The Hype Machine: Yves Saint Laurent Touche Eclat High Cover Radiant Concealer

The Hype Machine is a series that takes a critical look at well-loved, cult classic, appears-in-every-other-Instagram-photo products and asks: are they worth the hype?

A little under two years ago, this same series ranked the original Touche Eclat All-Over Brightening Pen as an above-average product, versatile and lovely, but probably more expensive than necessary. I've continued to use my Touche Eclat pen primarily as an undereye brightener, mixing it with my concealer du jour to get a bit less coverage and a brighter, slightly dewier finish. So when YSL released a true-blue concealer version of Touche Eclat (because, again, the original is not really a concealer; stop yelling at the poor thing), and when it was reviewed positively by bloggers I trust, I decided to bite the bullet and use up my gift cards.

Natural light on top, ring light on bottom. From left to right: YSL TE High Cover in 0.75 Sugar, YSL TE Brightening Pen in 2 Luminous Ivory, NARS Radiant Creamy Concealer in Chantilly, Glossier Stretch Concealer in G11.

What got me a little stuck was the shade range. I couldn't decide between the lightest shade, 0.5 Vanilla, and the second-lightest shade, 0.75 Sugar. After receiving several super-helpful comments on Instagram, I decided to go with 0.75 Sugar, since this is clearly meant to be an undereye/brightening concealer, and I knew the peachy tones of 0.75 would work well on my dark circles.

I'm glad I went with that shade. First of all, yes, 0.75 is DEFINITELY peach-toned, and it definitely works well on dark circles--more on that in a moment. Second, it's closer to the original Touche Eclat pen in 2 than you'd think. See, the original Touche Eclat pen darkens up a bit as it dries: it comes out looking almost identical to the very pale NARS Chantilly, but it ends up being about a shade darker. I'd peg the YSL Touche Eclat High Cover at about NC/NW 15 in terms of depth, and the YSL Touche Eclat All-Over Brightening Pen is maybe half a shade lighter.

The only other product on my face in these photos is a thin layer of the Surratt Surreal Skin foundation, which, LOOOOL, look at that beautiful application right over my top lip. I'M AN ARTIST.

The new High Cover version of Touch Eclat features a nearly identical metal tube and brush tip applicator; the only difference is that the High Cover version includes a black label, which is honestly helpful for differentiating between the two tubes quickly. I love the feeling and the weight of this packaging, and unlike many click tubes, it only takes a few clicks to get the product started.

One click will get you about twice as much product as you see in the above-middle photo. I actually find that a full click of this concealer is a bit much for me, so I just leave the rest on the brush for touch-ups or my next application. However, I tend to wear very thin layers of my base products, I only use this on my undereyes, and I have a sort of small face; you may use a whole click if you're covering more surface area or like more coverage.

Now, the name of this product may make you think this is going to completely blank out your dark circles. I don't think that's the purpose of this concealer. Instead, I think the name means this is a "high coverage version" of Touche Eclat (versus a traditional, maximum coverage concealer). I'd say this is a very natural, beautiful, just-barely-medium coverage concealer.

I can hear you scoffing. "Natural?! It looks like you smeared Vaseline on those undereyes!"

Look, I get what you're saying: my undereyes look hella-glossy in that after photo. But remember that it was photographed with a strong ring light shining directly down on me. In every other lighting situation I tested this in, including the all-important natural light, this just looked like a satin-y, natural, skin-like concealer. See the above natural light Instagram shot for proof!

You can also dust this very lightly with some powder to make it a natural matte texture. I found that powder took away any and all shine, and it prevented a bit of the (inevitable) creasing, but it didn't clump or cake.

Finally, let's answer that all-important question: is it worth the price? Again, I have to give you a wishy-washy "yes and no." For me, it's a pretty stellar product that's easy to apply, works well with all of my foundations, and really brightens up my face. I used to put two products on my undereyes; now I'm down to one. If you're like me and you have a hard time finding a single undereye concealer you like, it's aces. But if you already have an undereye concealer you love, I don't know that this luxury product is necessarily going to top it.

