Makeup Geek Power Pigments Reviews, Photos, Swatches (Part 2)
Tenacious
Makeup Geek Tenacious Power Pigment ($9.00 for 0.07 oz.) is a medium blue with subtle, cool undertones and a mostly matte finish. The color payoff was opaque in a single layer, though it was drier to the touch and had a tendency to look ragged along the edges when I blended it out on my lid. It was also the shade that darkened the most significantly within a few minutes of application, and despite attempting to layer it on multiple times, it never returned to its vibrancy–even over primer. When I tried using it on bare skin, it turned into a patchy, dark teal mess within 10 minutes that was unwearable out of the house (and frankly, I’m not too bothered by much these days, so I wear a slew of odd looks and the like out and about!) it was just that bad. Luckily, I tested at home, and it managed to cling to my lid sinking further and further into every line I didn’t even know I had on my lid for the next five hours.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- MAC Hi-Def Cyan (P, $21.00) is brighter (95% similar).
- Wet 'n' Wild A Regular at the Factory #2 (DC, $2.29) is darker (90% similar).
- Smashbox Cerulean (P, $22.00) is lighter (90% similar).
- Melt Cosmetics Emo (LE, ) is warmer (90% similar).
- Kaleidos Digiteal (PiP, ) is darker (90% similar).
- Natasha Denona Powder Blue (84V) (PiP, $29.00) is darker, more muted (90% similar).
- By Beauty Bay Hope (LE, ) is darker, warmer (90% similar).
- Sugarpill Kim Chi (P, $13.00) is lighter, cooler (85% similar).
- Huda Beauty Sapphire #4 (LE, ) (85% similar).
- MAC Electric Eel (P, $17.00) is cooler (85% similar).
Formula Overview
$9.00/0.07 oz. - $128.57 Per Ounce
The formula is supposed to be "highly-pigmented" that "will maintain their vibrancy." Some shades were pigmented, some were not. The majority of the eyeshadows had a grainier, drier texture that had some excess product kicked up in the pan and was prone to moderate fallout during application without use of a primer. In general, most of the shades were dismal applied over bare skin as the drier texture seemed more prone to picking up the natural oils on the skin, absorbing them, and looking uneven as some parts appeared darker than others.
Several shades were an exercise in frustration trying to blend out and maintain vibrancy, which was something I felt even when I used the eyeshadows over primer, as they always faded and darkened within a few minutes of wear. I packed and packed the shades on to get decent results out of them and had to use primer just to get something only mildly embarrassing to look at.
Typically, within six hours, the shades had altered noticeably with some fading and patchiness apparent; with primer, that got closer to eight hours overall but I saw some slight shifting in certain shades faster than that. The looks I created with these shades took me three times longer than other bright, matte eyeshadows on the market (Viseart, Sugarpill, Urban Decay, ColourPop) and required a lot of cleanup in comparison.
Browse all of our Makeup Geek Power Pigment swatches.
Ingredients
Talc, Zinc Stearate, Boron Nitride, Mica, Triethylhexanoin, Phenoxyethanol, Lauroyl Lysine, Ethylhexylglycerin, Silica. May Contain: FD&C Yellow No 5 Lake (CI 19140), Iron Oxides (CI 77492, CI 77491, CI 77499), Carmine (CI 75470), FD&C Blue No. 1 Aluminum Lake (CI 42090:2), Chromium Oxide Greens (CI 77288), Ultramarines (CI 77007), FD&C Red No. 40 Lake (CI 16035), Mica (CI 77019), Titanium Dioxide, Tin Oxide (CI 77861), FD&C Black No 2 (CI 77266)
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.
Look Using this Product
Tenacious
PPermanent. $9.00.
Indestructible
Makeup Geek Indestructible Power Pigment ($9.00 for 0.07 oz.) is a dark, violet purple with cool, blue undertones and a mostly matte finish. The consistency was rather grainy and felt unblended or poorly mixed. It had semi-sheer coverage that was buildable to medium coverage (four layers to achieve medium coverage and tons of fallout–probably more underneath my eye than on it!) without primer and mostly opaque coverage (four layers, though) over primer. It was hard to diffuse the edges of due to the drier, thinner texture that clung to my skin. On its own, the eyeshadow started to darken and turn patchier around the six-hour mark. This was another shade that caused other shades to lift, like when I tried to blend it with Transform (the green), it just lifted up half of the green and left behind a patchy mess.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- ColourPop Connect (LE, $4.50) is less shimmery, more muted (95% similar).
