Product Reviews

Guest Post! Review: Nails, Inc. Magnetic Polish in Trafalgar Square and Whitehall

By Voxy  |  2012/01/16 07:00 Posted in guest post, mani/pedi, nail polish, Product Reviews  |  Comments (0)

Guest post by Chaos!

~~~~~~

This is the fastest-drying nail polish in the world.

OK, so I haven’t figured out the drying time of all the nail polishes in the world, because a nail polish review needn’t be so scientific, but this stuff dries very quickly. This is awesome, and definitely contributes to how easy it is to use. I didn’t think it was super-easy to apply the first time I used it, but having since re-applied it many times (to experiment with different colors underneath, not because it chips easily – it lasted up to six days on my nails before it chipped, and I was working in the lab, which usually means I have to touch up my nails every other day), I have changed my mind. Once you get used to handling the magnet, this is a look you can create in under fifteen minutes.

Instructions for use are as follows:

“Firstly, remove any oil from your nails by cleaning your nails with nail polish remover. Then take off the over-cap which contains the magnet. You will find that there is an inner cap that you can use to apply the magnetic polish. Then apply one coat of your selected nails inc base coat. Follow with one coat of your chosen magnetic polish on all 10 nails and leave to dry for a few minutes. Then create the magnetic effect, one nail at a time. Apply a generous coat of magnetic polish to the nail and immediately hold the cap that contains the magnet, over the nail.

There is a small lip on the cap which should be placed just below your cuticle allowing the magnet to be positioned perfectly over your nail. Hold very close to the nail but take care not to touch the nail with the magnet. Hold the magnet for 10-15 seconds and move away to reveal the stunning effect. Repeat on all 10 nails. After a few minutes, apply one coat of nails inc Kensington Caviar Top Coat to seal in your nail design and to create an ultra-glossy, salon finish”

I find that it is best to sit on the floor with my hand on a table to apply the magnet, so I have my nail and the magnet at eye-level. Otherwise, it is very easy to hold the magnet too close to the nail (even if you do not touch your nail with the magnet, if you hold it too close, the magnet is strong enough to lift the polish off a bit and messes up the design). For me, holding it about 4mm above the nail produces a nice even design, which does appear immediately after magnetizing your nail, but is more defined if you hold the magnet in position for 10-15 seconds as per the instructions. You can also vary the intensity of the design by changing the thickness of the top layer of polish – more polish tends to create a darker design. I did use a Nails Inc. base coat and top coat the first time I applied this nail polish, but I imagine that any other base coat and top coat would work just as well. Since the first application, however, I have just used top coat; not using a base coat has made no difference to how long the polish lasts without chipping (4-6 days). I’m also not patient enough to really clean and buff my nails before applying new nail polish, so it might last even longer if you take the time to do that first as well. I would not recommend skipping the top coat; along with increasing the wear length of the polish, it also enhances the metallic shine of this particular nail polish. It’s difficult to visualize in pictures, but when you move your nails in the light, the polish has an almost holographic effect.

It is really important that you do the magnet stage on all of your nails individually. The magnet only works when the polish is wet, and because it dries so quickly, if you add your second layer to all your nails at once your second nail will be dry before you’ve finished creating the design on the first one. There are some instructions, however, that you can ignore if you want to change the look a bit. The instructions mention that you should hold the magnet with the lip on the cap just behind the cuticle, but if you want to change the design, you can also hold the magnet sideways across the nail. In addition, you can hold the magnet with the lip at the tip of your finger to create an inverted design. I have also tried this nail polish over different base colors instead of just using the polish itself as a base color, and although this takes slightly longer as regular nail polishes do not dry as quickly as this one – and the base has to be really dry before applying the layer you are going to create the design with, otherwise it kind of peels off – this also works very well. The base color is visible through the design, allowing you to create different colored looks with just the one magnetic polish if you don’t want to purchase it in all the available colors.

Overall, I highly recommend the magnetic polish if you are looking for a ‘special effects’ nail design that you can achieve with minimal effort. If you’re anything like me, the ‘minimal effort’ thing is one of the biggest advantages. Some of the other special effects polishes (Sephora by OPI “Shatter”, I’m looking at you) tend to require a whole lot more removing and reapplying before you get all your nails looking nice, never mind all looking the same. I didn’t have that problem at all with the magnetic polish, and also people have asked if I had my nails done by a professional, which is definitely a sign of a good nail polish. I will add, though, that the design is definitely better on long nails as you get more ‘bands’ from the magnet, so if you have short nails or want to paint your toenails, the design might not come out quite as well. I did try it on my toes and while it did work, it wasn’t as nice as it is on my fingernails.

This comes in four different colors on the Nails Inc. website; Trafalgar Square and Whitehall (pictured), Houses of Parliament (which is a deep purple shade; I also own this one) and Big Ben (gold) for £13. Trafalgar Square, Houses of Parliament and Whitehall are also available at Sephora (both in-store and online) for $16, however Sephora does not have Big Ben and, unfortunately, Nails Inc. does not ship to the US (though this product is available on eBay). A new raspberry shade, Kensington Palace, will be available for purchase from nailsinc.com starting next week (23rd January) and I suspect that it will also be available in Sephora stores shortly afterwards. Layla Cosmetics, an Italian company, also produces metallic polishes in a wider range of colors, but I have not tried any of these so I can’t say anything about their quality. The Layla polishes are also around $16 on Amazon and eBay.

