Makeup Empties: Eyeshadow, Eyeliner, Lipstick, Liptint, Powder

In addition to the skincare empties that I blogged about, I've also actually emptied some makeup! I'm particularly happy about my makeup empties, because it typically takes me longer to use up a makeup item than a skincare item. Anyway,

Makeup empties accumulated over the past few months!

This time round I've got some staples - like my Coastal Scents loose powders - as well as some new appearances! Most of these are products I love and would totally use again, and as we go through each of these items, I'll explain why.


Makeup empties: Lipstick, liptint, eyeshadow, eyeliner, and powder!
Without further ado, let's get started!

MAC Flamingo Park Swatches and First Impression

The MAC Flamingo Park Collection is the brand's first Spring 2016 makeup launch, and it was recently launched here. I happened to be at the store during the launch, and I managed to get swatches of the products for you! It was quite an ordeal swatching the products, because it was very crowded in the store, with people buzzing around and swarming around the collection testers, so I'm happy to have swatched everything I could!

MAC Flamingo Park Collection

But before we move on to the swatches proper, I'd like to mention that the lighting in the swatches might be a bit lacking due to the fact that these were all swatched in-store.

Also, as you can see from the above photo of the Flamingo Park setup, it seems like for some reason the collection differs slightly here in Singapore. Not all the "official USA" shades were displayed in the Flamingo Park Collection display, and some permanent shades were put in the display as part of the Flamingo Park Collection although they didn't appear in the US version of the shade lineup. I'm not too sure why this is the case, but in any case, I've just done my best to swatch everything that was on display, so any incongruency with what was launched in the US is just due to whatever was in the display in the store.

MAC Waterweight Foundation and Smashbox Camera Ready BB Water: Dupes and Similar Products

MAC's Studio Waterweight Foundation SPF30 is the latest foundation from MAC, and it has been getting tons of raves online for its lightweight, water-like texture. However, the foundation really made its way onto my radar because I was asked by my colleague at work whether I was going to review it or not. After sheepishly admitting that I probably wasn't (not because I don't want to, but because I'm already backlogged on my reviews), she told me that she had heard that it was a dupe of a Smashbox foundation, the Smashbox's Camera Ready BB Water SPF30. So I just had to check it out!

MAC Studio Waterweight Foundation SPF30 vs Smashbox Camera Ready BB Water SPF30: Dupes or not?

Of course, the ingredients nerd in me was piqued by this. Certainly this wouldn't be the first time a product has had a dupe, and is hardly surprising to me. In my 5 years of blogging, I've encountered beauty dupes for everything from brush-washing tools to colour-changing lipbalm to face creams, so nothing fazes me. But it is interesting to see a product being duped so early into its release.

Smashbox Camera Ready BB Water: A new Smashbox product, rumoured to be a dupe for the MAC Waterweight Foundation (Source)

Turns out, as you might guess, the MAC Waterweight Foundation SPF30 and Smashbox Camera Ready BB Water SPF30 are indeed extremely close, if not identical. But I wanted to find out more - what if there were other similar products out there? So began my journey into ingredient nerdiness.

Stuff I Used Up! Skincare, Makeup and Nail Empties

I think I've been pretty good this time round! I've actually used up a whole lot of stuff with this round of empties! There are 6 products in here, so perhaps numbers-wise this isn't the most, but 3 of them are tubs of moisturizers, so I get some credit, right?

As an aside, though, I've always felt like the "empties" post is perhaps something only the beauty junkie can appreciate. I mean, normal people with like, 3 eyeshadows and 1 blush and 1 powder foundation and 2 lipglosses don't go around telling people, "O Hai I finished up my eyeshadow! So happy! Squeeee!" because they pretty routinely use up their stuff - and go back to get the same (or similar stuff). So to them, it isn't particularly spectacular when they use up something. But the beauty junkie is slightly different. When you have literally have a few tens of blushes, eyeshadows, lipglosses, and so on, even as you keep lemming the new collections and makeup that gets put out, then every empty that you use up, every pan you hit, becomes a cause for celebration. To me, it's sort of a way of saying any one of the three messages: "Look, I actually use up my stuff - see, I don't have that much stuff, you're kidding, stuff, who me?", or "Look, I actually use up stuff! I get to buy more!", or "Look, I used up this stuff, because it's awesome/although it sucked, and I want to tell you about it!" And hence, the empties post.

Look at all those empties! This is some serious using up of products, guys!

But don't let my existentialist comments on empties bother you, let's get down to the good stuff - what did I use up this time, and what do I think of it?

MUFE Blush & Highlighter Brushes Review & Comparison: Buffer Blush Brush #152 and Medium Highlighter Brush #154

Along with the MUFE HD Second Skin Cream Blush that was launched recently, MUFE has also launched a set of makeup brushes, which I thought deserved their own post, because these are some really standout makeup brushes!

MUFE Buffer Blush Brush #152 and Medium Highlighter Brush #154

One of the really standout features of these new brushes are how soft they are. When I heard that these were made of synthetic bristles, my first thought was, "Aren't all these synthetic-bristled brushes the same? They all feel the same to me!" And I learned that these are made from a different material. Your regular synthetic-bristled brush is made out of nylon fbers, but these are made out of a special type of material that's proprietary (so although the science geek in me was trying to annoy the PR staff into telling me what the material was, it turns out that they didn't know exactly either) and unique to MUFE at the moment. So these brushes are indeed something unique!


MUFE's new brushes utilize a new synthetic fiber that makes their brushes softer than the typical synthetic brush.
In order to test this out, I thought there was only one fair way to do this - and that is to bring out all my synthetic-bristle blush and highlighter brushes, and do a brush-on-brush comparison, to see which one was really the softest! And after much digging around my stash, I got these. I included the Hakuhodo Kokutan Blush Brush S because it was partially synthetic (a mix of synthetic bristles and blue squirrel hair):


Almost all my synthetic-haired blush and highlighter brushes, for the sake of comparison!

