making faces :: hot stuff

it's hot in here. it's not you.

ah yes, it's that time of year when the sun is strong, the humidity is high and most people are a little leery of putting a layer of paint on their faces, even a light one. after all, the inclination in the summer is to remove layers rather than add them and hot, humid weather has a way of taking your nicely done makeup and turning it into something from the climax of "raiders of the lost ark" in a hurry.

if you live your life moving from one air-conditioned spot to another [home, car, office], that's very comfortable for you. but chances are that you're going to have to sit on a terrace to have a drink or visit a friend who find that air conditioning aggravates their asthma [me] or get on a bus because your brakes are being repaired. and there are a lot of people [me included] who just have to do battle with the elements every day.

no one is likely to force you to wear makeup [put on the mascara or we'll kill grandma!], so a lot of people just don't bother with it in the warmer seasons. but there are places- often workplaces- that do sort of tacitly expect that you make some attempt to hide the embarrassment of morning face and, if you're the kind of person who likes to put on makeup anyway, you're probably not interested in just stowing your collection until the mercury drops.

so, here are a few things that i find work for me... feel free to agree, disagree or add your own.

1. hot weather tends to make you perspire. i don't think anyone is going to disagree with that, but a lot of people use cosmetic products- creams, colour cosmetics, anything- that are actually intended to be quite moisturising. unless your skin runs quite dry [in which case, for once, you can laugh at the rest of us] you're at least going to want to move away from putting a lot of products on your face that are too rich or sebaceous. anything that has the keyword "glow" in it is suspect, because products that make your skin "glow" do so by imparting it with rich, nutritious oily goodness. doesn't mean you can't wear them [i've stuck it out with my nars' sheer glow foundation], but keep in mind that you'll be compounding what nature is doing to you anyway.

one thing that you can do is get yourself a nice mattifying primer. yes, it's another layer, but the whole point of these is that they help absorb. there are a lot of them around and i don't claim to have tried all of them, but nars has a very nice one that's light without being drying and neostrata in canada has one that leaves the skin feeling quite velvety. for a cheaper variant, apparently using milk of magnesia accomplishes the same goal, although i'd really recommend this only for oilier skins.

2. it's bright. again, probably not a lot of people are going to disagree with this one. the fact that you can't really do anything about the fact that you're under bright light all the time, though, means that there are a few things to keep in mind. very elaborate, detailed makeup under bright lights tends to look a bit overdone. keeping things simple- fewer shades, less blending, etc., tends to work better for me.

of course, that doesn't mean that you have to be overly subtle. under bright conditions, bold colours can really work. simple can mean one big punch in the nose of colour. 

3. heat makes things messy. makeup is certainly no exception. to get around this, i usually try not to get around it at all. bring on the mess and make it your friend. i like to do things that start out looking a little smudged and imprecise, because that way, when the heat inevitably takes its toll, it at least won't be quite so obvious. mac's sadly discontinued greasepaint sticks are amazing for this sort of work and give you the awesome sensation of literally colouring your face with big crayons. benefit's creaseless cream shadows and armani's eyes to kill powder-that-you'll-think-is-cream shadows are also very effective. essentially, a creamier product can go on looking a little blurry and inexact, but still look good. if you want to put shadow or liner over top of that base, it'll also help them last longer.

4. moisture feels good. i'm not being really controversial here, am i? but one of the things that i avoided for a long time, but now keep as a staple for everyday use is mac's fix+ spray. it purports to make your cosmetics last longer and is perfect for applying powder products [especially loose pigments] or priming your skin. i don't know that my makeup lasts longer with it, but what i will say is that it definitely keeps it looking fresher for the time it does last. it really seems to stop the fading that occurs, especially in warmer times. i also find that it softens the appearance of makeup slightly, making it look a little more natural and relaxed.

and you can spritz it on your face when you start applying and when you finish, to give an incredibly refreshing feeling. i swear i'm going to start carrying bottles of this stuff in my purse for those moments when i need something to relax me. it's probably better than vodka. well, the two go hand in hand, really.

here are a few things that i've done to my face that illustrate these points...

this is a sort of hot-weather variant on a smoky eye, where i just smudged a cream shadow over my lids, set it with a bit of a darker pigment and was basically ready to go.

