva Glam V?
I’m not sure!
Is Barking Gorgeous also a dupe from Salute (Hei Sailor)? Can you do a dupe with them? And also compare the one from the Osbourne Collection. I am in doubt, whether to buy this or the Marguerita from Giambattista Valli.
http://www.temptalia.com/side-by-side?sbs_1_search=Barking+Gorgeous&sbs_1=204597&sbs_2_search=Salute&sbs_2=107562