Sunday Riley Skin Adrenaline: Review

So in the time it took me to finally get around to writing this post, it seems Sunday Riley has either discontinued this product or it’s unavailable for purchase right now because it’s getting reformulated or repackaged.

Per Nordstrom’s website: “A lightweight moisturizer and instant radiance booster, perfect for normal to oily skin. Provides anti-aging actives in a non-oily base, making it a great alternative for oilier skin types. Maximum concentrations of key actives which rejuvenate lackluster skin, regulate epidermal growth factors for fibroblast development, and build youthful, dense collagen.” The retail was $125 for 50ml.

The texture is a thicker gel creme. It’s got a sweet scent to it, very fruit like and a bit too sweet. However, I do prefer the sweet fruit scent to powdery perfume scented skincare. Sadly this is so sticky. It was not my favorite thing to put on just because of the sticky texture. I had to force myself to use it all up, which is never good for an expensive skincare item. It’s got a lot of great antioxidants and with a thinner, less sticky texture I would have loved to try this as a serum. It’s too thick to be a serum, and too thin and sticky to be a moisturizer I use. It’s a gel creme. It leaves a sticky film on my face that dries into a shiny coating if you don’t cover it with another moisturizer.

Hopefully it’s being reformulated because it’s an interesting formula that I would like to try out again if it wasn’t so unpleasant to use texture wise. It did give a boost to my skin, meaning it gave a glow like a good mask. It didn’t do much for my forehead fine lines. It has limited anti-aging capabilities. But if reformulated with a better texture it could be a nice serum or light gel creme moisturizer for day antioxidant use.

Ingredients: Aqua (Water), NV-5 Ageless Complex (Opuntia Tuna Fruit (Prickly Pear) Extract, Cypripedium Pubescens (Lady’s Slipper Orchid) Extract, Opuntia Vulgaris (Cactus) Extract, Aloe Barbadensis Leaf Extract & Saccharomyces Cerevisiae (Yeast) Extract), Centella Asiatica Extract, PEG-75 Meadowsol, PEG-12/SMDI Copolymer, Caprylic/Capric Triglyceride, Butyrospermum Parkii (Shea Butter), Glucosamine HCL, Algae Extract, Yeast Extract, Urea, Hydroxyethyl Acrylate+Sodium Acryloyl Dimethyl Taurate Copolymer, Helianthus Annuus (Sunflower) Extract, Arnica Extract, Algae Extract+Artemisia Vulgaris (Mugwort) Extract, Glycerin, Lactic Acid, Thermus Thermophilis Extract, Hexapeptide-11, DMDM Hydantoin, Phenoxyethanol, Astaxanthin, Punica Granatum (Pomegrante) Extract, Propyl Paraben, Methyl Paraben, Copper Tripeptide-1

January Samples & Empties Post

Time for the January Samples & Empties post. Quick thoughts about each starting left to right above.

Alpha-H Instant Facial: This was OK, it’s a glycolic acid toner spray. I didn’t like the spray aspect of it, would have been better as a bottle to use with a cotton pad. I’ve moved on to Pixi Glow Tonic currently and wouldn’t rebuy. I talked about it here.

Zelens Micro-Refiner: This was nice, a real gentle scrub with fruit enzymes for a peel effect. It’s just really expensive for the size. I can get a really similar product from Omorovicza for less money in a bigger size. So I wouldn’t rebuy. I talked about it some here. You can check it out here.

Alterna Caviar Brightening Blonde Shampoo: This was nice as far as a moisturizing Alterna shampoo. The purple was a bit light so it didn’t really seem to do much. It needs a deeper purple tint to be able to have an effect for me.

Leonor Greyl Lait Luminescence: This was OK, a hydrating spray that didn’t weigh my hair down. It is absolutely not worth $48 in my mind. You can get something else similar for half the cost. I went through a Leonor Greyl phase a year ago and nothing seems to really impress me so far from it. It’s heavily perfume scented and there are other products in a cheaper price range as good as this. You can check it out here.

Drunk Elephant TLC Framboos Glycolic Night Serum: This is a staple night serum, love it. I talked about it here.

Drunk Elephant C-Firma Day Serum: Staple day serum for vitamin C. I talked about it here.

Rahua Amazon Body Oil: I loved this, it smells heavenly. It’s hydrating. It’s just really pricey for the size. I have to go with I would not rebuy it and stick with OSEA’s oil. I talked about it here.