face ::

nars sheer glow foundation "mont blanc"
diorskin nude hydrating concealer "001"

eyes ::
benefit creaseless cream shadow "skinny jeans"
mac pigment "the family crest"
mac eye kohl "smolder"
inglot e/s "352"
diorshow mascara

cheeks ::
mac blush "my highland honey"

lips ::
mac l/s "out-minxed"



here's one using one of mac's greasepaint sticks. i basically just used it all over my lid- more towards the outer corners, since that's where i like to concentrate colour- and the quickly blended a shadow over it. this actually held up remarkably well during a particularly hot day and i credit that to the fact that it looked all mussed-up to begin with. i only put eye kohl [also known as "liner", but i like to talk fancy] on my upper lash line, since, when it's really hot, it lasts less time on my water line than it takes me to apply it.

face ::

lush colour supplement "jackie oates"
diorskin nude hydrating concealer "001"

eyes ::
mac greasepaint stick "french quarter"
mac e/s "patina"
mac e/s "dazzlelight" [as a highlight along the brow bone]

cheeks ::
mac mineralize skinfinish "by candlelight"

lips ::
urban decay l/s "voodoo"


this is the sort of thing i was talking about in terms of using bold colours very simply. i'm kind of proud of the fact that this looks complicated, but actually took all of five minutes to do. because the colours are separated into blocks, there was really nothing to do other than just apply. they more or less blended themselves, clever buggers. i think that this shows off the lovely, intense pigmentation of the shadows that came out with mac's "surf baby" collection. there's a reason i got almost all of them.

face ::
nars sheer glow foundation "mont blanc"
diorskin nude hydrating concealer "001"

eyes ::
mac e/s "saffron"
mac e/s "sun blonde"
mac e/s "manila paper"
mac greasepaint stick "dirty"
ysl faux cils mascara

cheeks ::
mac cheek powder [aka blush] "my paradise"

lips ::
ysl rouge pur shine l/s "blood orange"


and, finally, another more colourful look. normally, i don't do this sort of pronounced liner in the summer, because it ends up looking a hot mess in short order, but one of the nice things i've noticed about the armani "eyes to kill" shadows is that they actually hold other products in place fairly well. it's like they're having a little colour competition on my face. these photos were taken not long after application, but i was floored six or eight hours later to notice that i looked more or less exactly the same. no summer-smudging, no fading, no creasing. i also decided to take another of the dangers of summer in hand when i did this by anticipating that i was going to get flushed in the heat. i started out with a fairly bright pop of blush on the cheeks and presto- i meant to look like that.

face ::
lush colour supplement "jackie oates"
diorskin nude hydrating concealer "001"

eyes ::
armani eyes to kill e/s "pulp fiction"
nars e/s "dogon" [dark side only]
mac mega metal e/s "prance"
mac e/s "all races"
mac fluidline "blacktrack"
ysl faux cils mascara

cheeks ::
guerlain blush g

lips
nars l/g "strawberry fields"

the currency gouging index

i'm starting to include references to this more and more as i post. you'll notice it mostly in posts related to cosmetics, because those are where there is a clear difference in canadian versus u.s. prices.

canadian vs u.s. dollar 2010- 2011

basically, the story is this:

the canadian dollar is worth more than the american dollar and has been for several months. in fact, for the last couple of years, we've been dancing with parity on an ongoing basis. many canadian consumers can accept the fact that our import taxes are a little higher, or that there is duty to be paid on imported goods, but considering that for every canadian dollar paid, american companies are making money if they charge the same price as they do to americans. [e.g., using yesterday's exchange rate from the bank of canada- a product sold at $25usd to a canadian customer would net $25.81usd if the customer paid in canadian dollars]

we are a reasonable people. most of us do not mind paying a couple of extra dollars for the convenience of being able to buy in our own country [although even saying that seems weird], but there are limits and many companies insist on pushing those limits. and so i give you the cosmetics "currency gouging" hall of shame/ fame for summer 2011. [i'm choosing cosmetics because the price changes from country to country. buying music is paid in usd and costs the same no matter what currency is in your bank account, which makes it an awesome time to buy music. i'm perfectly willing to look at any other industries if people are interested.]

hall of shame

armani- hmm... one eyes to kill eye shadow in the u.s.= $32. in canada? $42. one rouge d'armani lipstick in the u.s.= $30. in canada? $38. are you f**king kidding me? armani products are stellar, but you're going to have to do a lot of convincing to get me to believe they're that much better in canada than they are in the united states.

