REVIEW: Kosås Tinted Face Oil

We're all prone to marketing pushes, and I'm no exception. When Kosås started promoting their products via Instagram ads, and several accounts I follow began posting about the Tinted Face Oil, I started nosing around for reviews and photographs. Despite the hype kicked up by that marketing push, however, there's still relatively few in-depth reviews of the Kosås brand. Wanting to fill that gap, slash, totally suckered in by slick advertising and products that seem right up my alley, I purchased both the Tinted Face Oil and a Weightless Lip Color on Black Friday.

Natural light on top, ring light on bottom. From left to right: Kosås Tinted Face Oil in 02, MAC Face & Body in C1, NARS Radiant Creamy Concealer in Chantilly, Sephora Bright Future Concealer in Fondant.

I purchased the Tinted Face Oil in shade 02, since it's the lightest shade with yellow undertones. As these swatches demonstrate, 02 is roughly NC15 on a MAC scale. It works fine for me when I'm self-tanning my neck, which, frankly, is something I've been doing regularly for the past six months or so because I'm tired of trying to match the single whitest part of my body. Since this is not a full coverage base and it has a skin-like finish, I'd guess it would work for anyone in the NC10 - 20 range. There are only 10 shades in the entire range, but there's a solid gradient, and Tone 10 is quite dark.

The texture of this product is different from just about any other foundation I've tried, and I've tried dozens. My Instagram followers bombarded me with two questions over and over--"How does it compare to the original Glossier Skin Tint?" and "How does it compare to MAC Face & Body?"--and I'm here to tell you that it's kind of like those two products had a super-runny baby. The texture is extremely thin and watery; it starts running down your hand immediately after you squeeze it out of the thin, plastic nozzle. A little goes a long way: a dime sized amount was enough for my entire face, and it has an incredibly powdery, silicone-ish feel to it that makes it slide across the skin in seconds.

Initially, I wanted to call the Tinted Face Oil a light coverage base. However, looking at these photos, I can see why the brand would call it medium coverage. This has the same sort of blurring effect that the original Glossier Skin Tint had, making it look like it provides more coverage than it technically does in photographs. In both real life and photographs, redness and patches of uneven color are evened out; blemishes are softened, but not completely covered; freckles are still visible. The difference is that the tint has a "soft focus" effect in pictures and a "skin like" effect in real life.

You can see the oil settling in to the fine lines around my lips. I took this photo after I'd already patted the product out of these lines three times. By the way, I hope you all appreciate the fact that 30-year-old me is giving you these sexy shots of my fine lines, youth-obsessed culture be damned.

The problem with this blown-out effect, of course, is that it's pretty damn hard to take macro shots. While this looks perfect and natural in pictures, and from about a foot away from my face, get a little closer and you'll see that this clings to dry patches. Even more annoyingly, it doesn't stay put: I had to pull this tint out of my fine lines at least four times, and it would transfer on to my fingers or fabric if I touched it for hours after application.

In terms of wear, the Kosås Tinted Face Oil is "meh," and I say that as somebody with very dry skin. My nose was oily in a few hours, which is no surprise, but you can also see a bit of shine and wear on my forehead and chin at both the 4 hour and 10 hour marks. I also noticed that my skin looked even dryer and flakier after several hours of wear. And each time I wore this product, I would notice new, painful, under-the-skin pimples in odd places at the end of the night, suggesting that something in the formula broke me out. Since it's hard to see in these time lapse photos, here are some super-sexy macro shots:

That picture on the left gives new meaning to "frosted flakes."

When it comes to rating the Tinted Face Oil, there's part of me that wants to give it three stars. I'm thrilled to see the darker shades at the end of the range, the actual texture of this product is beautiful, and it looks fantastic in photographs. But even if I set my personal acne triggers aside, I have to think about how useful this will be to most people. It doesn't stay put, even on dry skin, and it emphasizes both dry and oily patches. I have to admit to myself that I lean toward a 3 out of 5 because I so desperately wanted this to be a new favorite for me. That desire? That's not worth an extra star.

Rating: 2 out of 5

Kosås products are available on their website.

REVIEW: Colourpop No Filter Concealer

The internet damn near broke when Colourpop announced they were releasing concealers. Colourpop has released a wide range of cheap makeup (some more successful than others), and now they were stepping in to the complexion product ring. Personally, I've yet to find a concealer that truly wows me, so I wasn't too interested in trying out the No Filter Concealer until I caught sight of their shade range. Yes, there's still a drop off in the variety of shades and undertones at the darker end of the spectrum, but at least there is a darker end of the spectrum. As soon as I snagged a great coupon, I bought both the lightest warm shade (Fair 5) and the darkest shade available (Rich 75).

The Colourpop No Filter Concealer retails for $6 a tube. I feel the need to point out that, yet again, Colourpop has created a product that is cheap per unit, but at 4 grams, each unit is a bit smaller than the standard 6-ish grams I've come to expect from a liquid concealer. Still, it's definitely a drugstore-priced product.

The concealer arrives in a sturdy plastic container with a white lid that scratches easily and a flattened doefoot applicator. I don't detect any fragrance, so yay!

I actually swatched both Fair 5 and Rich 75 against a range of products for my Glossier Wowder review, so I'm going to reuse those swatches. Please notice how these No Filter Concealer swatches are darker than you'd think from looking at the tubes; that's because this concealer turns 1-2 shades darker as it dries down on the skin. This is really important to consider when you're trying to get your perfect shade match.

From left to right: NARS Sheer Glow in Siberia; Milk Makeup Sunshine Skin Tint in Sand; Colourpop No Filter Concealer in Fair 5; Glossier Wowder in Light/Medium; Koh Gen Do Moisture Foundation in 001; Deciem The Ordinary Coverage Foundation in 1.0N; Urban Decay Naked Skin Concealer in Light Warm.

 From left to right: Milk Makeup Sunshine Skin Tint in Deep; Colourpop No Filter Concealer in Rich 75; Glossier Wowder in Rich; Koh Gen Do Moisture Foundation in 302 and 303; Urban Decay Naked Skin Concealer in Dark Golden.