VERB Leave In Mist: I saw this on Sephora and looked like a cool new brand with natural ingredients. This is odd it’s a thicker liquid, like a spray gel more. I didn’t like it as a hydrating mist, I prefer a more cream style. Currently I’m trying the Briogeo Rosarco Milk Leave in Spray.

Pureology Colour Fanatic Instant Deep-Conditioning Mask: This was OK, too hydrating for me, weighed my hair down.

St. Ives Blemish Control Green Tea Scrub: This used to be a staple for me, I used it on my arms and hips in the shower which helped with ‘chicken bumps’ as it has salicylic acid in it. Now I just use Paula’s Choice BHA 2% lotion on the areas I need it instead.

REN Flash Rinse 1 Minute Facial: This was OK. It turns brown on the open end too fast for me, I felt like I had to use it up really fast.

Ojon Dry Recovery Intensive Hydrating 2 Minute Mask: I love this, hydrating but not too much. Seems to be discontinued now as I don’t see it online.

Alterna Bamboo Luminous Shine Shampoo & Conditioner: This was OK, like most glossing or shine shampoos. They usually make my hair greasy so I don’t buy them, but I was traveling and it came in handy.

Charlotte Tilbury Magic Night Cream: This was terrible. Sorry, and I love Charlotte Tilbury. It was a greasy mess. Like not cream greasy, like Vaseline greasy. My face was still sticky and greasy the next morning. I imagine if I used it all the time I would just break out, it last for two uses because I used it on my face and neck just to get rid of it. It reminded me of smearing Elizabeth Arden’s Eight Hour Hand Cream on my face.

May Coop Raw Sauce: I liked this it was nice, hydrating. I’d have to use it long term to see if it added anything to my skincare routine.

La Prarie Skin Caviar Luxe Cream: I’ve tried this before, it’s a nice medium cream. It’s a small sample so it’s impossible to tell if it gives benefits or not. But no breakouts or strong scent.

Radical Youth Infusion Serum: This was OK. I’ve tried it before, I never really noticed anything from it, but I only had samples to try, a full bottle may show more. You can see it here.

Phyto Phytokeratine Extreme Exceptional Mask: This was nice. Really hydrating, more than I need for my hair. If you have really dry hair it’s for you. You can check it out here.

Suqqu Moisture Lotion: This was OK. Hydrating, no strong scent. I have a bigger sample bottle to move onto now.

By Terry Terrybly Densiliss Primer: This was OK. Gave a more semi matte finish. Has a creamy feel to it, doesn’t feel like heavy silicone ones. It does have silicone in it though. It made my makeup last a bit longer. It was such a small sample I can’t attest to it’s anti-aging claims. I’m not a huge By Terry skincare fan because of the higher price and the strong rose scent. This has a ridiculous price tag and if you look at the ingredients there’s hardly anything in it for skincare benefits. I’ve never been wowed by By Terry’s skincare line, but her foundations are great formulations if you can do the price.

Chanel Le Volume Mascara: This is the first silicone style brush wand in a mascara I actually liked. It gave volume instead of long spidery lashes. Yay. I actually had bought a big one with Nordstrom’s recent buy two get one free sale to try it. Glad I got this sample and that I might actually like it before I break open the big one.

Dior Diorshow Mascara: I like this mascara, great for volume. I would buy a big version when I need mascara again. You can check it out here.

Dr Hauschka Lip Care Stick: I love this, it’s hydrating and adds moisture. It’s not waxy or oily. I would rebuy and this is my second tube. I talked about it here.

Tata Harper Replenishing Nutrient Complex: Love this, it’s a staple. I just bought the bigger dropper version as I love the dropper style more than a roll on. I talked about it here. You can check it out here.

OSEA Brightening Serum: I liked this, it has a great ingredient list. I used half the bottle before getting pregnant then stopped and used the second half recently. By doing this I probably didn’t get to see how effective one bottle would be. So I may have to try this one again one day. I love the OSEA brand and ingredients in general.