m.a.c.- well, at first glance, the differences don't seem so huge- $14.50usd vs. $17.50cad for a lipstick or eye shadow- until you consider that m.a.c. are a f**king canadian company. seriously, despite the fact that they were purchased by estee lauder, their head office is still located in toronto [ok, technically newmarket, but they're seriously a block and a half north]. they should be charging us less!

givenchy- you'll see in my previous post that the pricing for a gloss from givenchy is $29cad versus $26.50usd. that's not so bad, right? well no, but on my on line order, i got dinged an extra $1.88 on the givenchy gloss only for "duty". what the hell is the inflated canadian price covering if it's not the extra import taxes we call "duty"? you're double dipping, givenchy.

hall of fame

guerlain- i was originally just going to make this a hall of shame, but i felt that i would be doing a disservice. guerlain are a really expensive brand, which is kind of sad because more people should be able to enjoy their products. the one thing that you can say about guerlain is that they're pretty much equally out of reach no matter what side of the border you stand on. price of a rouge g in the u.s.? $46. in canada? $50. price of a limited edition rouge g lipstick in the u.s.? $47. in canada? $50. that little differential is actually a key component of the guerlain pricing strategy. in fact, permanent products are priced above [but not grossly above] the exchange rate, but limited edition products are priced much closer to the current exchange rate. in fact, guerlain's limited edition blush/ bronzer powders are priced the same or less in canada as they are in the u.s. why do that when the regular products maintain a difference? guerlain is being very smart. they know that with the canadian dollar at parity or above, selling at the same price is a winning proposition. so for products that are only available a limited time, why not offer them at the same price? for permanent products, they are betting that, over the long term, the canadian dollar will be lower than the american, so it makes sense to guard permanent prices higher to protect themselves from a cad collapse. smart, smart, smart business and an excellent way to curry favour with the folks north of the border.

making faces :: fuchsia perfect

"all-natural" fuchsia

those who know me [and now, those who read this blog] know that i have a real thing for the dramatic shade known as either fuchsia or magenta. there are different definitions [and sub-definitions] of both, but for the purposes of the everyman, fuchsia is that point where intense pink and purple meet, shake hands and decide to be way cooler than everyone else. [sometimes literally- brown dwarf stars, the coolest stars in terms of temperature, emit an eerie fuchsia light.]

my proposed family tartan

the origin of the name fuchsia, as with many shade names, comes from a family of plant. these plants bear flowers of the eponymous colour, which is about as unnatural-looking a thing as you're likely to see in anyone's garden. not surprisingly, there are few people who, when asked to name colours they associate with the natural world, will go with fuchsia. [in fact, when asked to name colours that remind them of anything, most people are not going to go with "fuchsia" as a first choice.]

fuchsia and magenta are generally more associated with the modern world, perhaps because magenta is one of the building blocks of both print and screen colours. if you've ever heard of cmyk values in colour reproduction, guess what that "m" stands for? magenta. [i think that there are a lot of teachers in design school who are happy that the powers that be went with "magenta" rather than "fuchsia" in this case.]

rare, wild-caught polyester fuchsia fur

there are lots of ways to wear fuchsia, both in terms of clothing [i have a plethora of options] and cosmetically. there are shades for the eyes [mac has both "fuchsia" and "bright fuchsia" pigments, while indie company sugarpill has a shade called "dollipop" that, while i haven't tried it personally, looks like it could stop traffic], for the cheeks [aside from the fact that loose pigments can be used on the face, virtually every company has an intense fuchsia blush, my favourite being the mac "pro" colour azalea]. and of course, fuchsia colours abound for the lips, from every possible corner, in every 

finding fuchsia

micro-shade between pink and purple [other than those shades who are sent to camp mauve]. and i can't even begin to count the number of options there are for fuchsia shades to put on your fingers and toes... however, since it's the season to look at bright, eye-catching [or even eye-gouging] shades for the lips, let's start with a look at those...

four fabulous fuchsias ::

l to r :: nars funny face, mac show orchid, mac rebel, guerlain shalimar

shalimar

guerlain :: shalimar

part of the newly launched "rouge automatique" collection, this is a cool, light shade that is an easy choice for day or night. the light texture and relative sheerness mean that it's a shade that can go pretty much anywhere.

