Makeup Geek Do-si-do, Curtsey, Salsa Showstopper Crème Stains Reviews, Photos, Swatches
Do-si-do
Makeup Geek Do-si-do Showstopper Creme Stain ($12.00 for 0.19 fl. oz.) is a light-medium beige with warm undertones and a matte finish. It had nearly opaque pigmentation that covered fairly evenly, but it was slightly tacky and lifted away if I pressed my lips together within the first hour of wear. It looked a lot darker swatched than on my lips, though. The texture was thin, watery, and after it had dried down, it was extremely clingy and made my lips feel tight. The color lasteed for three and a half hours before there were serious pieces totally missing as it flaked off over time. The formula felt fairly drying.
The Showstopper Creme Stain formula is supposed to be “long-lasting” and “highly pigmented and offers effortless, buildable coverage.” Highly pigmented and buildable make it confusing what the coverage actually is, since something that is buildable means that it is less pigmented but can be layered for greater coverage. The majority of shades were medium to semi-opaque in coverage, hard to build as they often pulled up the first layer and shifted color around. The formula rarely applied well; it was streaky, dried so fast that there was no time for corrections (and attempts to correct just made it worse), and clingy. I found the applicator rougher, and the packaging made it seem that sometimes it was more like I wasn’t getting enough product on the wand to even coverage half of a lip (it seemed like the opening was wiping away too much product from the doefoot applicator). For every single swatch, I had to dip and pull the wand two to three times just to get enough product to cover my lips (it was impossible to stretch out the product very far as it dried as I was spreading it). It did dry to a transfer-resistant finish, but it did not survive eating well (most liquid lipstick formulas have survived better for me). Though transfer-resistant, it remained slightly tacky for one to two hours–and if you use more than one to one and a half layers, it often lifted and separated the color.
The brand’s swatches and lip swatches showcase a seemingly opaque product, but I could not achieve opaque coverage with several shades, even trying four or five layers, and the result after five layers of product was uneven, patchy, and cakey. The wear was average–four to six hours with significant fading from the center, which is more what I’d experience with a typical lipstick and a liquid lipstick–and surprisingly, little staining, even with deeper shades. So far, they have been slightly drying to somewhat drying. There are so many high-performing liquid lipsticks on the marketplace already, so I was caught off guard by the poor application and performance of this formula.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- Too Faced Child Star (P, $21.00) is darker, cooler (90% similar).
- Maybelline Nude Thrill (DC, $7.49) is glossier (90% similar).
- Sephora Love Love (07) (P, $8.00) is cooler, glossier (85% similar).
- ColourPop Vice (LE, $6.50) is brighter, cooler (85% similar).
- MAC Peachy Peter (LE, $19.00) is brighter, warmer (85% similar).
- ColourPop Midi (DC, $6.50) is darker, cooler (85% similar).
- Too Faced Melted Ice Cream (LE, $21.00) is lighter, brighter (85% similar).
- MAC Honeylove (P, $19.00) is darker, warmer, glossier (80% similar).
- ColourPop She Bad (P, $6.00) is darker, warmer (80% similar).
- Make Up For Ever M100 (DC, $22.00) is darker, glossier (80% similar).
Formula Overview
$12.00/0.19 oz. - $63.16 Per Ounce
The Showstopper Creme Stain formula is supposed to be “long-lasting” and “highly pigmented and offers effortless, buildable coverage.” Highly pigmented and buildable make it confusing what the coverage actually is, since something that is buildable means that it is less pigmented but can be layered for greater coverage. The majority of shades were medium to semi-opaque in coverage, hard to build as they often pulled up the first layer and shifted color around. The formula rarely applied well; it was streaky, dried so fast that there was no time for corrections (and attempts to correct just made it worse), and clingy.
I found the applicator rougher, and the packaging made it seem that sometimes it was more like I wasn’t getting enough product on the wand to even coverage half of a lip (it seemed like the opening was wiping away too much product from the doefoot applicator). For every single swatch, I had to dip and pull the wand two to three times just to get enough product to cover my lips (it was impossible to stretch out the product very far as it dried as I was spreading it).
It did dry to a transfer-resistant finish, but it did not survive eating well (most liquid lipstick formulas have survived better for me). Though transfer-resistant, it remained slightly tacky for one to two hours–and if you use more than one to one and a half layers, it often lifted and separated the color.
