katred
Specktra Bestie
Hurrah! I took a chance and went to my Pro store today and they had it out! They hadn't received the shadows, so I can't comment on those, but I looked at most of the other things. I only purchased one, but I'm thinking I might go back for more once I get my holiday shopping sorted out. All in all, I would say the collection is very good, but I don't know that it's good enough to justify the higher prices, particularly in Canada, where they're proportionally even higher. Here are my blow-by-blow thoughts on what I saw:
Nail polishes: Even prettier in person than I imagined. They really are beautiful, subtle shades, but are they necessary? Sort of depends on what you want to spend, I guess.
Inert looked a little dull in the tube, but I think it would have a nice opalescent quality on the nails. There are a lot of shades like this, though...
Hyper is stunning. It's sort of between a royal blue and an indigo blue with noticeable violet shimmer. Reminds me of a bluer "Rain of Flowers" or a bright version of Opi's "Russian Navy". My favourite.
Ascension looks like a perfect abalone shell, but I would also say it's nearly an exact dupe for Deborah Lipmann's "Wicked Game". Although I didn't have them side by side to compare, I have the Lipmann one and it seems really close. I think the polish prices for these and Lipmann are the same in the US. In Canada, Lipmann is a dollar or two cheaper.
Lipsticks: This is what I expected to buy, but I ended up passing, at least until I can go through my stash and figure out what I have that's similar. In both cases, the formula is different than anything Mac has done before. They feel and look a lot like an Amplified Creme, but the application is smoother, because there's silicon in them. The downside is that I had a hell of a time getting them to go on evenly. The MUA at my store was wearing Fervent and it looked a bit uneven on her too.
Fervent: Dark, vampy purple, as expected. It's very close in colour to Cyber, but leans more red, whereas Cyber leans more grey. I think that people who found Cyber difficult to wear would prefer this. I think that it might look better if applied with a brush, but it was definitely a bit patchy on me, even after a couple of passes. It also reminded me of a glossier version of the mattene Night Violet (Cult of Cherry).
Restrict: When I swatched it on my hand, it looked like a pearly taupe shade, as expected. When I tried it on, it seemed to pull a little bit pink. I liked it, although I think I'd really like to try it on when I hadn't just walked in from cold air, since it really didn't work with my reddened nose. Like Fervent, the application felt smooth but didn't look it. I could see some of my natural lip colour poking through (which probably added to the pink tinge). I couldn't think of a good dupe for this one in anyone's permanent collection, but it did put me in mind of a slightly more neutral version of "Tease Me", from 2006 (I think), if anyone remembers that one. It's more neutral than similar light pinks like Pervette or Pretty Please.
Glosses: Surprisingly, my favourite part of the collection. The texture on these is actually quite similar to Chanel's Glossimers and these are still cheaper. They're a little sticky, but not as much as Mac's regular glosses. They don't spread as easily, which actually makes them easier to apply more precisely. I haven't been wearing mine that long, but the lasting power seems good. They're sort of similar in appearance to Dazzleglasses, but the colour payoff is better and they last longer because of the thicker consistency. Either of these would look beyond amazing with a sort of futuristic smoky eye. These I have no trouble saying are worth the money.
Vacant: This one is lighter and more sheer and gives a kind of icy sheen to the lips. It reminds me a little of Icescape, or of the glosses from "Lightfully Bright" earlier this year. It's less pigmented than the former (although it's fairly easy to build up the colour on these glosses) and more pigmented than the latter.
Outrage: I couldn't wait on this one, so it came home with me. It is really lovely. It's a deep purple-berry shade with lots of blue and green shimmer. It's a little like a gloss version of Ascension nail polish, but with a darker base. It's not opaque, but it definitely give my lips colour and the shimmer is really nice. I'll post swatches tomorrow, as it's already too dark to get a decent photo here.
Pigments: Honestly, don't bother. The pots are small (although very cute) and the colours are nothing special.