Photos!

Trafalgar Square (magnet used sideways):

Trafalgar Square (magnet used not-sideways):

Trafalgar Square, again:

Whitehall:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Nails, Inc. Magnetic Polish: $16 at Sephora

Provenance: Purchased.

Price/Value Ratio (high-end: poor/fair/good/excellent): Fair. It’s quite expensive for a nail polish at $16 (although this works out cheaper in the US than if you buy in the UK for £13) but it is really, really good nail polish and you would spend a lot more to get an equivalent look in a salon.

Purchase again? Well, I bought three, so I think that answers this question.  

Have you tried this product? Love it? Hate it? Want it? Give a shout-out in the comments!

Review: LORAC Co-Stars Long-Wearing Lip Color in French Kiss, Hot Kiss, Steamy Kiss

By Voxy  |  2012/01/02 19:33 Posted in lip gloss, lipstick, Product Reviews  |  Comments (2)

Geez, I need a cigarette just after typing the title of the review. And I don’t even smoke.

I’ve had two of these clunking around in my lipstick drawer for awhile: French Kiss and Hot Kiss — which is why the brushes on those two are clearly not entirely white in the top photo. Sorry; I normally don’t photograph used products, but I had forgotten just how good they were until I came across them the other day. And since ULTA is having a sale through 1/21/12 and these LORAC Co-Stars are reduced in price to $9.99 from their normal price of $20, at 50% off you should definitely consider picking up a few.

Like most iterations of the “long-wearing” variety of lip color, this is a double-ended wand with a stain on one end and a gloss on the other. You apply the stain first, then gloss. Ideally, the only maintenance they should need throughout the day is a gloss touch-up, but  if you need it to perform perfectly from 8 am to midnight, you’ll probably want to touch up the stain as well as the gloss at some point. These formulas tend to be pretty effective at delivering long-lasting color, but the danger is that they tend to be drying on lips. These avoid that pitfall pretty well. There’s no way you could  call them “moisturizing,” at least not with a straight face, but they’re reasonably comfortable to wear; I find these more comfortable than MAC’s Pro Longwear Lipcolor by a long shot. And besides, it gives you such a good reason to expand your lip balm collection. (See? I’m helping. I’m a helper.)

French Kiss is a dusty rose, Hot Kiss is a terracotta color, and Steamy Kiss is a pinkish red — vivid but not blinding. French Kiss and Hot Kiss photograph more similarly than they appear in life, so I’ve put a few comparison photos in at the end.

Application is reasonably easy; the stain end has a doe-foot wand and the gloss end has a brush. Because the color is a stain, you will want to be careful applying around the edges of your lips; lip pencil helps a lot here. The stain on all three of the ones I own is very long-lasting indeed. It wears pretty evenly for the most part; the French Kiss is closest to my natural lip color so when that one starts to wear it’s not very noticeable. Hot Kiss starts to look a bit patchy after about 5 or 6 hours, which is still pretty darn good. I’ve just bought Steamy Kiss, so I haven’t tested its all-day wear yet, but school is starting again, so that’ll happen soon. In any event, you will definitely get a full evening’s wear out of it (or an MLA interview, just sayin’) with no touch-ups and no smearing.

Since the colors are almost opaque, they apply pretty true to the color that’s in the tube, which is a nice surprise. You don’t have to use LORAC’s gloss, of course; you can use any one you like. I haven’t noticed any difference in performance between LORAC’s gloss and any of my regular go-to products.

Swatches!

French Kiss:

Hot Kiss:

Hand swatch. L-R: French Kiss, Hot Kiss, Steamy Kiss:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

LORAC Co-Stars Long-Wearing Lip Color: $20 (on sale through 1/21/12 for $9.99 at ULTA)

Provenance: Purchased

Price/Value Ratio (high-end: poor/fair/good/excellent): Fair if full price; excellent if on sale!

Purchase again? Yes. More colors plz.

(Have you used this product? Love it? Hate it? Want it? Give a holler in the comments!)


Review: Kat von D Foiled Lipstick in Adora

By Voxy  |  2011/11/06 21:39 Posted in lipstick, Product Reviews, red lipstick  |  Comments (2)

Leonard Lauder, chairman of Estee Lauder, once opined that women buy lipstick during shaky economic times as a quick and inexpensive way to make themselves feel better. (I think he meant “inexpensive” as compared to, say, a fur coat, not an ice cream cone.)

Although things now are economically better than they were a few years ago, retail makeup therapy still works an awful lot of the time, especially in or after stressful situations. I recently had one of these, and we don’t need to go into details except that it involved me and three other cars and everyone is OK. Also, buy Toyota.