BOTTOM LINE: YSL has created a higher-coverage version of their beloved Touche Eclat pen that delivers natural, medium coverage that really works on my undereyes. If you're looking for a great undereye concealer, this could be the one for you; if you've already got a favorite, feel free to give this pricey pen a pass.

The Hype Machine is a series that represents my experiences and opinions. It is not meant to be a personal attack on a specific company, product, or consumer. I always recommend that you try products for yourself and see how they work for you. Everybody is unique, after all!

1P2L: Pencil Eyeliner with Glossier Colorslide + Glossier Play Mini-Reviews

Like most beauty bloggers, I assumed Glossier was about due for a "more full-on" makeup range, and I figured Glossier Play would be it. When they launched a range that prompted some excitement and a slew of criticisms, my initial feelings toward the four new cosmetics and two new tools were relatively mild. Yes, I was excited for the highlighters, but my reaction to highlighters is as instinctual and simple as my two-year-old niece's response to french fries. The lack of professional swatches on multiple skintones--something Glossier has been relatively good about for the past few years--leads me to believe that the launch was a little rushed.

All of this said, I received a slew of Instagram messages and emails when this line was announced, so clearly there's been some hype and interest surrounding the range. And frankly, a fun, colorful cache of products I could buy with the store credit you lovely people have earned me (thanks!) couldn't have at come at a better time. Between Kirby fighting a nasty bout of shingles and me being whacked with the depression hammer, the first half of March reminded me just how important fun and relaxation are.

Now, a lot of people have complained that this launch doesn't suit the "Glossier look." I can't entirely agree. For starters, there's a reason why they're launching these products under a sub-brand: they know it's not their usual no-makeup-makeup. But more importantly, this strikes me as "cool girl" party makeup, the kind of stuff naturally pretty people slap on their faces when they go out and want to try something a little different. None of it is designed for precise cut creases or stage-worthy Instaglam looks, and in my opinion, that's very Glossier.

There's also been a lot of debate about the design and environmental impact of these products. This delightful post from Auxiliary Beauty sums up most of my feelings about this. I'll add that I thought the 1970s-as-seen-by-Y2K-teenagers fonts and boxes were very cute. They hit me right in the "oh fuck that was middle school" nostalgia. However, like most people, I think wrapping each product in an extra piece of foil, then putting in to a box, is a wee bit excessive. It's also suspicious to me that Glossier claims they spent two years preparing this brand, yet they didn't think to use biodegradable glitter. Their consumer base is almost all Gen Z and Millenials, and we're groups that tend to worry about climate change and plastic consumption. To their credit, Glossier has listened to the criticisms; they will phase out the foil packets and plan on reformulating their products with biodegradable glitter.

Since I'm ranting, may I also point out that Glossier is STILL doing that "this is so unique and there's nothing like it" marketing, and it just doesn't work for them? Colorful pencil eyeliners and glitter gel have been around for decades, but they're releasing ad copy like this:

For the millionth time: there are more marketing tactics than the appeal to novelty. Customers like me are drawn to how easy and effortless Glossier's range is, and some are drawn to the "cool factor." But I'm not seeing a single, not-a-Glossier-rep person gushing over how "new" and "original" these products are. Play to your strengths, Glossier.

Enough complaining; let's get on to the swatches, looks, and reviews!

As mentioned, Glossier Play was launched with four new makeup products and two tools. The first makeup product is Colorslide, a range of colorful eyeliners. I got five shades: Adult Swim and Disaster Class for day-to-day wear, and Early Girl, Nectar, and Jumbo for experimentation and fun. All of these shades are matte, but there are metallic colors in the range, if that's more your gig. The Colorslide pencils are $15 each.

