MAC Matte Bronze Bronzing Powder Review, Photos, Swatches
MAC Matte Bronze Bronzing Powder
MAC Matte Bronze Bronzing Powder ($70.00 for 0.35 oz.) is described as a “bare shouldered bronze.” It was a medium-dark, tan brown with a subtle gray-tinge and warm undertones. It had a matte finish. MAC Scone (LE, $25.00) is rosier. Tarte Park Ave. Princess #2 (LE) is similar. MAC Aphrodite’s Shell (LE, $33.00) is lighter. Too Faced Chocolate Soleil (P) is similar. NARS Laguna (P, $36.00) is more satin. See comparison swatches / view dupes.
It is housed in a large, hefty metal compact (there’s no lack of weight with this compact). The product inside is part of the permanent range, which can be add for a mere $25.00 (and is also 0.35 oz. in size), so with this you are truly paying $45 just for packaging. It had decent to good color payoff, but the texture wasn’t impressive. It feels almost soft, yet dry, where the powder clumps and sticks together but doesn’t blend out easily. It’s hard to explain, but it lacks silkiness and blendability. On me, it lasted for eight hours before fading. I wish MAC had chosen to create a new, limited edition highlighter, probably with a design on the actual powder, with a really lovely texture; something that would rival luxury, seasonal highlighters that brands like Dior and Chanel release.
See more photos & swatches!
MAC Matte Bronze Bronzing Powder
MAC Matte Bronze Bronzing Powder
MAC Matte Bronze Bronzing Powder
MAC Matte Bronze Bronzing Powder
MAC Matte Bronze Bronzing Powder
MAC Matte Bronze Bronzing Powder
MAC Matte Bronze Bronzing Powder
MAC Matte Bronze Bronzing Powder
MAC Matte Bronze Bronzing Powder
looks great on your skin …but why such a high price for the regular powder just for packaging , mac seems to be out of ideas
It’s definitely more expensive packaging than their regular compact, but I think when confronted with the actual price difference, it can be hard to justify the extra just for packaging.
Hmmm…. No, thank you. When you really lay out the pricing like that, it doesn’t make sense to buy… $45 for a compact? I don’t think so.
Unless the packaging is really up your alley, I think it is hard to swallow!
hmmm now I’m really contemplating if I should get it. At first it was definitely on my list. Now that you said the product is a little lacking, hmmm… I don’t know.
If it had been one of their Extra Dimension Bronzers or their Pro Longwear… at least it would have felt more luxurious.
Now I’m not sure if I should splurge $70 just for some really nice packaging.
So true what you say about the fact that mac should release a good highlighter, something like the Kevin aucoin celestial powder, or like pearly pink color, or gold, silver… Any of these i would buy for sure, but 70 dls for this? No.
Seemed like a no-brainer to me!
The color is nice, but considering the price and the texture, I’ll stick with Milk Chocolate Soleil.
Good call! 🙂
I’m not even really much of a highlighter fan and even I agree with you. I’ve just come to associate highlighters with the holiday season. If they had released this in the fall a bronzer (especially matte) would have felt much more at home; I like when brands release non-traditional colors during seasonal releases, but this just seems pretty misplaced. I know MAC likes to think outside the box but this whole collection so far just seems a little “off” to me.
To justify such a high-end price from a mid-range line you really need to make everything flawless. I love the packaging and actually collect MAC compacts, but I don’t see myself getting anything from this release unless the lipsticks or shadow duos are stellar.
I hope one of the eyeshadow duos appeals to you!
Uh, no. The packaging is absolutely gorgeous, I prefer something that’s not heavy, unless I have a personal assistant to help me carry my makeup around (which I don’t). And if you’re going to pay $70 for a bronzer, it better get an A rating. Maybe they should’ve spent more money on the formula and less on the packaging, and kept it around $50, which is still expensive, but within reach.
I think you could almost get a Tom Ford bronzer for this price… Though his is massive, so maybe that’s closer to $90.
I totally agree that MAC should have made this highlight instead. A highlight powder would have been more universal and a pretty imprint would have justified the price a little more
I think that would have been a really good move!
Too warm for me! Great packaging though.
The packaging is nice!
Uh, well, I’m not really the market for bronzers anyway, but (if I switch my brain to MAC US pricing), it seems like MAC are leaning outside their usual price market with this? There isn’t technically anything wrong with doing that occasionally I guess, but come on, at least make the contents awesome! For this money I could get that drool-worthy Chanel highlighter! 😉
Oh, yes, they are. $25 vs. $70!
I was going to buy this (just because of the packaging because I’ma sucker for gold packaging).. but since this is lacking in quality I might skip this and buy myself the long wanted Kevyn Aucoin celestial powder..
Celestial!!
Wow, I have this bronzer in the normal packaging. The quality is much better than what you described. Honestly this entire collection is a huge joke and turning me off of the MAC brand. MAC has honestly been on a downward spiral in terms of price and quality lately, with several uninspired and lacking collections lately. Shame.
I find the bronzing powders have some consistency issues 🙁
I like it but once again, not gonna pay that much just for the pretty packaging!
It’s so much harder when you can get it for $25 normally!
What was MAC thinking….is what Im thinking.
I do wonder what motivates them to push a launch like this.
I have to say something good here. But the bad first: The price point here is just stupid for MAC. Yo MAC, you are not a ‘luxury’ brand, ‘kay, not even when you copy another luxury brands’ packaging (cough.. YSL) Anyhow, on to the good: I do have to compliment the bronzer shade here since I always feel MAC gravitates to rather hideously weird yellow and orange based bronzer colours which do nothing for my skintones. Yes, this shade looks workable, but I will NOT pay $70 dollars for it. Won’t.
The packaging has to do really do it for the buyer, since if it’s just the product you’re after, it can be had for $25 any day of the year!
…they could’ve put a couple of Swaravskis in the dots of their logo or something to make the packaging a bit more luxe, pressed the powder with a pretty imprint, and it’d still be a bit pricy for what it is. But at least it’d be a more attractive upsell.
I think there should have been an imprint at the very least!
The packaging of this bronzer looks absolutely divine! I would purchase this for the packaging alone!
Awesome! 🙂
I personally love packaging and I like the color and would want it even though I have 2 of the dupes. However, $70 and I can see the chunky texture on the swatch, no way!!!!!
I think the packaging was well-done on the bronzing compact!
I agree with you, Christine! A highlighter would be great. Is MAC going all holiday season without a skinfinish? Very disappointed.
It just makes sense to do an over-the-top highlighter, I think!
Thanks for saving me $70, I already have this bronzer in the regular packaging so I’ll definitely skip this guy. Why didn’t they make this an extra dimension skin finish highlighter?! Waaaaaahhhhhh!
No problem, Jenny!
Maybe if this was my tried and true HG bronzer I would splurge for the cool packaging just for fun. I actually like the color but I definitely need a bronzer that blends easily, so no way could I do $70 for this.
I wish they had used one of the PLW bronzers!
I bought a bronzed I really like this year. I’m fair so they can be found challenge. I bought Edward Bess bronzed in a simple oblong compact with a mirror and brush. The color is neutral, not dark and is matte with no organs or pink undertones. Don’t recall price but is the best I’ve purchased for my complexion. I know it was well under $70.00
Love that it’s matte! But I’m not sure about the texture and that gray tinge…
70 dollars!? the packaging is absolutely stunning, but spending 45 dollars extra for the same product thats permanent, AND its not even A+ quality…. I will pass.