Guise: This one is a sort of "dirty" grey-silver, very shimmery but not metallic. It looks a bit like the permanent Platinum pigment, but even more like Armani's Eyes to Kill silver shadow from their holiday collection. The Armani shadow is a phenomenal formula and I'm pretty sure the pots are bigger, for the same price.
Deceit: It's lovely, but it's a dead ringer for the permanent pigment Deep Purple, which is cheaper for a lot more product.
Elude Beauty Powder: Has a lovely, finely milled texture and reminds me a LOT of the Chanel highlighter from their holiday collection. I think the Chanel one might be a little bigger, but they're fairly close. Now here's where Mac's currency gouging comes back to haunt them: If you're in the US, the Mac powder is $60 and the Chanel powder is $72. So if you want a nice, soft, ivory highlight powder (in both cases, I think these would work mainly on lighter complexions), you can save a few bucks and get the Mac version. If you're in Canada, the Mac powder is $72 and the Chanel powder is $74. As close as makes no difference. I find the Chanel powder a little more "glowy", so personally, I'd go for that, but it's really your choice, based on which design or company you prefer.
Strada: See how I made you wait until the end for this one? I'm horrible that way. First, I agree with Mac Guy that this Strada is a bit softer than the regular version, but otherwise, it's the same. (That shouldn't be a surprise, since it's permanent at Pro stores in pan form.) I stand by everything I said about what a wonderful colour it is and if you really want it, I encourage you to pick it up. It'll work chiefly on lighter complexions (it kind of seems like darker-skinned ladies were forgotten in the face products) and it will look lovely, but for $30USD/ $36.50, I thought I was looking at a bad joke. It's TINY. At a guess, I would say it's a somewhat bigger than Inglot's square shadows. It fit very easily in the palm of my hand and I do not have big hands. My advice would be to order a Pro pan.
I hate the Technakohl formula, so I didn't really look at those. The lashes are as futuristic and awesome as they look, but I honestly think you could get ones just as awesome for less money.
Overall, I don't think anyone need fear going broke with this collection. There aren't enough great, unique items to run up a huge bill.
Must-haves: Outrage l/g, Hyper n/p
Maybe: Fervent l/s (if you don't have Cyber or Night Violet), Restrict l/s, Vacant l/g, Ascension n/p (if you don't have Wicked Game)
Skip: Pigments and Strada
Nail polishes: Even prettier in person than I imagined. They really are beautiful, subtle shades, but are they necessary? Sort of depends on what you want to spend, I guess.
Inert looked a little dull in the tube, but I think it would have a nice opalescent quality on the nails. There are a lot of shades like this, though...
Hyper is stunning. It's sort of between a royal blue and an indigo blue with noticeable violet shimmer. Reminds me of a bluer "Rain of Flowers" or a bright version of Opi's "Russian Navy". My favourite.
Ascension looks like a perfect abalone shell, but I would also say it's nearly an exact dupe for Deborah Lipmann's "Wicked Game". Although I didn't have them side by side to compare, I have the Lipmann one and it seems really close. I think the polish prices for these and Lipmann are the same in the US. In Canada, Lipmann is a dollar or two cheaper.
Lipsticks: This is what I expected to buy, but I ended up passing, at least until I can go through my stash and figure out what I have that's similar. In both cases, the formula is different than anything Mac has done before. They feel and look a lot like an Amplified Creme, but the application is smoother, because there's silicon in them. The downside is that I had a hell of a time getting them to go on evenly. The MUA at my store was wearing Fervent and it looked a bit uneven on her too.
Fervent: Dark, vampy purple, as expected. It's very close in colour to Cyber, but leans more red, whereas Cyber leans more grey. I think that people who found Cyber difficult to wear would prefer this. I think that it might look better if applied with a brush, but it was definitely a bit patchy on me, even after a couple of passes. It also reminded me of a glossier version of the mattene Night Violet (Cult of Cherry).