- MAC Heroine (LE, $17.00) is lighter (90% similar).
- Sephora Whoopee Party (LE, ) is darker (90% similar).
- Terra Moons Royal (P, $6.00) is darker, warmer (85% similar).
- Anastasia Soul (LE, $12.00) is more shimmery, more muted, warmer (90% similar).
- MAC Cobalt (P, $17.00) is lighter (85% similar).
- By Beauty Bay Curfew (LE, ) is darker (80% similar).
- ColourPop DAL (LE, $4.50) is darker, warmer (80% similar).
- Makeup Geek Neptune (DC, $6.00) is lighter, cooler (80% similar).
- Makeup Geek Fairytale (DC, $6.00) is warmer (80% similar).
Formula Overview
$9.00/0.07 oz. - $128.57 Per Ounce
The formula is supposed to be "highly-pigmented" that "will maintain their vibrancy." Some shades were pigmented, some were not. The majority of the eyeshadows had a grainier, drier texture that had some excess product kicked up in the pan and was prone to moderate fallout during application without use of a primer. In general, most of the shades were dismal applied over bare skin as the drier texture seemed more prone to picking up the natural oils on the skin, absorbing them, and looking uneven as some parts appeared darker than others.
Several shades were an exercise in frustration trying to blend out and maintain vibrancy, which was something I felt even when I used the eyeshadows over primer, as they always faded and darkened within a few minutes of wear. I packed and packed the shades on to get decent results out of them and had to use primer just to get something only mildly embarrassing to look at.
Typically, within six hours, the shades had altered noticeably with some fading and patchiness apparent; with primer, that got closer to eight hours overall but I saw some slight shifting in certain shades faster than that. The looks I created with these shades took me three times longer than other bright, matte eyeshadows on the market (Viseart, Sugarpill, Urban Decay, ColourPop) and required a lot of cleanup in comparison.
Browse all of our Makeup Geek Power Pigment swatches.
Ingredients
Talc, Zinc Stearate, Boron Nitride, Mica, Triethylhexanoin, Phenoxyethanol, Lauroyl Lysine, Ethylhexylglycerin, Silica. May Contain: FD&C Yellow No 5 Lake (CI 19140), Iron Oxides (CI 77492, CI 77491, CI 77499), Carmine (CI 75470), FD&C Blue No. 1 Aluminum Lake (CI 42090:2), Chromium Oxide Greens (CI 77288), Ultramarines (CI 77007), FD&C Red No. 40 Lake (CI 16035), Mica (CI 77019), Titanium Dioxide, Tin Oxide (CI 77861), FD&C Black No 2 (CI 77266)
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.
Look Using this Product
Indestructible
PPermanent. $9.00.
Invincible
Makeup Geek Invincible Power Pigment ($9.00 for 0.07 oz.) is a medium-dark purple with warm undertones and a mostly matte finish. The pigmentation was semi-opaque in a single layer, and it was buildable to opaque coverage with two to three layers. The consistency was slightly dusty and dry to the touch, along with some graininess in the pan when I felt it with my fingertips. It was one of the more blendable shades in the range, though it wouldn’t be a shade I’d reach for in a rush. I noticed that it had a tendency to lift color it layered on top of, though, so I had to be very careful with placement and blending. It lasted for seven hours before turning patchy on me.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- Natasha Denona Manganese (345CM) (LE, ) is less shimmery, darker, warmer (95% similar).
- ColourPop Filtered (PiP, $4.50) is less shimmery, darker, warmer (95% similar).
- ColourPop VR (LE, $4.50) is darker, cooler (90% similar).
- Juvia's Place Zulu #9 (LE, ) is brighter (90% similar).
- Sugarpill Poison Plum (P, $13.00) is lighter, brighter (90% similar).
- ColourPop Out Late (PiP, $4.50) is less shimmery, darker, warmer (90% similar).
- Sugarpill Undone (PiP, ) is less shimmery, warmer (90% similar).
- Natasha Denona Poison Berry (180CM) (LE, ) is darker (90% similar).