Again, there's some color changing as the concealer dries down and limited undertones at the darker end of the shade range, but overall, we're definitely covering the very fair to the very dark here. I'm totally impressed with the shade range.

On the day I photographed the Colourpop No Filter Concealer, I was testing it on top of my favorite foundation, MAC Face & Body. The picture on the left is my face with a thin layer of Face and Body; it definitely evens out my skin, but you can still see my undereye circles, the dark pigmentation from a healing blemish on my chin, and a bit of redness from a patch of hives between my brows. Concealer to the rescue!

I was initially a bit miffed by how light the concealer looked against my skin, but then I remembered that it darkens up within ten minutes, and it certainly did after I took these photographs. The Colourpop concealer has a smooth, thin texture and a weightless feel that worked wonderfully on my undereyes by softening up the darkness. On my blemishes, however, this product was less successful. I had to reapply the concealer to my chin three times to get any texture because it would pull up as soon as I tried to blend it out. It's almost like this concealer has a hard time sticking to foundation. In the end, I got medium coverage on my undereyes, light coverage on my redness.

I thought the concealer might soften up after it sat on my skin for a while, but while the color darkened and became a better match for my skin, the texture just got worse. Look above my eyebrow on the right side of this picture, and at my chin on the left side. See how weirdly dry and makeup-y those parts of my face look? That's the Colourpop concealer. It also drifted in to the fine lines under my eyes very quickly, as you can see in this picture, but that's fairly normal for me. I tapped it out with my finger and it looked fine.

Sadly, the concealer on my blemishes didn't fair so well. By the three hour mark, my forehead looked like a scaly mess. The Colourpop No Filter Concealer hadn't just faded, it'd taken the foundation underneath with it. I tried to reapply the concealer because I'm a glutton for punishment, but nope, it once again wouldn't stick to my skin properly.

I thought it might be an issue with MAC Face & Body, so I tested the concealer with other base products. I had better luck with this concealer sticking to bare skin on a no foundation day, but over other foundations? I had the same problem. And no matter how I applied it, the staying power of this foundation was pretty much garbage.

I had such high hopes for this concealer because of the low price, inclusive shade range, and lightweight texture. Unfortunately, I was totally let down by its staying power, coverage, and appearance on the skin, especially over foundation. You get props for the feel and the shades, Colourpop, but my praise stops there.

RATING: 2 out of 5

This concealer is available at Colourpop.com. This is an affiliate link that will give you $5 off of your first order and will give me $5 in Colourpop credit.

REVIEW: Glossier Super Serums

Rarely has a product prompted so many tweets and emails from my readers than Glossier's recently-launched serums, The Supers. It's no wonder, though, because serums have become all the rage in the beauty community. (Skincare aficionados will tell you they've been using them for years, you slackers.) The company really amped up the marketing for these puppies as well, loading their Instagram story with shots of employees in pink capes and bringing on their model-esque team to rave about the serums in Get Ready With Me-type advertisements.

So do these live up to the hype? Are they truly super and worth a purchase, or should you take a pass?

To find out, I used my store credit to purchase a full set of the serums for myself and my best friend, and we both spent about a month and a half trying them out, one by one. My skin is dry, dehydrated, and reactive; I'm prone to hives and itching. His skin is normal-combination and basically made out of Teflon.

The Glossier Super Serums are $28 for each 0.5oz bottle, or you can buy all three at once in a "Super Pack" for $65. Unlike a lot of other Glossier kits, you do get a substantial savings of $19 when you buy these as a set. They come in clear or slightly-frosted glass bottles with a pastel pink and white dropper. I'm leery of glass and I hate having my actives/oils in clear containers, but I haven't had a problem with these breaking or spoiling, so I'm assuming they're decently tough stuff. Also, Glossier promises that the formulations are not light-sensitive. I'm trusting them half-way and keeping them out of the fridge, but away from direct sunlight. As always, you can cover these in stickers, and I actually tried it this time.

Now, serums tend to be very pricey, so $28 strikes a lot of people as a great deal. Bear in mind, however, that these are only a half ounce each. The standard serum is a full ounce. This means that the Glossier Supers are $56/ounce, putting them on par with a number of mid-end serums:

Ren Keep Young and Beautiful Firming and Smoothing Serum, $65/ounce

Estee Lauder Advanced Night Repair Synchronized Recovery Complex II, $62/ounce

Clinique Smart Custom-Repair Serum, $59.50/ounce

Fresh Rose Deep Hydration Serum, $55/ounce

Ole Henrikson Truth Booster Vitamin C Anti-Aging Collagen Booster, $48/ounce

A lot of the videos from Glossier show their models running the actual dropper across their face. That gives me the ickies, so I just hold the dropper a few inches away from my hand and dispense the drops on to clean fingers. I'm sure either method works.

Before we get in to the nitty gritty, let me remind you that I am not a cosmetologist or dermatologist. I am simply an enthusiast. If I have gotten any of my information about the individual ingredients wrong, please let me know in the comments.

Super Bounce

Super Bounce is a hyaluronic acid and vitamin B5 serum designed to add the "bounce" back in to your skin by locking on to moisture. Notice that I said it "locks on," not that it actually moisturizes, because hyaluronic acid really won't add moisture to a dry face. Rather, it's meant to hold on to any moisture you already have and prevent dehydration. In other words, you'll want to use it under a moisturizer. (Update: our friend at Brutally Honest Beauty has let us know that hyaluronic acid should, ideally, draw moisture from your environment. I live in the Land of Forced Air, so that doesn't work in my world, but maybe you'll have better luck!) Super Bounce actually contains sodium hyaluronate, which is salt derived from the pure acid, but most sources I've read suggest that the ingredients are equally useful. Sodium hyaluronate is just cheaper. Vitamin B5 is a form of panthenol with a similar function: it attracts moisture. I also noticed that the formula contains glycerin, a basic moisturizer that works well with most skin types. This serum is very slippery and feels slightly thicker than water. Unlike many hyaluronic acid-based serums, it is not sticky.

