Tom Ford Acqua Metal Shadows Reviews & Swatches
Reflects Gilt
Tom Ford Beauty Reflect Gilt Acqua Metal Shadow ($46.00 for 0.1 oz.) is a light-medium gold with warm, yellow undertones and a sparkling, metallic finish. It had medium color coverage, and it was hard to sheer it out (it was supposed to be “translucent”) without really spreading out the tiniest amount of product all over my lid space but definitely not sheer if using the included applicator in any shape or form–you’d have enough for a sheer layer over half one’s face, probably!
It had a thin, watery consistency that felt cool as it applied, and it had a longer dry down time (about 30 seconds), which made it prone to creasing as it dried down so I had to try and smooth it back out as it was drying down. It applied fairly evenly but the sparkle/shine camouflaged the bits it didn’t apply as well to. It lasted for eight hours but had some visible flaking, though no creasing once it set.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- NARS Bayadere #3 (PiP, $19.00) is less shimmery (95% similar).
- Charlotte Tilbury Super Blue #1 (LE, ) is less shimmery (95% similar).
- Bobbi Brown Sandcastle (LE, ) is lighter (95% similar).
- PIXI Beauty Nude Lustre (PiP, $20.00) is less shimmery, warmer (95% similar).
- Dior Lucky Star #3 (LE, ) is less shimmery (95% similar).
- NABLA Cosmetics Moonlight (PiP, ) is less shimmery (95% similar).
- Charlotte Tilbury Legendary Muse #3 (LE, ) is more shimmery, darker (95% similar).
- Marc Jacobs Beauty Shimmy Dip (78) (P, $26.00) is more shimmery (95% similar).
- Glaminatrix Egg Hunt (P, $8.04) is more shimmery, warmer (95% similar).
- ColourPop Wild Life (LE, $4.50) is less shimmery (95% similar).
Formula Overview
$46.00/0.1 oz. - $460.00 Per Ounce
The formula is a "translucent cooling liquid eyeshadow" that is supposed to be "longwearing" with a "metallic shine" and superior adhesion," First, it's not translucent--it's fairly pigmented, and while it could be sheered out, they ranged from medium to mostly opaque. They had a smooth, thin but not watery feeling as they applied from the doe-foot applicator (which really over-applies the product; I'd recommend a flat, synthetic brush for more precise application) and did feel a bit cooling initially. I actually thought they were like a thinner, liquid version of the brand's Cream Color for Eyes, but the ingredient lists were different (not much of the half dozen initial ingredients overlapped).
These were hard to apply evenly and tended to clump up on my lid as I worked with them, and I used a separate flat, synthetic brush to apply a little amount to my lid space and there was no way I could have sheered it out without using it as a standalone color and really wiping away a lot of product to sheer it out. They took longer to dry down and had a tendency to crease as they did so, and in order to minimize this, I had to let it dry down for 10 to 15 seconds, then gently buff the product out to smooth it back out, and then let it fully dry down from there. I had some flaking after eight hours of wear, but once it had dried down, I didn't get additional creasing.
Browse all of our Tom Ford Beauty Acqua Metal Shadow swatches.
Ingredients
Water, Butylene Glycol, Glycerin, Acrylates Copolymer, Alcohol, Ethylhexylglycerin, Polyurethane-35, Caprylyl Glycol, Propylene Glycol, Sodium Laureth-12 Sulfate, Ammonium Acryloyldimethyltaurate/Vp Copolymer, Tin Oxide, Ammonium Hydroxide, Synthetic Fluorphlogopite, Silica, Tetrasodium Edta, Potassium Sorbate, Methylparaben, Propylparaben, Phenoxyethanol, [+/- Mica, Iron Oxides (Ci 77491), Iron Oxides (Ci 77492), Iron Oxides (Ci 77499), Titanium Dioxide (Ci 77891), Bronze Powder (Ci 77400), Manganese Violet (Ci 77742), Ferric Ferrocyanide (Ci 77510), Ultramarines (Ci 77007), Blue 1 Lake (Ci 42090), Yellow 5 Lake (Ci 19140), Chromium Oxide Greens (Ci 77288), Chromium Hydroxide Green (Ci 77289), Carmine (Ci 75470), Bismuth Oxychloride (Ci 77163), Ferric Ammonium Ferrocyanide (Ci 77510), Aluminum Powder (Ci 77000)].
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
Reflects Gilt
LELimited Edition. $46.00.
Violet Argente
Tom Ford Beauty Violet Argente Acqua Metal Shadow ($46.00 for 0.1 oz.) is a medium bronze with strong,w arm undertones and a metallic finish. It had opaque color payoff in a single layer–and a little went a long way. When I tried to sheer it out, the color appeared a bit softer but was still fairly pigmented! The swatch above is taking the barest dab and diffusing it with my fingertip and not having luck getting it to sheer out. It applied similarly onto my lid–I couldn’t really get it to sheer out in a meaningful way. I would never describe it as a “translucent” product–it’s intense!