- ColourPop Heart Eyes (LE, $4.50) is less shimmery, darker, warmer (90% similar).
- Give Me Glow No Filter (P, $7.00) is less shimmery, warmer (90% similar).
Formula Overview
$9.00/0.07 oz. - $128.57 Per Ounce
The formula is supposed to be "highly-pigmented" that "will maintain their vibrancy." Some shades were pigmented, some were not. The majority of the eyeshadows had a grainier, drier texture that had some excess product kicked up in the pan and was prone to moderate fallout during application without use of a primer. In general, most of the shades were dismal applied over bare skin as the drier texture seemed more prone to picking up the natural oils on the skin, absorbing them, and looking uneven as some parts appeared darker than others.
Several shades were an exercise in frustration trying to blend out and maintain vibrancy, which was something I felt even when I used the eyeshadows over primer, as they always faded and darkened within a few minutes of wear. I packed and packed the shades on to get decent results out of them and had to use primer just to get something only mildly embarrassing to look at.
Typically, within six hours, the shades had altered noticeably with some fading and patchiness apparent; with primer, that got closer to eight hours overall but I saw some slight shifting in certain shades faster than that. The looks I created with these shades took me three times longer than other bright, matte eyeshadows on the market (Viseart, Sugarpill, Urban Decay, ColourPop) and required a lot of cleanup in comparison.
Browse all of our Makeup Geek Power Pigment swatches.
Ingredients
Talc, Zinc Stearate, Boron Nitride, Mica, Triethylhexanoin, Phenoxyethanol, Lauroyl Lysine, Ethylhexylglycerin, Silica. May Contain: FD&C Yellow No 5 Lake (CI 19140), Iron Oxides (CI 77492, CI 77491, CI 77499), Carmine (CI 75470), FD&C Blue No. 1 Aluminum Lake (CI 42090:2), Chromium Oxide Greens (CI 77288), Ultramarines (CI 77007), FD&C Red No. 40 Lake (CI 16035), Mica (CI 77019), Titanium Dioxide, Tin Oxide (CI 77861), FD&C Black No 2 (CI 77266)
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.
Look Using this Product
Invincible
PPermanent. $9.00.
Dedicated
Makeup Geek Dedicated Power Pigment ($9.00 for 0.07 oz.) is a medium-dark plum with subtle, warm undertones and a mostly matte finish. It had semi-opaque pigmentation that was buildable over primer–applied over bare lids seemed to result in really uneven application that moved a lot without building up. The texture was drier and grainy, which also made it prone to fallout and made it harder to diffuse and blend out. I had better luck using this one when pressed and patted onto my eye first, and then using a separate brush for blending to avoid getting tons of fallout. I also had to go back and layer more product on top as it had faded and darkened within five minutes of application. It lasted for six hours on bare skin and eight and a half hours over primer.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- Natasha Denona Instinct (443CP) (PiP, ) is warmer (95% similar).
- MAC Absurdly Pretty (LE, $17.00) is darker (95% similar).
- Huda Beauty Risque (PiP, ) is more shimmery, warmer (95% similar).
- ColourPop Bop (PiP, ) is darker (95% similar).
- Anastasia C4 (Norvina Vol. 1) (LE, ) is darker (95% similar).
- Huda Beauty Hot Mess (PiP, ) is warmer (90% similar).
- ColourPop The Sagittarius (P, $4.50) is darker (90% similar).
- Wet 'n' Wild I'm Seeing Triples Eyelid (DC, $2.29) is cooler (90% similar).
- Anastasia Semsa (LE, ) is warmer (90% similar).
- Coloured Raine Ladyship (DC, $6.99) is darker (90% similar).
Formula Overview
$9.00/0.07 oz. - $128.57 Per Ounce
The formula is supposed to be "highly-pigmented" that "will maintain their vibrancy." Some shades were pigmented, some were not. The majority of the eyeshadows had a grainier, drier texture that had some excess product kicked up in the pan and was prone to moderate fallout during application without use of a primer. In general, most of the shades were dismal applied over bare skin as the drier texture seemed more prone to picking up the natural oils on the skin, absorbing them, and looking uneven as some parts appeared darker than others.