So after a harrowing experience, I think it’s totally natural to have indulged in a little lip splurge, even though yes, yes, Sephora is just about to have a VIB 20% off sale and wouldn’t it have been smarter to wait until next weekend. To which I say, “Pthhhhbbbttt,” and “Pffffffft,” and “shut up, I was just in a car accident and I will buy whatever I like.”

This lippie wasn’t originally on my to-buy list, though I did swatch it in the store when I did those red lippie swatches a few weeks ago, but it was awfully cheerful, and the person I was with swore it wasn’t too bright for me. (You may make your own decision below. Most of the time I’ll end up buffering it with a gloss of some sort, because really it is very bright.)

Kat von D “foiled” lipsticks are so named because they have a metallic finish. It’s a pity Kat wasn’t making these in the 80s, because I think Pat Benatar would have happily worn this onto the battlefield, or at least in the music video. I think she and Joan Jett might have gotten in a catfight over them.

Adora is what I would call a light red. That is not the same as pink, although in both the hand and lip swatch photos I took, it pulls distinctly pink. When I look at myself in the same lighting, it’s clearly red. Yes, it’s a blue-based red, but it’s definitely red. The metallic finish not so much a frost or a chromelike gleam but rather a sheen, like stainless steel. Because of the finish, I can’t call it either matte or glossy. It’s neither drying nor particularly moisturizing on the lips.

I haven’t given it an all-day go yet, but these foiled lippies stain like nobody’s business, so I would be very surprised not to get several hours’ wearlength out of this. The swatch I put on my hand for the picture below was on my hand for maybe five minutes in total and left a pink stain that hours later I haven’t been able to get rid of even with diligent scrubbing. On the lip, after I removed what I’d put on for a lip swatch, I got beautiful results by putting balm over the remaining stain. Although it looks terrifyingly bright when applied full-force, it turns out to be surprisingly versatile when coupled with other products. It would also make a gorgeous, gorgeous blush if you needed a quick touch-up. (You will, obviously, want to apply very lightly!)

Swatches!

Hand swatch:

(This definitely pulls pink in the swatch. In real life it is redder.)

Naked lip:

Lip with Kat von D Foiled Lipstick in Adora:

(Sorry, I was a little crooked there. Oops.)

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Kat von D Foiled Love Lipstick in Adora: $18 at Sephora

Provenance: Purchased.

Price/Value Ratio (high-end: poor/fair/good/excellent): Good. Less expensive than many other similarly-positioned brands.

Purchase again? Sure, if I found another color that worked for me.

(Have you used this product? Love it? Hate it? Want it? Give a holler in the comments!)


 

Review: AmorePacific Moisture Bound Lip Treatment

By Voxy  |  2011/10/29 23:49 Posted in lip balm, Product Reviews  |  Comments (1)

Or, why I actually think you should consider spending $35 on a lip balm.

This is going to be the Winter In Which Voxy Finally Decides To Stop Ignoring Her Unattractively Dry Lips. No, for realz this time. Yes, I know I said that the last three years. But this year I really really mean it, pinky-swear.

To this end I have a variety of products winging their way to me, but this is one I discovered last spring that I think is fantastic. Yes, it is $35. Which means that if you apply that first, and then a Guerlain Rouge G lippie on top, you have an $82 lip.

I don’t know why I mentioned that.

Anyhoo, this product is the best lip balm I have ever tried, which given the price tag is a good thing. There are two great things about it: 1. it clings to lips like no other balm I’ve tried, and 2. it is just glossy enough to make it look like you’ve put something pretty on even if you haven’t. Of the two, #1 is the reason it’s worth the money. It feels like it just wraps itself around your lips. It’s not goopy, it’s not sticky, it’s not oily, and it’s not waxy. It’s perfect.

So of course you are asking “if it’s so perfect, why do you still have a dry lip problem? Huh? HUH?” and the answer is that it’s my fault because I am very bad at proactive dry skin care. Instead, I wait until it’s an emergency and my lips are cracked and bleeding before I decide to do something about it. (See resolution, above.) Since the Sephora Friends & Family sale is still on until 11/2, if you want to give it a try, you can pick it up for 20% off, so it will only run you $28. If your lips are desperate for some help, and I mean threatening-to-go-on-strike-and-walk-off-your-face desperate, this is a lifesaver.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

AmorePacific Moisture Bound Lip Treatment: $35 at Sephora

Provenance: Purchased.

Price/Value Ratio (high-end: poor/fair/good/excellent): Come on. I have to say Poor, because even though it is an excellent product, it’s 35 frigging dollars.

Purchase again? I just did, since I thought I lost my original tube. Fortunately, I found it, so now I have one for home and one for the purse.

(Have you used this product? Love it? Hate it? Want it? Give a holler in the comments!)


Some Red Lipstick Swatches

By Voxy  |  2011/10/09 20:21 Posted in lipstick, Makeup, red lipstick  |  Comments (6)

For those of you from Over There who have been asking about red lipstick, I thought I would swatch some when I was at Sephora the other day. After seeing all of these on my hand, the friend who was with me said something to the effect of, “you know, they all look pretty much the same, don’t they?” and I had to say “yes, yes they do.”