Dupes or Not? Benefit Dallas vs MAC Flirt and Tease

Here's a quick swatch comparison of Benefit Dallas and MAC Flirt and Tease blushes. Both Benefit and MAC have great blushes, and between Dallas and Flirt and Tease, both are powder blushes, with similarly nice textures, and good pigmentation. I have to say though, Benefit tends to scent their powder blushes, so Dallas smells a little sweeter to my nose, for some reason.

At first I thought they'd be similar in the pan, but on the skin they're actually pretty different. Dallas is more brown and less shimmery than Flirt and Tease, although they're both pretty wearable. I know Dallas is meant to be more of a bronzer, while Flirt and Tease is a blush, so that accounts for some of the colour difference. I do feel like Dallas could be a perfectly fine blush as well, though, for days where you want a more nude cheek kind of look. In my opinion, I prefer Flirt and Tease, just because I like the shimmery plumminess of the shade, but both look pretty good.

MAC Select Cover-Up Concealer: Stuff I'm Using Up!

Just look at this, guys! Have you ever seen a concealer tube quite so empty? Well, this is exactly how my tube of MAC Select Cover-Up Concealer in NC20 looks right now, all 10ml of it! I can't believe it, but I'm actually using up some of my makeup! Well, okay, some is an oversstatement, because I have so much makeup I probably have enough for my daughters and my grand-daughters and their grand-daughters. But hey, I'm using up something! And it counts, right? Right?

My concealer shade in MAC is NC20, so this Select Cover-Up tube you're looking at is also in the NC20 shade.



I thought I'd do a couple of swatches of this concealer for anyone who might be wondering if they are NC20 too. NC20, from what I know, is one of the more "common" shades MAC sells, in that its one of the shades people seem to buy more.



I know what you're thinking: What's so special about this Select Cover-Up Concealer that led me to actually finish up a tube of it? Well, to be honest, I was just trying to use it up. I personally think it's good, although not that great, and it seemed to match and blend into my skin, so I just kept using it until the tube was all flattened out.

The good thing about this concealer is that it covers reasonably well for a liquid concealer. I'd call it light-to-medium coverage. And when it goes on your skin, it doesn't feel oily or heavy, and when it's dried and blended in, it doesn't look oily or shiny. It also blends pretty well without looking cakey. So it's good for anyone looking for a liquid concealer that doesn't feel too heavy.

The downside? MAC claims that this is a "moisturizing" concealer, but I don't really find that to be the case. In fact, if you have dry skin, this can really sink into fine lines and wrinkles, so it should be avoided. To be fair, though, I didn't find it drying, but I didn't feel like it moisturized, either.

Would I rebuy this? I'm still on the fence about it. On one hand, I don't mind using it, and the fact that I managed to use up a tube shows that I did quite like it while I had it. On the other hand, though, I'm itching to try out something new. I guess it'll just boil down to whether anything else catches my eye the next time I go concealer shopping, LOL!

Soft and Feminine Dior Spring Inspired Eye: Get the Look for Cheap

Spring makeup always features a range of soft, feminine and girly looks, and while I'm not exactly a soft, feminine, girly kind of person, I can still appreciate the beauty in such looks. In particular, Dior's Spring 2011 Collection is one of those which has caught my fancy. The eyeshadows are all pinks and greys, which is such a pretty combination of colours. While I was drooling buckets over the pretty pictures, a thought struck me: Surely I already have at least a few pinks and greys in the abundance that is my makeup stash?


(Image from pleasureflush.blogspot.com)

Thus, began my quest to dupe the Dior Spring 2011 eye look. After all, not every girl can afford US$58 eyeshadow quints, right? So, I told myself while pulling my eyes away from those pictures, there had to be a cheaper way to dupe the look, or at least come up with something similar.

Here's a simple outcome using just two colours:



For the pink eyeshadow, I used Stila Fleur all over the lid, and then I applied MAC Knight Divine in the contour area, and applied a smidgen of it on the lashline as a liner.

Stila Fleur is a gorgeous baby pastel pink which I had from waaay back when, when Stila was still headed by Jeanine Lobell. I'm not even sure if they still make this colour. It's a gorgeous shell pink shade, although it is a little on the shimmery side. MAC's Knight Divine is a colour that is a more recent purchase, and currently available as a permanent shade in MAC's collection. It's a blue-based gunmetal grey shade wish silver shimmer. Very cool, almost like knight's armour. Both are fantastic shades, in terms of application and staying power.



So if you're a cheapskate like me, or just have too much makeup and don't want too many similar colours in your collection, duping the look might be a good idea. This is especially so if the look just uses simple basic colours, as in the case of this pink and grey Dior look. Have you ever tried duping a look before? Do you routinely dupe looks, or are you of the opinion that looks are difficult to dupe without the right colours?

Sigma Flat Top Kabuki vs MAC 187: A Comparison

The MAC 187 is one of the most famous makeup brushes in makeupdom. I remember when I was a newbie to the makeup world, everyone I knew had one, wanted one, or thought it was absolutely necessary to have one. Over time, of course, dupes and similar brushes came out. And since I'm doing a review on the Sigma Flat Top Synthetic Kabiki F80, I thought I'd photograph the two brushes next to each other, since they do appear to be similar.

Both brushes have comparable handle length, and bristle colour. You can see below that they are of a similar size, so if you liked the MAC 187's size, you'd probably like the Sigma Flat Top Kabuki as well. The quality of both brushes is also very good - I have to admit that I wasn't expecting much from a Sigma brush - after all, nothing lives up to its hype, right? - but I am forced to admit that the Sigma brush is actually of much better quality than I expected.



Top: Sigma Flat Top Kabuki, Bottom: MAC 187

However, despite their similarities, they perform totally different functions. After all, the MAC 187 is a duo fiber/skunk/stippling brush (whichever terminology you prefer), while the Sigma Flat Top Kabuki, is well, a kabuki/buffing brush. In short, this means that the MAC 187 would be bettr for applying product in a sheer, sparing manner (e.g. for heavily pigmented blushes or foundations), while the Sigma Kabuki would be best for buffing, or blending (e.g. blending after all product is applied, or buffing in mineral makeup). But let's explore the brushes a little more.