rebel

mac :: rebel

this is an almost vampy magenta- very deep and equally purple and pink. the finish is close to matte for that extra oomph. not a shade for the shy, but definitely a different take on a dark, dramatic lip.

show orchid

mac :: show orchid

this is definitely on the pink side of fuchsia and on the outspoken side as well, but there's a reason why this shade has such a loyal following with mac. it really is a stunning colour. although it's referred to as a "hot pink", it's ironically a very cool shade that doesn't pull red at all.

funny face

nars :: funny face

this is another opaque, more full-coverage shade, a perfect purple/ pink blend with a hint of red shimmer [hint is the key word- it's almost matte]. personally, i think this is a much nicer shade than their more attention-grabbing "schiap", which is a hot pink, but that's just my taste.

i'll also point to an excellent limited edition fuchsia shade that mac had out last year as part of their "liberty of london" designer collaboration- "petals and peacocks". this one leans very cool and, while it's a bright shade, is a little less likely to cause retina damage than show orchid.

here are a couple of fuchsia-themed looks for day or night [i'll let you choose which works best where, depending on your schedule] ::

"shalimar"

this is a very quick, ultra-simple combination for day time. it has a little bit of impact, but it's quite understated, really. if you want to be even quicker and simpler about it, you could skip the eye liner, but on me, i think that would look faded.

face ::

lush colour supplement "jackie oates"

diorskin nude concealer 001

eyes ::

benefit creaseless cream e/s "skinny jeans"

laura mercier e/s "african violet"

mac fluidline eye liner "blacktrack"

mac eye liner "i get no kick"

dior diorshow mascara

cheeks ::

mac blush ombre "azalea blossom"

lips ::

guerlain rouge automatique "shalimar"

nails ::

opi "miami beet"

"show orchid"

you might notice that i'm cheating a little bit here, or at least recycling. yes, this is the same photo set that i used when i featured show orchid as part of my "30 days of lips". i find this kind of look works very well for either day or night [if memory serves, this ended up serving for both], because it's bright and punchy, but also simple and bold enough to look "unfussy" by daylight.

face ::

nars sheer glow foundation "mont blanc"

mac prolongwear concealer "nw20"

eyes ::

nars soft shadow pencil "celebrate"

mac e/s "sweet & punchy"

mac e/s "humid"

mac e/s "dazzlelight"

mac greasepaint stick "greengrease"

ysl faux cils mascara

cheeks ::

mac magically cool liquid powder "truth & light"

mac blush "azalea"

lips ::

mac l/s "show orchid"

"bright fuchsia"

the lipstick in this look is limited, but i think you could easily substitute show orchid, funny face or rebel. on the other hand, you still see some of these kicking around on ebay and it is a beautiful shade. i really wanted to do something a little dramatic for nighttime using some loose pigments. although there's a little skill that needs to be employed using pigments, they're unparalleled for getting intense colours [particularly if used wet and/ or with a base]. i'm a complete klutz and if i can learn, anyone can.

face ::

nars sheer glow foundation "mont blanc"

diorskin nude hydrating concealer "001"

eyes ::

mac pigment "bright fuchsia"

mac pigment "pink opal"

mac pigment "later"

mac e/s "stars & rockets"

urban decay e/s "asphyxia"

mac eye liner "smolder"

mac fluidline eye liner "blacktrack"

dior diorshow mascara

cheeks ::

mac blush "azalea"

lips ::

mac l/s "petals & peacocks"

nails :: 

deborah lipmann "bad romance"

join me in a fuchsia fandango?

friday favourites 03.06.11

my feet hurt. and that's a good thing, because it means that i've had a lot of time to go walking. walking is kind of a year-round favourite with me and it's more than a little frustrating that i live in a climate where walking can be impossible or highly unpleasant for so much of the year. not this week, though! i have taken advantage of this week's sunny days [and the fact that i have a lot of time on my hands and frustrations to work out] to pound the pavement, mostly in ndg and westmount and feel content that i'm keeping myself at least a little bit active.

although i really want to avoid repetitiveness, i feel like i would be remiss if i didn't point out that the segment of last night's episode of "the daily show", where jon stewart responded to eric cantor's position on tornado relief is quite possibly the best thing they've ever done. you can watch the full episode on the show's web site, unless you're in canada, in which case you go through comedy central. the segment goes right to the heat of what i think infuriates most people about cantor's statements- not that they are ludicrous on their own, but that they are so completely hypocritical. jon's definitely on top of my "men i would chase down the street if i weren't already spoken for" list this week. it's not a big list, but it's constantly evolving.

so what about some things i haven't talked about yet?

