Showing posts with label MAC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MAC. Show all posts

Thursday, November 29, 2007

Foundation Smackdown: MAC Studio Fix vs. Prescriptives Flawless Skin

vs.


MAC Studio Fix Foundation
Color Quality: 3.5 out of 5 - very close to my skin color
Coverage: 4 out of 5 - full coverage
Length of Wear: 3.5 out of 5
- skin gets oily after a few hours. Also has tendency to settle into crevices of face.
Kindness to Skin: 3.5 out of 5
Price:
$25 for .52 oz ($48 per oz)
Verdict: WINNER

I have been wearing MAC Studio Fix foundation in C6 for almost 10 (EEK!) years. It's not that I am stuck in my ways and have a hard time changing. The truth is, I am a black woman who likes a full coverage foundation that does not look like stage makeup. And oh, by the way, my skin is sensitive! So until more companies develop quality makeup for women of color, I'm stuck.

So let's talk about the foundation. Studio Fix is a powder makeup that goes on with as much coverage as a cream foundation. It comes with a fantastic sponge that applies the color smoothly and evenly. Some people like to use a brush instead for lighter coverage. One caveat about the sponge is that you should change it every 1-2 months. I wear Studio Fix just about every day and it usually lasts me about six months. It looks lighter than your skin shade when it first is applied, but once it settles and mixes with your skin's natural oils, it darkens a bit (so don't be worried if it looks pasty when you first put it on). I am happy that the C6 color looks very close to my skin tone. The problem is, even though it is a powder, my T-zone always gets shiny when I use it. Oil blotters are essential! On another note, as long as I change the sponge regularly I seldom get breakouts as a result of the foundation.

Does it live up to its claim? The site claims it "is a powder and foundation in one that combines good coverage with ease of application." It also claims to maintain "a matte finish by absorbing oils on the skin, as well as Talc to provide a smoother, less reflective, matte finish" and "is long-wearing." I agree that it provides good coverage and is easy to apply. Though it has a matte texture once it is first applied, it does not absorb enough oils for it to maintain the matte finish. As far as long-wearing, it stays on for a long time but does not necessarily look good for a long time.

Would I buy it again? Yes

Prescriptives Flawless Skin
Color Quality: 4 out of 5 - a Prescriptives salesperson evaluated my skin color and matched it very closely.
Coverage: 3 out of 5 - medium coverage (worked best with Magic Powder)
Length of Wear: 4 out of 5

Kindness to Skin: 2.5 out of 5

Price: $39.50 for 1 oz.
Verdict: LOSER

I was very excited to try Prescriptives' Flawless Skin foundation especially after seeing how good it looked on my friend Karissa's skin. Her skin looked "flawless" and she told me she used a mix of the Flawless foundation and Magic Powder. I thought I was finally able to try something other than my old faithful Studio Fix. The same day I bought the foundation I also bought a new facial regimen from a different line. When my skin started becoming irritated and breaking out worse and in a different way than ever before, I just assumed it was the facial regimen. I stopped using the face creams and cleansers and continued to use the Flawless, though I still had irritation. I finally went to get a facial and I was told that whatever I used ended up irritating my skin to the point that it looked severely windburned. Needless to say once I stopped using the foundation, everything was back to normal.

The worst part of it was that though my skin was severely irritated, it looked amazing. The color looked great, and the Magic Powder topped it off very nicely. I wish I didn't have to let it go, but anyway you slice it, nice looking makeup over irritated, breakout infected skin just isn't very nice. Though it did not win the Beauty Smackdown, you should still try it out only if you don't have sensitive skin.

Does it live up to its claim? The site says it "works to protect against sun damage and external assaults while simultaneously diffusing imperfections" and "achieves a flawless finish while working 'undercover' to provide your skin with superior skincare protection." It also says that "daily use improves skin's ability to repair itself and guard against UVA and UVB damage" and the "lightweight, long-wearing foundation provides natural-looking medium to full coverage for all skin types." Since it has SPF 15 sunscreen in it, it must protect against sun damage. And as far as working "undercover," for me it worked undercover to damage my skin. I will agree that it is lightweight and fairly long-wearing. It also does maintain a natural looking coverage.