The MAC 187 has bristles that are a lot less dense than the Sigma Kabuki. So for more pigmented products, the 187 might be a better choice, since less product will be picked up and deposited. However, for sheerer products, the Sigma Kabuki would be better, as it can really pack on product.

Also, the MAC 187 has natural bristles, as opposed to the Sigma Kabuki which has synthetic bristles. While there are no hard and fast rules for what brush goes with what product, it has been my general experience that natural bristles do better with powder products, while synthetic bristles work better with cream, liquid, or gel products. With natural bristles, they deposit powder products evenly, but if used with liquid products, the bristles tend to absorb some of the moisture from the product, making application uneven. On the other hand, synthetic bristles tend to work well with liquids and creams because they don't absorb any moisture, however I do find that for some reason they don't deposit as much powder as natural bristles do. For some reason the powder just seems to get "trapped" in synthetic bristles, but not in natural hair ones.

So, although they might look similar, they actually aren't when it comes to function. The MAC 187 is better for powder products, and for products that are more pigmented, while the Sigma kabuki works well with cream, liquid and gell products, and also for products that are more sheer. The 187 is a stippling brush, while the kabuki is a buffing brush. They actually complemnt each other very well in that regard. Well worth owning both, in my opinion.

(The Sigma brush was sent to me for review. Review is my own honest and complete opinion. I am not affiliated with/compensated by the company for this review.)

Rock and Republic Seduce, MAC Flirt and Tease, First Light Cosmetics Sundowner: Dupes or Not?

Since First Light Cosmetics is currently having a 20% off promotion for OFAF (Of Faces and Fingers) readers, I thought some comparison swatches would be in order. The last time I featured First Light's blushes, I mentioned that there were some very similar colours for a higher price, and that Sundowner could potentially be a dupe for some of those.




Here's what I dug up from my makeup stash for comparison - the much vaunted and raved about Rock and Republic Seduce, the one-with-the-fangirls MAC Flirt and Tease, and First Light Cosmetics Sundowner. All three of these were powder blushes, and they were in the same colour family. All three are plummy blushes with a hint of brown - a bit overwhelming to look at in the pan, perhaps, but lovely if applied with some caution on the skin. And yes, I do think fair girls can wear these colours too! (I'm NC20, and these happen to be some of my favourite shades.)

Anyway, enough with my gushing about plummy blushes. On with the swatches:



L-R: Rock and Republic Seduce, First Light Cosmetics Sundowner, MAC Flirt & Tease

Now, first off the bat, you'll notice that these are very similar. Very, very similar. They aren't 100% dupes for each other, but I guess once worn it's a little difficult to tell the difference. But there are some small differences.

The first small difference is that Sundowner is a lot more shimmery than either Seduce or Flirt and Tease. It doesn't have huge glitter bits, but it's more light-reflective than either the Rock and Republic or the MAC colour.

The second tiny difference is Sundowner is more plummy and rose in colour, while both Rock and Republic's Seduce and MAC's Flirt and Tease are more brown. But as you can see in the photo, the difference isn't very great.

The last difference is that of pigmentation. Rock and Republic had the best pigmentation, while MAC was the least pigmented. Now before I get lynched by all the MAC fangirls for even daring to suggest that MAC can be less pigmented than another brand, let me offer an olive branch by saying that Flirt and Tease is a Sheertone colour, anyway, so it isn't meant to be super-duper pigmented. It isn't sheer by any means, though, and you can definitely build it up to the level of kabuki clown cheeks, but it is a little sheerer than Seduce and Sundowner.

So, are all three blushes dupes for each other? Colour-wise, I think the Rock and Republic and the MAC blushes are more similar to each other than the First Light Cosmetics version. So if you want the closer dupe of Seduce, then Flirt and Tease is the one to get, even if it's a tad sheerer. But they're all similar enough that I can't tell you which one to pick definitively - it's going to depend on your brand preference (high or low end?), budget (cheap or expensive?), and other preferences in terms of form (loose powder blush or pressed powder blush?), pigmentation (more pigmented, or less?), and colour (more red, or more brown?).

Stuff I'm Actually Using Up: MAC Dazzlelight

As a beauty fanatic, I often get people asking me, "Do you actually ever use up any of your stuff?" And most of the time, I have to admit, I have way more than I'll ever use up. I mean, sure, I use up basics like concealers, powder products (face powders etc), and mascara (because they dry up quickly anyway), but when it comes to colour products, I have to admit, it's rare for me to use anything up. So when I do use something up, I have to trumpet it.

So here you go - look what I actually hit pan on lately, people!



That's MAC Dazzlight. It's a gorgeous fleshtoned neutral that packs a punch. I think I've been using it everyday for the past 6 months or so. And I know you're thinking - what's so special about this boring beige that she's using up so fast? Well, first of all it's highly pigmented. You know sheer eyeshadow shades bore me to tears, and this applies to fleshtoned neutrals as well. You see, when you wake up with those panda eyes in the morning, a bright fleshtoned neutral covers the fact that your eyes are sunken in and two shades darker than the rest of your face. And of course, it can only do that if it's reasonably pigmented.



The other thing about Dazzlelight is that it's frosty, as you can see from the swatch above. By that I don't mean chunky glitter, but I do mean so much shimmer that it's like bling for your eyes. That may, or may not, be a good thing depending on your preferences. Generally, I prefer some shimmer but not outright frost, so I do find Dazzlelight a tad too frosty for my tastes, so I exercise caution when applying. But as an eye-brightener, I can't complain that it isn't doing its job.

So now I cay say I'm officially using up something. Has anyone else recently used up something?

Breaking News: MAC Decides Not to Ship Rodarte Collection!

The end to the whole MAC-Rodarte saga has come. In my previous posts HERE and HERE, I talked first about how and why the collection was in bad taste (in my opinion at least), and in the second post, I talked about what concrete steps we can take to help the women of Juarez. I thought the controversy died down when MAC said they would donate all proceeds to charities to help the women of Juarez, but MAC has gone one step further.

MAC has just posted on their Facebook wall about half an hour ago that they would not be shipping out the Rodarte Collection.