ONLY ONE WAY TO FIND OUT... AND HEY, THERE'S AN ADORABLE KITTEH AT THE END



a sense of responsibility :: mac cosmetics have long been associated with causes, particularly their phenomenally successful mac aids fund. now they're adding to that by collaborating with the u.s. government and other organisations to help fight gender-based violence. you can check out more from mac, parent company estée lauder and secretary of state hilary rodham clinton.

in addition, rumour has it that lush cosmetics, themselves no strangers to causes, will be launching a campaign in favour of legalising gay marriage. this won't mark the first time the company has taken on a controversial political topic- they campaigned against extracting oil from canada's tar sands, helping to spread awareness of the environmental risks associated with the project before the oil industry had even started hyping it in their ad campaigns. it's nice to see that someone at lush hq evidently has testicles the size of those ubiquitous bath bombs.

the mad monkette :: this is the sartorial equivalent of comfort food.

soft kill :: this is the phoenix risen from the flames of blessure grave. their new album "an open door" isn't exactly going to shake the foundations of music, but it's still a lot of fun [in a mopey kind of way]. perfect summer listening.

more fun with mac & guerlain [& nars & chanel & my new friend stila] :: what's the point in having a great paint set if you don't use your paints? i may have been forced by blogger to abandon my "by the letters" makeup experiment, but here are a few things i've been doing with some of the lovely things i've raved about... you can also check out my wicked tan. seriously. that's a tan.

products used ::
nars sheer glow foundation mont blanc
dior hydrating concealer 001

mac manila paper e/s
mac surf usa e/s
mac grey range e/s
nars night clubbing e/s
mac blacktrack fluidline eye liner
ysl faux cils mascara

mac my paradise blush

mac lollipop loving l/s

lush colour supplement jackie oates
dior hydrating concealer 001

guerlain terre indigo e/s palette [all 4!]
diorshow mascara

guerlain terra inca sublime radiant powder

nars mayflower l/s

lush colour supplement jackie oates
dior hydrating concealer 001

mac sun blonde e/s
mac cobalt e/s
guerlain terre indigo e/s [blue only]
stila sparkle waterproof liquid liner curacao
ysl faux cils mascara

mac my paradise blush

chanel antigone rouge coco shine l/s










but really... there's no doubt as to who is the real beauty queen on these premises...

photo by dominic f. marceau- fsquaredmediapixels.blogspot.com

thanks to everyone who took the time to read & comment. please feel free to share your thoughts and suggestions.

making faces :: my date with guerlain

there's something about even saying the name guerlain that just seems elegant. and indeed, there is something about virtually everything released from the venerable perfume house [originally founded in 1828 and currently owned by luxury brand powerhouse conglomerate lvmh] that does seem to radiate an elegant, refined and delightfully [not off-putting] snooty air. they are a luxury brand among luxury brands and virtually everything that emanates from them whispers class, refinement and beauty. so when i found out that my local guerlain counter was inviting women to come for a makeover to celebrate the launch of their summer 2011 collection and their new rouge automatique lipstick line, i was quick with a positive response.

now, regular readers of this blog will note that i've already indulged in both of these collections. i picked up two rouge automatiques the week they were released and i treated myself to the stunning terra inca sublime radiance powder from the summer collection. but the fact that i'd already seen some of the goods didn't make the prospect of having one of their makeup artists use me as a canvas any less exciting.

guerlain is one of those brands that just consistently seems to get things right. i came to their cosmetics by way of their perfumes [as i assume many do], since i'm a long-time devotee of their mitsouko perfume [incomparable in every way] and dom swears by their vetiver for men. i'm pretty certain that fans of guerlain fragrance are lured into their cosmetics through one of two avenues :: 1. their "terracotta" line of bronzers which are apparently the be-all, end-all of bronzing for those who are into that sort of thing; or 2. their remarkable powdered eye kohl with its perfectly precise wand applicator and remarkable formula that seems able to resist even the dampest and most smudge-prone of water lines [mine].