The consistency was lightweight, thin but not too runny, and felt cool as it initially applied. It applied fairly evenly, and I was able to blend out the edges without much effort. The issue I had with it was that it had a tendency to crease as it was drying down due to it taking a longer time to set, though once it locked into place, it didn’t crease further. I felt like the shimmer/finish of this shade also emphasized my lid texture and appeared thicker in places. There was slight flaking of product after eight hours of wear.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- Kosas Smolder (P, $15.00) is less shimmery (95% similar).
- Charlotte Tilbury Gorgeous Glowing Beauty #2 (LE, ) is less shimmery, lighter (90% similar).
- Moira Copper (P, $7.50) is less shimmery, lighter (90% similar).
- MAC Tan (PiP, $21.00) is darker, cooler (90% similar).
- ColourPop Underworld (LE, $4.50) is darker (90% similar).
- Tom Ford Beauty Warm (Winter 2016) Eyeshadow #2 (LE, ) is less shimmery, darker, cooler (90% similar).
- Charlotte Tilbury Supersonic Girl #3 (LE, ) is less shimmery, darker (90% similar).
- Moira I Mean (P, $8.50) is less shimmery, darker, cooler (90% similar).
- NARS Stricken (LE, $28.00) is less shimmery, darker, more muted (90% similar).
- Charlotte Tilbury Icon Diva Eyes #2 (LE, ) is less shimmery, lighter (90% similar).
Formula Overview
$46.00/0.1 oz. - $460.00 Per Ounce
The formula is a "translucent cooling liquid eyeshadow" that is supposed to be "longwearing" with a "metallic shine" and superior adhesion," First, it's not translucent--it's fairly pigmented, and while it could be sheered out, they ranged from medium to mostly opaque. They had a smooth, thin but not watery feeling as they applied from the doe-foot applicator (which really over-applies the product; I'd recommend a flat, synthetic brush for more precise application) and did feel a bit cooling initially. I actually thought they were like a thinner, liquid version of the brand's Cream Color for Eyes, but the ingredient lists were different (not much of the half dozen initial ingredients overlapped).
These were hard to apply evenly and tended to clump up on my lid as I worked with them, and I used a separate flat, synthetic brush to apply a little amount to my lid space and there was no way I could have sheered it out without using it as a standalone color and really wiping away a lot of product to sheer it out. They took longer to dry down and had a tendency to crease as they did so, and in order to minimize this, I had to let it dry down for 10 to 15 seconds, then gently buff the product out to smooth it back out, and then let it fully dry down from there. I had some flaking after eight hours of wear, but once it had dried down, I didn't get additional creasing.
Browse all of our Tom Ford Beauty Acqua Metal Shadow swatches.
Ingredients
Water, Butylene Glycol, Glycerin, Acrylates Copolymer, Alcohol, Ethylhexylglycerin, Polyurethane-35, Caprylyl Glycol, Propylene Glycol, Sodium Laureth-12 Sulfate, Ammonium Acryloyldimethyltaurate/Vp Copolymer, Tin Oxide, Ammonium Hydroxide, Synthetic Fluorphlogopite, Silica, Tetrasodium Edta, Potassium Sorbate, Methylparaben, Propylparaben, Phenoxyethanol, [+/- Mica, Iron Oxides (Ci 77491), Iron Oxides (Ci 77492), Iron Oxides (Ci 77499), Titanium Dioxide (Ci 77891), Bronze Powder (Ci 77400), Manganese Violet (Ci 77742), Ferric Ferrocyanide (Ci 77510), Ultramarines (Ci 77007), Blue 1 Lake (Ci 42090), Yellow 5 Lake (Ci 19140), Chromium Oxide Greens (Ci 77288), Chromium Hydroxide Green (Ci 77289), Carmine (Ci 75470), Bismuth Oxychloride (Ci 77163), Ferric Ammonium Ferrocyanide (Ci 77510), Aluminum Powder (Ci 77000)].
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
Violet Argente
LELimited Edition. $46.00.
Venus Rising
Tom Ford Beauty Venus Rising Acqua Metal Shadow ($46.00 for 0.1 oz.) is a medium pink with warm undertones and a frosted finish. It had semi-opaque pigmentation when I applied it using the included applicator; I had to really work at it to get even semi-sheer coverage–taking a small amount and blending it out with a fingertip all over the lid. The applicator was uneven, slightly patchy, and it was hard to apply it with precision when attempting to use it as a sheer layer of product.
It was actually easier to just apply it at its natural pigmentation level rather than trying to sheer it out. It took about 30 seconds to dry down and creased and moved a bit during that time, so I had to buff the color a bit to try and minimize the creasing before it finished drying down. Once it set, I didn’t get additional creasing but saw slight flaking after eight hours of wear.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- Danessa Myricks Romance (P, $18.00) is less shimmery, cooler (95% similar).
- Huda Beauty Irresistible (PiP, ) is darker, cooler (95% similar).
- Stila Enchantress (P, $24.00) is darker, warmer (95% similar).
- NARS Firenze (P, $22.00) is lighter, warmer (90% similar).
- Sephora Rose (LE, ) is darker, warmer (90% similar).
- ColourPop A La Mode (PiP, $6.00) is darker, cooler (90% similar).
