Tom Ford Daydream Eye Color Quad Review & Swatches
Daydream
Tom Ford Beauty Daydream Eye Color Quad ($88.00 for 0.21 oz.) includes a soft mauve, violet, faded navy blue, and silvery purple. All four shades had shimmer in them, though two of them were more satin-to-pearl rather than metallic. The four shades coordinated well together, and I could see any purple-lover enjoying the color scheme in practice, though I think that the quad absolutely needs to be used with an eyeshadow base and/or used with a dampened brush to get even, opaque coverage out of the shades. Unless you prefer sheerer coverage, then it may work well as-is (but doesn’t live up to the marketing).
Ingredients
Look Using this Product
Daydream
PPermanent. $90.00.
Daydream #1
Daydream #1 is a soft, silvery mauve with subtle, warm undertones and a metallic sheen. It had medium coverage that was buildable to full coverage using two layers when applied with a dry brush but was opaque in a single layer when used with a dampened brush. The texture was soft, smooth, and dense without having any powderiness but wasn’t stiff, so I had no trouble using brushes with it. The color stayed on well for seven and a half hours on me before fading noticeably.
Top Dupes
- Dior Magnify #4 (PiP, ) is less shimmery, cooler (95% similar).
- Viseart Lunar Eclipse (GPV2 #5) (LE, ) is less shimmery (95% similar).
- Too Faced The Strip (LE, $16.00) is lighter, cooler (90% similar).
- Dior Shimmer Lilac (PiP, ) is less shimmery, warmer (90% similar).
- Urban Decay Electric Air (LE, $19.00) is more shimmery (90% similar).
- MAC Girls, Girls! (LE, $22.00) is more shimmery (90% similar).
- LORAC Soft Plum (LE, $19.00) is less shimmery, cooler (90% similar).
- Inglot J405 Celestial (LE, $25.00) is more shimmery, darker (90% similar).
- Too Faced Honey Lavender (LE, $16.00) is darker, cooler (90% similar).
- Dior Pink Corolle #4 (PiP, ) is darker (90% similar).
Look Using this Product
Daydream #1
PiPPermanent in Palette.
Daydream #2
Daydream #2 is a light-medium purple with subtle, cool undertones and a satin finish. The pigmentation was semi-sheer when applied with a dry brush and nearly opaque applied with a dampened brush, though I found it faded a bit upon dry down so it never looked as vibrant on the lid as it did in the pan. The texture was dustier, which surprised me, as this more powder-gel formula tends to be denser in the pan. The eyeshadow blended out with ease but only lasted for seven hours on me. Worth noting: layering a bit of #2 on top of #3 helped to enhance the vibrancy of #2 to be a little more true-to-pan in color.
Top Dupes
- Fenty Beauty Lady Pimp (PiP, ) is lighter, warmer (95% similar).
- Milani Bella Violet (14) (P, $4.49) is less shimmery, darker (90% similar).
- MAC Jam Session (LE, $17.00) is less shimmery, darker (90% similar).
- Kevyn Aucoin Hardwire (LE, ) is more shimmery, darker, cooler (90% similar).
- Fenty Beauty Hey Aunty (PiP, ) is less shimmery, warmer (90% similar).
- MAC Sexy PB&J (LE, $17.00) is more shimmery, darker (90% similar).
- ColourPop Fault Line (P, $4.50) is more shimmery, darker, cooler (90% similar).
- MAC Zip Me Up (LE, $17.00) is more shimmery, darker, warmer (90% similar).
- Sephora 1980's (LE, ) is darker, warmer (90% similar).
- Sydney Grace As If (P, $5.00) is darker, warmer (85% similar).
Look Using this Product
Daydream #2
PiPPermanent in Palette.
Daydream #3
Daydream #3 is a faded navy blue with subtle, dark blue pearl. It looked almost like a bluish-gray when applied dry, and it wasn’t unless I used it with a dampened brush or over an eyeshadow primer that it appeared more bluish. The texture was drier and dustier to the touch, so it had a tendency to sheer out a bit when applied to bare skin, though it was easy to diffuse the edges. The eyeshadow wore well for seven hours on me before fading noticeably.
Top Dupes
- Makeup Geek Nautica (DC, $6.00) is less shimmery, lighter (90% similar).
- Tom Ford Beauty Cobalt Rush #2 (P, ) is more shimmery (90% similar).
- MAC Imaginary (DC, $23.00) is less shimmery, brighter, cooler (90% similar).
- Pat McGrath Underworld (PiP, $25.00) is darker, warmer (90% similar).
- MAC Indigo Blend #2 (LE, ) is less shimmery (90% similar).
- Cle de Peau Serenity (Left) (PiP, ) is lighter (90% similar).
- NARS Long Game (DC, $25.00) is less shimmery, darker, cooler (90% similar).
- Tom Ford Beauty Starry Night #4 (PiP, ) is less shimmery, darker, warmer (90% similar).
- Too Faced De La Mer (PiP, $16.00) is less shimmery, darker (90% similar).
- Dior Atlantique #3 (LE, ) is less shimmery, lighter (90% similar).
Look Using this Product
Daydream #3
PiPPermanent in Palette.
Daydream #4
Daydream #4 is a light-medium, sivlery purple with cool undertones and a metallic sheen. The color coverage was dismal applied dry–sheer at best and a little looser, so there was a bit of fallout if I wasn’t careful–but the intensity improved greatly when I used it with a dampened brush (just using water), as it became opaque and went on more smoothly. It stayed on well for seven and a half hours on me.
Top Dupes
- Kaleidos Flowing Haze (Radiate) (PiP, ) is more shimmery, darker (95% similar).