The brand’s swatches and lip swatches showcase a seemingly opaque product, but I could not achieve opaque coverage with several shades, even trying four or five layers, and the result after five layers of product was uneven, patchy, and cakey. The wear was average–four to six hours with significant fading from the center, which is more what I’d experience with a typical lipstick and a liquid lipstick–and surprisingly, little staining, even with deeper shades. So far, they have been slightly drying to somewhat drying. There are so many high-performing liquid lipsticks on the marketplace already, so I was caught off guard by the poor application and performance of this formula.
Browse all of our Makeup Geek Showstopper Crème Stain swatches.
Ingredients
Polybutene, Caprylic/Capric Triglyceride, Polyethylene, Calcium Sodium Borosilicate, Microcrystalline WaxCera MicrocristallinaCire Microcristalline, Dipentaerythrityl Hexahydroxystearate, Octyldodecanol, Dicalcium Phosphate, WaterAquaEau, Alumina, Tin Oxide, Silica, Calcium Aluminum Borosilicate, Synthetic Fluorphlogopite, Aluminum Calcium Sodium Silicate, Disteardimonium Hectorite, Alcohol, Fragrance (Parfum), Pentaerythrityl Tetra-Di-T-Butyl Hydroxyhydrocinnamate, [+/- Mica, Titanium Dioxide (Ci 77891), Iron Oxides (Ci 77491), Iron Oxides (Ci 77492), Iron Oxides (Ci 77499), Bismuth Oxychloride (Ci 77163), Blue 1 Lake (Ci 42090), Bronze Powder (Ci 77400), Carmine (Ci 75470), Copper Powder (Ci 77400), Manganese Violet (Ci 77742), Orange 5 (Ci 45370), Red 6 (Ci 15850), Red 7 (Ci 15850), Red 21 (Ci 45380), Red 27 (Ci 45410), Red 7 Lake (Ci 15850), Red 22 Lake (Ci 45380), Red 28 Lake (Ci 45410), Red 30 Lake (Ci 73360), Red 33 Lake (Ci 17200), Yellow 5 Lake (Ci 19140), Yellow 6 Lake (Ci 15985)]
Disclaimer: Ingredient lists are as available by the brand (or retailer) at the time of publishing. Please always check product packaging, if it exists, for the ingredient list applicable to the product you're purchasing, or the brand or retailer's website for the most up-to-date ingredient list.
Do-si-do
LELimited Edition. $12.00.
Curtsey
Makeup Geek Curtsey Showstopper Creme Stain ($12.00 for 0.19 fl. oz.) is a light-medium, peachy orange with warm undertones and a matte finish. This was another shade that appeared lighter and more white-based on my lips than swatched–it appeared almost chalk-like, as it had such a dry, texture-emphasizing dry down. It had semi-opaque color coverage that went on unevenly and looked patchy. The texture was thin, watery, and dried down to a very clingy, uncomfortable feel. The color lasted for three to four hours, but there were big chunks missing as the color flaked off. It was also drying.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- KVD Beauty Noble (P, $20.00) is lighter (95% similar).
- Obsessive Compulsive Cosmetics Lament (DC, $18.00) is glossier (90% similar).
- Anastasia Peachy (LE, $20.00) is darker (90% similar).
- MAC Shrimpton (P, $19.00) is lighter (90% similar).
- ColourPop Platform (LE, $6.50) is warmer (90% similar).
- ColourPop Likely (P, $7.00) is glossier (90% similar).
- Makeup by Mario Sierra (P, $24.00) is cooler (85% similar).
- MAC Oxblood (LE, $19.00) is darker, glossier (85% similar).
- ColourPop Midnight Snack (DC, $6.50) is more muted, cooler (85% similar).
- Urban Decay Kinky (P, $18.00) is darker, more muted (85% similar).
Formula Overview
$12.00/0.19 oz. - $63.16 Per Ounce
The Showstopper Creme Stain formula is supposed to be “long-lasting” and “highly pigmented and offers effortless, buildable coverage.” Highly pigmented and buildable make it confusing what the coverage actually is, since something that is buildable means that it is less pigmented but can be layered for greater coverage. The majority of shades were medium to semi-opaque in coverage, hard to build as they often pulled up the first layer and shifted color around. The formula rarely applied well; it was streaky, dried so fast that there was no time for corrections (and attempts to correct just made it worse), and clingy.
I found the applicator rougher, and the packaging made it seem that sometimes it was more like I wasn’t getting enough product on the wand to even coverage half of a lip (it seemed like the opening was wiping away too much product from the doefoot applicator). For every single swatch, I had to dip and pull the wand two to three times just to get enough product to cover my lips (it was impossible to stretch out the product very far as it dried as I was spreading it).