There are a couple of pictures in different lighting, none of which are studio or light-box quality. For reference, my skin tone is NW20 in MAC, which is medium fair and pink-toned.

 

 

The third picture (the unlabeled one) is probably the one that shows the texture/opacity of the various shades the best. The two on the far right on the bottom “row” (I use the term loosely) are the two foiled lipsticks from Kat von D. Adora is a bright but light red; Beranice is pinker. Of all of these, those two left the most stain, even a full day and several hand-washings later.

I know these swatches are messy and untidy, but I thought they might be useful. And I do intend to buy one of these that I swatched, but you’ll have to guess which. ;)

Review: bareMinerals Pretty Amazing Lipcolor in Courage

By Voxy  |  2011/06/14 09:29 Posted in lipstick, Product Reviews  |  Comments (0)

Gee, do you think bareMinerals took (let’s say “borrowed”) a page from Bobbi Brown in terms of product titling? Bobbi Brown Spring 2011: “Pretty Powerful” campaign; bareMinerals Summer 2011: “Pretty Amazing” lipcolor. Huh. Pretty Suspicious, if you ask me.

People tend to be either lovers or haters when it comes to bareMinerals. As usual, I am the outlier. I really like some products and really dislike others. (Love: bareMinerals Multi-Tasking Face powder concealer in Bisque and SPF 15 Matte Foundation — even though I have to buy two different shades and mix them together to get a match for my skin tone. Hate: Original “dewy” SPF 15 Foundation, All-Over Face Color [no "face color" should be "all-over"], pretentious capitalization.)

I’m mostly on the bM bandwagon for the “Pretty Amazing” lipcolor. I have maybe one foot trailing on the ground in terms of caveats, but I’m mostly on the wagon. At the mo’ there are eight shades of this liquid lipcolor available, in colors ranging from bold to bright to unwearable. (Srsly, who looks good in ghostly pink? No one. Sorry, MAC Viva Glam Gaga — NO ONE looks good in this color.) Do NOT buy this product unswatched. And don’t buy based solely on some swatches you saw on the internet (including here). Go to the store — Sephora, ULTA, a bareMinerals store, wherever — and swatch it on yourself. These lipcolors are almost opaque, and when you see how that color that sounds so lovely really looks on your skin, you may be surprised. “Courage” was not the shade I intended to buy, but it was one of only two shades that were wearable for me. The one I’d originally had in mind would have looked fuglicious.

It’s a comfortable product to wear — not drying like some longwear lipcolors can be, and the wearlength is really very good (at least four hours in my timed trial, after which point I forgot to keep checking). Touchups or a midmorning dollop of gloss are not strictly necessary but do help the color wear evenly. Blotchiness as the product wears off is a built-in problem for opaque lipcolor, but these manage it reasonably well. Because they are so opaque, you’ll have to finesse it with lip pencil if you don’t want a hard lip line, and you’ll have to find a color that really matches. (For “Courage,” I’ll recommend UD 24/7 lip liner pencil in Paranoid, and not just because I like the juxtaposition of those two words.)

And speaking of the juxtaposition of words, I have to share with you the bM blurb about the product.

“The innovative hydrating glaze of our Pretty Amazing Lipcolor cocoons your lips in opaque high-impact lipcolor. The cushiony texture, insatiable shine and seriously polished appearance will propel you into an elevated state of gorgeousness. And our precision applicator handles like a racecar, cornering, sculpting and accentuating every curve of your luscious lips for enduring color with real staying power. Pretty Amazing.”

1. What is “high-impact” lipcolor? Is it like high-impact aerobics? Do I need to buy it sneakers and a Jane Fonda leotard?
2. “Insatiable shine.” What? What is that? You know that “insatiable” already has a meaning, right? And that in this context, that meaning makes no sense? Right. Just checking.
3. This is my favorite bit. The applicator handles like a racecar. Let me guess: it zooms around your mouth at speeds of up to 200 mph, you can only move the applicator to the left, and if you get bumped by the person next to you at the ladies’ room mirror while you’re applying, you will flip over and die in a ball of fire. (P.S.: “Cornering” also has a meaning — several, in fact, and none of them is appropriate to putting on lipcolor.)

Swatches!

Naked lip:

Lip with bareMinerals Pretty Amazing Lipcolor in Courage:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

bareMinerals Pretty Amazing Lipcolor in Courage: $16 for 0.13 oz

Provenance: Purchased.

Price/Value Ratio (mid-range: poor/fair/good/excellent): Good.

Purchase again? Probably, but they’ll have to come out with some more shades that are wearable.

UPDATE! Bare Escentuals is having a Friends & Family sale from Thursday 6/16 through Sunday 6/19. Get 20% off with code LOVE at checkout.

(Have you used this product? Love it? Hate it? Want it? Give a holler in the comments!)

Review: Benefit Triple Performing Facial Emulsion SPF 15 PA++

By Voxy  |  2011/06/12 19:31 Posted in Product Reviews, Skincare  |  Comments (6)

You are not seeing things. I am actually reviewing a Benefit product, in spite of my professed boycott of the brand for overly aggressive guerrilla marketing techniques. (That’s probably redundant, huh? Do there exist guerrilla marketing techniques that are “appropriately aggressive”? I doubt it.)