- Sugarpill Strangeling (P, $13.00) is more shimmery, cooler (90% similar).
- Makeup Geek Pop Culture (DC, $6.00) is less shimmery, cooler (90% similar).
- MAC Time to Tango (LE, $21.00) is less shimmery, more muted (90% similar).
- ColourPop Sunbeam (LE, $6.00) is less shimmery, cooler (90% similar).
- Giorgio Armani Scarab Violetta (33) (DC, $33.00) is less shimmery, lighter, cooler (90% similar).
- Ciate Oh, Roger (LE, ) is less shimmery, darker, cooler (85% similar).
- Chanel Tisse Rhapsodie #3 (LE, ) is less shimmery, warmer (85% similar).
- Wet 'n' Wild VI Purple #8 (PiP, ) is less shimmery, cooler (85% similar).
- Makeup Geek Daydreamer (P, $9.99) is more shimmery, lighter, warmer (85% similar).
For Daydream#2:
“Worth noting: layering a bit of #2 on top of this shade helped to enhance the vibrancy of #2 to be a little more true-to-pan in color.”
Perhaps the first # should be another number?
Thanks for reviewing these quads so quickly, Christine! ?
Sorry, #2 on top of #3. My stupidity is showing, LOL!
Aww come on Christine! A typo doesn’t stupidity make. Don’t be so hard on yourself and thanks as always for your reviews, done by your high and exacting standards! ?
It’s just really terrible of me to not be able to proofread my own work to catch those types of meaningful mistakes – to me, it just shows something is wrong with my brain!
Oh for heaven’s sake Christine! I just read your comment…you’re so hard on yourself! Proofing your own work is quite difficult, especially if you do so shortly after writing the text. (And I imagine you typically do, since your turn-around time on reviews is so prompt) Our brains are wired to read what we intended to write!
You’re awesome ?
Thank you, Christine, for your honest review. 100% accurate. Having gotten this the first day of the Sephora sale, after a brief swatch, I decided, it’s going back. I could not believe the reviews that rationalize the low pigmentation of this release. Yes, it looks absolutely stunning in person and in photos. Yes, apart from Virgin Orchid, it’s the cool toned quad in the new line-up, nearly all of which are way too warm for my skin tone, (apart from the special Sephora quad which is not a must-have for me at this price point.) I’m underwhelmed by the entire series, apart from Leopard, which is gorgeous and well-pigmented– and the duo chrome in Photosynthesex. Virgin Orchid is a classic, but I have Enchanted so I don’t need it. I have two other TF lavender based quads, Lavender Lust, and Lilac Dreams both of which perform better. I actually got them out and swatched them to verify my impression. A month ago I purchased (and have really enjoyed) the Classical Paradise Palette from Ace Beaute. It’s got some great cool and neutral yellows and I reach for it a lot. I resisted buying their purple palette, Paradise Fallen, because the reports were that it had strong pigmentation (but some kick up.) Well, it went on Hautelook yesterday and for $22.95 I took the plunge. Can’t believe that I am passing on TF and going for this new indie. But it’s easier for me to carefully use strongly pigmented shadows, then to pack on poorly pigmented one that cost 3 – 4 times the price.
It’s such a strange palette, and I was surprised there wasn’t a leaflet inside the box about using it wet/dry perhaps because it really doesn’t do many favors dry! I’ve only tried this and Virgin Orchid, but here’s hoping the rest aren’t as bad.
Oh I am disappointed as it was the one quad I really had my eye on! I do prime and use glitter glue to prevent transfer but I don’t know how I would feel about paying that price tag for such low performance… I think I would constantly compare to how Nude Dip performes and would end up frustrated! Haha
Thank you for the review Christine! ❤️
Yeah, if you want Nude Dip quality then stay away from this one!
These would 100% be my colors if they weren’t $88.
If I’ve spent almost a hundred dollars on an eyeshadow quad, I would expect nothing but IMPECCABLE QUALITY. Which is clearly not the case here. Thank you for your review, Christine.
I agree, Mel!!
I’m an established, slightly obsessed with purple eyeshadows fiend who did love the color scheme when I saw the Swatch Gallery preview. However, two things have me telling myself that, no, I better not:
1.) This runs extremely cool-toned and could give me a bruised look.
2.) This ain’t no Nude Dip or Honeymoon! Not a Virgin Orchid, either!
I think it’s really pretty, just to expensive for what it is.
Agreed, Rachel!
Was thinking of buying this during the VIB sale. So glad I didn’t get it. For the price the colors should be pigmented and easily applied. Money saved!
A very, very disappointing quad for the price. There are a lot better elsewhere, Tom Ford is losing the plot.
Pan 1 and 3 would have been a really nice duo.
I came so close to picking this up sans review but decided I had better wait at that price point. My only two Tom Ford quads are okay but they don’t knock my socks off so that had me waiting. If left to looks alone and shade I would have snapped this up. I love me some purple shadows!!
I love the look of this quad, love it. It would have been a perfect quad, I would have used it a lot, but at the price point it should be nothing but stellar, A and A+ all the way.
I have a TF quad and I’m not impressed by it. I do make myself use it a week at a time as it was so expensive I don’t want to throw the money away. It works, but I don’t enjoy applying it and I don’t need another such quad.
Sorry TF, not this time either.
Thank you so much for all honest, well written reviews and true swatches, Christine!
As I always do my makeup on the go, and as my workhours are very long, it’s a big no for me. It’s a shame, the colors are so pretty !
I bought this quad, (Actually I buy 4 of the new quads as I like always the combinations of TF’s quad on eyes.). I haven’t tried this yet, I’m so sad it got such a bad rating!! Now I’m sooo worried!!