Here is the text of the Facebook wall post:

M·A·C Decides Not to Ship M·A·C Rodarte Makeup Collection Out of Respect for Women & Girls of Juárez and their Families
by MAC Cosmetics on Monday, August 16, 2010 at 5:27pm

This decision will not impact M·A·C 's commitment to donate all of its projected profits from the collection to benefit the women and girls of Juarez.

Out of respect for the people of Mexico, the women and girls of Juarez and their families, as well as our M·A·C Mexican staff and colleagues, M·A·C has made the decision not to ship the M·A·C Rodarte limited edition makeup collection. This decision will have no impact on M·A·C's commitment to donate all of its projected global profits from this collection to local and international groups that work to improve the lives of the women and girls of Juarez. We are currently conducting due diligence to ensure we donate to organizations with a proven record of directly supporting the women and girls of Juarez.

M·A·C and Rodarte are deeply and sincerely sorry and we apologize to everyone we offended. We have listened very closely to the feedback of concerned global citizens. We are doing our very best to right this wrong. The essence of M·A·C is to give back and care for the community and Rodarte is committed to using creativity for positive social change. We are grateful for the opportunity to use what we have learned to raise awareness on this important issue.

Click HERE to see the actual Facebook note that MAC put up on it's wall.

I was satisfied when MAC offered to donate all proceeds to charities, because they would then no longer be profiting from the controversy they caused, and most of the controversy died down after they announced that. So this is a step I certainly didn't anticipate! While I am happy they are pulling the collection, I hope this pulling of the collection doesn't result in them donating any less!

Hai, my name is Drama, I iz refuze to die!
(Image from the Independent, credited to MAC)
(Can you tell I'm weary of being slammed for expressing my own opinions on this issue?)

At the same time, (being a girl with a major in Economics and a masters in Management), a side of me cynically wonders if MAC just plans to repackage the items, rename them, and re-release them in another collection. If this is the case, it would leave a bad taste in my mouth, because it would seem like they are still trying to make money off these items. Bear in mind that the collection was slated to launch in September, so these collection items would already have been manufactured a long time before, and if they weren't sold, it would mean a dip in MAC's profits.

I can't help but wonder if this is their way of still trying to turn a profit from these items by re-selling them under another name. Furthermore, in place of the planned launch of the collection that would see all profits go to charity, MAC would now just donate an arbitrary amount to charity. From what I've been told, MAC is donating the "projected profits" from the collection, and when it comes to projecting profits from such a controversial collection, your guess is as good as mine. The exact amount to donate would then just be a number of MAC's choosing, and this makes me feel uncomfortable.

If this is what they are going to do, re-sell the products under another name and make money from them, while just choosing an arbitrary amount to give to charity (anyone remember the $100,000 they initially offered?), then I just hope that they donate a decent amount (not just $100,000!). However at the same time I do see how pulling the entire collection altogether is more considerate for MAC employees with Mexican ties or heritage - how is a MAC salesgirl with Mexican relatives going to sell this collection at the counter? It would be tough for her, and I imagine she'd rather not have to sell the collection altogether.

So I guess my feelings on this issue are somewhat ambivalent. I'm happy they're not shipping the collection, but I do have concerns about how much they'll be donating to charity. What are your thoughts on the issue?

MAC Rodarte Controversy: How You Can Help the Women of Juarez

I'm not going to expound on my opinions in this post (since my LAST POST was already quite clear on my views). But there's no point raising awareness without follow-up action, so here's what you can do to further help the women of Juarez:

1. Sign a petition: This is one started by Healing Beauty, and I think it's well-reasoned and articulate: LINK.

2. Donate money: Both PinkSith and Pretty in Dayton have compiled a list of charities that are safe to donate to. PinkSith's list is HERE, while Pretty in Dayton's list is HERE. I do think they have the same charities listed down, as they were helping each other with the research.

3. Continue raising awareness about it! You can tweet about the issue with the hashtag #rodartemac, or you can direct anyone who's interested to Tsunimee's compilation of blogposts on the issue. After all, MAC didn't offer an apology and agree to donate money just because they were feeling nice; they did it because the beauty community raised awareness about the issue and they were afraid of alienating customers.

I hope everyone who has been unhappy with the Rodarte collection will do one or more of these. And for everyone else who preferred the "it's just makeup" stance, I hope your indifference to the controversy doesn't stop you from helping out the cause by signing the petition or making a donation - if you're going to buy from the collection anyway, wouldn't it be good to see it go to charity? A good cause is always worth your time and effort, regardless of whether you agree with the opinions of others or not.

MAC Rodarte Controversy: How to Give Your Brand a Bad Name Part 2

Edited to add: Want to help the women of Juarez? Check out THIS POST to learn how you can do your bit to help!
Edited to add (again): View MAC's response to the issue HERE.

Stupid companies seem to be in abundance lately. First it was the heavy-handed and overreactive threat by G+L to sue a blogger, and now Rodarte and MAC have decided to join in and create their very own scandal. Will the controversy never cease?

MAC has collaborated with designer brand Rodarte to release an upcoming collection called Rodarte, which they claim is inspired by the etheral beauty of the towns that border USA and Mexico. In particular, they named two of their nail polish colours Juarez (a pale pink) and Factory (a pale green). These two names in particular were at the forefront of much backlash, as people accused MAC of exploiting the controversy and violence there for their own profit. In particular, Juarez and Factory were really offensive to many girls, because Juarez is pretty much a poster child for violence, drug crimes, cross-border trafficking, and border-town factories, and a lot of the violence is female-specific(apparently female homicide is particularly high, as is rape). Also, the police are corrupt (stories abound of people being mugged in Juarez by the police), these crimes have little to no response. If you want to know more about Juarez, here's an 8 mins audio segment on NPR radio called "Juarez: A City on the Edge", a link kindly passed to me by Tsunimee, a Youtuber I follow. If you prefer to read, there's also an NPR article on it, called "Whos Killing the Women of Juarez?"

MAC's response was to quickly issue an apology, and they also said they would donate some of the proceeds to charities in Juarez. Of course, this is where opinion splits, there are people who applaud it, and people who feel that the response is inadequate. Both these posts have valid points.