That I would investigate a Benefit product after ranting about them just shows you how desperate I have been to fill this particular hole in my skincare regime. Desperation will make a girl do strange things.

The story of the hole in my skincare regime is this: several years ago, I had a spray container of an MMPi product by Patricia Wexler. I don’t remember what it was exactly, but it was very light and was like a toning emulsion: slightly thicker than plain water and milky in color. I loved this. It was the perfect thing for putting on post-cleansing to make my skin drink in the moisturizer I was getting ready to put on. After I ran out, I discovered that it had been discontinued (WHYYYYYYYYYY?????????) and I started desperately searching for a replacement.

[Author's note: This space originally contained a film-noir style dramatization of my desperate search. It was gritty and highly dramatic, and involved a black 1947 Frazer Manhattan. You are better off without it.]

In the end, I picked up this new Benefit product because — and I am so embarrassed by this — the packaging is SO CUTE. Am I so frivolous that fanciful frippery can sway my resolve to not buy any of their products? Apparently, yes I am. This is depressing. I did also test it in-store, though, so I knew it was the kind of product I wanted. But I still yelled at myself all the way home.

Although not watery enough to put in a spray bottle, Benefit Triple Performing Facial Emulsion is a light cream that is just the kind of transition product I wanted. It is not thick or heavy enough to be a stand-alone moisturizer for me, but it works well as a preparatory cream. Why is that a good thing? Two reasons: it enhances whatever other moisturizer you put on top of it, and (more importantly) you will use less of your expensive luxe moisturizer when your skin has been properly prepared underneath. Also, it’s nice that this is SPF 15/PA++ — that’s not a huge amount of sun protection, but it’s a good way to get at least some sunscreen on the bottom layer of everything else you’re going to be putting on your face.

The packaging is, as previously stated, adorable. It’s real glass; very retro-pharmacy. I love it. The “cork” in the bottle top is not really cork, but rather a plastic cap that lifts off to reveal a little pump. How well will this pump work as I get down to the bottom of the container, I wonder? The cream has a light but noticeable fragrance — it smells like “spa.” A little aquatic, a little cucumber-y, a little floral. I want to listen to soothing music and drink a glass of lemon water while I’m applying it.

Do you need this product? That depends on whether you have a hole in your skincare regime that this could fit. Honestly, I don’t think it’s really practical as a stand-alone moisturizer; it’s so light that I don’t think it would cut the mustard on any serious dry skin. For layering under something else, though, I like it a lot. If you’re interested, it’s part of a suite of skincare products Benefit has recently released called “b.right!” that also includes an eye cream (which I have a sample of — meh), a regular moisturizer, and about five other products. Interestingly, there is something specifically called a Moisture Prep Toning Lotion, which you would think would be exactly what I would want. I haven’t come across it in stores yet to check the ingredients, and Benefit doesn’t do consumers the courtesy of listing their ingredients on their website (which is so often a sign that they would prefer you to believe their marketing language rather than their ingredient list) — but they do say that this product can’t be shipped internationally due to hazmat restrictions, which says to me that it must have alcohol in it. Definitely a no-no.

In case you are interested, at the Benefit website you can also download wallpaper of the main ad for the line, which features a woman with a lampshade on her head. I have no comment. Oh, wait, yes I do. I hope that this means that Benefit employees will now be required to wear lampshades on their heads at all times, which will at least make them easier to spot as they rush at you in a department store and try to drag you to the Benefit counter.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Benefit Triple Performing Facial Emulsion SPF 15 PA++: $28 for 1.7 oz.

Provenance: Purchased.

Price/Value Ratio (mid-range: poor/fair/good/excellent): Fair to good.

Purchase again? Maybe. Something better might come along! If not, then yes, I’ll repurchase. Unless Benefit pisses me off again.

(Have you used this product? Love it? Hate it? Want it? Give a holler in the comments!)

Review: Hourglass Extreme Sheen High Shine Lip Gloss in Siren, Truth, Primal

By Voxy  |  2011/06/08 21:18 Posted in lip gloss, Product Reviews  |  Comments (2)

I’m not quite sure what to make of Hourglass, and I’m not sure Hourglass is quite sure what to make of Hourglass either. Which is probably part of the problem.

For the record, the problem doesn’t seem to be with the quality of the products themselves, but with the packaging and marketing strategies. You know the saying “a camel is a horse that was designed by a committee”? Yeah, well, most of Hourglass’ products seem to be packed in camels. Fortunately they don’t spit at you when you open them.

Packaging, which includes not just the swankiness of the box the thing comes in but also the design of the product container and the delivery mechanism, the choice of typefaces and graphic elements, and the overall look and presentation of the product, should be an visual translation of the brand message. Well, not “should be,” I guess — it is a visual translation of the brand message. Based on the unholy mess of design elements going on, the brand message that Hourglass seems to be sending at the moment is “We’re confused.” And given the price point on most of Hourglass’ products, “confused” is something they really cannot afford to be.