This is the serum my friend and I were most excited for, me because I love anything that promises to prevent dehydration, him because he's obsessed with products that promise a "bounce." But our experiences were far from pleasant: we both experienced some form of irritation.

I used Super Bounce four times, and on two of those occasions, I experienced some form of irritation. The picture above was my attempt to document the horribly red, inflamed, itchy rash it gave me one Saturday afternoon, though it's not very clear. Trust me, it was worse in real life. A few weeks later, my friend texted me and said, "I'm stopping Super Bounce. It broke me out horribly." The man rarely gets a pimple, let alone a breakout, so I was a little shocked. It turns out he actually experienced some clogged pores, not a full-blown cystic breakout. Still, it was not a good experience for him.

Beyond the irritation, Super Bounce didn't do much for me. I did notice that it made my makeup slide on a bit smoother, but I'm thinking that's the silicone in the formula, not the moisture-grabbing ingredients. My friend noticed zero benefits and couldn't wait to get back to his regular First Aid Beauty Ultra Repair Hydrating Serum. All-in-all, this one was a total dud.

Super Pure

Super Pure is advertised as a serum for "break-out prone skin and redness." The redness I can understand, since it contains ingredients I've noticed in a lot of skincare for rosacea sufferers. Zinc is often used to calm irritated, rashy skin. Niacinamide (or Vitamin B3) abounds in many anti-aging products, since it improves skin texture and tone. This serum is clear and has a very thin, watery texture.

Unfortunately, this is not a product I can use all over my face because Glossier refuses to announce the percentage of actives in their formulas. I'm sensitive to high amounts of niacinamide--it makes me break out in tiny whiteheads--and there are absolutely serums on the market that contain 10% of the ingredient. Instead, I would use a drop of this on one of the "special" pimples I sometimes get. These spots are red, itchy, and inflamed, but I can tell they're not hives because:

1. there's only one bump at a time, and
2. there's a tiny whitehead somewhere in the midst of the redness.

When I used Super Pure on one of these inflamed pimples, I noticed that the redness would fade away a bit quicker and it'd handle some of the itching. It's not a miracle product, though; it only seems to speed up the process by an hour or two. My friend said he found this one the most useful of the three Supers, though he doesn't use it often: it helps blemishes and irritation heal a bit quicker.

Honestly, I doubt how well this product could fight acne. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that, while some dermatologists think zinc can reduce sebum production, the science still puts it a ways from other anti-acne ingredients like salicylic acid. Most of the websites I'm seeing that contain anecdotes about niacinamide impacting acne describe niacin pills, not topical treatments. Furthermore, Super Pure contains silicone, which can cause clogging in some breakout-prone people. I could be completely off-base here, so again, feel free to tell me more in the comments.

Super Glow

Super Glow is Glossier's Vitamin C and magnesium serum. This form of vitamin C, aminopropyl ascorbyl phosphate, is relatively new and apparently more stable than many other forms of vitamin C. It can brighten and even out the skin, particularly if you deal with hyper-pigmentation. Magnesium is a humectant, most likely included to help with vitamin C's tendency to make skin feel dry and tight. (Definitely use this one under a moisturizer!) This serum has an extremely thin, watery texture, and it absorbs quickly, so I got in to the habit of rubbing it between my fingers and patting it in to my skin. Unlike many vitamin C products, you do not have to refrigerate Super Glow. Oh, and there's no smell! A lot of vitamin Cs reek, let me tell you; it's like rubbing a hot dog on your face.

Out of all of the serums, this was the one I was most happy with. It soaked in to my skin almost instantly and, after two or three weeks of use, gave me a bit more glow and evenness. Alas, it is a bit too drying for me right now, even with moisturizer on top, so I'm retiring it for the moment. My friend said he didn't notice a difference with this one, but he blames this more on his routine and his skin, since he's used to potent products that give a mega-watt glow after each use.

The Verdict

Perhaps you've noticed that I'm not particularly enthused in this review. That's because my friend and I were both let down by these serums.

For starters, there is nothing special about these formulations. They are not revolutionary or complex. All of these serums contain basic ingredients that have been around for some time and are either available much cheaper from other brands (see Deciem's The Ordinary range), or are available in products that contain other beneficial ingredients and have better textures (see Drunk Elephant's range). Unless you're producing products with the absolute best-feeling and most-effective formulas on the market, it's ridiculous to charge $56 an ounce for something so run-of-the-mill.

Speaking of how basic these formulas are, is anybody else a miffed by Glossier's cheerful refusal to release percentages for the Supers because the formulas are "top secret?" One, let me repeat that there's nothing special or secret about the ingredients in these formulas, so acting like they're "TEE-HEE SOOOO UNIQUE!" grates on me. Two, a lot of people can only use X percentage of certain ingredients. If Super Pure does contain 10% niacinamide, for instance, then somebody like me could experience a major reaction after a few days of use. Third, plenty of more established brands openly state the percentage of actives in their products, or will tell you if asked. Fourth, let's not pretend that duping a product is as easy as knowing the percentage of a certain active in its formula. Fifth, it doesn't matter if you can dupe these easily, because a big part of Glossier is the experience. Many people will repurchase their stuff just because of the pink pouches and snappy marketing, even if they can find a cheaper alternative.

Lastly, while I am not a member of the "Silicone is the Devil" team, I am disappointed that two of the three serums contain silicone. Silicone gives beauty products a bit more slip, but it contains no actual skincare benefits. It's been my experience, actually, that silicone is often added to skincare products to make them seem more emollient than they really are. And again, silicone can be a potential irritant or clogger for some people.

In the end, we both agreed that we would not purchase these serums with our own money. In fact, I wouldn't even use store credit to get them again, and neither would my friend. There are just better and/or more affordable products on the market. Glossier has made some solid skincare basics, like the Milky Jelly Cleanser, but the Super Serums are a definite pass.