It did dry to a transfer-resistant finish, but it did not survive eating well (most liquid lipstick formulas have survived better for me). Though transfer-resistant, it remained slightly tacky for one to two hours–and if you use more than one to one and a half layers, it often lifted and separated the color.
The brand’s swatches and lip swatches showcase a seemingly opaque product, but I could not achieve opaque coverage with several shades, even trying four or five layers, and the result after five layers of product was uneven, patchy, and cakey. The wear was average–four to six hours with significant fading from the center, which is more what I’d experience with a typical lipstick and a liquid lipstick–and surprisingly, little staining, even with deeper shades. So far, they have been slightly drying to somewhat drying. There are so many high-performing liquid lipsticks on the marketplace already, so I was caught off guard by the poor application and performance of this formula.
Browse all of our Makeup Geek Showstopper Crème Stain swatches.
Ingredients
Polybutene, Caprylic/Capric Triglyceride, Polyethylene, Calcium Sodium Borosilicate, Microcrystalline WaxCera MicrocristallinaCire Microcristalline, Dipentaerythrityl Hexahydroxystearate, Octyldodecanol, Dicalcium Phosphate, WaterAquaEau, Alumina, Tin Oxide, Silica, Calcium Aluminum Borosilicate, Synthetic Fluorphlogopite, Aluminum Calcium Sodium Silicate, Disteardimonium Hectorite, Alcohol, Fragrance (Parfum), Pentaerythrityl Tetra-Di-T-Butyl Hydroxyhydrocinnamate, [+/- Mica, Titanium Dioxide (Ci 77891), Iron Oxides (Ci 77491), Iron Oxides (Ci 77492), Iron Oxides (Ci 77499), Bismuth Oxychloride (Ci 77163), Blue 1 Lake (Ci 42090), Bronze Powder (Ci 77400), Carmine (Ci 75470), Copper Powder (Ci 77400), Manganese Violet (Ci 77742), Orange 5 (Ci 45370), Red 6 (Ci 15850), Red 7 (Ci 15850), Red 21 (Ci 45380), Red 27 (Ci 45410), Red 7 Lake (Ci 15850), Red 22 Lake (Ci 45380), Red 28 Lake (Ci 45410), Red 30 Lake (Ci 73360), Red 33 Lake (Ci 17200), Yellow 5 Lake (Ci 19140), Yellow 6 Lake (Ci 15985)]
Disclaimer: Ingredient lists are as available by the brand (or retailer) at the time of publishing. Please always check product packaging, if it exists, for the ingredient list applicable to the product you're purchasing, or the brand or retailer's website for the most up-to-date ingredient list.
Curtsey
LELimited Edition. $12.00.
Salsa
Makeup Geek Salsa Showstopper Creme Stain ($12.00 for 0.19 fl. oz.) is a bright, medium-dark orange with warm, reddish undertones and a matte finish. It had semi-opaque pigmentation that applied fairly evenly, though color sunk into my lip lines and there was some streaking along the edges of my lips as I fought to get the color even as it dried down so, so quickly. The texture was uncomfortable to wear, drying, and very clingy, so it appeared “cracked” when I smiled. Some color flaked away over time (it seemed to be the bits between my lip lines), and the formula felt drying over the four hours I wore it for.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- MAC Lover's Lane (P, $20.00) is brighter, warmer (90% similar).
- MAC Quite the Standout (P, $21.00) is brighter, warmer (95% similar).
- Tarte Cray Cray (P, $20.00) is brighter, warmer (90% similar).
- Tarte Mai Tai (P, $22.00) is glossier (90% similar).
- ColourPop First Class (LE, $6.50) is brighter (90% similar).
- MAC Barbecue (LE, $19.00) is brighter, more pigmented, glossier (90% similar).
- MAC Style Shocked (P, $22.00) is lighter, warmer (90% similar).
- Maybelline Craving Coral (P, $7.99) is darker (90% similar).
- KVD Beauty Countess (DC, $21.00) is brighter (90% similar).
- MAC Darling Clementine (LE, $19.00) is warmer, glossier (90% similar).
Formula Overview
$12.00/0.19 oz. - $63.16 Per Ounce
The Showstopper Creme Stain formula is supposed to be “long-lasting” and “highly pigmented and offers effortless, buildable coverage.” Highly pigmented and buildable make it confusing what the coverage actually is, since something that is buildable means that it is less pigmented but can be layered for greater coverage. The majority of shades were medium to semi-opaque in coverage, hard to build as they often pulled up the first layer and shifted color around. The formula rarely applied well; it was streaky, dried so fast that there was no time for corrections (and attempts to correct just made it worse), and clingy.