SEE WHAT HAPPENED...


once you've gone down one of those roads, it's easy to be drawn in by guerlain's combination of quality and beauty. one of the reasons that i love getting something from guerlain is because they take such care to design their products [critics, particularly of their "rouge g" lipsticks, say over-engineer] so that they consistently feel like luxuries, like you really are getting something quite special. don't discount that feeling.  

before

the artist [and i'll have to apologise that i didn't get her name, so i can't credit her] asked if there was a look i wanted to try in particular, but to me, the excitement is always in seeing what they'll come up with, without the prejudice of knowing what i usually do. my only request was that she not use either of the two lipsticks that i'd already purchased. i was a little nervous that i left the door open to bronzers, because i'm normally not a fan, but i'd told myself that i wasn't going to set any limits aside from not wanting a repeat.

interestingly, though, the makeup artist didn't once reach for any bronzer. she did use the terra inca powder, which gets no objection from me, but she could obviously see that i am one pasty girl and that it was better to stick with lighter colours.

after #1

i have to say that one of the things that i really liked were the "brightening" products she used- essentially designed for the face or around the eyes to give a healthy, natural glow. they really add something to the complexion, an effect that lasted several hours. it's tricky to capture in photos, but i looked radiant [without looking shiny, which is unfortunately what "radiant" means much of the time in cosmetics] throughout the day.

i liked the light consistency of the lingerie de peau foundation that she used- it gave nice, even coverage, but it felt like nothing on my skin. the problem i have with guerlain foundations [and i've tried a few] is that they simply don't come light enough for my skin tone. this one was a fairly good match, but i find that, if you look at the difference in skin colour between my face and my neck/ shoulders, even in full sun, you can still see that there's a bit of a difference. [apparently, there are lighter shades available at their boutiques in the orient, but that doesn't help me a whole lot, since even if i could convince someone to get them for me, i'd have no way of telling which shades would work.] it's too bad, because, as i said, the formula is lovely.

after #2

for my eyes, she created a very soft, smoky look using shades from the summer "terre indigo" eye shadow palette. she used mostly the darker, cooler brown and the blue, which gave a really nice lift to my eyes. since it was a bright, sunny day, she kept the effect understated. she did combine these colours with a couple of lighter permanent shades [one from the "rue de franc-bourgeois" palette and the "instant charnel" single shadow]. she used shadows to line as well [the dark brown shade from the "terre indigo" palette], which was a nice complement, since it made the outline a little softer than a black liner would have.

after #3

for the lips, she used a combination of rouge g #71 "rose désir", which was actually a limited edition colour from their spring collection [still available through sephora on line in canada and the united states] and "salsa" gloss from the summer 2011 collection. all three of the summer glosses look fiercely bright in the tube, but they're actually quite sheer when applied. the end effect of the soft pink lipstick and the gloss was very much a "my lips but better" shade with a lot of shine.

terre indigo shadow palette

the only slight disappointment was with the mascara. guerlain aren't known for their mascaras and i can now see why that might be. i found the application on this one to be a bit clumpy, adding neither depth nor definition. i forgot to ask, but i think this may have been a "curling" formula, in which case it seemed to work, but my lashes already curl fairly well on their own, so the effect was more of a "kink". 

swatches, single layer, with flash

in the end, i couldn't resist the adorable "terre indigo" palette, with its mosaic of warm medium and cool dark brown, burnt orange and persian blue. true to guerlain's established form, it's beautiful to look at and, if my makeover were not enough, it comes with a lovely little insert that gives suggestions on how the colours can be used together. [i should add that while the effect in the "look" photos is more muted, the pigmentation is actually very good. see swatch photo. only the blue seemed a little powdery, but it can easily be built up.] i can't wait to start playing with it myself.

many thanks to veronik at the holt renfrew guerlain counter for hooking me up and thanks to dom for the "after" shots of my makeover.

making faces :: product review [mac "big bounce" shadows]

sheesh. with all the advance talk about these and the reviews from consumers, you'd think these shadows broke up someone's marriage. seriously, even the best products have their detractors, but i don't think that i have ever seen such universal distaste for something. i guess it's kind of reassuring to know that unanimity is still possible, even in the diversified world of the internet.

mac released these at the beginning of the month, along with a collection of coloured mascaras under the collection name "flighty". on the same day, they came out with a colour collection [one with no new products] called "fashion flower", which i reviewed previously. at the time of the launch, i'd already heard reviews of the new cream-mousse formula big bounce shadows that indicated that they weren't for me.