RATING: 2 out of 5

These serums were purchased from Glossier.com using store credit earned through referrals. Affiliate link: Glossier

REVIEW: Kevyn Aucoin The Etherealist Skin Illuminating Foundation

Everybody has a brand that makes them weak in the knees. Even if most of their products are subpar or they commit a major faux pas, we forgive them and drool over each upcoming release. It's easy to scoff at brand loyalty, but at the end of the day, I think we're all prone to it. I know that's how I am with the Kevyn Aucoin makeup range: they announced a new "glowy," "moisturizing" foundation and I checked Sephora's website every morning until it launched.

The Kevyn Aucoin Etherealist Skin Illuminating Foundation is $58 for 0.95 ounces of product. (The Sephora website states that this is a full ounce, the box says otherwise, eh, it's not too far off.) It comes in sturdy plastic packaging with an airless pump that is easy to control. I know a lot of people dislike plastic packaging, but I prefer it because I'm clumsy, and I think this bottle still manages to look quite nice.

Flash on top, natural light on the bottom. From left to right: Kevyn Aucoin Etherealist in Light EF01, Buxom Show Some Skin in Tickle the Ivory, NARS Sheer Glow in Siberia, MAC Full Coverage in NW10.

 I purchased the lightest shade, Light EF01 (or just "1" on the Sephora website). It's reasonably fair, but has some strong peachy undertones. I find that they're more obvious in swatches, though, than when the foundation is blended across the face. There are currently 16 shades in the range, running from quite light to reasonably dark. The inclusive shade ranges are part of what has made me so unerringly devoted to the Kevyn Aucoin brand.

One pump was enough to cover my entire face and the top of my neck. I will note that this product dries quickly, so you'll want to work in sections. I didn't detect any fragrance.

The description for this foundation states that it will give you "medium coverage with a semi-satin finish," slash, "an airbrushed opinion," slash, "a radiant glow." That's kind of a lot and it's all a little different, but I interpreted it as "this is a medium coverage product that won't be matte." One layer of this product buffed in to my skin with a Real Techniques Buffing Brush does, in fact, give me a medium coverage, and the foundation does have a bit of a glow to it. It also spread very easily without streaking.

But...wait. Something's not quite right here. It has a bit of shine to it, yes, but it looks...kinda dry?

Oooooh yes, yes indeed, it clung to every dry part of my face and emphasized dry patches I didn't even realize existed. Immediately after applying this foundation, I noticed that the tip of my nose looked a bit patchy, the space between my brows was hideous, and my cheeks and jawline were looking rather dry. The above macro shot demonstrates the texture perfectly.

I'd actually used my 10% AHA the night before I tested and photographed this foundation, by the way, so my skin was about as smooth as it ever is. This was a little shocking.

Yet this foundation has some tricks up its sleeve. For starters, it was not only easy to The Etherealist across my skin, it was also a breeze to blend other products on top, like a Becca Beach Tint for blush. And if you stood a few feet away from me or looked at me through a camera lens, you'd see nothing but airbrushed glory--I took a screengrab of how I looked on my phone, with beauty mode clearly turned off, to demonstrate. How the Hell was this possible?

I'm going to have to guess that it's the silicones. While the brand claims that the Etherealist "boosts hydration" with hyaluronic acid, the biggest ingredient in this foundation is silicone. It shows up in many forms: dimethicone, phenyl trimethicone, vinyl dimethicone, cyclopentasiloxane...and that's just in the top 10 ingredients. Now, I'm not one of those people who thinks silicones are the devil incarnate (though they can aggravate some acne-prone and sensitive skins), but I do know that silicone doesn't have much in the way of skincare benefits. It basically provides slip and can create a "diffused" look, making products seem more emollient than they really are. The Etherealist is no different.

After 3 hours on the left, after 5 hours on the right.

I tried to give this foundation a fair shake and photographed it throughout the day. It wasn't always comfortable, though: at several points throughout the day, I found that the apples of my cheeks, my jawline, and my temples itched. This is probably because the foundation made my face slightly drier throughout the day.

My mother actually asked me, "What are all of those bumps on your forehead?" Now, I am human, and I do have some texture to my skin; namely, my forehead is prone to clogging. But any decent foundation will not make the fine lines and clogged pores on my forehead more obvious. This one did. By the end of the day, it was so, so, so dry.

Oh, except for my nose! It wore completely off of my nose after 4 or 5 hours.

This product isn't totally transfer-proof, either. It wore off under the nose pads of my glasses, which is normal, but it always came off on my finger and on clothing if I put any pressure on my face. This kind of perplexes me, given how quickly it seems to dry on the skin during application.

Honestly, I try to wear foundations for 6 to 8 hours to give them a real test, but I couldn't bear to wear this any longer after 5. When I removed it, I noticed a small amount of red irritation where I'd itched throughout the day. It had faded by the time I woke up the next morning. I gave The Etherealist a second chance, applying it with a Beauty Blender and topping it with plenty of moisture spray, but I got nearly the same results.

I'm giving this foundation a 2 out of 5 because I think it might be nice for normal to slightly oil skin in photographs, the packaging is great, and the shade range is inclusive. Yet even that might be my brand loyalty rearing its ugly head. At the end of the day, this is a foundation that left me more disappointed than almost any other base product I've tried.

RATING: 2 out of 5

The Etherealist is available at Sephora.

Recent Disappointing Products

My beauty life tends to go in phases: either I'm trying a bunch of new products and I really like almost every one of them, or I'm trying a bunch of products and they're all utter crap. August was unfortunately another month full of not-so-good stuff, and to be honest, most of it was so "meh" to me that I didn't even have the patience to write full, exhaustive reviews for every one of them. Instead, I thought I'd do another disappointing products post! These are all products that would rank at 2 out of 5 or less in a full review.

Living Proof Perfect Hair Day Dry Shampoo -- I normally use drugstore dry shampoos, but I heard so many good things about the Living Proof option that I decided to give it a shot. Although the travel size is almost double what I usually pay for dry shampoo ($12 for 1.8oz), I got at least 10 good uses out of this bottle. And this dry shampoo does something pretty impressive: instead of just making your hair less oily and more textured, it actually makes your hair feel cleaner to the touch. My praise stops there, though, because it certainly doesn't make my hair look cleaner. I've used a lot of dry shampoos, but none of them has left this much white residue in my hair. And it's resilient residue, too: I've restyled my hair two or three times in a row after using the PhD Dry Shampoo, brushing it all the way through every time, and I'll still find massive white flakes all through my hair. I'm glad to be done with this junk.