They have a certain typeface for the brand name. It’s sort of Art Nouveau. Great. But this appears to be just a logotype or wordmark — it is used consistently for the brand name when the brand name is imprinted on products, but nothing else in the packaging uses that font. But OK, I’m now prepared to see Hourglass as Art Nouveau: curvaceous, slightly decadent, sensual, Maxfield Parrish, you get the idea.

Then we see the words “extreme sheen” that are written in Gothic blackletter. Uh, wait. Didn’t we just say Art Nouveau? Curvaceous? Decadent? That doesn’t go with blackletter at all. Plus, Kat von D sort of already cornered the market with blackletter product names. See?

So you’re Art Nouveau and also … goth? Or, wait, you want to be Kat von D. Or, you didn’t do your research. Either way, you already have two animals in your design cage that don’t play well together (one of which immediately makes me think of another company, which is probably not a good marketing ploy).

Then there’s a third typeface on the front of the package (you now have at least one too many by most design standards), and it’s a plain sans-serif — in all caps for some reason, which just adds to the confusion, especially since the “extreme sheen” portion is all lowercase. What’s that doing there? And which way do you mean for me to hold the darn box? If I hold it horizontally, I can read the brand name and your sans-serif text. If I hold it vertically, I can read the “extreme sheen” portion of the product name and the fact that it is 7 g/0.24 oz.

I don’t think I should really have to choose, do you?

On to the product container itself: OK, going with the darkened copper chrome for the cap, very sophisticated. But did it occur to you that that color looks pretty gosh-darn awful when it’s butted up against any shade of pink or red, which are largely the colors of the glosses we’re going to see in that tube? Also, did you copy your product design from Urban Decay? It’s got the length of a Lip Junkie gloss but the flatness of a Pocket Rocket. (To your credit, at least yours don’t have pictures of men in their underwear on them, so yay you.)

On the other hand, I do see that you’re trying to create a package that has a different feel to it than any other. The UD glosses are squeezy tubes while yours is rigid and comes with a flattened doe-foot applicator. OK, I give you points for effort. But you know how I can tell which gloss is the Hourglass one when I reach into my bag — which routinely contains, on average, 18 lip products? It’s the one that keeps slipping out of my hands because it’s an unwieldy shape. It’s therefore the last one I pull out, so if I’m at all impatient, I’ve already decided something else in my bag will do and I stop hunting. I see, by the way, that this wasn’t the original package design for the extreme sheen HIGH SHINE LIP GLOSS (hey, just want to be sure I get your capitalization correct). I therefore conclude that you went to this one because you thought it was an improvement.

I also think that you went to this packaging to mimic the look of your other gloss, the Prodigy hydrating lip gloss. This one, for readers who have not seen it, is roughly the height and width of a credit card, and less than 1/2″ thick at its thickest point (like the extreme sheen HIGH SHINE LIP GLOSS, it tapers at both ends). Apparently, Hourglass touts the shape as being “perfectly contoured to fit into the palm of the hand” — because that’s where I hold a lipgloss when I’m applying it, in my palm — and also mentions it could be discreetly slipped into a pocket. Because:

a) I buy pants that have pockets on the ass
b) I would want to keep something in those pockets on my ass
c) What I would really like to keep in the pocket on my ass is LIPGLOSS.

And no, it’s not any better if you are talking about pockets in the front. Other bloggers may have been drawn in by the packaging hype, but I’m not one of those other bloggers, and the audience for this blog isn’t like the audience for other blogs. Someone needs to give the marketing folks a serious talking to. (The website, by the way, is another design disaster, for some of the same reasons. A high-end line needs to aim higher than that.)

Now that the marketing folks are done cringing, let me get on to the portion of the review that will make the product developers and formulators happy — it’s a great lip gloss. Really. I like it very much. It’s non-sticky and it smells like cake batter. So that just wins me over right there.

I purchased it in Siren first and then went back for two more shades, Truth and Primal. Siren, pictured at the top of the page, is fire-engine red. When worn on its own, it’s easy to get opaque coverage (actually, when worn on its own, it’s hard not to get opaque coverage). It wears well and doesn’t stain, which is surprising given how bright the color is. I can easily see adding it to my red-lippie rotation during the holiday season; right now I primarily wear it by dotting it on top of another lippie or gloss, which kicks up the color of what’s underneath and lets me get a more sheer version of Siren. In this role it is very versatile and I’ve been wearing it a lot.

Truth is a MLBB shade; it’s very close to my natural lip color and also wears very well. Because it’s so close to my natural lip color, I should probably wear a lip pencil under it to be sure that there’s no visual bleed effect at the lip line. (I didn’t do that in the photo below.)

Primal is a very lovely raspberry color. It will be excellent in the late summer and fall to get you through that weird period where summer things no longer feel quite right but you’re not ready for wine-colored lipsticks or blackberry glosses.

Wearlength on all three of these colors is pretty good. So, overall, the packaging has some identity issues, but what’s inside it is worth buying.

Swatches!