now, just to let you know where i'm coming from, i haven't used a cream shadow in about fifteen years. i don't like them as a rule, they tend to crease like crazy on my deep-set eyes and i dislike the sensation of having moist eyelids. so the negative reviews just reinforced what already made me skeptical. however, i got sample sizes of four of the colours and i figured, there are lots of things that i like even though a lot of other people hate them, so maybe i'll find out if there's a way i can make these work. the colours, after all, are simply gorgeous. mac really ran with these and released a whole palette of shades, even more than they did with their sumptuous "mega-metal" shadows that came out in january.

spread the wealth/ good fortune/ rich, sweet, luxury touch- direct light

i can understand their eagerness to get in on the market right away. in 2011, cream shadows went from being a niche product to "the new hotness", which meant that mac competitors nars, makeup forever and benefit had a serious advantage, since they already had cult favourite products on the market. on the high end, giorgio armani led the charge with their "eyes to kill" shadows, which are not creams but work more or less the same way and everyone else is now playing catch-up. guerlain has three cream shadows out with their summer collection and chanel apparently has some on deck for fall. so mac needed something that was new and they needed a good colour range to hold their own against those who already had a toe-hold.

ARE THE BIG BOUNCES REALLY THAT BAD? SEE THEM IN ACTION...



people seem to like cream shadows for two main reasons: they're quick to apply and their smooth consistency makes them relatively idiot-proof. you can swipe them on with a finger and go and they tend to be more even than powders. once they've set- usually within a few seconds- they stay put. also, bright colours are more intense in cream formula, so if you really want a pop, they're your best bet.

same as above, in indirect light

people hate cream shadows more or less for one reason: they crease. the moist product gets squished into the fine lines on your eyelids, which make it look like you're wearing a dingy horizontal blind as makeup. there's a reason benefit named their product "creaseless creams" to push them to the public.

so for mac's product to be successful, it would have to be quick and easy to apply, it would have to be relatively forgiving in application [without being unreasonable] and it would have to maintain an even colour [and a rich colour for darker and brighter shades] for several hours. on top of that, there are a couple of things that they would need not to do [i can't make that grammar sound good]: smudge and crease.

with that in mind, i proceeded to test out four shades:

good fortune :: a light pink champagne
spread the welath :: a medium metallic golden olive
luxury touch :: a rich purple-plum
rich, sweet :: a deep espresso brown with gold shimmer

from the start, i have to say that i was nervous. the texture of the shadows, described by mac as "spongy [and] mousse-like", is considerably wetter than regular cream shadows. they're about the consistency of yogurt- not the thick eastern european stuff, either- which seems counter-intuitive for a product that's supposed to last longer and wear better than regular cream shadows. but i figured i'd try them in a few different ways to see if i could find something that worked.

attempt #1 :: use 'em like a regular shadow

6 hours after application

5 minutes after application

i figured that a lot of people will just want them for the colour and will combine them with other shadows to create a full look. in this case, use applied "good fortune" lightly with a brush, it sheered out a lot and seemed disinclined to dry. i used two of mac's own mega-metal shadows, which are the ultimate in terms of blending and ease of use. however, it still looked kind of messy, because the cream shadow just wouldn't set, despite me leaving it a full minute. in order to get it anything close to dry, i had to give it a few seconds with the hair dryer. i did use a base [mac paint pot in painterly], but i have to say that the end result still looks like the before picture in a lesson on why you should use a base for your eye makeup. i tried adding a touch of eye liner- a liquid formula, because i could apply it with a lighter touch in case things still weren't absolutely dry- but that just seemed to make the cream shadow angry. within minutes the liner was so smudged you could barely tell it was there. the weird thing is that there really isn't that much difference between the way it looked after a few minutes and the way it looked several hours later when i took it off. that would be great, if it had looked good to begin with.

attempt #2 :: quick & dirty

5 hours after application

5 minutes after application

like i said, the main appeal of cream shadows is supposed to be their ease of use. endeavour #1 didn't seem very easy to me, but i figured that maybe i just wasn't using the shadows the way they were intended. so this time, i went with the simple approach.

having learned my lesson about liner, i started off with a paint pot base [augmented with a little inglot powder shadow for extra grip] once again, but i used one of mac's greasepaint sticks to get a dark, smudgy line around the eye, then i carefully, gently patted "rich, sweet" on my mobile lid, with the aim of doing a very quick, slightly smoky look that would allow me to go from no makeup to out the door in five minutes. the result?

