Concealers -Neutrogena - 3-in-1 Concealer for Eyes
keahi 4/29/2008 2:41:00 PM
Pretty good stuff. Not perfect, but what is? I've been using MUFE Lift concealer for so long I am 1/2-way through my 2nd tube of it. (That's 1.5 years at my rate of usage.) It works great, but doesn't miraculously make those dark circles disappear completely. Thus, I am always willing to try something new. . . just in case. . . [Please keep in mind that I'll be comparing this mainly to the performance of MUFE as that is the concealer I have been happiest with/ have used for the longest amount of time.] 1)Price. Well. . . cheap compared to MUFE. It's still $10 for a d/s product which some people may have issue with. I don't. If it works, I don't care where it comes from or what it costs. 2) Coverage & Blendability: Coverage is quite nice--seems as good as MUFE Lift. Blendability is not quite on par. This seems to get a tad cakey if you don't prep your eye area/ moisturize, which is true for many concealers. 3) Shades. Pretty limited--I think there's only 3-? I'm about an NC20-25 in MAC. Fair skin w/ yellow undertones. I wear # 3 in MUFE Lift--which has a peachiness to it that seems to give it the upper hand in circle camoflauge. With this Neutrogena, the light shade is TOO light (hello, reverse raccoon!) and the Medium is too dark. I had to buy the Medium to mix with the light and consequently got my perfect shade! Mixing ain't a big deal--in fact it's a better match now than my MUFE Lift #3, but suddenly that d/s price just shot up to $20 since I have to buy 2. Not looking quite so economical now. . . I didn't examine any of the shades deeper than Medium, but I have a hunch that women with deeper skintones may be excluded unfortunately. 4) Wear. This is the area the Neutrogena lost out to MUFE. The coverage looked great at first but seemed to fade considerably by mid-day whereas my MUFE goes pretty strong all day. YMMV depending on how you prep your eye area. I get a lot more mileage when I use this over my BB corrector, but factoring that into this review takes away some objectivity towards the performance of this product by itself. I forget what 2 other things this is supposed to do besides conceal? Sunscreen & eyecream? As eyecream. . . um, no. That sounds like a load of baloney. Sunscreen I am also skeptical of. It has Spf, but how effective/ stable it is. . . I don't know what the PPD is or if it covers UVA spectrum. I wouldn't put a lot of faith in the protection factor personally, though it can't hurt too much, unless your eyes are sensitive to SS. One final note: I tested it out as E/S base and it failed miserably. Never had such crepey creasy eyelids in my life! Dont' recommend it for that purpose. As a concealer, this is probably one of the better ones I've tried. But I'm still reaching for my MUFE Lift more, so I guess that tells me something. No repurchase unless I were in a pinch.
This bronzer is terrific! The pretty sunflower design is actually a smart layout. The pink blush-y strip divides a shimmer portion from a matte portion, so you can control your level of "glow." Very versatile. This is nice and silky and pigmented going on. So pigmented that at first I applied a wee bit too much and it looked a bit orangey. When applied with discretion it looks very natural--the healthy sunkissed look I am always trying to achieve. I have fair skin and this looked pretty believable on me. Quite possibly the best bronzer going at the drugstore these days! I think I paid $12 at CVS.
Lipstick -Sally Hansen - Natural Beauty Inspired by Carmindy l/s
keahi 4/29/2008 10:36:00 AM
The consumer is at a major disadvantage trying to pick out one of these lipsticks--it's like Russian-drugstore-roulette. There is no way to actually see the color you're buying apart from a plastic color swatch at the bottom of the tube. I can tell you now from experience that these swatches are not to be trusted. You can take your chances (like I did) or be one of those tactless people racking up bad makeup karma who have simply ripped open the seals for a peek. Judging by the display at my CVS a lot of people have been opting for the latter. Shame on you Sally Hansen Camindy for making us stoop to such lows. I picked up Baby Pink. The color swatch on the bottom made it look like it was going to be a beautiful pure, neutral rose-pink. It turned out to be a cool blue pale pink. At first I was dismayed, but since it looked a *teeny* bit similar to NARS Roman Holiday minus the lavendar tones, I thought maybe I had stumbled into a happy accident. Nope. It's a chalky, opaque, pepto-bismol pink. Paler than a porn star would even go for. The texture is all wrong for this shade. Had it been sheer I may have been able to pull it off, but it's weirdly dry and waxy. Crayola Crayon texture. Ok, maybe not that bad. On top of that, it smells. Not terrible, but it's still a bit unappetizing. It smells like candy and wax. Actually, it smells like one of those play lipsticks I had as a girl. Candy scented play makeup. Ugh. Not trying any more of these. I'm giving 2 lippies for the attractive packaging and. . . I don't really know what the other lippy is for--maybe benefit of the doubt that had I not gotten such a loser shade I would like the lipsticks in this line better. Hope y'all fare better than me.
Oh no, here comes the voice of cynicism to spoil the rave reviews. . . Perhaps it is the hype that leaves me feeling disappointed. In all honesty, this is a good foundation, and *quite* good by drugstore prices & standards, but by the time I read these reviews and tracked this down (not easy where I am!) I was expecting something pretty miraculous. This failed to live up to the hype for me. PROS: *Price, obviously! * Packaging is smart and attractive, though personally the pump delivers too much in one squirt and it doesn't seem like there's anyway to control the amount that comes out. I ended of opening the top anyway so I didn't waste so much. * Shades. I tried 2. Ecru Beige was weirdly green/ gray on my skin so I took it back and got Creamy Beige, which turned out to be almost a dead-on match. * Formula. Another reviewer mentioned that it had an "elegance" to it and I agree. It's a rich, luxurious cream that feels cushioney and soft going on. * Stays true throughout the day. This looked the same on me at the end of the day as when I first applied it. That would be a huge selling point if not for the fact it didn't look great when I first applied it! *Not oil free. I love this! Foundations w/ oil are best with my skin--provide more natural looking coverage and easier to blend in my past experience. * No Spf. I love this fact also. Most foundations have such pitiful spf--either not photostable, or only covers the UVB spectrum. I use a GOOD sunscreen everyday that has passed my criteria and doesn't break me out, so I do not need extra "marketing Spf" crap in my foundation to complicate things/ increase the chance of me breaking out. It's very difficult to find non-spf foundation these days, so this was refreshing! CONS: * Difficult to blend. I was actually amazed I had difficulty--the cream is so nice in consistency, but when I used my usual stipple on and blend application w/ my trusty 187 the result was a horrible, streaky mess. I had to start over and rub in with my fingertips. This worked much better, but the coverage was heavier than I wanted and trying to sheer it out resulted in more streaks. When I was through, I experienced that wonderful "morphing into perfect skin" thing everybody else reports, but a few minutes later that euphoria was over when I noticed how cakey and heavy it looked. I definitely looked like I was wearing a full coverage foundation. I'm used to wearing makeup and looking at my face and not *seeing* make-up. With this--I saw MAKEUP. Not perfect skin. I'm no novice w/ liquid foundation--I've used a few in my day. I'm reluctant to chalk up my mediocre results to user failure alone. * Broke me out. Literally within hours my first new pimple appeared. This is the deal-breaker for me. I'm surprised more people haven't reported breaking out from this stuff. I like foundations with oil in them, but usually they are formulated with jojoba, safflower, grapeseed or macademia nut oils. This has Corn oil in it-which if I'm not mistaken is more comedogenic than the aforementioned. The corn oil may not be to blame, but something is. If I hadn't broken out I would keep experimenting on ways to make this work. I gave this a 3 day trial period and by the end of it my face is pretty much a mess. Thankfully, once I stopped using my skin is beginning to clear up quickly. I glad this is working well for a lot of people--and I LOVE the cream blush and bronzer from this line, but bottom line for me was that I didn't like the way it looked AND it broke me out. Revlon's Colorstay and Maybelline's Age Rewind liquid are drugstore foundations I've tried that I much prefer over this. **Edited to Add** Huge thanks to Cavewoman, who had the foresight to capture the ingredients off the shrink wrap and add them to her review! Looking at these, I'm pretty confident the Ethylhexyl Palmitate so high up on the list is the culprit for my breakouts and not the Corn oil. E. Palmitate is a 4 on the scale of comodogenicity (where 1 is least and 5 is hightest) so acne-prones may want to proceed with caution on this one.
Liquid -Maybelline - Instant Age Rewind foundation
keahi 4/24/2008 6:00:00 PM
I have tried both this and the cream version, and although I think both are very nice, I like this version a tad bit better. Both smell like cake batter--strange, but pleasant IMO, LOL. The biggest challenge is finding a shade that works for me. I scoured 3 stores when I was testing out this product, and let me tell you that Maybelline's shades do not stay consistent--from formula to formula or even within the same formula! Here's an example. I picked this up in Classic Ivory--2nd to lightest color in the line. It was alright, but perhaps a bit too beigy pink. The finish, however, was incredible! My face has never looked so amazing!! So I went back to the store it see if they had anything more yellow-toned I could mix it with. "Nude" seems to be about the only light-ish shade Maybelline carries that is yellow toned. I found 3 different variations within "Nude." One was orangier, one was peachier, and one was the most perfect color--an exact match for my HG foundation shade--Bobbi Brown's Warm Ivory. I bought that one of course! Then I started looking at the "Nude" color in Maybelline's other formulas. Not one of them matched the one I had pegged as perfect. In fact, I didn't see anymore bottles of the perfect "Nude" anywhere--and I went to 3 stores to check. The other versions of nude were far too dark or peach for me. All this to say that it's a huge frustration to find only 1 of the perfect color. I adore the coverage, but cannot count on ever finding the same shade of "Nude" again! Long story short: this was beautiful. It does have a radiance factor--and in bare sunlight you can see some shimmer particles but it wasn't enough to repulse me. When I used this for an evening out I couldn't believe how gorgeous my skin looked. Smooth, even, velvety and radiant. It didn't melt off or sink into my pores. The "Nude" I got from a rogue batch apparently was a PERFECT match. This is a little bit more coverage than I like for an average day, but I am extremely impressed by this formula--it covered flawlessly. If I can ever find the right shade again I will definitly repurchase. Way to go Maybelline! Now just get your act together with your shades already.
As good as everyone says it is. Granted, I don't have a lot to compare it to. I'd been using the same Maybelline curler since I was like, 12, and probably stole it from my mom, so who knows how long that puppy had been in circulation. It had gotten to a divine state of broken-in ness where it could clamp ALL the way down to the bottom of the pad, giving me a dangerous and damaging perfect curl. Then one day it went from broken-in to broken down just like that and I decided it was time to splurge and check out what all the hype is about. This really isn't too expensive if you think about it. That old Maybelline one lasted almost 15 years at least--so I imagine this will last me close to that--it's not an expense you'll have to repeat too often. At first, this was horribly stiff. I could barely press down without making me feel like I was hurting my lashes. I was dismayed to say the least, but perservered. Within 2-3 weeks this took on a nice, comfortable flexibility. It gives me a wonderful curl, and doesn't seem to damage my lashes in the least. Hoping this helps anyone in the painful breaking-in phase--it DOES get better. In fact, it gets great! When it's time for a new curler, I will probably replace it with SHU again. Unless some miracle curler hits the radar before then. Well worth the investment.
Meh. Not bad, but not great. PROS: *low-risk at only $5 * beautiful invisible coverage. Somehow, this managed to make me look flawless while being virtually undetectable. This evened out my skin tone incredibly well. *got a shade match. The sheerness of this makes it forgiving. For once I was able to find something decent and nearly yellow based in Maybelline's usual line-up of crazy pinks and peaches. Cons: * left a shiny film on my face that no powder could correct. This had the same effect on my face that most chemical sunscreens do--a greasy shiny film. This was the deal-breaker for me and why I won't keep using this. Though my skintone looked flawless, the shine was distracting and ruined it for me. * Gave me 2 new small pimples. Perhaps my skin would adjust after awhile, but I didn't like it enough to find out. Down it goes to the bottom of the make-up drawer. Indifferent about this one, really.
When all the hype for the original Luminous was going on I didn't live anywhere near someplace to buy Milani, and then when I moved somewhere they had it it had already been d/ced. Besides, already had Orgasm and barely used it, so wasn't exactly in the market for a dupe. That was a long-winded way of saying I can't compare this to the original, LOL. This "mineral" version is wonderful, however. In fact, I prefer it by far to Orgasm. Orgasm did not show up on my without lots of layers, which of course resulted in too much gold shimmer. I also had to scrape the surface of Orgasm to pick up ANY pigment. This, on the other hand, I barely have to touch the surface of to get loads of pigment. The shimmer is more refined and less obnoxious than the gold glitter in Orgasm. On top of all that--it's $5!!! When I bought Orgasm I thought it was the most over-hyped product in the history of cosmetics. Now, with this Milani blush, I finally understand the appeal of this pinky-peach w/ gold shimmer shade. It's intensely flattering, face brightening, makes you look younger, healthier, and glowy. I love NARS blushes and embarrasingly own all but 6 of them, but IMHO there is NO reason to buy Orgasm when you can get this. It's better. It's cheaper. And that's that.
I have waited to write a review until I've used this daily for a month so I could make sure it didn't clog my pores or break me out over time. I'm thrilled to say that it has caused no adverse reactions in my skin. My skin type is combination/ normal. Slightly oily T-zone and slightly dry cheeks. It's normalized a lot since I started using cleansing oil and a consistent routine. I'm not generally too break-out prone, but neither do I have perfect skin. Furthermore, I am coming off hormonal BC and the last time I did that my skin freaked out big-time (and left me with the scars to prove it) so I am being extra vigilant and careful about what I introduce my skin to right now. My daily moisturizer was Cetaphil lotion which I loved because it moisturizes so well and never caused ANY breakouts. The one flaw was that it left me too shiny mid-way through the day. Not a huge problem, but I'm always trying to find something *perfect*. Enter Cerave. It's much lighter in texture, and sinks in better than Cetaphil. It leaves my skin hydrated but not at all greasy, and the residual shine is far reduced when I use this. I think it's not quite as moisturizing as Cetaphil, but it's enough for the levels my skin needs. Drier skin types might notice the difference more. I LOVE this stuff. No breakouts--just comfortable, hydrated skin. You get a large amoung for the $$. My ONLY complaint is that it is more difficult to find. I've only seen it at Walgreens and Drugstore.com although I've heard CVS carries it too. Unlike Cetaphil, which you can buy pretty much EVERYWHERE. I'm worried this will become more obscure, or worse yet, discontinued. I'm so happy to find this inexpensive and effective moisturizer. Never would have known about it if not for MUA!
Liquid -Revlon - ColorStay Makeup with SoftFlex SPF 15 Normal/Dry Skin
keahi 4/24/2008 10:44:00 AM
Just so there is no ambiguity, I am reviewing the Normal/ Dry skin formula. I've never tried the Combo/ oily version so I don't know if any of these comments apply to that formula. So. . . . wow. All these years I've tried pretty much every liquid foundation you can buy in the drugstore. . . except this one. For some reason I simply thought that Colorstay was only for those hard-core foundation wearers. You know--the ones who have oily, bad skin and need super duper heavy matte coverage that won't wear off. Who knows where I got this idea--pure invented prejudice. Since I am one of those people who gravitates toward sheer barely-there coverage and maybe medium at MOST, I never even considered this as an option. Fast forward to now and I've been on a drugstore foundation testing binge. I've been doing the mineral/ powder foundation or TM thing for awhile now, and thought I'd check out what I've been missing in the world of liquid foundation. To my surprise, this one gets lots of love on the boards so I gave it a whirl. All I can say is check your assumptions at the door. This is nothing like I expected it to be, in fact, it's an incredible discovery for me! The Good: * beautiful coverage with a natural finish. Not matte, not sparkly, not heavy. Looks like my skin but perfected. Slightly dewy finish, but not shiny. * easy to blend. Yes, I found this easy to blend despite what many reviewers are saying. I apply by stippling on and blending with my MAC 187--I do one section of my face at a time. Reading through these reviews I noticed that the people who complained about it being tough to blend were usually using their fingers to apply. So of course, YMMV depending on your application technique. * Price & Availability. Full price at Target was about $7.99, however there are always BOGOF and % off deals to be had. Savvy shoppers can score this for much cheaper. * Good color match. I didn't expect it to be, but the shade "Buff" turned out to be an excellent match for my fair skin. I would prefer it only *slightly* more yellow toned, but at least there are no horrifying pink or peach undertones. It's a good neutral for fair skin. * long-wearing. Of course it is! I was surprised my makeup could look so fresh near the end of the day. Guess I had resigned myself to the inevetible fade & melt. The Bad: * Stinky. It's not terrible, but it does have a stronger fragrance that is pretty weird. The best way I can describe it as is "hardware store." Like paint and sawdust and other weird utilitarian things. * May be difficult to wash off. I use MAC clease-off oil as my nightly cleanser, so I didn't have a problem, but I can imagine those using oil-free cleansers may not be able to take it off w/out some effort. I feel sorry for these gals that describe all the torture and scrubbing they have to do to get this off. Get thee some cleansing oil! * I think this may break me out. I can't be certain, but after 2 consecutive days of wear I've noticed some uncharacteristic tiny red spots. No monster cysts or whiteheads or anything, but they look sort of like irritation spots. To be fair, I mentioned I'm on a foundation testing binge--so I don't know if this is to blame, or something else, but it's something I'm going to watch out for. Overall, I am incredibly impressed with this. I had thought BB's Moisture Rich Foundation was my HG liquid foundation, but I think the finish and performance of Colorstay surpasses Bobbi's. If only it came in the shade Warm Ivory I'd be set! I've also used liquid foundations from NARS (oil-free), Prescriptives, Clinique, EL, Laura Mercier, MAC, and Shiseido. Honestly, this Revlon on is on par in terms of formula (but again, not color choices). It's more coverage than I want for Spring/ Summer, so this won't be my daily HG foundation. But, I will be reaching for this on occasions I want to look more polished, and also in the fall/ winter seasons provided there are no skin reactions. Good stuff--check it out!
Powder -Everyday Minerals - foundation semi-matte formula
keahi 4/23/2008 8:01:00 PM
I've been testing this out for awhile now and have started to feel like maybe there's something wrong with me because I am not too impressed with this, even though everybody else seems to love it. I purchased a starter kit and also got myself a bunch of samples. Didn't really use too many of them though because I got lucky and found myself a perfect match right off the bat in the Fairly LIght Neutral shade of the Semi Matte formula. The first day I wore this my skin stung. It got hot and itchy to the point I had to wash my face mid work day. I had also tried a new skin care product recently so couldn't attribute this sensitivity wholly to EM. Besides, this stuff has practically no ingredients in it--how could this possibly be to blame? Gave myself a week before trying again, ditching the suspect skincare product in the meantime. 2nd time I wore this my skin still felt a bit itchy. Not as bad--but just not *normal*. I really don't know what to blame it on since I have used plenty of products containing the same ingredients w/out any kind of similar reaction. The only thing I can think of is maybe EM uses a particular kind of mica that my skin isn't too fond of? Now, it's just weird. Some days I use this with no problems. My skin feels fine and comfortable. Other days, that strange sensitivity comes back. The rest of my skin care routine stays consistent--it's only when I use this that my skin feels strange--sometimes. Sometimes not. Moving on. . . I have never used BE, but I did use Urban Decay's mineral makeup for almost a year and had no real complaints. It never amazed me, but it was good enough. Based on the MUA buzz I thought this *must* be better. My main gripe with this formula is that I don't feel like I get any coverage. At all. Or, no more so than a pressed powder would give me. It may even out my skintone a little, but it also makes my face look kind of dull, and believe me, inadequate exfoliation is not my problem--I am all over the glycolic acids. Also, after about 2-3 hours my skin looks gross--like a layer of dust over oily skin. Yuck. I hardly have any oil breakthrough w/ liquid foundations (I'm not too oily)so I would expect a LOT more from a MMU. Again, thinking the problem was my own ineptitude I've tried this out a number of ways. I've buffed it in using both the EM long handled Kabuki, my MAC kabuki, the EM flat-topped brush, dry with the MAC 187, with a damp 187, mixed with a spritz of water, mixed with moisturizer, with a sponge, etc, etc. The flat-topped brush gives better coverage, but by "coverage" I mean my face looks more caked in powder. There is a difference between real coverage and layers of product on your face. I never felt like I could achieve the former with this MMU. I came to the conclusion that MMU must not be for me. If this is one of the better ones, than I guess I'm out of luck. And then, on a whim, I tried the L'oreal MMU and. . . instant, flawless, airbrushed coverage. I simply buffed it on with any old brush and there it was--exactly what I was seeking. I now understand the appeal of MMU. So I guess it wasn't me to blame after all. . . this formula just didn't jive for me. I may check out the Intensive sometime, but right now the L'oreal has me singing it's praises. I'm giving this a "3" because I think EM offers some great products at incredible prices, and I think this MMU has some good qualities even if it wasn't my cup of tea. The range of shades is quite good and I personally love the design/ shape of the packaging. Definitely worth a try.
Bronzers -Alima - Satin Matte Bronzer in Mauna Loa
keahi 4/23/2008 12:32:00 PM
After trying the samples I think Alima makes great bronzers. Mauna Loa is the medium shade. It looks fairly light--lighter say, than BE's Faux Tan, but it looks incredibly natural on. I've got pretty fair skin and the lightest shade Maracaibo is the most natural for me, but when I want something with more impact Mauna Loa delivers without looking like I'm wearing bronzer. It's easy to control how much color payoff you want. Gives me a sunkissed look that is not at all orange or muddy--really looks the way my fair skin looks with a bit of sun on it. I liked this one enough to order full-size. Maracaibo will be great as a pick-me-up for my pale skin in winter, and Mauna Loa will be perfect for my slightly-less-pale skin in the summer. **UPDATE** Alas, wouldn't you know that after I sprang for the full-size of this I've discovered a sensitivity to Alima's mineral makeup? For some reason I now can't wear this without my face feeling hot and itchy. My skin gets uncomfortable to the point I have to wash my face mid-day. I don't know if they started using a different type of mica that I'm reacting to, or what. I'm SOOOOO bummed, because this was the BEST shade of bronzer I've ever tried, the finish was lovely & perfectly matte/ believable, and the price is right. I love Alima as a company, but their face products are now off-limits to me. Everyday Minerals makes my face react the same way, so I guess mineral make-up and me were not meant to get along. If you aren't sensitive in the same way as me, I would still highly recommend this bronzer.
I think this is the most believable bronzer I've ever tried. It's VERY light--ladies with deeper skintones likely have translucent powders that look darker than this. I have fair skin w/ yellow undertones. Based on how light this looks, I was skeptical it would do anything, but when I put it on. . .wow! It looked like I had caught some sun! I couldn't detect it at all on my face, but somehow I looked healthier and not quite so pale. AMAZING. Love the satin matte finish--it's not easy to find a good bronzer w/out shimmer. I have gone back for the full size of this. Also love the Mauna Loa shade for a deeper bronze.**UPDATE** Alas, wouldn't you know that after I sprang for the full-size of this I've discovered a sensitivity to Alima's mineral makeup. For some reason I now can't wear this without my face feeling hot and itchy. My skin gets uncomfortable to the point I have to wash my face mid-day. I don't know if they started using a different type of mica that I'm reacting to, or what. I'm SOOOOO bummed, because the finish was lovely & perfectly matte/ believable, and the price is right. I love Alima as a company, but their face products are now off-limits to me. Everyday Minerals makes my face react the same way, so I guess mineral make-up and me were not meant to get along. If you aren't sensitive in the same way as me, I would still highly recommend this bronzer. Guess I am back to the petro-chemicals and silicones.
Eye Shadow -Bobbi Brown - Cream Eye Shadow Sand Castle
keahi 4/23/2008 12:20:00 PM
I LOVE this! Bobbi Brown's website describes this as a "medium mauve brown with silvery shimmer." I guess that's pretty accurate--I've been thinking of it as a plummy brown as it has some very subtle red tones. Now that spring is here I've been craving simple, unfussy eyemakeup and this product is perfect. Makes a gorgeous wash and looks very "beachy" indeed when I am going for a bronzey sunkissed look. Quick and easy to apply. I'd say this goes strong for a good 7 hours on me before it starts to fade. By the end of the day I'll have some very minor creasing--but that is when using this without any sort of base. UDPP of TFSI underneath would make this last an eternity, but I don't usually feel the need for it. I love the finish of this--it has some luminosity but no chunky shimmer particles like Galaxy had. My other eyeshadows have been gathering dust since I bought this!
I've been reaching for this lippie a lot lately. It's perfect for the days I can't figure out what else to wear on my lips to compliment the rest of my *face*. On me, Scant is a deeper MLBB shade. I have fair skin w/ yellow undertones, dark hair and eyes and this suits my coloring nicely. I am ambivalent about the slimshine formula. It has a nice consistency, but nothing that *wows* me and staying power is below average. It doesn't apply like a sheer lippie, but it wears like a sheer lippie, if that makes sense. Pigmented, but ephemeral. I give this color 5 lippies and the slimshine formula 3. Averaging that out to 4. There are better l/s formulas on the market, but MAC does have some stellar colors in this line. Actually, now that I think about it, this formula is quite good by MAC standards--their best IMO. Guess MAC has never won my heart in the l/s department. I can see how MAC devotees would be impressed by this one though. So you can better gauge my preferences my favorite l/s formulas include EL Pure Crystal, NARS satins & sheers, anything made by Dior or Shu, Revlon Renewist & new Colorstay formulas, Chanel Rouge Allures, Guerlain sheers, and the Clinique Buttershines.