OSKIA Renaissance 360 Anti-Ageing & Brightening Supreme Cream: This was a preview, as it doesn’t launch until February 29th, that came in a Cultbeauty gift bag recently. I Love OSKIA and was really excited to try it. “A 360 degree vitamin-rich day cream that combats the aging process on all fronts. With Swiss Cress Liposomes, Vitamins A, C, D, E & F, Galactoarabinan, Bearberry Extract, Hyaluronic Acid, Opuntia Cactus Extract.” It has low level SPF 8 using Zinc Oxide. I would prefer this had no SPF so you could choose to use it as a day or night cream based on your skin type. I hate sunscreen in my lotion/cream, I would like to add my own on top of what I need for my skin at the time. So that’s a negative for me. It was a little to rich as a day cream for me. It was whipped in texture almost, had a faint pleasant scent. It was OK, nothing was bad about it, it just didn’t wow me like other OSKIA stuff has in the past. I prefer their Nutri-Active Day Cream to this. This one felt like it sat on the skin too long, it didn’t absorb in as well and it left me a little greasy. This is why I was thinking it was better as a night cream for me, but with the non removable SPF I wouldn’t use it at night. First OSKIA fail for me and I wouldn’t buy a big bottle.

Alpha-H Liquid Laser Concentrate: This was OK. It’s pricey and was a disappointment that the alcohol content was so high. I could smell it in the product. It irritated my face so I had to use it on my neck. It’s a shame it had great ingredients otherwise.

OSEA Atmosphere Protection Cream: This was OK. It was a nice lotion. A touch thick for the glass bottle as I had to store it upside down to get the last 20% out.

Rodial Dragon’s Blood Eye Gel: This was nice in some aspects. Felt like a silicone thicker style eye gel. I used it more during the day if my eyes were dry versus as an eye gel. I hated the package, it was large and bulky, the center you push down to get the product out. Eventually the button popped out and then it came out faster and got messy. I couldn’t snap it back in. I’ll stick with other eye gels that I’ve found just as hydrating as a pick me up. You can check it out here.

Belief The True Cream-Aqua Bomb: This is an average gel cream. I found it odd the front says ‘increased hydration level 18%’ as that doesn’t seem like a high amount to be proud of. Maybe it’s just me? I like Clinique Moisture Surge gel cream better.

Marc Anthony Coconut Oil & Shea Butter Conditioner: This smelled great, seemed nice like coconuts. It’s way too heavy for my hair, it weighed it down and made it too greasy. I wouldn’t rebuy for that reason.

DERMAdoctor Wrinkle Revenge Eye Balm: This was OK. Hydrating, not greasy. Without using a full jar of it I can’t tell if it was a great eye cream or not. Nothing about it made me want to try a full version, I have others I like more. You can check it out here.

Tata Harper Regenerating Cleanser: Creamy cleanser and very fine scrub. I bought a large bottle recently and love it. You can check it out here.

Charlotte Tilbury Magic Eye Rescue: This wasn’t bad. Hydrating and not greasy. I would try a large jar one day.

NARS Radiance Enhancing Pro Prime: This was a hydrating shimmery primer. Nothing more special than a liquid highlighter. I’d pass on it.

Omorovicza Gold Eye Lift: I loved this. Hydrating, not greasy. My eyes felt a bit brighter. I would buy a large size once I need a night eye cream again. Use code GOLD30 for 30% off and you can check it out here.

Tata Harper Repairative Moisturizer: This is nice. I prefer the Rebuilding Moisturizer to this one, very similar ingredients, just less moisturizing so I can layer it with other serums and gels I like. You can see it here.

Armani Maestro Glow Foundation 5.5: Review & Swatches

I love Armani’s original Maestro Foundation. It’s the only foundation I’ve ever bought a second bottle of. While it has so many positives, weightless feel and buildable skin like coverage without being cakey, it does hate dry areas. I saw this new Maestro Glow foundation and thought it sounded great.

Per Armani’s website: “Introducing Giorgio Armani’s newest liquid foundation.The Invisible Glow Revolution.
Bi-phase nourishing makeup. Sheer glow finish. Maestro Glow is the first bi-phase makeup elixir. True skincare oils infused with pure pigments. Nourishing comfort, lasting glow. Each drop perfects the complexion. It is inspired by Maestro Fluid in its lightness and silkiness, and gives an instant and lasting glow due to the pigments and oil blend. These oils make the texture comfortable, easy to apply, and nourishing for women with drier skin.” The retail is $64 for a 1 fl oz jar, it’s the same price and size as the regular Maestro Foundation.