Several shades were an exercise in frustration trying to blend out and maintain vibrancy, which was something I felt even when I used the eyeshadows over primer, as they always faded and darkened within a few minutes of wear. I packed and packed the shades on to get decent results out of them and had to use primer just to get something only mildly embarrassing to look at.
Typically, within six hours, the shades had altered noticeably with some fading and patchiness apparent; with primer, that got closer to eight hours overall but I saw some slight shifting in certain shades faster than that. The looks I created with these shades took me three times longer than other bright, matte eyeshadows on the market (Viseart, Sugarpill, Urban Decay, ColourPop) and required a lot of cleanup in comparison.
Browse all of our Makeup Geek Power Pigment swatches.
Ingredients
Talc, Zinc Stearate, Boron Nitride, Mica, Triethylhexanoin, Phenoxyethanol, Lauroyl Lysine, Ethylhexylglycerin, Silica. May Contain: FD&C Yellow No 5 Lake (CI 19140), Iron Oxides (CI 77492, CI 77491, CI 77499), Carmine (CI 75470), FD&C Blue No. 1 Aluminum Lake (CI 42090:2), Chromium Oxide Greens (CI 77288), Ultramarines (CI 77007), FD&C Red No. 40 Lake (CI 16035), Mica (CI 77019), Titanium Dioxide, Tin Oxide (CI 77861), FD&C Black No 2 (CI 77266)
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.
Look Using this Product
Dedicated
PPermanent. $9.00.
Courageous
Makeup Geek Courageous Power Pigment ($9.00 for 0.07 oz.) is a medium-dark berry with subtle, cool undertones and a mostly matte finish. It had good pigmentation, though the texture was rather grainy and felt like it wasn’t well-mixed, though maybe the grainy bits made for better blending (with the side effect of a ton of fallout). The eyeshadow started to darken on me within a few minutes but didn’t turn noticeably patchy until six hours later.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- Juvia's Place Zobo (P, ) is cooler (95% similar).
- ColourPop Minty (LE, $4.50) is brighter (95% similar).
- MAC Bijou (LE, $17.00) is lighter, brighter (90% similar).
- ColourPop Seed U Later (DC, $12.00) is lighter, warmer (90% similar).
- Wet 'n' Wild I'm Seeing Triples Eyelid (DC, $2.29) is cooler (90% similar).
- Pat McGrath Lovestruck (Amber Allure) (LE, $38.00) is more shimmery, lighter (90% similar).
- MAC Available in Petite (LE, $17.00) is darker (90% similar).
- ColourPop Trove (LE, $4.50) is darker (90% similar).
- Marc Jacobs Beauty In Bed (PiP, ) is darker (90% similar).
- Pat McGrath Cherish (P, $38.00) is lighter, warmer (85% similar).
Formula Overview
$9.00/0.07 oz. - $128.57 Per Ounce
The formula is supposed to be "highly-pigmented" that "will maintain their vibrancy." Some shades were pigmented, some were not. The majority of the eyeshadows had a grainier, drier texture that had some excess product kicked up in the pan and was prone to moderate fallout during application without use of a primer. In general, most of the shades were dismal applied over bare skin as the drier texture seemed more prone to picking up the natural oils on the skin, absorbing them, and looking uneven as some parts appeared darker than others.
Several shades were an exercise in frustration trying to blend out and maintain vibrancy, which was something I felt even when I used the eyeshadows over primer, as they always faded and darkened within a few minutes of wear. I packed and packed the shades on to get decent results out of them and had to use primer just to get something only mildly embarrassing to look at.
Typically, within six hours, the shades had altered noticeably with some fading and patchiness apparent; with primer, that got closer to eight hours overall but I saw some slight shifting in certain shades faster than that. The looks I created with these shades took me three times longer than other bright, matte eyeshadows on the market (Viseart, Sugarpill, Urban Decay, ColourPop) and required a lot of cleanup in comparison.
Browse all of our Makeup Geek Power Pigment swatches.
Ingredients
Talc, Zinc Stearate, Boron Nitride, Mica, Triethylhexanoin, Phenoxyethanol, Lauroyl Lysine, Ethylhexylglycerin, Silica. May Contain: FD&C Yellow No 5 Lake (CI 19140), Iron Oxides (CI 77492, CI 77491, CI 77499), Carmine (CI 75470), FD&C Blue No. 1 Aluminum Lake (CI 42090:2), Chromium Oxide Greens (CI 77288), Ultramarines (CI 77007), FD&C Red No. 40 Lake (CI 16035), Mica (CI 77019), Titanium Dioxide, Tin Oxide (CI 77861), FD&C Black No 2 (CI 77266)
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.