Restrict: When I swatched it on my hand, it looked like a pearly taupe shade, as expected. When I tried it on, it seemed to pull a little bit pink. I liked it, although I think I'd really like to try it on when I hadn't just walked in from cold air, since it really didn't work with my reddened nose. Like Fervent, the application felt smooth but didn't look it. I could see some of my natural lip colour poking through (which probably added to the pink tinge). I couldn't think of a good dupe for this one in anyone's permanent collection, but it did put me in mind of a slightly more neutral version of "Tease Me", from 2006 (I think), if anyone remembers that one. It's more neutral than similar light pinks like Pervette or Pretty Please.
Glosses: Surprisingly, my favourite part of the collection. The texture on these is actually quite similar to Chanel's Glossimers and these are still cheaper. They're a little sticky, but not as much as Mac's regular glosses. They don't spread as easily, which actually makes them easier to apply more precisely. I haven't been wearing mine that long, but the lasting power seems good. They're sort of similar in appearance to Dazzleglasses, but the colour payoff is better and they last longer because of the thicker consistency. Either of these would look beyond amazing with a sort of futuristic smoky eye. These I have no trouble saying are worth the money.
Vacant: This one is lighter and more sheer and gives a kind of icy sheen to the lips. It reminds me a little of Icescape, or of the glosses from "Lightfully Bright" earlier this year. It's less pigmented than the former (although it's fairly easy to build up the colour on these glosses) and more pigmented than the latter.
Outrage: I couldn't wait on this one, so it came home with me. It is really lovely. It's a deep purple-berry shade with lots of blue and green shimmer. It's a little like a gloss version of Ascension nail polish, but with a darker base. It's not opaque, but it definitely give my lips colour and the shimmer is really nice. I'll post swatches tomorrow, as it's already too dark to get a decent photo here.
Pigments: Honestly, don't bother. The pots are small (although very cute) and the colours are nothing special.
Guise: This one is a sort of "dirty" grey-silver, very shimmery but not metallic. It looks a bit like the permanent Platinum pigment, but even more like Armani's Eyes to Kill silver shadow from their holiday collection. The Armani shadow is a phenomenal formula and I'm pretty sure the pots are bigger, for the same price.
Deceit: It's lovely, but it's a dead ringer for the permanent pigment Deep Purple, which is cheaper for a lot more product.
Elude Beauty Powder: Has a lovely, finely milled texture and reminds me a LOT of the Chanel highlighter from their holiday collection. I think the Chanel one might be a little bigger, but they're fairly close. Now here's where Mac's currency gouging comes back to haunt them: If you're in the US, the Mac powder is $60 and the Chanel powder is $72. So if you want a nice, soft, ivory highlight powder (in both cases, I think these would work mainly on lighter complexions), you can save a few bucks and get the Mac version. If you're in Canada, the Mac powder is $72 and the Chanel powder is $74. As close as makes no difference. I find the Chanel powder a little more "glowy", so personally, I'd go for that, but it's really your choice, based on which design or company you prefer.
Strada: See how I made you wait until the end for this one? I'm horrible that way. First, I agree with Mac Guy that this Strada is a bit softer than the regular version, but otherwise, it's the same. (That shouldn't be a surprise, since it's permanent at Pro stores in pan form.) I stand by everything I said about what a wonderful colour it is and if you really want it, I encourage you to pick it up. It'll work chiefly on lighter complexions (it kind of seems like darker-skinned ladies were forgotten in the face products) and it will look lovely, but for $30USD/ $36.50, I thought I was looking at a bad joke. It's TINY. At a guess, I would say it's a somewhat bigger than Inglot's square shadows. It fit very easily in the palm of my hand and I do not have big hands. My advice would be to order a Pro pan.
I hate the Technakohl formula, so I didn't really look at those. The lashes are as futuristic and awesome as they look, but I honestly think you could get ones just as awesome for less money.
Overall, I don't think anyone need fear going broke with this collection. There aren't enough great, unique items to run up a huge bill.
Must-haves: Outrage l/g, Hyper n/p
Maybe: Fervent l/s (if you don't have Cyber or Night Violet), Restrict l/s, Vacant l/g, Ascension n/p (if you don't have Wicked Game)
Skip: Pigments and Strada