Compared to the original Maestro foundation this has the same dropper style glass bottle, it has a shimmery overspray versus the matte finish of the regular Maestro bottle. You need to shake this well before applying like the original. It has a similar light weight texture but it’s sheerer in coverage, it’s light coverage. It’s also really moisturizing and borderline greasy. It feels oily on application and stays pretty dewy. It does dry down a little but not much. The oils in this one stay around unlike the original. I didn’t really notice the shimmer particles in the Maestro Glow foundation, either on my face or when swatched. The glow comes more from the hydrating oils aspect but there is a faint very fine shimmer to it. If you try to go above light coverage it gets greasier.

I tested the Maestro Glow on half my face and the other half with Luminous Silk. The Maestro Glow is more dewy, hydrating and feels greasier, the Luminous Silk actually felt like a normal foundation in comparison. I say this because I find Luminous Silk hydrating and slightly greasy compared to a lot of foundations. There is better coverage with Luminous Silk than the Maestro Glow.

Comparing all three: Maestro Original, Maestro Glow and Luminous Silk, the Maestro Glow is the sheerest of the bunch and the most greasy feeling. Luminous Silk is the next most hydrating and both Luminous Silk and the original Maestro have a similar medium coverage level. They both can built up more in areas where it’s needed without adding the extra oil like this new Maestro Glow. After testing this I would stay away from it if you have oily or even combination skin, it will be too much for you. I’m not even sure it’s really for normal skin, dry skin definitely. I would also think about the climate you live in, here in humid Texas might not be the best choice for you, but in dry Montana it can be nice in the winter even on normal skin. I took this with me a few weeks ago from Texas to Montana, on my normal to dry winter skin it was much better in Montana than here at home in Texas where I felt like a grease ball with it. There is double the sunscreen in this version as well, SPF 30 versus SPF 15 in the regular Maestro. Honestly, I think sunscreen in foundation is a joke anyway, you have to apply more foundation than you need coverage wise to get that SPF coverage level. And with this oily foundation that would be a disaster.

I grabbed the same shade I wear in the regular Maestro foundation, 5.5. Per Nordstrom: “Shade 5.5: medium skin with neutral undertones”. It worked great for me as a NC 25. It’s darker and more golden/warm than the regular Maestro foundation. I notice it lightens up a tad when you start to rub it in, so don’t freak when you first drop it onto your skin. The Maestro Glow is lighter than Luminous Silk 5.5. Even though all three look different on my arm they work for me once sheered out and applied on my face.

Overall, the new Maestro Glow is good for dry skin that only needs sheer coverage. I did notice it settled a bit into my fine lines and pores on my cheeks. It seems to emphasize these areas on me. If you look closely at the comparison swatches below, you’ll see you can see my very fine peach fuzz forearm hairs more in the Maestro Glow swatch, you don‘t notice it as much in the other two. So it emphasized the faint hairs I have on my inner forearm which I can’t even feel or see in normal light. Maestro Original and Luminous Silk don’t settle into the pores on my cheeks like this one does.

Swatches: Top Maestro 5.5, Bottom Maestro Glow 5.5:

Top to Bottom: Armani Maestro 5.5, Maestro Glow 5.5, Luminous Silk 5.5:

Same order as above sheered out:

Natasha Denona Eyeshadow Singles: Review & Swatches

After a venture into Natasha Denona’s highlighters I felt compelled to pick out some eyeshadows. I know everyone is getting the large palette’s but I ended up with a few singles. The 5 pan palette’s all had only one shade I would use out of each one, so it would have not been cost effective for me to buy 5 palette’s. The 28 pan green brown palette, while tempting, had way too many shades I would never ever use. I’m not really into greens. And even though the palette’s are a much better deal for the eyeshadows than the singles, it still cost me less to grab a few singles than buy the large palette and two singles to get all the shades I wanted. Now a 14 pan neutral/brown palette I would have gone for.

So I grabbed L to R: Glaze, Skin, Satin Skin, Golden Flesh, Satin Tan, Smoky Quartz:

So each single from the Metallic Family is $27 for a 2.5g compact. This is actually quite a markup considering in a palette they’re about $8.54 a piece. It’s 3x the cost to buy them individually, which usually is not the case with most companies, you might pay for packaging a bit more for a single, maybe add 50% of the cost of a single pan etc. I could see them being around $15 or so and $27 is quite ridiculous in comparison. I only bought the singles because the few I knew I wanted was still less than $239 for a palette where I would use 20% of the shades and have this big clunky palette lying around.