Lit Cosmetics Clearly Liquid Glitter Base -- As a glitter primer, this stuff is hard to beat. Unlike other options on the market, it's completely weightless and not sticky in the slightest--it feels like water going on your lids. Yet it holds your glitter on all  night and is easy to remove when you get home. My beef with this product is that it seems to go bad so damn quickly. I'm on my second bottle in two years, and it's already taken on a weird, jaundiced yellow color and a rank smell. I thought I was having some bad luck, but a few of my friends who wear glitter far more often have mentioned that their bottles also start to go off after 6 months or so. It's still the best glitter primer on the market, in my opinion, but I wish it lasted longer.

Caudalie Resveratrol Lift Eye Lifting Cream -- I'm rarely impressed by eye creams, but I still think they're fun to try, so I was excited to see this pop up in my Sephora Play! box. After using it for about 2 weeks, however, I had to give this Caudalie cream the axe. I began noticing clogged pores around the outer portion of my eye, where I pretty much never break out; as soon as I stopped using this eye cream, they began to fade. It's not like this did much for my eyes when I was using it, honestly--it has a lightweight texture and is soothing and moisturizing, but so are a lot of other eye creams. Save your $62.

Namaste freshly applied (top) and after 4 hours (bottom). The lipliner is NYX Nude Pink.

Tarte Tarteist Cream Matte Lip Paint in Namaste -- I got this deluxe sample with a Sephora coupon code much earlier this summer, but because I'm always trying to space out my new products, I didn't try it until the fall semester rolled around. I understand why these are so popular, to be honest: they contain massive amounts of silicone, which makes the formula weightless and very smooth. It almost feels weird to spread this on my lips because it reminds me so much of a face primer. The color is gorgeous, too, especially with a bit of lipliner around the edges to add depth and warmth. Unfortunately, this formula emphasized dry patches and, to a lesser extent, fine lines. It dried out my mouth within an hour and began to smear and fade after three or four hours. There are much, much better matte liquid lipsticks available at this price point.

MAC Satin Lipstick in Twig -- This lipstick shade is apparently all the rage right now, probably because it's the sort of mauve shade one of the Kardashians is wearing. (Kylie? Kendall? I'm having trouble "keeping up" with them.) I love MAC lipsticks and usually have zero problems with the Satins, but this one was really dry on me and totally parched my lips. I also found that the shade was completely unflattering on me. It turned damn near gray on my mouth and made me look dull and washed out. The shade issue is certainly dependent on skintone, but again, the formula left something to be desired as well.

REVIEW: BeautyBlender Blotterazzi

I became a member of Sephora's subscription box service, Play!, in April of this year. I think the boxes have been pretty decent thus far, but I was expecting something stellar when I found out that the July boxes would be specialized: there was going to be one box for oily skin and one box for dry skin. I feel a little frustrated when I get sample products that sound really great, but not for my skin type, so this seemed like a fantastic idea.

Imagine my surprise, then, when I saw a BeautyBlender Blotterazzi sponge in my box. This is meant to be a blotting sponge that soaks up excess oils on your face. It's a neat product in theory, actually; you won't be slapping four or five pieces of blotting paper on your face every few hours, you can easily wash this guy up for less waste, and it will presumably last you a while.

Except, you know. I'm dry-skinned. I've had the same pack of ELF blotting sheets in my purse for over a year because my face is basically the Sahara. I might blot my nose in the midst of a long night out or a busy day at work, but that amounts to two or three sheets a month. I'm not the ideal customer here.

But it's summer, and summer in Pennsylvania is very sticky. And since my partner suggested we go to a local park and take photos for Christmas cards, I figured, "Hey, what better time to test this guy out? I'll never be sweatier!"

Blotterazzi is normally sold in a compact with two sponges for $20. The Play! boxes came with one Blotterazzi in a cardboard sleeve, which...okay, I get it, it's a sample, but how am I supposed to keep this thing clean in my purse? We were out of sandwich baggies and none of my reusable metal cases were large enough to hold the sponge, so I considered wrapping it in plastic wrap. Then I decided that the inside of my bag is decently clean, placed it back in its cardboard sleeve, and carried it around that way.

Even without a case, this sponge is pretty sizable. With a compact, it's going to take up some definite real estate in your purse or pocket. It does come with a mirror, though, so it'd serve more than one purpose. Overall, I admit that I think this sponge is a little large for its intended purpose. (I have tiny hands, though.)

If you use this sponge to blot your face, you're going to want to wash it regularly. Now, this is fine for somebody who doesn't produce a lot of oil (like me), or somebody who only wears makeup once or twice a week. But if you wear makeup very frequently and need to blot constantly, you're going to want to wash this thing every other day or so. And that can be a hassle.

And seriously, BeautyBlender, why are you incapable of making a product that doesn't leak pink dye after numerous washes?! The picture above shows the second time I washed my Blotterazzi, and it was still producing hot pink droplets in my (very dirty, sorry 'bout it) sink. Gaddamn, just make the thing dye-free and call it good.

After running around in 90 degree weather with my boyfriend for a few hours, I noticed that my nose was quite shiny while my forehead and chin were a smidgen too glowy. Time to blot! You can see the end result above: the picture on the left is me pre-blot, the center is mid-blot (and again, I think the sponge is a bit big, but it could just be me), and the right is post-blot. See a difference?

Yeah, neither did I. Honestly, you'll have to click on the above photos and stare at them pretty intensely to see that I am slightly less shiny on the right versus the left. Slightly. I did use it several more times throughout the day, but frankly, the ELF Shine Eraser sheets remove more oil with less pressing and fuss.

Also, I am disgusting, and one of the things I really enjoy about blotting sheets is that you can actually see how much oil you took off of your face. It's not clearly visible on the Blotterazzi sponge: it looks the same to me freshly washed as it does after I've used it all day. Now, that's a bummer for me, but if you're very oily, slash, easily squicked out, you may like that Blotterazzi hides the evidence.