I've also sharpened them with the Blade sharpener. I get that a sharpener isn't something most people are going to lose their shit over, but this is a pretty nice one at an agreeable $4. It comes with a purple "cleaning stick" that you can twist in the sharpener to clean out the blade.

Next, we have those not-yet-biodegradable Glitter Gelees. I have three of the four shades: Glass Bonsai, Phantasm, and Firewalk. They're all technically suspended in a clear base and are, therefore, meant to be layered or used as sparkle rather than as full-on eyeshadows. But you can see that some of the shades contain a bit more of the fine shimmer, which makes the base seem less clear; this is most obvious with Firewalk. Phantasm, meanwhile, contains no fine shimmer and is all larger, more obvious holographic glitter shapes. Glass Bonsai is somewhere in the middle as far as opacity goes.

The product I was least excited for, shocker of shockers, was the Vinylic Lip. Yes, a liquid lip product in a click pen with a spongey applicator takes me right back to my first order from ELF, I'm not gonna lie. But I'm not a huge gloss person, and I find clicky pens a bit of a pain to use. It took me 41 clicks to get product out of Pony, and a whopping 71 clicks with Baby. I also find Glossier's color descriptions a little weird: Pony is less "taupe" to me and more mauve, and "Baby" reads more like a strawberry pink than a saturated, blue-based red.

By contrast, I was beyond hyped to see that they were releasing more full-on highlighters, because...highlighters. I purchased the two lightest Niteshine shades, the yellow-based Pale Pearl and the pink-based Platinum Rose.

Here are two looks I created with my Glossier Play products. (The only one not shown here is the Glitter Gelee in Glass Bonsai.) On the left, we have my attempt at something a little more full-on. I used the Jumbo and Disaster Class liners as bases, then added Glossier Lidstar in Cub to the center of my eye and topped it with two layers of Firewalk Glitter Gelee. I lined my lower lashline with Nectar. On the whole, I enjoy the eye look:

Interestingly, neither the Colorslide pencils nor the Glitter Gelee applied the way I expected. Glossier describes Colorslide as a "technogel eye pencil," implying it has a smooth gel formula. I actually found these pencils very waxy, and they tugged at my lids a little as I applied them. Disaster Class was especially difficult to use and applied patchy when I tried to use it as a base. Also, while I was able to get some intense color out of the Colorslide pencils, it took at least two layers to reach full saturation, sometimes three. And using these all over your eyelid when they're a waxy formula that catches? This can happen:

Yeah, that's frustrating.

In short, you can use these as eyeshadow bases, but it's a real pain in the ass, and some of the shades work better than others. These also take a little more effort to transfer to your waterline as compared to a true gel or khol-type pencil. If you're going to get these, go for the more pastel, interesting shades, like Nectar and Easy Girl, which are perfectly serviceable and can be tough to get in a decent formula. As a whole, though, I don't think these eyeliners are particularly special.

I had much better luck with the Glitter Gelees. Now, some people have complained these glitter gels made a huge mess on their face and left a ton of fallout all over their cheeks. In video reviews that stated this, I noticed that the person would apply the glitter to their eyelid, then immediately start blinking and moving their eyes all over the place. A product like this needs a minute to dry, so just be patient and keep your eye as still as you can right after application. I had absolutely zero glitter fallout or movement from all three Glitter Gelee shades after they'd dried, which sort of stunned me.

For the second, more natural look, I used Easy Girl and Adult Swim on my upper lashline to create a simple, slightly winged eyeliner, then lined my upper waterline with Adult Swim and tapped a bit of Phantasm Glitter Gelee at the corner of my eye. Phantasm is the glitter most people are excited about, and I can see why; it's just really fun and pretty.

For both looks, I used their Detailer to apply the glitter. A silicone applicator is definitely the best way to apply these, since it gives you more control and limits the mess, but you don't have to buy this one. Plenty of other brands make cheap silicone applicators.