Onto the packaging of the singles, it’s flimsy, lightweight, cheap clear plastic. I laughed when I saw it, considering the 3x markup of a single, the packaging you’re paying for doesn’t make up for it. It’s cheap. Like drugstore cheap. I will be depotting these anyway for my palette so I could care less yet can’t fathom why I’m paying 3x the cost for such a cheap package. Natasha Denona should really think about that one with the singles. At least put them in something like the highlighter or blush cases if you’re charging $27, at least those look decent and not really cheap.

Now onto the eyeshadows themselves. The price and packaging of the singles is the only down side to the eyeshadows, the formula is great. Though on her website they’re all under the Metallic Category I have three types of formulas: Pearly, Shimmer and Metallic.

Glaze & Golden Flesh are the Metallics. They’re both smooth, buttery, highly pigmented and metallic, Glaze has a bit more of a metallic mirror like feel. Golden Flesh is a touch smoother feeling than Glaze so there is a tad variation among the Metallic range. Glaze is a lighter metallic silvered taupe, it pulls pretty cool on me. Glaze feels a touch thicker and more pigmented than Golden Flesh, yet I prefer the texture of Golden Flesh it’s smoother. Golden Flesh is a light warmer metallic bronze. It pulls warmer and lighter on application than in the pan.

Skin is a Shimmer finish. I read on other blogs that the Shimmer is supposed to be a ‘baby metallic’, toned down ultimately. Honestly it’s really close to the Pearly finish, there’s not that much difference I can see. It’s a tad more metallic. It could just be the one shade Skin I have, other Shimmer shades may be more noticeably metallic than Pearly shades. This is also buttery, smooth, pigmented and a fabulous formula. Skin is a shimmery warm coppery pink nude. It’s not a full on orange copper it’s more of a pinky copper.

The last three I have are the Pearly finish. They are also all smooth, buttery and very pigmented. Satin Skin is a shimmery neutral light to medium brown. It has a hint of almost pink to it, but you see it when swatched more. It’s a more neutral, toned down, brown version of Skin. Satin Tan is a shimmery medium neutral brown. Smoky Quartz is a shimmery medium to deep cooler brown with some grey.

They’re all smooth, buttery, pigmented and great eyeshadows. Glaze is my least favorite of the bunch, it’s a touch stiffer in the pan and too cool and metallic for me. Overall, it’s a fabulous formula despite the exorbitant cost of the singles. This post was long so I didn’t do comparison photos, I’ll shoot for that coming up.

Each is pictured inside then outside in sunlight. Glaze:

Skin:

Satin Skin:

Golden Flesh:

Satin Tan:

Smoky Quartz:

Swatches Top to Bottom: Glaze, Skin, Satin Skin, Golden Flesh, Satin Tan, Smoky Quartz:
Inside:

Partial Sunlight:

Sunlight:

Sephora Play! February Box

Here’s the February Sephora Play! Subscription Box. Read my subscription box information page for more details on the subscription boxes I’ve tried.

Inside is: Bumble & Bumble Pret-a-Powder, Bareminerals Pop of Passion Lip Oil-Balm in Plumberry Pop, Lancome Drama Liqui-Pencil Longwear Eyeliner in Noir Intense, Make Up For Ever Rouge Artist Natural Lipstick mini in N9 Copper Pink, Tarte Lights, Camera, Lashes Mascara and Tom Ford Black Orchid EDP.

I meant to cancel this after last month because I’m not really into subscription boxes, they always seem fun at first, then after a few boxes I think about how much I’m spending for stuff I don’t like or won’t use. This box solidified that for me. I’m not into the makeup boxes because I am so picky about what colors I like. I’ve already tried the perfume, even owned it at one point. It’s nice but it goes into the won’t use category. The Lancome eyeliner, surprise another black eyeliner in a subscription box, won’t use pile. The Tarte mascara I used to love and I love the effect it gives, but it flakes terribly and goes into my contacts, won’t use pile. The Bareminerals lippie seems nice but I can’t wear berries, they’re the only lip color I’m not into at all because they look terrible on me, won’t use pile. The Make Up For Ever lipstick I’ve had and tried, anyone who has been a Sephora member for years knows this was an old birthday freebie, won’t use pile. The Bumble & Bumble dry shampoo seems OK, I’m not really using dry shampoo currently but this would be the one item I would use out of the box. Overall, this was the most disappointing box for me of the three so far and ultimately I just spent $10 on nothing exciting or useful to me. I’m sure it’s great for a lot of people, just not me. So I will be cancelling this soon, bummer after checking it out online you have to call customer service to cancel as you can’t do it online.

