Tom Ford Beauty Scintillate Shade & Illuminate Cheeks Review, Photos, Swatches
Tom Ford Beauty Scintillate Shade & Illuminate Cheeks ($80.00 for 0.49 oz.) includes a cream highlighter and cream blush. You get plenty of product in the compact, but the product itself is just that type of product that for someone will be essential and for many others, totally unnecessary and almost am “I don’t get it” kind of product. Both shades are sheer and barely-there with a dewy finish that never sets or dries down, and as a result, the wear was between three to four hours. The formula is, however, touted as “super sheer,” so the coverage level is as described. Despite never setting, they didn’t feel tacky, just a little emollient to the touch, and can handle a powder being patted on top (though the dewiness went away completely). I think this will be best for someone who doesn’t need their makeup to last long, has drier skin (perhaps it would last longer), and/or wants a sheerer base for their powder blushes.
LELimited Edition. $80.00.
Scintillate (Illuminate) is a light gold with a hint of fine, golden pearl. It had sheer coverage and gave more of a natural glow to the skin than visible shimmer. On very fair complexions, it might add warmth, but it did not appear to add any trace of color on my skin tone. The texture was creamy, blendable, and a little thin. It never dried down and lasted for three hours on me.
- elf Champagne Campaign (P, $9.00) is less shimmery (95% similar).
- NYX Crystal Glare (P, $6.99) is more shimmery (95% similar).
- Bobbi Brown Beach Babe (P, $36.00) is darker (95% similar).
- Becca Champagne Pop (P, $41.00) is more shimmery (95% similar).
- Guerlain Liu (LE, $88.00) is less shimmery (95% similar).
- Giorgio Armani Champagne (2) (P, $44.00) is lighter (95% similar).
- Charlotte Tilbury Light/Medium (3) (P, $44.00) is more shimmery (90% similar).
- MAC Goldlite (P, $33.00) is more shimmery, cooler (90% similar).
- Dior Universal (001) (P, $38.00) is more shimmery, cooler (90% similar).
- Tarte Goddess Glow (LE, $35.00) is more shimmery (90% similar).
Scintillate (Shade) is a medium peachy coral with warm undertones and a dewy sheen. It yielded sheer coverage on my skin; a hint of color that was impossible to overdo (it did not build up). The consistency was creamy, thin without being too thin, blendable, and always looked wet on the skin. This shade wore well for three and a half hours on me.
- Sleek MakeUP OC (PiP, ) is brighter (95% similar).
- Too Faced Sweet Peach Blush (PiP, ) is more shimmery, more pigmented, warmer (90% similar).
- ILIA Dreamer (P, $34.00) is more shimmery, cooler (90% similar).
- MAC Miss Cupcake (LE, ) is more shimmery, cooler (90% similar).
- ColourPop Aloha (P, $8.00) is warmer (85% similar).
- ColourPop 25/8 (P, $8.00) is darker, cooler (85% similar).
- Kosas Velvet Melon (High Intensity) (Blush) (PiP, ) is more shimmery, darker, cooler (85% similar).
- Tom Ford Beauty Megeve (Blush) (LE, ) is cooler (85% similar).
- MAC Something Special (P, $21.00) is more pigmented, cooler (85% similar).
Comments on this post are closed.
I’m in the I-don’t-get -it-category. $ 80 for this???? Sheer, can’t build it up, never dries down, doesn’t last long. Would be a very very expensive base for blushes. Will stick with the MAC Quick Trik
HA – try $93 here in Canada. Talk about “the emperor has no clothes” and it’s a perfect example of why Temptalia is such a wonderful resource to have.
Couldn’t have said it better!
Even though I do quite well using MAC’s creamy cheek products like the LE Summer Wind, these just look far too wet and would make my face melt off in the AZ hot sun! Definitely not for me! ?
Haha, and it wouldn’t even need to be 110 degrees!
Wow – for the price this product sure is lacking in a lot of ways! I don’t like the idea that this doesn’t really dry down – what if it transfers? I can’t imagine splurging that kind of money on something super sheer either and the colours seem highly dupeable!
Yeah, it not drying down is odd!
I like this and I don’t mind the “downsides” described, i just wish the highlight had a liiiiiiiittle more impact.
The highlights in the duos are so sutle!
I’m afraid I’m in the “I don’t get it” column, but I’m not into the super-dewy look.
I read “never dried down” and stopped reading, ahaha. This is NOT for me and my oily, full coverage face!! It would just separate and cause grossness on my cheeks.
I’m trying to think of something positive to say, but I don’t like these hmmm.
I get you – not sure exactly how this is envisioned as being used in a regular routine (on its own)!
Too pointless for me. I’d sweat this off in minutes with one hotflash.
I feel like the top color could be duped with vaseline mixed with some loose shimmery eyeshadow or pigment…
I don’t see much point in paying tom ford prices for something like that, but I guess it does come in nicer/more convenient packaging than a jar with a homemade vaseline mixture in it.
Yes, it’s very light/sheer so Vaseline would have a similar impact!
A waste of money really – but it does look pretty on you. Most people want their makeup to last all day.
Tom Ford. Your name alone does not sell. And I buy your products, not your popliteal beliefs. Your products are started to look like MAC poor quality products. As I always say, the first items that come out is always superior to the subsequent that follows…regardless of the brand….whether it is clothes or beauty products or cars etc.
No thanks. For a product that looks like someone mixed some blush power with vaseline for 80 buck. Definitely in a “no.” category for me. I bought the Shade and Illuminate from last year, and promptly returned it to Nordstrom (love that place). I”m an NC30/35 and the woman at the counter was surprised at how it barely showed up on her skin (she looked like she was NC15/20). Just not a good look for me.
I’m really disappointed by this…I actually love dewy cheeks but I won’t spend $80 on something that won’t look like anything on me. I have the last shade & illuminate from spring 2015 and I feel like these would look the same as that one.
Man, I feel like Tom Ford is one of those brands that creates trends and doesn’t follow them, but they haven’t really done anything appealing for my own tastes the last few releases… At the risk of sounding SUPER “trend-centric” I’m like… where are your liquid lipsticks? duochrome highlighters? But could you imagine from Tom Ford! lol
Eeeeesh! This should be a solid A for that price!
How does the highlighter compare with RMS’ “living luminizer”? Is it more or less intense?
Less intense but dewier.
Or, mix your cream highlighter and your cream blush with pure silicone or jojoba oil. Thank you for the review Christine
$80 or $93 here in Canada and a C rating….sorry, Mr. Ford but you can mediocre, overpriced stuff like this! A perfect example of what I was talking about in the question about “brand image”….Tom Ford has a very prestige image but far too often, the products don’t measure up and I won’t buy just for image alone.
I get the glossy look, but the lack of wear time makes it such a limited product, I think!
On my oily face, this wouldn’t last a minute. lol Pretty colors, though!
I actually had this in my cart on line at Nordy’s. Thanks for saving me a bunch of money.
No problem, Cathi!
I hate products on my face that never dry down. It’s one thing on the lips but on the face, no no no.
I really want to love these but the fact that they are sheer and can’t be built up, given the price, makes it a pass. I like cream blushes, with my all time go to CTxNP Healthy Glow and have done well with Tom Ford’s single cream shadows. These duos need better testing. Saves my $ to buy the original blushes from the CCO. Disappointed in TF on his Spring release.
I wish they were more buildable as well!