Both the Colorslides and Glitter Gelees had great staying power; there was no fallout and minimal fading/smearing throughout the day. I use baby oil and cottons to remove them. The glitter is especially tenacious and should be kept out of your plumbing as much as possible, so you'll probably want to hold the oil-soaked cotton on your skin for a while to loosen it up.

For the more dramatic look, I wanted a super-shiny, very bold, definitely red lip, but I didn't get that with the Vinylic Lip in Baby. In fact, when I tried to layer it, I got only slightly more color, but I also noticed flakes on my lips that I didn't see before--see above. And it still never became "high shine" like Glossier promised. It's a thin, lightweight, decently comfortable formula with a faint strawberry smell. Nothing terrible, nothing to write home about. Frankly, I think Glossier should have produced colored versions of their regular gloss instead, since it is far shinier and more full-on than this formula.

I'll definitely get more use out of Pony, which I used for the softer look. One layer gave me that wearable, work-appropriate mauve shade that's perfect for work.

Last, but not least, we have the Niteshine Highlighter Concentrate. In terms of payoff and shine, I'd say these are like Glossier Haloscopes and Becca Shimmering Skin Perfectors had a baby: they're shinier and more obvious than the Haloscope, but they manage to do it without being sparkly a la the SSP. It's a nice product with a thin, liquid formula that can be built up. Just make sure you blend them out fast, because they dry within seconds. I'm wearing Platinum Rose on my cheekbones in the full-on look, Pale Pearl on my cheekbones and under my brows in the more natural look.

While I really enjoy these and will get good use out of them, I have two quibbles. First, the shade range is just plain dumb. Platinum Rose and Pale Pearl are almost identical on your skin, and the two darker shades look similarly close. If you're releasing glitter gel and colorful eyeliner, and if your ads are full of disco and rave-inspired shots, you should probably come out with some more interesting colors. A lavender, for instance, would've been an on-trend option. Second, these suffer from the same packaging problems as the Lidstars: the lids are small, smooth, and difficult to turn. Anybody with limited hand mobility is going to have a rough time opening these highlighters.

When it's all said and done, I don't think this launch is as terrible as some people are making it out to be, but I also don't think it's full of products you have to rush out and buy. True, I really love the Glitter Gelees, and I'll use the Niteshine Highlighters regularly. But one of each, tops, will probably be more than enough for most people. And while the Colorslide pencils and Vinylic lips aren't dreadful, they certainly aren't worth it when you have brands like Colourpop producing better stuff at a lower price. If Glossier wants to improve this range, I suggest that they:

• Fulfill their promise to use biodegradable glitter in the Glitter Gelee,
• Improve the shade ranges for several of the products, and
• Focus on creating what their fans have actually been asking for, like a cream bronzer or a tinted moisturizer/foundation with a bit more coverage. 

PS: I'll be taking a very short break from writing this blog to focus on work. I should be back by the end of March!

PPS: WHERE IS THAT GODDAMN CANDLE YOU PROMISED, GLOSSIER?!

Note: All of these products were purchased with Glossier store credit earned via an affiliate link. I have not been paid to test, photograph, or write about anything in this post. My reviews are always honest. Actually, Glossier is probably a bit sick of sending me so much free shit, given how poorly I've rated some of their releases. Sorry, guys.

REVIEW: Laura Mercier Flawless Lumiere Radiance-Perfecting Foundation

Laura Mercier is the brand of my dreams, promising glowy skin and naturally gorgeous looks packaged in sleek, simple tubes. Unfortunately, I haven't had much luck with their products. Their formulas are almost always perfectly fine for me, but their shade ranges? I don't know what it is, but I can never find a passable match in a Laura Mercier formula. When they released the Flawless Lumiere Radiance-Perfecting Foundation, a product name full of words I love but refuse to keep typing throughout this review, I thought things might be a little different.