Here’s the Tip Page:

Charlotte Tilbury Magic Foundation #6 Medium: Review & Swatches

I love Charlotte Tilbury’s line. The Light Wonder Foundation, which is a light and dewy foundation, was my first product from her line. Charlotte recently added a medium to full coverage, semi matte foundation to her line called Magic Foundation. It’s currently only available in the UK. It will come to the US, looks like this month. I had to get this from Harrods as Selfridges wouldn’t ship it to the US. This is from the FDA rules on ingredients just like when the Magic Cream first got released. I picked shade #6 after trying both 5 & 6 from eBay samples.

It comes in a glass bottle with a light pink pump and rose gold metallic lid:

Per Charlotte’s website: “My Magic Foundation is a miracle in a bottle that transforms skin for all ages, skin tones and skin types. I have worked with laboratories for five years to create a “hyper-intelligent” formula that gives full-coverage yet feels completely weightless, with all the anti-ageing and protective benefits of a luxury skin cream. It conceals imperfections, glides on like a dream, and literally feels like a second skin. Whether your skin needs just a bit of perfecting, or you struggle with a frustrating issue like acne, melasma or rosacea, my Magic Foundation will give you a perfect looking skin day, every day!”

Shade #6 is described as: “6 Medium is a neutral golden/yellow for Medium Skin Tones with Neutral Olive Undertones.” It’s a good match for my NC 25 skin tone. Sometimes I’m more 25-27 and this would cater to being darker in the summer. Shade #5 worked as well for me, but it was a touch too peachy. Shade #6 seems to cover the redness in my cheeks better than #5 did. I agree with the shade description for this shade and #5 as well. If you’re more in the NC 23-25 this might be a tad too dark for you.

The coverage is medium and can be built up to almost full coverage. It has a semi matte finish. The finish is not the driest matte foundation I’ve used, nor is it dewy or moist. After applying it feels dewy and almost too thick, like it was just sitting on my skin, then it sets and dries down to a semi matte finish. It looks best after setting for about 30 minutes. That’s when it didn’t look like it was sitting on my skin anymore, it blended in to be more skin like and the feel was lighter. However, you can apply too much and it will look too thick and not have that skin like feel.

I tried applying with my fingers, a foundation brush and with a Beauty Blender. The Beauty Blender gave this the best finish out of the three. This looked best on me with a light layer all over than building up to a medium layer on the redness in my cheeks and around my nose. It did cover the redness in my cheeks and around my nose. It also did emphasize the dry area I had on my chin where I had a healing area from scratching myself. I feel this isn’t really uncommon with more matte foundations. It lasted 8 hours before fading and I did get a bit of oiliness in my t-zone after a few hours with it. Less than I do with the more light and dewy foundations I normally wear.

Overall, I liked this better than some other matte foundations I have used. It was better than By Terry Densiliss which was too thick, matte and full coverage for me. This was lighter weight and more skin like, less like I was wearing an almost full coverage foundation. I’m not a big matte or full coverage foundation fan in general. I’ll use it on occasion but it’s not an everyday product for me. This is great for a day when my cheeks are more red, or I want to do a photograph, or for a special occasion. It’s not something I would wear on a daily basis, so therefore I can’t attest to it’s skincare benefits. I you have dry skin this may be too dry for you, I am drier right now in the winter and it got a little itchy in my drier areas later in the day. I also noticed that this sunk into the pores on my cheeks emphasizing them. This did not happen when I first started testing it in September. My cheeks are super dry this winter and I seem to have this problem with almost every foundation that’s above a tinted moisturizer right now. So if you have the same problem with dry cheeks, or have dry skin in general, you may have to think if this foundation is right for you. Also keep in mind using this foundation might take using a Beauty Blender everyday for you to get that built up coverage without overdoing it. 

Ingredients:

Swatches Top to Bottom(All Charlotte Tilbury): Light Wonder #6, Magic Foundation #6, Magic Foundation #5, Light Wonder #5:

THREE Under the Magic Moon Shimmering Lip Jam: Pale Moon X01 & Moon Whisper X03: Review & Swatches

I’ve talked about the THREE Shimmering Lip Jam formula here as well as the recent holiday Under the Magic Moon collection with the Eye Quad here. These Lip Jams are limited edition from the Holiday 2015 collection. I love the formula and grabbed X01 Pale Moon and X03 Moon Whisper.

