MAC In Extra Dimension Collection 2013 (April 2013)

G

Genn

Well-known member
im going to try and stick with one SF, 2-3 blushes and about 3 ES. I also want the brushes i think. I use my ED shadows a lot but the only one with a noticable dip in it is Young Venus.
 
MACina

MACina

Well-known member
grouphug2.gif
nanaparty.gif

erine1881 said:
Yay for us whores!!!
Click to expand...
 
Mac4Megan

Mac4Megan

Well-known member
06dda522_image.jpeg
Closer look at the shadows. I think the only shadow I want is zestful. I say that now, but i always end up impulse buying more. Credit to IG user
 
P

Pinkdollface

Well-known member
MRV said:
pompom.gif
What does she say?
Click to expand...
I can try to translate it, but I was never that great with German:p In the swatch picture the first three are the EDSF (mixed and then the individual colours).

Then she says that the colours are not true to real life in the first picture (the one with the products). The MSF seems more champagne/rosegold in the first picture than it is and in the swatch it looks more true to colour. Bareness is not as light as it is in the first picture and is more beige with some rose tones. Also At Dusk comes across completely different in the first picture compared to real life. Overall the swatches give the best idea, but are not 100% true to real life.

About the blushes: The pigmentation is bad when swatched with fingers, but a lot better with a brush. They do have light pigmentation, but she's ok with that for blushes. On the cheeks they are a dream and they are silky to work with and not powdery at all.
About the skinfinish: This is her first EDSF, so she can't compare it to another one, but she likes it. They didn't have Shape the Future at her counter, but this was her first choice.
About the e/s: The colours were to light she thought. She has swatched two and they seemed more coarse (I'm not sure about this translation) compared to the Glamour Daze ones. And they have the larger pan.

I hope this help a bit. The translation went better than I expected:p
 
SydVicious

SydVicious

Well-known member
Pinkdollface said:
I can try to translate it, but I was never that great with German:p In the swatch picture the first three are the EDSF (mixed and then the individual colours).

Then she says that the colours are not true to real life in the first picture (the one with the products). The MSF seems more champagne/rosegold in the first picture than it is and in the swatch it looks more true to colour. Bareness is not as light as it is in the first picture and is more beige with some rose tones. Also At Dusk comes across completely different in the first picture compared to real life. Overall the swatches give the best idea, but are not 100% true to real life.

About the blushes: The pigmentation is bad when swatched with fingers, but a lot better with a brush. They do have light pigmentation, but she's ok with that for blushes. On the cheeks they are a dream and they are silky to work with and not powdery at all.
About the skinfinish: This is her first EDSF, so she can't compare it to another one, but she likes it. The didn't have Shape the Future at her counter, but this was her first choice.
About the e/s: The colours were to light she thought. She has swatched two and they seemed more coarse (I'm not sure about this translation) compared to the Glamour Daze ones. And they have the larger pan.

I hope this help a bit. The translation went better than I expected:p
Click to expand...
Danke Pinkdollface! You rock!
 
Audrey C

Audrey C

Well-known member
My list: Opalesse Zestful (unless swatches show it as being too light) Smoky Mauve Shape the Future 235 I can't justify any more blush. I only have a couple with even faint dips.
 
Corally

Corally

Well-known member
Pinkdollface said:
MRV said:
:pompom: What does she say?
Click to expand...
I can try to translate it, but I was never that great with German:p In the swatch picture the first three are the EDSF (mixed and then the individual colours). Then she says that the colours are not true to real life in the first picture (the one with the products). The MSF seems more champagne/rosegold in the first picture than it is and in the swatch it looks more true to colour. Bareness is not as light as it is in the first picture and is more beige with some rose tones. Also At Dusk comes across completely different in the first picture compared to real life. Overall the swatches give the best idea, but are not 100% true to real life. About the blushes: The pigmentation is bad when swatched with fingers, but a lot better with a brush. They do have light pigmentation, but she's ok with that for blushes. On the cheeks they are a dream and they are silky to work with and not powdery at all. About the skinfinish: This is her first EDSF, so she can't compare it to another one, but she likes it. The didn't have Shape the Future at her counter, but this was her first choice. About the e/s: The colours were to light she thought. She has swatched two and they seemed more coarse (I'm not sure about this translation) compared to the Glamour Daze ones. And they have the larger pan. I hope this help a bit. The translation went better than I expected:p
Click to expand...
Crap. Why does Definitely Defined look so good. :shock: It was the EDSF I thought I could easily skip. Then again... is ED-stuff ever easy to skip? Nah. So for now all the EDSF's are on my list again. Don't really like the At Dusk swatch so I think that one goes off the list.. My list: EDSF Double Definition Shape The Future Definitely Defined EDB Bareness Fiery Impact Blazing Heat Though I really hope I can stick to 'only' three blushes and Double Defition EDSF.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Top