- ColourPop Lifted (P, $5.00) is less shimmery, lighter, warmer (90% similar).
- Huda Beauty Daydream (PiP, ) is darker, cooler (90% similar).
- Huda Beauty Provocative (PiP, ) is less shimmery, cooler (90% similar).
- Sydney Grace Shine Bright (P, $6.25) is darker, warmer (90% similar).
Formula Overview
$46.00/0.1 oz. - $460.00 Per Ounce
The formula is a "translucent cooling liquid eyeshadow" that is supposed to be "longwearing" with a "metallic shine" and superior adhesion," First, it's not translucent--it's fairly pigmented, and while it could be sheered out, they ranged from medium to mostly opaque. They had a smooth, thin but not watery feeling as they applied from the doe-foot applicator (which really over-applies the product; I'd recommend a flat, synthetic brush for more precise application) and did feel a bit cooling initially. I actually thought they were like a thinner, liquid version of the brand's Cream Color for Eyes, but the ingredient lists were different (not much of the half dozen initial ingredients overlapped).
These were hard to apply evenly and tended to clump up on my lid as I worked with them, and I used a separate flat, synthetic brush to apply a little amount to my lid space and there was no way I could have sheered it out without using it as a standalone color and really wiping away a lot of product to sheer it out. They took longer to dry down and had a tendency to crease as they did so, and in order to minimize this, I had to let it dry down for 10 to 15 seconds, then gently buff the product out to smooth it back out, and then let it fully dry down from there. I had some flaking after eight hours of wear, but once it had dried down, I didn't get additional creasing.
Browse all of our Tom Ford Beauty Acqua Metal Shadow swatches.
Ingredients
Water, Butylene Glycol, Glycerin, Acrylates Copolymer, Alcohol, Ethylhexylglycerin, Polyurethane-35, Caprylyl Glycol, Propylene Glycol, Sodium Laureth-12 Sulfate, Ammonium Acryloyldimethyltaurate/Vp Copolymer, Tin Oxide, Ammonium Hydroxide, Synthetic Fluorphlogopite, Silica, Tetrasodium Edta, Potassium Sorbate, Methylparaben, Propylparaben, Phenoxyethanol, [+/- Mica, Iron Oxides (Ci 77491), Iron Oxides (Ci 77492), Iron Oxides (Ci 77499), Titanium Dioxide (Ci 77891), Bronze Powder (Ci 77400), Manganese Violet (Ci 77742), Ferric Ferrocyanide (Ci 77510), Ultramarines (Ci 77007), Blue 1 Lake (Ci 42090), Yellow 5 Lake (Ci 19140), Chromium Oxide Greens (Ci 77288), Chromium Hydroxide Green (Ci 77289), Carmine (Ci 75470), Bismuth Oxychloride (Ci 77163), Ferric Ammonium Ferrocyanide (Ci 77510), Aluminum Powder (Ci 77000)].
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.
Wow. Don’t they test these products before they sell them? Overpriced garbage.
Wow. This is really not good. I’d be furious if I spent that sort of money on a product which performed like that.
Tom isn’t having a good spring.
Yikes! This is really sad. Brands have to do better with quality control.
Question: Did these get a low rating because they claimed to be sheer/translucent but was actually not, or because it creased easily/hard to work with? If it claimed to be pigmented, what grade would it have gotten?
Hi Vivien,
Products are rated based on how they’re marketed – the claims the brand makes – so yes, since these were supposed to be sheer/translucent and were more pigmented, the rating is lower (see pigmentation rating) – however that IS also because they creased easily and were harder to work with – it’s not an either/or thing. I don’t know what the ratings would be without redoing them, but they would be somewhat higher.
More sub-standard, overpriced drek from Tom Ford. If he’s trying to assassinate his cosmetics line, he’s sure going about it effectively!
Even if TF has zero to do with formula/mfg, he never should have put his imprimatur on these. Hubris, baby. That fellow thinks he can fly close to the sun. Oops, Icarus, crash and burn. He wouldn’t do that in his scent range, which says he thinks his color cosmetics customers are gullible. For those of us who follow these things, it’s insulting and off-putting.
KJH, he is so out of touch with his customers on the cosmetics end of his business that it’s just plain infuriating. Yes, I agree, this is very insulting on his and/or his corporation’s part!
Tom Ford really needs to lift their game. When brands like Stila and Colourpop can get the formula spot on and at a lower price point, why would anyone waste their money on TF products?
I’m sorry but at this price point I expect quality and innovation. None of Tom Ford’s recent releases exhibit either.
Beautiful shades, but really woeful as to their formula and application.
Go figure, the only one I actually liked only earned a D. Oh, Violet Argente, why couldn’t you have done a better job instead of flaking off late in the game or adding texture?
What a spectacular fail! Sad when ultra-luxury brands phone it in and let quality lapse.
Thank the Goddess for dupes!
Wow, this spring collection is really all over the place in terms of quality.
So uninspired!
I used a brush to smooth out instead of applicator and it spread out a lot easier & cleaner.
Yes, so did I 🙂