Top Pale Moon, Bottom Moon Whisper:

Pale Moon is described as “translucent with rainbow pearl.” Moon Whisper is described as a “foggy pink with multi colored pearl.” Pale Moon is definitely not translucent, it’s a pale, creamy, yellow orange beige base with small multi colored pearl. Pink or red pearl is the most prevalent. Moon Whisper could be a ‘foggy pink’, it’s a cooler light to medium pink with multi colored pearl. It reminds me of a Barbie pink or deeper bubblegum pink. 

They both sheer out on the lips and just add a tint, like the other Lip Jams. The shimmer in these limited holiday ones is more abundant in the glosses, but it’s smaller than the usual shimmer they use. It doesn’t show up on the lips well. You can see it more so in the sunlight. However, the regular Lip Jams sheer out to look like a tint with no shimmer on the lips, so these ones are more shimmery technically. They’re just not a lot of shimmer. I would love to see some shades with more shimmer, not glitter.

Pale Moon sheers out to be almost clear feeling, it makes my lips a bit paler in a concealer nude type way, but I don’t look dead. I usually am not a fan of creamy colors this light, I would prefer clear with shimmer above pale creamy shades. Pale Moon seems to work OK for me, it’s warmer than a regular concealer style gloss so maybe that’s why it works. Moon Whisper is too cool for me, Barbie pinks aren’t as good on me as the more yellow based warmer pinks. So both were kind of a fail for me, love the formula just wish there was more shimmer in these and that I had picked better shades for me.

Sunlight to show the pearl, Top Pale Moon, Bottom Moon Whisper:

Swatches: Top Pale Moon, Bottom Moon Whisper:

Sunlight:

Sheered Out:

Surratt Prismatique Eyes: Real Eyes: Review & Swatches

Surratt Beauty just came out with some new duo eyeshadows called Prismatique Eyes. I’m not a huge cream shadow or glitter fan, but I love Surratt and thought I would try one. Real Eyes seemed the most for me. It’s described as a “universal taupe cream with gleaming golden duo-chrome.”

Per Sephora: “A twinset eye shadow palette within a jewelry box container, filled with complimentary matte cream and prismatic, shimmer shadows coupled in a double-deck section for mesmerizing eye looks. Surratt Beauty Prismatique Eyes eye shadow sets feature cream shadow that can be blended onto lids and then dusted with a prismatic shimmering top coat for a multidimensional, glittering eye look. The top tier contains a water-proof shadow base that can be blended onto lids or used as liner. The lower deck swings out to reveal a prismatic top coat that can be swept on and blended to give eyes a celestial look.” The retail is $38 for 0.07 oz Cream Shadow & 0.05 oz Powder Shadow.

The case is a small glossy black plastic square with that Surratt purple and green glitter over spray. The top twists off to reveal the cream shadow. The bottom pivots out to reveal the glitter shade. I found the packaging to feel a little flimsy and kind of cheap like I could break it easily. I had to hold the base together when twisting off the cap because it felt like I would swivel it out then snap the top off.

The cream shadow is matte there’s no shimmer. It’s thin and was easy to work with. It took a bit to dry down. It almost felt like it never dried down fully, it was still slightly tacky after an hour even. This helped the powder shadow adhere well, but it did leave me creasing after a few hours with and without the powder shadow on top. I did use a primer, and without a primer it was even worse. The shade is not a universal taupe to me, more of a tan or caramel shade. It was on the warmer side as well, it pulls warmer when applied than it looks in the pan. It was slightly darker than my eyelids so it did add something, but it was pretty close in depth and was very natural looking. I did notice the color darkens once dried. The creasing wasn’t terrible for me for as a cream shadow, I’ve used worse. I wasn’t a fan of this particular color it didn’t work for my skintone and well. I would have preferred it to be a tad darker or maybe even just more neutral or cool. It was a bit too orange of a tan for me.

The powder shadow is the same size as the regular singles and it looks like you can pop it out to put it in a palette if you wish. The shade was a glittery pinky peach glitter with gold glitter. It was very glittery, powdery, and prone to fall out even when applied over the cream base. It adhered really well to the cream shadow but was terrible at adhering to the lid without the cream base, so it didn’t really function well alone. It didn’t feel like a duo-chrome shade, just more of a pinky peach glitter with gold glitter.