I'll give BeautyBlender this: their products always have a nice texture. This is a very soft sponge that doesn't stick to the skin or cause irritation. And in theory, a reusable sponge seems like a good idea. But it did such a poor job of removing oil off of my barely-greasy nose that I can't imagine it working wonders on a truly oily-skinned person. For now, it might be best to stick to the sheets.

RATING: 2 out of 5.

Available at Sephora.

REVIEW: Milk Makeup Eye Marker

My first experience with the Milk Makeup range didn't go so well. One product disliked my face, another didn't work for me at all, and a third product was really nice, though nothing new or revolutionary. Despite those sad results, I decided to give the brand one more shot with an item that seemed smartly designed and right up my alley: their Eye Marker, a liquid eyeliner that is designed to look and function like an actual marker.

The Milk Makeup Eye Marker currently only has one shade, a black called Black Sheep, though I'm sure they'll expand the range in a bit. It retails for $20, which is about par for the course for high end liquid liners. The packaging is a hard tube with some rubberized pieces and a lid that snaps on tightly. I'm sad to say that the tube smells strongly of rubber for the first few weeks. That's not the end of the world, and the smell does fade, but it's worth noting.

The tip is firm and stiff, but not rough or painful, and comes to a decently thin, flat tip with beveled sides. This is meant to make it easy to draw whatever line you want, similar to doing calligraphy on paper.

Unfortunately, it's not always easy to draw with this product. The picture above shows my first attempt at using the Eye Marker. On the one hand, I was able to get the outer half of my eyes done in mere seconds, and drawing the wing was a breeze. (I went back in and darkened it after taking this photo.) However, I found it very hard to make the line perfectly smooth and even; you can see that the edges of my liner look a tad "rough" in this photo.

Also, the shape of the eyeliner tube makes it a bit awkward to draw on the inner third of the eyelid. I have small, deep set eyes, so when I tried tilting the marker to finish off my liner, I couldn't seem to hold the marker steadily without smacking my browbone. I eventually got the hang of this after 3 or 4 uses, but it's worth noting that the Milk Makeup Eye Marker is not quite as ergonomic as it seems.

I also had to make more than one pass with this liner, drawing the same eyeliner shape twice to ensure smooth, even color. The problem is that the tip of the marker is either pulling up the liquid liner, or it's not applying it as evenly as the rest of the marker, leaving a line of blank space. You can see it in the swatch above. This isn't the end of the world, since you can get your eyeliner on quickly with this product, and you can avoid this entirely if you just use the beveled side of the marker. But it's definitely an added frustration to have to do it all twice if you want a thin line.

The biggest disappointment, for me, is the wear. Milk claims that this product will wear for 24 hours without fading, and while I definitely didn't experience fading, I did notice a lot of smearing and some flaking with this product. That was the nail in the coffin for me. My $3 Wet n' Wild liquid eyeliner will wear for hours with zero smudging or flaking, and it's easier to get a smooth, solid line.

Yet again, it seems like Milk has created a product that looks cool and works well in theory, but doesn't really function in practice. It's "cool concept" over "smart concept." And that, my friends, has turned me off of the line, at least for the time being.

RATING: 2 out of 5

Milk Makeup is available at MilkMakeup.com.

REVIEW: Milk Makeup

Milk Makeup first appeared on Sephora's website last month, apparating like a fun and funky makeup genie from a bottle. The brand caught my eye immediately with its minimalist packaging and promises of unique, easy-to-use products for on-the-go hipsters. Because as much as I enjoy spending a lazy weekend hour applying my makeup, I am always pressed for time when I wake up 20 minutes late on a work day and need to get myself together before I hit the bus stop.

I was interested in a lot of the Milk Makeup range, but I decided to start with products that might fill gaps in my collection (and were available at the time, since they seem to be rolling the line out over the course of the spring season). I grabbed the Coverage Duo in Fair, the Weekend Lash Stain in 8-Ball, and the Gel Brow pencil in Pilsner.

Let's start with the Coverage Duo, because I wasn't actually able to wear it: my skin responded badly during patch testing. Milk promotes this product as a multipurpose base product, with 0.33 ounces of liquid concealer and 0.08 ounces of cream concealer, housed in super-portable packaging. Now, they call it a liquid concealer, but if you watch their tutorial videos, the models who use this product often apply it in a thin layer over most of their face like a foundation. And the idea of a grab-and-go concealer and foundation drew me in.

But when you think about it, this is rather pricey. Most foundations are a full fluid ounce, while you get a third of an ounce in the Milk Makeup Coverage Duo. (Again, they promote it as a concealer, but it behaves as, and is demoed like, a foundation.) The cream concealer is also super tiny, especially compared to my NARS Radiant Creamy Concealer (0.22 ounces) and my Urban Decay Naked Skin concealer (0.16 ounces). I put a dime on the cream concealer and placed the pod next to a Becca Beach Tint for a visual size comparison.

So yes, it's very portable and small, and it'd easily fit in your purse. But if you break it down to dollars-and-ounces, you're definitely paying for the cutesy packaging and portability.

Here's the Coverage Duo swatched up against the OCC Tinted Moisturizer in Y0, Glossier Perfecting Skin Tint in Light, and Buxom Show Some Skin in Tickle the Ivory. This is too dark for me by about a shade, but it's also very very very pink. I'd peg it at about NW15. So even if I had gotten past the patch testing phase, this product would not have worked on my skin tone.

Despite the fact that I couldn't give these concealers a full test run, I was able to feel the texture and get an idea of the coverage and performance. The liquid concealer is incredibly thin and provides light coverage; it's also easy to blend in to the skin. The cream concealer has an interesting and pleasant texture, kind of like a marshmallow that turns to liquid under your fingers (no, really!). It provides medium coverage. Both feel very emollient, though the liquid stays a little dewy on my skin and the cream dries down to a satin finish.