As for me, I'm somewhere in between. I don't believe MAC when they say they weren't trying to exploit the associations of the border towns in their collection. I mean, this is the age of controversial product names. NARS has Orgasm and Deep Throat, Benefit has Thrrob, and once a makeup artist with his own cosmetics line went on MakeupAlley to ask what we would think of a lip colour called Adulteress (fortunately, it was nixed, as most of the girls had a bad response to it). So I don't believe MAC, of all brands, with their hip-and-edgy image, wasn't trying to join the fray. I'm sure they were aware of the controversy. I mean, look at the promo image:

(Image from The Independent, credited to MAC)

Skinny, emaciated girl looking like she's on the brink of death, check. "Exotic", Mexican-inspired clothes, check. Black rings around the eyes and deathly-pale lips and face, check. I don't know about you, but that sure looks like they're trying to exoticise the image of the impoverished factory girl! And I hadn't noticed it until Styrch pointed it out, but there's a ghost in the photo as well - the outline on the left is the silhouette of a woman, and the way the cloth drapes suggests she's wearing the same clothes as the girl. That just creeps me out - the way the girl looks like she's backed into a corner, combined with the way the ghost seems to be staring at her, just gives me the heebie jeebies (but then again I'm one of those wimps who don't like to watch ghost movies). I don't believe they can put out an image like that and say they didn't mean to stir up any controversy at all. That's a load of bull.

And it gets even worse if you look at the items in the collection. In addition to Juarez and Factory, there's a lipstick called Ghost Town, that's white, and one that's called Sleepless, that's a "light grey taupe", for that chic abused factory worker look. And they're even promoting lip erase, a concealer for the lips that's used to block out your natural lip colour so your lipstick is more true-to-colour on your lips. I know it's a permanent item in their line, but including it in this collection is just bad taste. Yeah, now we can buy Lip Erase to look like a murder victim! And don't forget Bordertown, a mineralized eyeshadow that's black with red, blue and silver veining - so you can get a badly punched up black eye, just like the victims of rape and violent crime! And of course don't forget the pigment named Badlands, or the eyeshadow called Sleepwalker - I guess being raped and abudcted on your way to work in a factory must feel like a dream, huh? Is this what MAC and Rodarte means by the "etheral" inspiration of Mexico? I really don't know how MAC and Rodarte can claim that they weren't aware of the connotations with a straight face. Everything, from the promo pictures to the product names to the colour selection, looks very deliberately done. I know that the whole concept behind the colours and the names is a bit deeper than simply exploiting associations - I know there is this whole sleepwalking, etheral theme behind it as well, but it doesn't negate the bad associations nonetheless, and I think the companies were capitalizing on it. They wanted this. They made it happen. They wanted the buzz. They just didn't want to look bad in the ensuing discussion.

In light of this, I feel that MAC's response - donating some of the proceeds to charities - is horribly inadequate, but it's the best they can do for now. They really should pull the collection altogether, but that may not be possible, given that the Rodarte collection is a collaboration with the Rodarte designer brand, and that Rodarte was really the one who came up with the entire concept. You can read about their "inspiration" here, and they have deconstructed US$4000 designer dresses based on this whole border-town concept. Style.com reports that Rodarte was "interested in the troubled border town of Ciudad Juárez; the hazy, dreamlike quality of the landscape there; and the maquiladora workers going to the factory in the middle of the night." The whole bit about the factory workers inspiring the collection is in there - its not just supposed to be about etheral sleepwalking, they did in fact see those factory workers and think "Hey, it's great to do a collection on them!" And they did have Juarez particularly in mind. I don't know about you, but somehow that just strikes me as being really insensitive.

MAC, doing a collaboration with them, was probably contract-bound to imitate their concept for the makeup line too. So it would be hard for them to get out of it. In this case, I suppose the only other alternative is to donate the proceeds. It's not ideal, but I guess this is life. I personally feel that MAC should have gone one step further and donated ALL the proceeds to the charities, along the line of their Viva Glam lipsticks, instead of a measly unspecified "portion". That way, at least they wouldn't be profiting from any of the controversy they've created.

On a last note, I'm also surprised that while everyone is heaping criticism on MAC, while Rodarte - the collaborator and original designer that originated this whole fiasco - got away with it. The fashion press didn't give them a very hard time about their disgusting collection, and some even called it "beautiful", and as far as I know, Rodarte, unlike MAC, isn't donating any money to the associated charities at all. It just saddens me that Rodarte would stoop so low to get "inspiration" for their clothes, and MAC had to follow suit. I've never heard of or bought anything Rodarte, but now I don't even like or want to buy anything from them, and MAC has been tainted by association for collaborating with them. What are they going to come up with next, a Nazi-inspired collection with a red, white and black eyeshadow trio called Swastika?

Edited to Add: Looks like I'm not the only one feeling outraged. Here's a list of posts, compiled by Tsunimee, that other bloggers have made on the MAC Rodarte collection: LINK.

MAC Pinky-Brown Neutral Lipstick Swatches!

One thing every girl needs to have is a neutral pinky-brown lipstick. That's supposedly the quintessential MLBB (My Lips But Better) shade that goes with everything. Fortunately, every mid-range or high-end brand will have at least a couple of shades in that family. MAC, the ever-popular brand with a huge cult following, has a few MLBB shades, some of which are hugely popular, like Twig and Cream in Your Coffee. The basic colour families are the same, but differences arise in pigmentation, texture, finish and nuance.

And I mislabeled the photo. It's not Viva Glam Cindy in there, it's Viva Glam VI, I think.



L-R: Viva Glam VI, Cream In Your Coffee, Brick-O-La, Retro, Spice Is Nice, Twig

Most of these were really pigmented, the least pigmented was Cream in Your Coffee. That's actually not a bad thing, because on my relatively fair NC20 complexion, a lot of these look awesome in the tube but come out on the brown side on me (like Twig and Spice is Nice). So if you have that problem with these shades, it might be better to get something a bit sheerer.