 Natural light on top, flash on the bottom. From left to right: Tarte Shape Tape Concealer in Fair, MAC Face & Body Foundation in C1, Kosas Tinted Face Oil in 02, Laura Mercier Flawless Lumiere Foundation in 1W1 Ivory.

The Flawless Lumiere foundation is $48 for an ounce of product housed in a simple glass bottle with an easy-to-control pump. As of this writing, there are 30 shades in the range, stretching from fair to decently dark, though it looks like there's quite a jump between the depth 5 and depth 6 shades. I chose the lightest warm shade, 1W1 Ivory. In swatches, it's about NC15 with very strong golden undertones, but I do think it gets a bit darker after application. Even when I self-tanned my neck, this shade was too dark for me.

The formula itself is a thin, relatively fragrance-free liquid that spreads easily with your fingers, a brush, or a sponge. If I had to describe the texture in one word, I'd call it "soft."

Laura Mercier says this product has medium coverage, and some people have taken umbrage with that. I actually think Laura Mercier is right, though you could call it a "light medium" or "natural medium" coverage. As you can see in these before-and-after pictures, my skintone is evened out and most of my flaws are covered or softened, but you can still see my freckles and a bit of the darker surface redness peeking through. This is a very skin-like foundation, and while it isn't outright glowy on my dry skin (what foundation is?), it certainly makes me look healthy and hydrated.

The one issue I had with this foundation? I had an awful time blending my blush over it. I tested all of my cream blush formulas, which normally spread like a dream for me, and they all experienced a bit of "catching." Powdering mitigated the issue a little, but of course, it cut down on the radiant finish. In the end, the best fix for me was to really warm up the blush on my fingertips or the back of my hand, then take my time slowly but surely patting it in to my cheeks. Going over the blush with a damp Beauty Blender also helped.

Here's a macro shot of my makeup completely finished. Looking at my nose, the skin around my brows, the tops of my cheeks...I think this foundation looks just like skin. Really, it's a beautiful texture.

PS: Why do so many brow pencils turn red on me? Is this some weird makeup version of a Midas touch? Send help and ashy pencils, please.

As far as wear goes, the Flawless Lumiere foundation performed pretty well. I noticed some oil breakthrough on my nose after three hours, and a lot of oil and some fading on my nose after 8 hours. The skin on the driest parts of my face--around my mouth and up the sides of my jaw--also looked a little dry at the 8 hour mark, though you had to get really close to my face to see that. I'd call that pretty solid performance, though I'd hesitate to recommend this foundation to truly oily skin. I didn't experience any itching, discomfort, or breakouts from this product; it was comfortable and weightless all day.

Now, in these pictures, I buffed out two pumps of foundation with a Real Techniques buffing brush, then bounced a damp Beauty Blender on top of it, as directed by many-a-YouTuber. However, Laura Mercier suggests using a sponge to apply this product. So I used a damp sponge and my usual "spray your face with moisturizing spray until it's dripping wet" tactic on my next test run, and I got this:

While they're both really lovely finishes, I'd say I prefer this sponge-and-spray look to the brush-and-sponge look. It has an even more natural finish. I also applied this product with my fingers during another test, and while it looked just fine, I really think a damp sponge works best.

And yes, I wore a turtle neck and applied the foundation to the top of my neck. This stuff is way too dark for me, but dammit, it's pretty, and I wanted to wear it to work at least once.

So there you have it: another Laura Mercier foundation that doesn't work for me, personally, but is an overall gorgeous product. If it wasn't such an uphill battle to apply my cream blush on top of it, the Laura Mercier Flawless Lumiere What Is With These Long Names Foundation would be a five star product.

RATING: 4 out of 5

I purchased this foundation from Sephora.

Pray for My Face, March 2019

I'm at a really terrible point in my stop-consuming-shit journey: while I can ignore just about every new release and raved-about product for months on end, I suddenly want to buy everything Jordan Samuel releases. And since it's cold as the ninth circle of Hell right now, I'm also tempted by every balm, ointment, and glow-promising serum out there. I've managed to tamp down those desires by using deluxe samples that were hanging around my bathroom, and being "meh" about two of them reminded me that you can spend a lot to find one product you love.