Would I buy it again? No. If only I didn't have sensitive skin...

Which would you choose?

Saturday, November 17, 2007

Lip Gloss Smackdown: Kissable Couture vs. MAC 3D Lip Glass

VS.






Kissable Couture Lip Gloss

Shade: Forest
Color Quality: 3.5/5 - nice shade, best layered with another lip color
Endurance (lasting power): 2/5 - does not last very long
Price: $22 for .16 oz - not a great value (you're basically paying a premium for the packaging)
Verdict: LOSER

Kissable Couture, launched by Forest Whitaker's wife, Keisha Nash-Whitaker, and celebrity makeup artist, AJ Crimson, has been receiving a lot of press lately. I have been intrigued by this line ever since my girl, Bernie, featured it on COCOACHiC - so much so that I bought some and wrote an article about it. Since then Keisha has even been featured on Oprah. I love beauty-preneurs!

So here's the scoop: My bottle of Kissable Couture came in an ultra chic black gift bag with ribboned handles and an elegant box. The packaging was very well done. I really liked the look of the intense crimson color in the bottle, but was surprised when it went on extremely sheer. The applicator's felt tip along with the gloss' thin consistency made it go on very lightly. I had to dip the applicator in a few times for it to go on with enough color that I was comfortable with. I liked it best when I applied it over a lipstick. But, its thin consistency also prevented it from lasting long. I felt like it was gone after 30 minutes. It does last longer on lipstick (or maybe it was just the lipstick that lasted longer). Also, after a few weeks there seemed to be an odor (that happens with a lot of drug store brands too).

Does it live up to its claim? The website says it "offers the ultimate high gloss factor that is standalone satisfying" and keeps you "coming back for a single sheer application or double coat of sexy sheen & divine fluidity." It also says it "won't weigh down your lips, rather provide an endearing feeling of everlasting love." Someone's PR person has a way with words, huh? I will agree that it doesn't weigh down your lips. However, I think "ultimate high gloss factor" is exaggerated and I have yet to feel the "endearing feeling of everlasting love."

Would I buy it again? Yes. Though I would not buy it again for me (too expensive and doesn't last long enough), but I like it as a gift idea for my fashionista friends.

MAC 3D Lipglass
Shade: In 3D
Color Quality: 3.5/5 - glossy, clean look with a hint of color
Endurance (lasting power): 3/5
Price: $14 for .17 oz
Verdict: WINNER

I am a fan of MAC lipglasses and was excited to see MAC launching the 3D Lipglass, a more sheer, less sticky version of their original lipglasses. The applicator and consistency reminded me of MAC's lip lustreglass. I think the color is very on-trend since women are wearing less-pigmented lip glosses. Though the color is sheer, there was a level of complexity to it (a peachy, pink color with tiny shimmers that didn't make my lips sparkle, but rather shine) so it didn't feel like I was putting on something I could find in a drug store. Also, I liked that despite its sheerness, it lasted a pretty long time. Usually about an hour if I wasn't eating or drinking a lot. Great for a fresh, feminine look.

Does it live up to its claim?
The website indicates it "fuses a high gloss wet-look finish with balm-style emolliency and conditioning" and "delivers 3D-style dimension to the lips through an innovative combo-blend of extreme pearl and multi-reflective shine." It also says it is "non-sticky, smooth to apply" and its "finish lasts for hours." I agree that it does feel conditioning to the lips and has "multi-reflective shine" (you can see fine shimmering in the bottle but it is not glittery). I also agree that it is "non-sticky" and "smooth to apply." However, saying that it "lasts for hours" is a stretch - it may last for hours if you didn't move your mouth for hours.

Would I buy it again? Yes. At least as long as this look is on-trend.
Which would you choose?