Siren (and by the way you have no idea how difficult it was to get this picture, since the tube has a beveled edge that makes it near impossible to balance it on the edge by itself, let alone with a box on top of it — if the whole blogging thing doesn’t work out, maybe I could make a living stacking Zen rocks):

Hand swatch of Siren:

Hand swatch of Truth (L), Primal (R). I swear the above and below photos are of the same hand in the same light tent. Still workin’ on those skillz.

Naked lip:

Lip with Siren:

Lip with Truth:

Lip with Primal:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hourglass Extreme Sheen high Shine Lip Gloss in Siren, Truth, Primal: $28

Provenance: Purchased

Price/Value Ratio (high-end: poor/fair/good/excellent): Fair to Good.

Purchase again? Yes, but I really hope they put some serious thought into branding and design.

(Have you used this product? Love it? Hate it? Want it? Give a holler in the comments!)

Overview and Brand Introduction: Inglot

By Voxy  |  2011/06/07 07:00 Posted in Product Reviews  |  Comments (0)

To the list of fabulous Polish things that have made their way to the US — including kielbasa, the music of Chopin, and my great-grandparents — let us please add Inglot Cosmetics, an extensive and impressive brand with an enormous range of products and overall very high quality. Since I am partially of Polish descent, I’m happy to see this brand starting to get wider exposure, especially now that they offer online ordering.

At the moment, Inglot has only five brick-and-mortar stores in the US: NYC, Paramus (NJ), Las Vegas, Miami, and Newport Beach. I don’t live in any of these places, so getting my hands on some products was next to impossible. But a few months ago, Inglot rolled out an online ordering system, thus (theoretically) putting their entire range of cosmetics within my foxalicious grasp.

With great excitement, I placed an online order and started drooling in anticipation of the gorgeousness soon to grace my doorstep. When the package arrived, unfortunately, two items were missing. As soon as I opened it up and saw this, I used the “contact” form on Inglot’s online-ordering site to contact the company and let them know about the omission. Unfortunately, this didn’t get me a response, which I attribute to the online ordering system being brand spanking new and not having all the kinks worked out of it yet.

Around this time, Marigolds made a trip to NYC and visited the NYC Inglot store in person, where she picked up some items for me. Well, she picked them up, and then she left them at the counter. ;)  The kind folks at the NYC Inglot store agreed to send them to me, so I had to call them and give them my address. While I had someone on the phone, I asked if she could help me with the problem with my original order (even though the NYC store doesn’t itself handle the online orders). I explained that I’d tried to use the web contact form twice and although it appeared to go through, I hadn’t had any response. The young lady on the other end of the phone said, “No worries— I’ll send them an email myself from my company account and ask them to fix it for you.” She took all my info and sent the email while I was on the phone with her.

Some more time goes by, and my doorstep remains sadly ungraced by gorgeousness. Finally I end up sending an email to the address from which my order notification was sent. Often those addresses are no-reply addies, but considering I’d been through all the other options, it seemed worth a try.

Success! I immediately received a horrified email from Inglot and literally seconds later a shipping notice that they were shipping out the remaining items to me overnight. When I received the package, they had also thrown in some extras: a cream blush, a lip gloss, and a swanky Inglot tote bag. And someone called me over the weekend to check to see if I had received it and whether everything was all right.

Now that is good customer service. The first couple of messages had clearly gotten lost in cyberspace, but as soon as a message actually got through to the company, they handled it with blazing speed, absolute professionalism, and thoughtfulness. Not only did they send an extra cream blush and lip gloss, but someone there looked at my order and clearly thought about what to send me. The products that were missing from my original order were an eyeshadow palette (empty) and a cool pink liquid blush — so whoever put my new package together chose a cream blush and a lipgloss that were also cool pink. I was impressed. Someone took the time to really think about that. Extra points in my book!

Mistakes happen all the time, and the way a company handles them when they do happen is often a really informative indicator of the company ethos. I was very impressed, and Inglot has won me as a customer for a long time. (I didn’t tell them I was a beauty blogger, but I will send them a link to this review because I want them to know that that meant a lot to me. So, thanks, Inglot!)

They also are the first winners of an award I have never given out on the blog before: the Least Wasteful Packaging award. All three boxes that eventually came to my house (the original order, the items from Marigolds’ trip, and the replacement items) were small and tightly packed, with no wasted materials or space. Considering the generally egregious packaging I so often see from other brands, this earns them a special gold star.

I’ll be doing individual reviews on most of the products I ordered, but let me give you an overview of what I have and my general thoughts, both pro and con:

1. Eyeshadows: Great range of colors (including the fabulous orange shade #10 that I am totally crushing on this season). Excellent staying power. Easily blended. Unfortunately, lots of fallout on application if you’re using them dry, so prepare the undereye area appropriately beforehand and do your eyes before the rest of your face. They’ll need to revamp the online color swatch database because the swatches do not accurately depict the colors of any of the products they offer.

2. Liquid blushes: Love them. Great color. Long-lasting. Excellent wear. Easy to apply. Very blendable. Pump works well to dispense the right amount of product. Nothing not to like here.