Jordan Samuel Hydrate: The Mist, $29 at JordanSamuel.com

I'm a sucker for facial mists, but I'm also weirdly picky about them. They have to provide light hydration without feeling sticky, they need to work under and over other skincare and my makeup, they have to have a fine mist, they must be "no-no ingredient" free, so on and so forth. I'm also loath to buy a mist if there's a similar, more concentrated product in the range. Jordan Samuel's Hydrate Serum is already one of my favorite products, and I use it regularly, so why buy a watered-down version?

Well, I had to repurchase my serum at the end of 2018, so I caved and tossed a bottle of Hydrate: The Mist in to my cart. And I am so, so glad I did. It is, indeed, a lighter, less hydrating version of the Hydrate Serum, and that makes it perfect for my morning routine. I can spray this all over my freshly-washed face in the morning, and it dries in a minute while plumping and smoothing my skin. All of my moisturizers and foundations smooth over it without issue. I especially love topping it with my Skin Laundry Daily Moisturizer SPF35 to lock in the moisture.

My one complaint is the smell: when I first spray it, it has a bit of a mildew scent. That dissipates after it dries, but it's always a little jarring.

Glow Recipe Watermelon Glow Sleeping Mask, $45 at Sephora

According to YouTube circa 2017, this is THE mask to get if you have dry, sensitive skin. Frankly, I have plenty of AHA exfoliants and lightweight hydrators already, but this appeared in a sample pack I bought, so I figured, "Hey, why not." Alas, I'm not impressed. I find that this exfoliates my skin just fine, but it doesn't do anything else, and it's certainly not so gentle or effective that it warrants a $45 price tag.

Now, to be fair, I don't leave this on my face all night; I rinse it off after about 15 minutes. That said, the instructions say you can wash this off after 10 minutes, most exfoliants will do their work within those first 10 minutes, and frankly, there's nothing in the ingredients list that suggests it will be enough to keep me hydrated throughout the night. I do appreciate the lightweight gel texture of this mask, but the strong, artificial watermelon scent erases any of the textural benefits.

Laneige Lip Sleeping Mask, $20 at Sephora

This is another YouTube darling, but unlike the faddish Glow Recipe mask, I think this lip balm is still quite popular and beloved. Karima McKimmie recently mentioned it in a favorites video, and it's regularly recommended on various skincare forums. I can see the appeal of this one: while it looks waxy and thick in the pot, it applies with a smooth, creamy texture and almost seems to blanket the lips. (I've photographed it against the waxier, dryer Nuxe Reve de Miel balm I use every night so you can get a feel for the texture.) It's very comfortable and works well under lipsticks.

Unfortunately, I don't find this as hydrating as other people do. When I wake up, my lips feel slightly dry, as if the balm sort of faded away instead of soaking in. Part of the problem may be the inclusion of denatured alcohol, which is halfway up the ingredients list and always seems to dry me out if I use it regularly. I'm sticking with my Nuxe balm for bedtime and keeping the Laneige pot on my desk, where it will serve as a lipstick primer or occasional "touch-up" balm.

Belif Moisturizing Eye Bomb, $48 at Sephora

I hate it when I really like an eye cream, partially because they're also so damn expensive, partially because I know they're not entirely necessary. And frankly, this eye cream doesn't do anything so spectacular that I would rush out and repurchase it when I finish this sample pot. But yes, I do really like it.

The best thing about this eye balm is the texture: it's a "gel lotion" texture, almost like a body lotion that has been thinned out with a little extra water. A small amount spreads pretty far, and it smooths over the eye area easily, softening the skin and providing a tiny bit of plumping. This definitely helps with my fine lines in that area, but it's quite temporary, of course. I've also used it in the morning and tested it under makeup, and it soaks in quickly enough that you don't have to worry about it borking your concealer.