Finish-wise, I felt Cream In Your Coffee and Spice is Nice, being Cremesheens, had the nicest texture, although Spice Is Nice is more pigmented than Cream In Your Coffee. The rest were a little drier, and a little too dry for my preference. As heretical as it sounds, while I love MAC's colour range for lipsticks, the texture has always been a bit drying for me. Maybe I just have really sensitive lips. I really can't remember much else, because this photo was taken long ago, but I thought I'd just post it here anyway, because it might help someone.

MAC Coco Pigment and Urban Decay Eyeshadow: Dupes or Not?

If you love makeup as much as I do, you will probably have heard of the legendary MAC Coco pigment. It was released once as a limited edition shade in May 2005 (that's five whopping years ago!), promptly sold out, and was never released again. Right now, if you can find any, it goes for handsome amounts on Ebay and other scalper sites. It was hailed as the perfect complex taupey neutral, that looks good on almost every skintone. And it's runaway popularity and success was all the more impressive because it happened in the days when beauty blogging was still wearing pampers, so there weren't any bloggers to toot its horn and post photos (there were online forums, though).

Anyway, awhile back, I managed to get my hands on a small sample of the notorious Coco pigment. And while I cradled my precious in my hands, I couldn't help buy notice one thing: beautiful as it was (hello complex taupe!), it looked familiar. Eerily familiar. Like, don't-I-already-have-a-similar-colour-in-my-stash familiar.

Excited at this awesome possibility that Coco pigment might have a dupe, I went to my stash to dig out all my eyeshadows, and found the potential dupe - the humble and totally underrated Urban Decay eyeshadow in YDK.

Here they are in their containers. Similar, no?



L-R: Mac Coco Pigment (in sample jar), Urban Decay YDK

But of course, the million-dollar question is, how are they swatched? So here you go:



L-R: Urban Decay YDK, Mac Coco

There you go! I do think they are dupes, or at least on my skin they are. I think one might be a tad browner than the other, but I honestly think that if you already have YDK, and you pay insane amounts for MAC's Coco, you're going to be disappointed that you paid for something you already have a dupe for.

On me, they're virtually identical. It may vary on other people, as to some extent what passes for a dupe is partly dependent on your skintone. Not so much for nail polish, but more so for makeup products. Still, I think UD's (Urban Decay) YDK is going to satisfy a lot of lemmings for MAC's Coco.

Which might make some of us wonder - if MAC's Coco pigment was all that and a bag of chips, why isn't UD's YDK taking over the world and being sold out at Sephoras and other makeup stores all across the world? It could be that MAC has that hardcore fanatic fanbase that makes every LE item a must-have while UD doesn't, or it could be that Coco was such a long time ago that people forget they ever wanted it and have moved on to other things. I guess this just shows that some makeup products are just totally underrated. And UD YDK is one of them.

Anyway, to sum up my post - both colours are TEH AWESOMEZ, like SRSLY. LOL. No seriously - it's hard to fine such a complex taupe. It's taupe, sure but they have hints of other colours - bronze, plum, champagne, purple, brown - that make it so unique, and so universally flattering. And also, that if you missed the boat on Coco pigment, you can still catch the YDK one.

Are They Dupes? GOSH Bourgogne vs MAC Sweetie Lipsticks

In my last post swatching the GOSH lipsticks HERE, I mentioned that GOSH Bourgogne 66 was a more punched-up, pigmented version of MAC Sweetie. I thought they were similar because they were both plummy pinks with shimmer, so here are actual lip swatches for comparison!

Now that I actually swatched both of them side-by-side, I realized that while they might both be in the same plummy-pink-with-shimmer category, in terms of intensity these are two very different creatures. GOSH Bourgogne is a helluva lot more pigmented and intense than MAC Sweetie, so if you're looking for a pigmented lipstick, the GOSH is the obvious winner.

Here's a swatch of my bare lips for comparison:



Here's a swatch of MAC Sweetie. I love this lipstick:



I really like MAC Sweetie, it's a very work-appropriate colour, and it's a very sweet-looking pinky-plum with silver shimmer, and it's a slightly cool-toned colour. It's shimmery without being frosty, and it's not too sheer although it isn't totally opaque. This is one of the no-brainer shades I like to use when I can't think of anything else.

Here's a swatch of GOSH Bourgogne:



GOSH Bourgogne is like MAC Sweetie, but really revved up. It's also a slightly cool-toned pinky-plum, but really pigmeneted, to the point where it's a very bright colour. It also has a blue flash duochrome going on, which makes it really cool. I don't know if you can see the blue flash on the lips, but it's more obvious in the tube. The blue duochrome is more diminished once applied on the lips, so the net effect is shimmer that just ever-so-slightly flashes blue. It's not noticeable once it's on the lips, but if you look at the lipstick in the tube, its a lot more obvious.

Formula-wise, I found the two lipsticks to be similar. On me, both of them were a little on the slightly dry side, although the GOSH was slightly more dry than the MAC. I'm one of those weird people who find all MAC lipsticks drying (even the Lustres and Cremesheens), but if you aren't one of those, then you might find the MAC substiantially less drying.

So between the two, which one should you pick? Once again, it depends on a number of factors. If you love bright, pigmented lipsticks, then GOSH Bourgogne is definitely the one to pick. But if you want something less flashy and more work appropriate, or if you want a lipstick that's more sheer, then MAC Sweetie is a better choice for you. And if you want the less drying of the two, then MAC Sweetie is probably your best bet.

Gel Eyeliner Swatches and Review! Bobbi Brown, MAC, Stila, Etude House

Today's swatches are also featuring my stash! Yay! Some time ago I did a post on my stash pics (which you can read about here), and it had a measly number of gel eyeliners. Well, since then, I've acquired a couple more, and now I can show them all off!

Unfortunately, I'm not much of a bright colours person when it comes to eyeliner (or for that matter, makeup in general), but I swear, although they're almost all neutrals, they're all different!