3. Cream blushes: Love them too, just as much as the liquid. I love that they’re in minimal packaging. Some brands would take the same size pot and stick it in a big fiberglass square (*cough* YSL *cough*). Inglot just gives you the pot of product — it’s lighter, easier to slip in your purse or pack for travel, and wastes fewer environmental resources. This makes me unbelievably happy.

4. Powder blushes: These are good but don’t rock my world in the same way as the liquids and creams — but then again cream and liquid blushes have always had my heart. The powder blushes are especially hard to buy unswatched, I think, since they don’t show up on skin the way you think they will based on either the online swatch or just by looking at the pan.

5. Lip gloss: I have two different kinds of their gloss options: the AMC Lip Gloss (pictured at left), which is sheer and shiny, and the Sleeks lip gloss (this was one of the freebies), which is thicker and more like sugary frosting.

 

I’d like to explore their lipsticks and eyeliners, but haven’t done so yet.

You can expect future reviews from me on each of these categories of product. The product quality is really excellent and the customer service exceptional. Dziękuję, Inglot!

(I hope that means “thank you.” I take no responsibility for international diplomatic incidents that may result from errors with Google Translate.)

If you want to brave the world of Inglot online ordering, you can do it here. They ship to the US and Australia at present.

Review: Urban Decay Melt Down Makeup Remover

By Voxy  |  2011/06/06 07:00 Posted in cleanser, Product Reviews, Skincare  |  Comments (2)

Things about which I am skeptical:

1. A picture is really “worth a thousand words.” Doesn’t it depend on what words they are?

2. Beyonce really had “one of the best videos of all time”

3. Makeup removers are really a necessary part of everyone’s cleansing regimen

As fascinating as #1 and #2 are, and indeed they are nothing short of riveting, they are a) not the subject of this blog, and b) probably best discussed after a couple of martinis. So let us instead turn to #3, which (in case you have forgotten) is the one about makeup removers.

I’ve never been a believer in makeup removers — either their necessity or their effectiveness. It has always seemed to me that if your cleanser isn’t taking off your makeup, it’s not a very good cleanser. This has become even more true since I picked up a Clarisonic. I’ve tried many makeup removers over the years (mostly because they tend to come in gift-with-purchase kits whether you want them or not) and I haven’t found any that really changed my mind, including the cult favorite Lancome Bi-Facil. Many of them leave their own residue that’s as much trouble to remove as the makeup was in the first place, which seems like kind of a clever trick, if you ask me.

Sephora and ULTA have makeup removal stations for those of us who are avid in-store swatchers (ULTA is a little less conscientious about this, which is annoying when you have sixteen different long-wear eyeliner swatches on your hand and you don’t want to wear them for the next eight hours). Sephora uses their own brand eye makeup remover; I don’t know what ULTA uses because half the time they don’t have any. My local CCO, however, has a really very nice one that was a cream, not a liquid. Oho, said I, what a good idea. It’s like a hand cream that happens to dissolve makeup. You didn’t even need to tissue it off, really. (Note: this was for hand swatches, not makeup removal on the face!) I’m pretty sure that this was Estee Lauder’s Take It Away Total Makeup Remover, but since I wasn’t really in the market for a makeup remover and my visits to the CCO are fairly infrequent, it dropped off my radar pretty quickly.

Until I met Urban Decay’s new Melt Down Makeup Remover, that is. I’m a sucker for the word “melt” in conjunction with cleansing. I spent months mooning over an Adrien Arpel Coconut Makeup Melt cleanser just because it contained both the word “coconut” and the word “melt” in its title. So I couldn’t resist testing this UD product in-store, and when I realized how like the CCO’s Estee Lauder product it was, I had to pick it up and give it a try.

Result: I’m really pleasantly surprised by the performance of this product. I don’t use it every day, only when I’ve done something complicated with eye makeup or made several applications of mineral sunscreen during the day, but it works really well. It’s the texture of a hand cream, and has a scent I can’t quite identify. A little bit like anise, maybe, but it’s mild enough not to be an issue for me. I apply it to a dry face using my fingers, massage it in, and then tissue it off. I do always follow up with my regular cleanser and Clarisonic, but my skin is noticeably softer after cleansing on days I’ve used this as a remover beforehand. My only complaint is that I always underestimate how big of a dollop I need, and so I think I’ll probably run out sooner rather than later.

Is it really a necessary part of cleansing? Nah. I can get clean with my regular cleanser and a Clarisonic. But it does make the job a little easier when I’ve got heavy eye makeup on — or, as previously noted, that e.l.f. mineral sunscreen which is a pain in the neck to get off.

Swatch! (just so you can see the texture)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Urban Decay Melt Down Makeup Remover: $24

Provenance: Purchased.

Price/Value Ratio (mid-range: poor/fair/good/excellent): Poor. See below.

Purchase again? Surprisingly, no, in spite of my favorable review. UD’s charging $24 for 2.5 oz, while the Estee Lauder I originally liked runs at $22 for a whopping 6.7 oz. Now that I’ve got the EL back on my radar, and it’s a considerably better bargain to boot, I’ll be picking up that one instead.

(Have you used this product? Love it? Hate it? Want it? Give a holler in the comments!)