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.

The Hype Machine: Pat McGrath Lip Products

The Hype Machine is a series that takes a critical look at well-loved, cult classic, appears-in-every-other-Instagram-photo products and asks: are they worth the hype?

Pat McGrath herself needs little introduction. She's known for using a range of inventive materials to create unique looks, and she's done everything from editorial shoots to runway shows. When I watch her applying makeup, I am absolutely flabbergasted by her talent; it's like she puts a brush to a model's skin and magic pours out. It's no surprise that her makeup line has been wildly popular, especially when her products were first released in limited quantities on Sephora and sold out almost immediately.

But I'm not exactly rolling in disposable income, so as pretty as her products looked and as intense as the reviews and praise were, I just couldn't spend my money on the Pat McGrath range. $38 for a lipstick? $125 for an eyeshadow palette? And there's no way for me to swatch the products and experience the textures before I purchase? That's just beyond me and my means.

So how did I get these products? Well, my friends...I did some damage during Black Friday 2018. With the LuxeTrance lipsticks on sale for $26, I decided they were close enough to my $25 price ceiling to give them a try. I went for the shade Strangé, partially because it's a red and partially because I think that's a Grace Jones reference.

 She is perfection and this scene is iconic.

I also purchased an on-sale PermaGel lip pencil in Manhattan, thinking it would match Strangé. In reality, Manhattan is a bit darker and more brown, but that little bit of depth helps.

What do we think of the lighting in this photo: yay or nay?

The packaging for these products is definitely worthy of the price point. Every product comes in a beautiful box fastened with string. The writing on both the products and their boxes is gold foil. And while some people have complained that the giant gold lips on the lipsticks are tacky, I think they're just the right amount of over-the-top for a Pat McGrath range. The woman is famous for the number of bags and trunks she travels with; she's not exactly known for subtly.

Are the formulas inside those pretty packages worth a day's pay? Well, that depends. The lipstick is certainly beautiful: it feels incredibly thin and smooth during application, almost like a liquid, and it gives full color payoff with one stroke. I did blot and reapply on this day, like I do with all lipsticks, and after eating a bowl of homemade sesame chicken, I noticed that the lipstick was mostly intact, with some wear near the very inside of my lips and all of that slightly glossy finish gone. It goes without saying that I love this color, because...red.

The lip pencil, however, leaves something to be desired. The name "Perma-Gel" suggests that the pencil will be creamy and long-wearing. It certainly has a fluid, soft gel texture, but it doesn't prevent feathering in the slightest. This macro shot shows how my lipstick looked after just an hour of wear: you can see that the edges, especially on my top lip, are smeared. I love the color of the lip pencil and how it pairs with this lipstick, so I'll keep using it, but I'll likely use a slightly waxier pencil first to get my lip lines smooth and crisp.

Perhaps the best way to sum up my feelings about Pat McGrath's lip products and the hype around them is this: I haven't looked at any other lip pencil shades, but I have picked out one more LuxeTrance lipstick I'd like to own, 1995. (Take a moment to appreciate my restraint here, please, because there's a shade named Labeija and I haven't bought it just for the name.) It's just one shade, and I won't even think about buying it until it's on sale again. I'll get my use out of these products and may own a few more, but I won't break the bank for them.

BOTTOM LINE: Like the NARS Audacious lipsticks before them, these Pat McGrath lip products are beautiful, but not necessarily better than any of the $20 lipsticks I've tried. Skip the lip pencils and settle on one or two special lipstick shades unless your budget is endless.

The Hype Machine is a series that represents my experiences and opinions. It is not meant to be a personal attack on a specific company, product, or consumer. I always recommend that you try products for yourself and see how they work for you. Everybody is unique, after all!