Most of these that I've shown here are pretty awesome - as everyone knows, Bobbi Brown is pretty much the queen of gel eyeliners, and MAC is her little more tempremental daughter, and Stila is the court jester who spouts out golden gems in between bit of rubbish. That's my opinion of it, anyway. But I do love them so, and all of these are pretty good, although some are better than others, and I'll go into more detail when I discuss each individual colour. In general though, the Bobbi Brown ones have the best texture, consistency and pigmentation, although the rest are pretty good too. That being said, there's a difference between the different types of Bobbi Brown gel liners too - some are better than others, and rumour has it that the "newer ones" in the clear glass jar aren't as nice as the "older" ones in the frosted glas jar, although whether the eyeliners were reformulated or merely repackaged is still a mystery. Still, there aren't any duds in this stash, because, you know, its MY stash. Duh. :P

Also, most of you would probably already know this, but it's always a great idea to store your gel eyeliners upside down. This allows you to not only see the labels on the bottom of the pots (and thus save yourself the trouble of looking through your stash to find that one pot), but it also prevent the gel eyeliners from drying up so fast. I'm not sure how exactly, but it does seem to work for me.

Anyway, here are swatches to start off:



L - R: MAC Ostentatious, Bobbi Brown Black Mauve, Etude House Orgel Light Gel Eyeliner 04, Bobbi Brown Violet, Bobbi Brown Indigo, Stila Jade Smudgepot

MAC Ostentatious is a neutral taupey brown that's not too cool-toned for warm-toned people. I actually expected this to be more grey, but it's more brown than anything else. It's not a brassy, bronzed, orangey brown though, it's a greyed out brown, the kind that I love. This one is really very work safe, and it doesn't have a hint of shimmer at all. I didn't like this as much as I should have - the pigmentation is not as good as the Bobbi Browns or the Stila, so with this particular colour you do have to go over the line a couple of times. It does last for awhile, but it does tend to get a little smudgy towards the end of the day - just a bit.

Bobbi Brown Black Mauve is a purply-grey-brown, another one of those colours that I could have a million of and still love. It has just a hint of shimmer that disappears once on your skin. I was disappointed by the case of the disappearing shimmer though, it was the shimmer that really got me excited. This one looks less interesting on skin than in the pot, unfortunately. The texture is also great, but the one I have is the "newer" repackaged gel eyeliners, in the clear glass jars rather than in the frosted glass jars, and it doesn't seem as nice as the other Bobbi Browns I have. It does have good staying power though - I've no problems with this.

Etude House Orgel Light Gel Eyeliner 04 (what is it with Asian brands giving their products ridiculously long names!?) is a beautiful, captivating colour - the kind you look at and just HAVE to have. It's a cross between a purple and a grey, with a really cool pink flash/duochrome to it. I LOVE THIS. It's neutral but interesting, and it's really glowly. Unfortunately, the texture of this is the driest out of all the gel eyeliners I have, and I attribute this to the terrible lousy packaging of Etude House. When I first got thi gel eyeliner, it was a little harder than my Bobbi Browns and MAC, but after a couple of uses it just slowly hardened. Now whenever I use it I have to dig my brush into it. Although the packaging doesn't keep the gel eyeliners moist, it does look really cute. I've included a few photos further down in this post, just so, you know, we can ooh and aah over the innate ability of Asian brands to be kawaii :P LOL OK I'm kidding, but the packaging is really very pretty, which is always a plus. Also the pigmentation on this is a little bit skippy, so you do have to go over your work again to really build up the colour. The good thing about it though, is that it stays forever on your skin. This colour is the most unique neutral I've ever seen in awhile, so I feel sad that it just had to be ruined by quality problems. I think it was also possibly limited edition, although I'm not certain.

Bobbi Brown Violet is very very pretty, it's a muted deep purple violet with shimmer, and it doesn't lose any of it's oomph even when it's on your skin. And it' incredibly pigmented, and glides on like butter. It also stays on for a really long time without smudging. The one I have is in the older packaging though, and I'm not sure if that makes a difference.

Bobbi Brown Indigo is blue, but it's not a screaming neon blue. It's a beautiful matte deep blue, more navy than indigo actually, since indigo implies that there is some purple to the colour, but this one has no purple at all. I'd have called it Navy instead, but I'm not Bobbi. Anyway, This one is also awesomely pigmented - you really only need to touch your brush to the surface - and also very smooth, and also really long lasting.

Last, but not least, Stila Jade Smudgepot. Now the Smudgepots are a bit of a hit-and-miss affair - some are really awesome, and some not so much. Fortunately, Jade is one of their better colours - very creamy, very pigmented, and really long lasting. I really like this a lot. It's also got gold shimmer in it which really amps up the colour. Beautiful. They call it Jade, but Jade to me conjures up images of minty green colours, no thanks to the ongoing Chanel Jade craze. Still, true Jade is indeed not really mint green but a bit deeper than that. I'd say this one is sort of a jade green with some emerald in it, because it really has that vibrancy of colour.

Anyway, that was a really lengthly review, wasn't it? But I'm not done yet! I said I would show you the cute Etude House packaging right?





Is that cute or what?! Cute pink plastic top (and they even put shimmer in the pink plastic! Talk about attention to detail!) with nice girly swirls and design...Unfortunately the pretty packaging doesn't do much to prevent drying up of the eyeliners - and I stored them upside down too! I'm so disappointed.

Anyway, here's an EOTD I did awhile back with the Etude House eyeliner. Unfortunately the lighting wasn't very good, and the pink flash seems to have disappeared, but here you go:



Wow, my eyes are really small and hooded, aren't they :X

And, that concludes this real looong post for today, finally! :)

Fake MAC Twitter Acount: MACartists on Twitter

Update:

As of March 5th, I tried to access the MACArtists twitter page, and I received a HTTP 404 not found error instead. It looks like they self-deleted, got removed, or something - I've no idea what happened, only that the account doesn't seem to exist anymore. Has anyone managed to access anything more than a 404? I just hope they got deleted before they filched anyone's personal information from their 'giveaway'...

You've heard of fake MAC cosmetics, now check out the newest fake to hit the block - a fake MAC Twitter account! For years MAC has been plagued by ever-increasingly sophisticated fake eyeshadows, pigments and blushes, but now it look's like MAC's got a new problem on it's hands. It turns out that user MACartists on Twitter isn't actually affiliated with MAC. Unfortunately, it seems like most of their followers think they're following an actual MAC account, so I thought I'd just run a quick post on it to alert everyone.