I also wanted to talk about this liquid concealer applicator for a moment. The Milk Makeup line seems to be quite fond of these rollerball applicators, probably because the idea is that you can just swipe the product where it's needed, smear it out with your fingers, and go. In theory, it's a nice idea, but I have three major problems with it:

1. It's messy. As soon as you start rolling the liquid concealer, you're going to get product all over the packaging, and it can actually smear in to the cap.
2. Sometimes the rollerball puts out a ton of product, and other times you have to roll it for almost a minute to get the liquid out.
3. This isn't very sanitary if you're using it the way it's advertised--the only way you can really clean the rollerball is to rub it on a makeup wipe, and then you're wasting some of the concealer in the process.

Next up is the Weekend Lash Stain in 8-Ball, a jet black mascara that's designed to give you a natural look while lasting for days at a time. This is the product I was the most excited about, because while I don't sleep in my makeup (guys, please don't do that), I do sometimes work for 12+ hours or run around in 95 degree, 85% humidity weather, and a long-wearing, not-makeup-y mascara would be a homerun for me. I'm also a huge fan of mascaras in squeeze tube packaging because it makes it easier to manipulate the product and get every last drop out of there.

Unfortunately, this mascara did not wow me. As soon as you pull the thin, slightly-slanted wand out of the tube, you'll notice it is absolutely dripping with mascara. Wipe it off on the rim of the mascara tube and you'll make a mess; wipe it off on a tissue and you'll be getting rid of half of your mascara.

Even after dabbing off the wand, this product is a nightmare to apply. The formula is so, so liquidy that it clumps your lashes together and smears all over your eyelid. I had to use a lash comb immediately after applying to separate my lashes, scrub my lids with my ELF Makeup Remover Pen, and make sure I applied eyeshadow after mascara so it didn't get ruined. I'm completely baffled by a product range that claims to be low-maintenance, then puts out a mascara that's this much work.

To be fair, you don't have to fuss with this much after it's actually on your eyes. It lengthens a bit and looks very black, but is overall quite natural, which is what a lash stain should be. It doesn't smear or flake throughout the day, and as long as you use an oil-based makeup remover, getting it off of your face isn't that hard. But quite frankly, I don't think the 10 minutes of faffing around is worth it when I can get similar results from a quick coat of Maybelline Full n' Soft. I'm still not sure if I want to keep this product or not, but I'm leaning towards "return."

Natural light on top, flash on the bottom.

The product I expected to feel the most "meh" about, the Gel Brow pencil, actually ended up being my favorite of the bunch. I got the middle shade, Pilsner, which is a dead-on-balls accurate color dupe for the Anastasia Beverly Hills Brow Wiz in Medium Brown. (The Shu Uemura Hard Formula pencil in Seal Brown applies a bit lighter to my brows than the other two, but it swatches really red/purple on my hand...I need to just give up swatching that pencil, cause it never works.) There's also a taupe blonde shade called Pale Ale and a darker brown called Dark Brew. I love that the shades are named after beer, but I wish they had a good option for redheads.

The spoolie on the end of the pencil is very serviceable, though not the softest of the bunch, and the lids don't snap on quite as tightly as I'd like. Beyond that, I'm loving this pencil. It definitely has a gel-like texture that smooths over the brows easily without looking flaky or chalky. I can get my brows done in a minute with this pencil because it's so pigmented and soft: brush brow, apply pencil in soft strokes, brush again, repeat process on other brow. The one caveat is that the soft formulation makes it impossible to draw on individual brow hairs, so if that super duper natural brow look is your game, I don't think this product will work for you; it's always going to apply like a "smear" of color. A nice smear! ...but still a smear.

In the above photos, I'm wearing the Gel Brow pencil and the Weekend Lash Stain on the left and am bare-eyed (man, that sounds funny to me) on the right side. I think the done-up brow looks faboosh: emphasized, strong, and appropriately ashy-colored without looking very fake or drawn-on. The stained lashes are definitely black and noticeable, but the amount of work I had to do to get them that way was not entirely worth it.

Milk likes to promote their products as "high concept and low maintenance," designed for cool, young urban people on the go. But "high concept" doesn't necessarily mean "smart concept." It's fine to have some gimmicks, like fun video tutorials and a quirky little paper that can blot your t-zone and roll your weed, but you can't rest on those laurels--at the end of the day, products need to work.

Dear Milk Makeup: if you start focusing more on products that really are fast and functional, and less on products that just look neat in pictures, let me know. I'll give them another shot.

RATING -- GEL BROW: 4 out of 5

RATING -- WEEKEND LASH STAIN: 2 out of 5

RATING -- COVERAGE DUO: ???

Milk Makeup is available at MilkMakeup.com and Sephora.com.

REVIEW: Colourpop Cheek Products

If you've read my review of the Colourpop lip products, then you probably already know that I think they're a "good" brand. Not stupendous, not horrible, not Holy Grail Worthy...just plain ol' "good." So I assumed I wouldn't be too tempted by what else they had to offer; after all, I'm not a huge eyeshadow person.

Then they came out with highlighters. And I think we all know how I feel about highlighters. Since I was already buying the highlighters, I figured I'd let a few blushes fall in to my bag as well.

All of these products are $8 per unit. Each unit weighs 4.2g/0.15oz and is housed in a simple plastic screw-top jars. Unlike Colourpop's Lippiestix (which are smaller than the standard lipstick), these are about par for the course: MAC Cream Colour Bases are 3.2g each and Kevyn Aucoin Creamy Moist Glows are 4.5g each, for example.

The formula is a cream-to-powder that's practically identical to the Colourpop eyeshadows. It has a moussey texture with a lot of slip. They're easy to apply with fingers or brushes, though I personally favored using my fingers because it makes them a bit easier to blend. This formula apparently dries out easily, so be sure to put the lids on tight.

Daylight on top, flash on the bottom.

On to the swatches! I decided to order 2 blushes (Holiday and Thumper) and three highlighters (Smoke n' Whistles, Hippo, and Lunch Money) for my testing purposes. I tried to pick shades that were different, but still workable with my skintone. Holiday is a bright coral and Thumper is a cool-toned pink; both shades have a matte finish. Smoke n' Whistles and Lunch Money have similar yellow undertones, though the former is slightly cooler and paler. Hippo is a pale lavender color.

In swatches, these look particularly impressive. The pigmentation is way high on both, and the blushes look smooth and beautiful while the highlighters look mega reflective. Of course, swatches can be deceptive--let's look at how they actually perform on my cheeks.

In the left photo, I'm wearing Holiday and Lunch Money. On the right, I'm wearing Thumper and Hippo. The blushes are probably jumping right off the picture at you, and they should. I found these an absolute dream to blend. Despite being a cream-to-powder product, they did not look dry or cakey on my cheeks. It was also easy to apply a small amount of color for my pale skin, but you could easily pack more on.

The only disappointment I have regarding the blushes is that the staying power is average. They lasted for about 4-6 hours on my cheeks, depending on what I was doing that day, how much I applied, and how warm and humid it was outside. My cheeks are dry, so this makes me wonder how they'd perform on oily skin. They're so easy to slap on, though, that I'd have no problem tossing the little plastic pot in to my purse.

The highlighters, however...they were a let-down.

To be fair, they aren't AWFUL. Hippo definitely gives me some glow, especially in photos. But for the most part, they just look like very visible shimmer on my face--click on the photos above and look at the picture on the right, and you can absolutely see Hippo's shimmer particles on my cheeks. Lunch Money looked like glitter smeared on my cheeks, but it didn't even have the decency to give me a megawatt glow in my photos.

As added proof, here's a close-up of Smoke n' Whistles on my cheek:

I'm fine with highlighters being glittery. I'm fine with them being very natural. But if you're going to look like straight-up shimmer on my face, the least you can do is give me some glow as well.

Overall, I think some people will enjoy the highlighters, and many people will enjoy the blushes. I might even buy more of the blushes if the mood strikes me...but for now, I'll pass on getting more of the highlighters. In fact, I'll probably sell mine off or swap them away. They're just too "meh" in a sea of better products.

RATING: 4 out of 5 for the blushes, 2 out of 5 for the highlighters.

Colourpop products are available at Colourpop.com.  This is an affiliate link that will give you $5 off of your first order and will reward me $5 in store credit.

REVIEW: RMS Beauty "Un" Cover Up

I've tried several products from RMS Beauty, and while thus far, the Living Luminizer is the only one to really work for me and my needs, I've been impressed with the company's aesthetic and formulations as a whole. After a good year of circling around this product, I finally found a lightly-used pot on a blogsale and took the plunge.

The RMS website describes the "Un" Cover Up as "a foundation or a light concealer" that "visibly melts into the skin while covering imperfections and redness." It's a relatively bare bones formula, comprised primarily of oils and pigments; in fact, coconut oil is the #1 ingredient (which is the case for a lot of RMS products). Lots of oil bodes well for dry-skinned folks like me, but if you're sensitive to those sorts of ingredients, you'll definitely want to patch test first.

I absolutely adore the packaging of RMS Beauty products, by the way. The frosted glass jars have sustained numerous dropsies from me, the lids are clean looking, and the overall presentation is simple and elegant. This is the kind of stuff I enjoy pulling out of my handbag and showing off.

Dim daylight on top, flash on bottom. From left to right: RMS Beauty Un Cover Up in 00, NARS Sheer Glow in Siberia, Paula's Choice Barely There Sheer Matte Thing in Level 1, NARS Radiant Creamy Concealer in Chantilly.

I obtained a pot of the lightest shade, 00, recommended "for the true snow whites." While this isn't the absolute darkest "first shade" I've ever seen a brand produce, I think it's kind of weird to advertise this for truly pale people. I'd peg 00 at about NW15, maybe a hair darker, with some definite peachiness to it.

Because of how dark this product is, I decided not to try it as an overall foundation. I knew it would look ridiculous on me. (And before I get the comments: I've already decided to stop wearing the PC tinted moisturizer because it's just too dark compared to my neck. We're gettin' finicky here at BOGL!) Instead, I tried it as a spot concealer and an undereye brightener.

On the left, we have my face with a 1 thin layer of MAC Face & Body foundation, but no concealer. You can see that I have a few small blemishes--one on my chin, one on my left cheek (your right)--and dark undereye circles. On the right, I have added a thin layer of the RMS Beauty Un Cover Up to both blemishes and my undereyes. The coverage on this product is definitely sheer: while it softened up my blemishes and brightened my undereyes, it never completely covered them.

First, the good. This is definitely a creamy concealer. That makes it very easy to blend on to the skin with just the warmth from your fingers. It also has a bit of a glow to it (which it damn well should, with all of the oils in the formula), which makes it look particularly beautiful on the undereye area. And if your blemishes aren't as stark red as mine are, this might provide enough coverage for your spots. If you have a hard time finding a concealer that won't dry out your skin, this could be a good option for you.

Now for the bad. A common philosophy amongst creators of "natural" products is that makeup should not last all day because that's "unnatural." Alright, fine, your philosophy is your own. To be fair, I've never heard Rose Marie Swift herself say this, and I'm also kind of freaked out by stuff that lasts for 12+ hours without needing touch-ups.

But in my opinion, makeup should at least last for a few hours. The RMS Beauty Un Cover Up barely lasted from the time I put it on to the time I finished my cup of coffee and got on the bus for work--that's less than 2 hours. By that point, the Un Cover Up had creased all over my undereye area and slid off of my blemishes. Setting with powder helps a bit, but it sort of defeats the purpose of having a glowy, non-drying concealer. I can't imagine wearing this all over my face and trying to hug someone or spend a few hours at work; it'd smear everywhere. And I have dry skin!

I'm also really disappointed in the shade range. There are only 5 shades of this product, and while it is on the sheer side--meaning you get some leeway in terms of finding a match--the darkest shade isn't that dark. Hence, there are limited options for truly ebony skinned people in the RMS line.

This isn't a terrible concealer. It's got a nice glow to it, it's easy to blend, and some people may enjoy it for their undereyes. But its usability is limited by the shade range, poor longevity, and low coverage.

RATING: 2 out of 5.

RMS Beauty Un Cover Up is available at RMSBeauty.com for $36.