Swatches: Top Cream Shadow, Bottom Glitter Shadow:

I show this photo to show how the glitter looks powdery, you can see it’s texture:

I compared the glitter shade with Urban Decay’s Gwen Stefani Palette shade in Pop as it was the only other glitter shade I owned. Pop is a bit lighter applied.

Here I swatched the cream shadow wet on top, you can see it’s dried and darker right below. Then the Surratt glitter shade and Urban Decay Pop is below that.

I’m thinking I might have like Neutral Eyes more than Real Eyes color wise. However, due to the glitter shade and it’s bad fall out, I’ll skip trying it. The cream shade was OK and the glitter shade was too much work and I’m not into ones with lots of fall out. I was hoping the cream shadow would keep it in place, but it’s powdery texture made that hard. I think I prefer Tom Ford’s glitter shades, and I don’t even like those ones that much.

Chanel Sunkiss Ribbon Blush: Review & Swatches

Chanel is a brand I go to time and time again. They’re classic and have great limited edition items or what used to be their ‘star of the collection.’ The Sunkiss Ribbon Blush is the star of the collection, limited edition item from Spring’s 2016 collection.

Per Chanel’s website: “In an interlaced-ribbon design, this exclusive creation brightens cheeks with a radiant palette of pink, beige and coral, and leaves a smooth, satin finish.” The retail is $70 for a 0.38 oz product. This comes in the standard Chanel black case with black velvet pouch.

Sunlight:

The compact is the size of a Joues Contraste Blush. A Joues Contraste Blush is 0.21 oz so this one is definitely bigger and has more product. The Sunkiss Ribbon Blush does have a very strong powdery smell, just like the Joues Contraste Blush. It’s too strong for me, and one of the reasons I’m not a huge collector of Joues Contraste blushes. I love my Rose Bronze and Caprice shades, but hate the smell. I love that Chanel does not put that powdery perfume smell in most their powders, their highlighters seem to be fine for me. So that’s the disappointing thing about this blush. Now onto what’s not disappointing about it. It’s very finely milled, pigmented, silky and not powdery. The pink and bronze shades have shimmer which make this an overall satin effect blush, not too much shimmer nor is it matte. It is very pigmented and bright, so use a light hand and apply lighter layers to build color. I wasn’t thinking and put on way too much first swipe and looked like a clown the first time.

On the top is a bright orange. Below is a shimmery rose pink. On the bottom left you have a bright fushia. To the right is a shimmery light bronze. And last on the right bottom is a bright rouge color. Together they mix to make a lightly shimmery bright pink coral. The mixed color does seem to change a bit depending on which light you view it in. It’s warmer feeling in sunlight, cooler inside. Overall, it is warmer versus cooler. The colors are too small to be able to use separately. You could use a small eyeshadow brush to play with them if you wanted maybe eyeshadows. However, you can sweep your blush brush more at one end or another to vary the shade a touch. I swirled all of them equally like I would with a blush brush to get the mixed swatch shade. The bronze and pink shades were the best texture and quality, they were a bit softer. The other three bright more matte colors were drier, and I had to swatch them 4 times or so to get that color swatch versus once with the bronze and pink. With my brush I didn’t seem to feel like there was the same issue with not being able to pick the pigment up, it was worse swatching with a finger than applying with a brush.

The blush lasts a long time before fading and is a great spring color. If you like pink corals, spring colors and Chanel’s quality then you might check it out. It is limited edition. I had two blush shades slightly similar, Surratt’s Ponceau and Makeup Revolution’s Matte Blush in Fusion. Surratt’s Ponceau is brighter, more coral and less pink. It’s not shimmery, and not $70. Makeup Revolution is a drugstore brand I recently grabbed a few blushes from and they are remarkably great for drugstore. I’ll have to post on them one day. Fusion is matte and a more toned down pink. It’s bright and actually looks slightly similar on, but is less coral and bright pink, more of a warm pink slightly earthy or browned pink.

Swatches Top to Bottom: All Mixed Together, Top Orange, Middle Pink, Bottom Middle Bronze, Bottom Right Rouge, Bottom Left Fushia:

Sunlight:

Compared with L to R: Makeup Revolution Matte Blush Fusion, Chanel Sunkiss Ribbon, Surratt Ponceau:

Top to Bottom: Chanel Sunkiss Ribbon All Mixed Together, Makeup Revolution Matte Blush Fusion, Surratt Ponceau:

Sunlight: