Laura Mercier Stellar

Laura Mercier Stellar


6 reviews

66% would repurchase

Package Quality: 4.7

Price: $$$

Package Quality: 4.7

Price: $$$


Where to Buy

Start your review

on 4/2/2017 2:59:00 PM

Age: 36-43

Skin: Dry, Fair, Cool

Hair: Blond, Straight, Medium

Eyes: Blue

I am actually panning this shadow. But it's not because I love it. It's that it's usable and I want to use it up. LM advertises this as a "sateen" finish shadow, and that's my main gripe. It really doesn't look or feel "sateen." It feels quite rough actually. The texture is dry and a bit chunky. It is quite sheer and not all buildable. Color is a warm leaning off-white/beige with flecks of warm-hued shimmer, though not out-right gold. It really doesn't feel nice on the lid! Those with dry lids, for sure avoid this. Anyway, I use it as an all over lid wash. I am just trying to use it up at this point because I feel foolish for spending $25.00 on a totally average single e/s. Have had comparable shades of much better consistency/finish by L'Oreal, for example. For approximately the same price-mark, Clinique shadows are far superior in silky feel and finish IMO. Would not repurchase.

1 of 1 people found this helpful.

Age: 19-24

Skin: Dry, Fair-Medium, Cool

Hair: Black, Wavy, Medium

Eyes: Black

I actually use this as a highlighter on my dirty ivory-beige Asian skin (I'm a pale Asian, and I actually don't have all that much yellow or olive in my skin: ruddiness is my main problem. Not all Asians are yellow! I wish more makeup artists would get hip to that fact!)

The color is like the sand of the finest, softest white shell beaches. The shimmer, if you look closely, is all different sizes, so the light doesn't quite reflect evenly, but this makes it ideal for highlighting skin. It just looks like light that not only reflects off my skin (more popular highlighters like High Beam or Albatross do reflect light prettily, but it's more of a blunt sheen that makes my skin look thicker, more opaque - and yes, AGED - than it is) but has actually gone through a few layers of my skin and come back out. That is, it makes my skin look actually more luminous.

The fallout, when I brush my brush over it, is phenomenal. I suppose that's only to be expected when you're talking about a finish as light as this one gives: it's the dense, really pigmented powders that stick to the brush and don't fly everywhere. And I guess that's the main flaw with this one, that the color (? but it's not really a pigmented shade in the first place) payoff is poor. Using a sponge tip rather than a brush doesn't help either, I've found.

But, as I've said, Stellar is more light than color, and softly diffuse light at that. There's no point to using a tip, as it's the diffuse sweep of a brush that's better suited to applying this. If you're looking for a paint-by-the-numbers highlighting/contouring job, this isn't it, and that's where I think the negative reviews come from. If you're looking for a soft veil of light to throw over eyebrows, cheekbones, or wherever else, however, there is no better product.

3 of 3 people found this helpful.

Age: 30-35

Skin: Combination, Fair, Not Sure

Hair: Brunette, Other, Other

Eyes: Blue

I found Stellar somewhat disappointing.

I used Laura Mercier Eye Shadow in Sandstone for a long time, and loved it. Though a light shade, it was highly pigmented, so you only needed a single swipe. With a creamy, satiny finish, it was thick and smooth and easy to blend; a great base for other shades or on it's own to brighten your eyes. A perfect shade of pale pinky peach with very finely-milled shimmer, it doubled as a highlighter when used sparingly over blush. It made the apples of my cheeks pop and added some much-needed luminosity to my large, deep-set eyes. I'm extremely pale though, so while on most people it would be a safe neutral, on my eyes (in daylight) it was quite peachy compared to my cool alabaster skin.

I thought Stellar might be my best option for a less pigmented shade to highlight the inner corner of my eyes. Unfortunately it's nothing like Sandstone (at least the old formula of Sandstone - I understand it's changed). Though I obviously expected it to be paler, it is also a lot less pigmented, so I have to load my brush with it. With Sandstone you could just tap your brush in the shadow and have more than enough to cover the lid. With Stellar, I have to swirl my blender brush around in the palette at least once, possibly more if I'm going up to the brow bone.

There is no actual colour payoff for me. The shade matches my skin almost exactly, so it's not pale enough to work as a highlighter, and it's TOTALLY sheer. Basically all I get from this is shimmer, and the shimmer is not even as finely-milled as Sandstone. It's more glittery than luminous. I can't use it on my cheeks, it just doesn't do anything. I do use this as a base for other eyeshadows, so I find it practical, but I don't think it will last long because I have to use so much of it. It doesn't last terribly well on it's own, either. Basically, if you want a sheer wash of faint frost, this is your eyeshadow. I'm still looking for my perfect luminous neutral.

3 of 3 people found this helpful.

on 12/21/2011 8:07:00 PM

Age: 25-29

Skin: Combination, Fair-Medium, Warm

Hair: Black, Straight, Fine

Eyes: Brown

I made a three pan out of this, African Violet, and Twilight Grey. I often line with Twilight Grey and do a wash of Stellar with a Shu Uemura 8h brush. On the hand this eyeshadow is not very impressive and even a little boring. On the lid, however, it's a perfect, perfect champagne wash, just enough to bring softness and glow to the area (i'm NC20) without being frosty or overly shimmery. Gorgeously refined texture and purely pigmented. I've looked and looked for a cream shadow equivalent, without avail. Great color density and complexity -- the other reviewers have described it well -- which is only apparent on comparing it with other highlighters. Excellent wear, great to be able pop it out for a three pan, and I'm happy not to pay for a silly brush I won't use anyway.

4 of 4 people found this helpful.

on 2/18/2011 2:20:00 PM

Age: 44-55

Skin: Normal, Fair-Medium, Neutral

Hair: Brown, Straight, Fine

Eyes: Blue

I'm eternally on the hunt for THE perfect champagne wash color for my lids. I have deep set blue eyes and I won't leave the house without a wash of light color to brighten my eyes. Stellar is one of the best I've tried. Like the previous reviewer said, it has shimmer but no frost. For those of us getting up in years, that is the secret of what makes this particular shadow so wonderful. It lights up my eyes in a subtle way. No crepyness and no glitter fall out. This one goes into my top rotations.

9 of 9 people found this helpful.

on 2/18/2011 10:24:00 AM

Age: 25-29

Skin: Sensitive, Fair-Medium, Cool

Hair: Black, Wavy, Medium

Eyes: Brown

A finely, finely shimmered cream, with just enough peach to marry it to the skin. On my skin, the failsafe, all-over-the-lid highlight. Like any good highlighter, the shimmers are dimensional: predominantly silvery-white, fine and even as satin, a few larger flecks of sparkle to scatter light all the better, with minute traces of pink-gold and green. But what I like best about Stellar is that it's not a frost, for once a champagne that's not overfrosted; it draws light to the skin in the most naturalistic way.

15 of 15 people found this helpful.

Back to Top