ten minutes later i was still fidgeting with the eye shadow, had resorted to using a brush [smaller and firmer than the first time] and had something that looked worse than my first attempt. in the end, i had to call it quits [although the shadow still hadn't entirely dried] and live with something that was uneven and messy. a few hours later, the cream shadow had dissolved more or less to a dirty stain and i was left with a sort of muddy ring around my eyes, because the greasepaint stick, true to form, stayed put.

attempt #3 :: from the bottom up

5 minutes after application

so the last thing i could think of to do with a cream shadow was to use it as a base for other shadows. i do this anyway with a natural shade to even out the colour of my lids and to give a smooth surface for the makeup i'm applying. i still did that, but in this case, i layered "spread the wealth" over the base on my lid with a large, round, soft shadow brush. this brush on its own gave me smoother and more even coverage than anything i've tried so far, which is a plus. it did not help with the drying time, but since i knew what to do [close my eyes and wait], i managed to get it to dry much as i applied it.

i used a palette of greens [mac's photorealism quad- l.e. 2009] over the cream shadow and it definitely does seem to add a certain depth and warmthto the overall look. the thing is, i don't know that i'd spend $20 just to get this effect. it's nice, but it's not a real "wow" factor. these colours are lovely on their own and all this adds is a bit extra.

i will say that this is the only way that i was successful in using the big bounce shadows and since previous attempts indicate that there isn't a huge difference between what these look like freshly applied and what they look like hours later, i decided just to go with the "fresh" photo. used as anything other than a base, i'm afraid the big bounce are a big bust. the drying time means that they aren't quick to work with. the super-soft texture means that they're far from idiot-proof and, unless you apply a base underneath and a shadow over them, they start to migrate within minutes of application. sorry mac, i think you were so eager to get something into the cream shadow market that you rushed a deeply flawed product that'll come back to bite you.

note :: by day three, my right eye showed signs of irritation and was itchy and swollen in the corner. i can't say whether this was because of the shadows or not, since my eyes can be a little sensitive. nonetheless, i can't rule them out as a source of the irritation, so i felt i should mention it. 

here's a breakdown of the three looks that i did [realistically, i think the first two belong in the "hall of shame" from last week.]


"good fortune"

good fortune

i find that the sloppy eye here really lets down the side. the blush and lipstick are so pretty [guerlain rocks], but the shadow makes me look tired.

face ::
nars sheer glow foundation mont blanc
mac prolongwear concealer nw20

eyes ::
mac painterly paint pot [as base]
mac good fortune big bouncee/s
mac mating call mega-metal e/s

good fortune

mac noir plum mega-metal e/s
mac smoky heir superslick liquid liner
ysl faux cils mascara

cheeks ::
guerlain blush g

lips ::
guerlain cherry blossom rouge automatique





"rich, sweet"

rich, sweet

notice that, on the eyes closed shot, even though the focus is a little fuzzy, you can still see the unevenness of the cream shadow application.

face ::
nars sheer glow foundation mont blanc
mac prolongwear concealer nw20

eyes ::
mac painterly paint pot [as base]
inglot 351 e/s
mac french quarter greasepaint stick
mac rich, sweet big bounce e/s

rich, sweet

mac false lashes mascara

cheeks ::
nars deep throat blush
mac truth & light magically cool liquid powder

lips ::
mac red devil l/g

spread the wealth

"spread the wealth"
again, this is one that worked. i find you can the golden tone on the lid, but does that make the look that much better? a matter of personal preference, i guess. after the first two disasters, i eschewed liner on my upper lids, something i would normally not do, since i find liner makes my eyes pop. you can definitely see the irritated eye in the first shot.

face ::
gosh velvet touch foundation primer
nars sheer glow foundation mont blanc
dior diorskin nude skin perfecting hydrating concealer [trying this one out for a change]

eyes ::
mac sensibility e/s

spread the wealth

mac photorealism e/s
mac fresh approach e/s
mac image maker e/s
mac grey range e/s
mac mothbrown e/s
mac she who dares mineralize e/s [blue & green mixed as liner]
ysl faux cils mascara
mac smolder eye kohl

cheeks ::
mac dollymix blush

lips ::
mac true babe l/g