Sad showing. Though I was amused that the best dupe (B-) for Indestructible is MUG’s own Neptune. That, to me, means these are unforgivable, as they CAN do it.
What you said, KJH: they CAN do it, therefore, no excuse!
Bingo. MUG had such promise at the beginning until the cult of self-importance took over.
These are just plain awful. There’s no excuse for their wretched lack of quality when one can plainly see that Sugarpill, UD, Viseart and even Nyx have all successfully produced excellent quality vivid, bright eyeshadows in these same shades. MUG fails again. And that makes me very sad, as I really used to like Marlena and didn’t get a chance to delve into her line back when it had excellent quality all around.
Is it because these are pressed pigments that they are so hard to use? I don’t own any, so I don’t have any experience using them, but I have heard the application method for applying them is different than normal eyeshadows, namely you have to use a light hand and just pat them on without trying to blend them too much.
Either way, this is why I tend to stick to regular eyeshadow formulas. Unless I did makeup for shoots, I find normal eyeshadows work just fine, and we even have really pigmented and bright ones nowadays. I just can’t be bothered with fussy eyeshadows.
I didn’t personally feel like they were remarkably different than other powder eyeshadows on the market… they suffered from a lot of the problems that brighter, matte eyeshadows have for years, IMO.
I’m so sad about the formulation of these, especially because the colors are gorgeous.
Tenacious D lol (had to). Too bad bc the swatches looked good for these!
EXACTLY what I came to comment – I just thought I’d first scroll down and check if anyone else got that as well!!
Some of the worst eyeshadows I’ve seen in a while produced by a non-morphe style brand. Your eye look is BEAUTFUL but I imagine it was difficult to create and short lasting with these shades.
I don’t like any of these at all – the quality is like something you would get from the $2 shop……
Is Viseart Bright editorials would be a better choice than the whole set?
Yes, but keep in mind that the Viseart Bright Editorials is technically not eye safe (MUG’s don’t come with that warning, and when I perused the ingredient list, I didn’t see any non eye-approved colorants).
Your eye look is EVERYTHING!
I’m sad these aren’t good. Good, inexpensive, super-bright mattes would have been great.
I don’t typically wear these colors BUT HolyS OMG your eye look was incredibly gorgeous! as someone who watches a lot of YT and iG I am blown away by how incredibly pretty the color combinations you worked into the look are. So many colors, brights even, yet it looks STUNNING! and your blending skills are impeccable would have never guessed these rated so poorly based on how incredibly beautiful your work looks!
I have no comment on the eye shadows but had to mention your eye look. I think this might be my favorite look you have ever done and with such terrible shadows, too. Talk about skill. I have been trying to slowly expand my eye shadow usage to include some brighter, more colorful looks and this is so inspirational to me. You can see every single shade on your lid and distinguish each from the other. I could go on but my word this is gorgeous to me!!!
This saddens me a bit.
I have a lot MUG shadows, and most of them I truly love. I’ve been on the hunt for colourful shadows for some time now, and I think it’s like Christine says, GOOD colourful shadows are hard to find these days.
I just ordered a bung of colour pop super shock shadows (they were on sale!), have some Sugarpill in the drawer, and my hunt goes on 🙂
This would have been the ONE thing to get me on board with MUG, and just look how it turned out. It’s a sign. They will never be on my vanity.
You make bad makeup work! You eye look is sooo colorful!
What a mess. Why, Makeup Geek, why? Rooting for them to get back to the quality they were once known for….
Maybe I’m insane, but I actually really like these. The only colors that I wasn’t wowed by were the yellow and the green. The yellow because it took too much build up and the green because it just doesn’t look that great on me (I think I need warmer toned greens like olive). I have plenty of WEAK yellows in my collection so I forgive it. The best yellows are the mustard kind as a bit of brown seems to help them show up.
The rest were really smooth and pigmented. I’m kind of shook that they got such a terrible review. I love courageous and tenacious.