I found the applicator rougher, and the packaging made it seem that sometimes it was more like I wasn’t getting enough product on the wand to even coverage half of a lip (it seemed like the opening was wiping away too much product from the doefoot applicator). For every single swatch, I had to dip and pull the wand two to three times just to get enough product to cover my lips (it was impossible to stretch out the product very far as it dried as I was spreading it).
It did dry to a transfer-resistant finish, but it did not survive eating well (most liquid lipstick formulas have survived better for me). Though transfer-resistant, it remained slightly tacky for one to two hours–and if you use more than one to one and a half layers, it often lifted and separated the color.
The brand’s swatches and lip swatches showcase a seemingly opaque product, but I could not achieve opaque coverage with several shades, even trying four or five layers, and the result after five layers of product was uneven, patchy, and cakey. The wear was average–four to six hours with significant fading from the center, which is more what I’d experience with a typical lipstick and a liquid lipstick–and surprisingly, little staining, even with deeper shades. So far, they have been slightly drying to somewhat drying. There are so many high-performing liquid lipsticks on the marketplace already, so I was caught off guard by the poor application and performance of this formula.
Browse all of our Makeup Geek Showstopper Crème Stain swatches.
Ingredients
Polybutene, Caprylic/Capric Triglyceride, Polyethylene, Calcium Sodium Borosilicate, Microcrystalline WaxCera MicrocristallinaCire Microcristalline, Dipentaerythrityl Hexahydroxystearate, Octyldodecanol, Dicalcium Phosphate, WaterAquaEau, Alumina, Tin Oxide, Silica, Calcium Aluminum Borosilicate, Synthetic Fluorphlogopite, Aluminum Calcium Sodium Silicate, Disteardimonium Hectorite, Alcohol, Fragrance (Parfum), Pentaerythrityl Tetra-Di-T-Butyl Hydroxyhydrocinnamate, [+/- Mica, Titanium Dioxide (Ci 77891), Iron Oxides (Ci 77491), Iron Oxides (Ci 77492), Iron Oxides (Ci 77499), Bismuth Oxychloride (Ci 77163), Blue 1 Lake (Ci 42090), Bronze Powder (Ci 77400), Carmine (Ci 75470), Copper Powder (Ci 77400), Manganese Violet (Ci 77742), Orange 5 (Ci 45370), Red 6 (Ci 15850), Red 7 (Ci 15850), Red 21 (Ci 45380), Red 27 (Ci 45410), Red 7 Lake (Ci 15850), Red 22 Lake (Ci 45380), Red 28 Lake (Ci 45410), Red 30 Lake (Ci 73360), Red 33 Lake (Ci 17200), Yellow 5 Lake (Ci 19140), Yellow 6 Lake (Ci 15985)]
Disclaimer: Ingredient lists are as available by the brand (or retailer) at the time of publishing. Please always check product packaging, if it exists, for the ingredient list applicable to the product you're purchasing, or the brand or retailer's website for the most up-to-date ingredient list.
And, to be even more snidely critical, nobody at geek knows how to spell curtsy.
Curtsey seems to be an accepted way to spell it, and even things like Wikipedia’s entry about the gesture uses curtsey as the spelling (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtsey).
Not sure how some of these made it out of QC–the nude colors are esp. bad
That makes two of us!
What a travesty 🙁
I know!
Shame. You can just see the poor quality of the product in your full face photos. I wonder if MUG will make any changes and improvements. This whole line was a serious miss.
Well, it is limited edition, so here’s hoping they don’t bring it back any time soon, lol!
There’s bad, and then there’s BAAAD. These are definitely the latter. ?
These even look uncomfortable. Your poor lips, the things you do to give us truethful reviews. Thank you!
I’m sure I have commented this several times before, but I have to say it again: I appreciate each and every swatch/review you post on your site. Because of your reviews, I am able to make decisions on what products will work for me and which ones I should pass on. I am so glad I got to see the review of these products before I wasted my money. Don’t get me wrong, I love Makeup Geek, but these are terrible. They don’t allow returns to make matters worse. I don’t understand how their swatches look so different– fooling us into thinking that these are opaque with no streaks or dryness. I’ve even seen other people wearing them and they look different too. Is it manipulation of the photo or are they wearing a lip liner underneath to maximize the opacity? I lose trust in brands more and more each day. Shame…
I know some people wear lip liner often, so that would definitely help improve the opacity or illusion of opacity with these! It would be hard to say without someone actually listing what they were wearing and if lip liner was included!
But yes, these were all-around poor, and I’m not entirely sure why they were released at all – I haven’t really seen any glowing reviews for them yet.