This was discovered by Karlasugar, who runs the very helpful and positively awe-inspiring swatch blog The Next Best Thing to Going Shopping Yourself, and reported on her Twitter account.

According to Karla, real MAC artists have usernames like MAC_Gordon_E, MAC_Vimi_J, MAC_Gina_B, MAC_Gregory_A, MAC_Bianca_A, and MAC_Caroline_D. Those are all real MAC artist accounts.

For anyone wanting to follow real MAC artists, there is also a list of actual MAC makeup artists who are on twitter, located at http://www.macartiststweets.com.

Naturally I'm puzzled. Why anyone would want to pretend to be a makeup company is beyond me. I've heard of people setting up twitter accounts as a form of satire - anyone vaguely familiar with the finance industry will recall the (now suspended) fake twitter account set up to mock the John Boden incident, in which the managing director at the investment bank Thomas Wiesel Partners sent this email telling his underlings to get back to work, on Good Friday too, no less: "We are an investment bank. Unless you are an orthodox something, please get into the office. We are getting paid minimum wage for a reason – we are not making money, which is hard to do from home. Join Wells Fargo and become a teller if you want to take holidays." The fake twitter account (screenshot and more info here) mocked Boden, with tweets like "Analyst slacking again. Headed to mosque to get him back to work. Traffic sucks", "Just made plans for sushi tonight. Man, I love chinese food!", and of course, "Unless you are an orthodox something, please get into the office."

But in thise case, MACartists is obviously no satire twitter account. The account is answering people's questions about MAC products, giving out "MAC Tips", making announcements on upcoming products and collections, and even holding contests under the guise of being affiliated to MAC. The last one is particularly disturbing - even if you won the contest, would you really want to hand over your address and details to someone you cannot trust? If it was some sort of satirical account, set up purely for the purpose of humour, I would have found it funny, but in this case, I found this about as repulsive as those dodgy MAC eyeshadows with the too-thick print logo, the lousy colours, and the toxic, untested ingredients.

Of course, if anyone wants to follow MACartists for whatever reason, I'm not stopping them, or even saying that they shouldn't follow MACartists. I just thought that people should know that they aren't actually affiliated to MAC. If they know that and still choose to follow them, that's their right, but at least they should make the choice informed, knowing who they are really following.

Face Brushes Review and Comparison 2: MAC 188, Stila #24 and Body Shop Blush Brush

OK, so we had a nice diversion with Bourjois Brun Nylon. Now back to brushes: here's Part 2 of my face brushes review!

So in this previous post, I talked about the MAC 187 and 189, and how they were nice, but not really must-haves for me. Today, I will review and compare The Body Shop's synthetic blush brush, and the Stila #24. Just like how last post's brushes were all for face and foundation, today's brushes are all blush brushes!

The Body Shop has a really nice and soft range of synthetic brushes, comparable to the Too Faced ones in feel and quality, and I really like them for the face. I don't like them so much for eyes because sythetic brushes by their nature tend to pick up less pigment than natural hair brushes - this isn't so annoying when applying face powder or blush, when you want a sheerer application, but can be a pain if you're trying to put on eye colour, and you want the colour to show up. Thus, I tend to buy synthetic brushes for face use only. That said, I really like The Body Shop's version, for what it's worth. It has a nice dome shape, which fits into your cheek nicely, and it's nice to hold and use. I use this pretty often, especially for my more pigmented blushes, because like I said, the synthetic bristles pick up less pigment than, say the Stila #24, which is all natural hair. Although of course, if I reallly want a very sheer wash, I'd use my MAC #188 for that, because of its smaller size and it's sparse bristles. The only minor gripe I have with this is that the distribution of powder that it puts on your face isn't totally even. For some reason (I think it's because the dome shape ends abruptly at the sides - does that make sense? I can't think of a better way of putting it), it tends to put a greater amount of color in some areas than in others. It's not a big deal, because I just blend it out and it works well, but it's something I thought I'd just note. Like I said, it's a minor gripe.

The MAC 188 is of course, the little sister of the MAC 187, except, much better due to its smaller size. Here, like I mentioned above, it works reallly well for the most pigmented of blushes, like for example, your NARS Exhibit A. It also works fantastically for highlighters, especially for MSFs, because the sparse bristles work to prevent glitter overload. Very useful indeed. I like this one, and there's not much else to be said for this.

Last of all, the Stila #24 is a must-have for anyone who loves blush, but has a stash of mostly moderate-to-lightly pigmented blushes. Like the MAC 188, the Stila #24 is made out of natural hair, but the bristles are denser on both ends (duh!), and the larger end has a dome shape. If you look at the picture above you'll see that the larger domed end is actually just the right shape for blush - meaning that the brush itself isn't big, and the other end (which resembles a mini Stila #21), is really, really tiny. A lot of people ask me if the Stila #24 can be used for the entire face, like for face powder application, because they have been woefully misled by pictures on the Stila website, which somehow always seem to make the Stila #24 look a lot bigger than it is. You defintely won't be able to use this to powder your face, unless you're a pixie or something....Although it COULD double up as a powder blush if you want to squeeze one into your makeup bag, since its bristles are just the right type and density. It just would take a lot longer than using an actual powder brush, such as the Stila #8. Despite its smallness, I really like this brush! I love the rounded, domed end for powder blushes that aren't too pigmented, as it picks up just the right amount, deposits it evenly, and is just the right size for fitting on my cheek! And as for the other mini end? Wellllll....I'm not really sure what to do with it, and to be frankly honest, I rarely, if ever, use that tiny end. I do guess it would probably be good for powder highlighters, for spot highlighting. Otherwise, I can't think of a use for this - suggestions anyone? I do think the tiny end makes this brush a pity, since it is so expensive. I do love the bigger end, but I kind of think for USD$50, it isn't really worth the cost if you're not going to use the smaller end at all. The fact that I have it in my stash shows that I'm a sucker, I guess..

Anyway, that concludes Part 2 of my review and comparisons of face brushes for today. In Part 3, we will deal with the remaining brushes, which are all on my can't-live-without list, and you'll see why! :)