REVIEW: Surratt Surreal Skin Foundation Wand

I've lusted after the Surratt Surreal Skin Foundation Wand for over a year now, but I couldn't bring myself to pay $130 per ounce for a foundation. Then Sephora put most of their Surratt products on sale, including this foundation, and I decided that I could stomach $32.50 to test a half ounce of Japanese-aesthetics-inspired luxury. That sale was only temporary, of course, so the question remains: is this product worth that $65-per-wand price tag?

The Surratt Surreal Skin Foundation Wand is described as a "medium-to-full coverage and long-wearing" foundation that "instantly melts into skin." It comes in a plastic tube that looks solid black on the website, but actually has this elegant bluish-green, sparkly gradient color at the top. You press a button at the end of the tube to dispense product through the attached brush. Makeup artist and brand founder Troy Surratt has claimed that he wanted the Surreal Skin Wand to be your primer, foundation, and tool in one package.

 Natural light on top, flash on the bottom. From left to right: Surratt Surreal Skin Foundation Wand in Surreal Skin 1, NARS Radiant Creamy Concealer in Chantilly, Sephora Bright Future Concealer in 03 Fondant.

The shade I purchased is the lightest in the range, Surreal Skin 1. It's described as being pale with beige undertones. I actually think it has a bit of the cool yellow undertones I go for, though it's not as pale as the NARS concealer or as yellow as the Sephora concealer. Overall, I'd say this is an NC/NW10-15 foundation that can be used by people with neutral or moderately yellow undertones. I don't know if this shade will be pink enough for people with strong pink undertones.

So how does the foundation and the applicator work? I have to be honest: I didn't expect it to work at all. I've always been leery of products packaged like this because I'm fussy about the cleanliness of my tools. (I've been cleaning the brush with Dr. Bronner's soap every couple of uses.) I also didn't think it would work very well, since, in the video I just linked, Troy Surratt applies the foundation and blends it out with the attached brush, then goes in with a Beauty Blender.

"Sure, Troy," I said snidely. "This is the only tool I need, asterisk, and a Beauty Blender." I'm happy to report that the foundation always comes up through the center of the brush after a few clicks, and it's easy to manage how much you get, but swiping the brush on my face for my first test run didn't fill me with hope. The brush isn't the absolute softest tool out there, and the foundation felt a little stiff.

When I started buffing the foundation in to my skin, however, I realized that the brush actually works just fine. In fact, I was able to cover my entire face in a thin layer of foundation in about two minutes. Okay, Troy, I stand corrected. I'll put my Beauty Blender and my shitty comments away.

Now, I'm not usually happy about having a cystic pimple on my face, but looking at these before-and-after photos, I'm glad this zit came to visit. Surratt claims that this foundation is "medium to full coverage," and I can't fathom why. This is definitely a light coverage foundation: you can see that it covered up my discoloration and gave my skin a more even look, but it barely softened the angry red zit on my chin. In my experience, a medium coverage foundation will cover a zit at least partially, and a full coverage foundation will work about as well as any concealer. That's not what's happening here.

In terms of finish, the Surreal Skin Foundation looks like skin. It does cling slightly to dry patches, though this softens up a bit throughout the day; as promised, it sort of "melts in." Also, it's worth mentioning that my skin was at its absolute driest when I took these photos. Buffed over less parched skin or a moisturizer, you'd have to get right up against me to see any dryness or clinging.

The picture on the left is 15 minutes after application, and the picture on the right shows 6 hours of wear. (I didn't take a later picture because it looked roughly the same at the 9 hour mark.) The foundation stays skin-like and beautifying, but it does start to fade a little from my nose, the one oily part of my face. However, you can reapply the foundation without making it look cakey or dry, which I tested one day: I threw the wand in my bag and buffed it back over my nose during my lunch break. Lastly, this foundation was comfortable all day and did not make me itch or break out.

On the whole, I really enjoy this foundation. I think it will be a better fit for me in the summer, when my skin and the air around me are less dry, simply because this isn't as dewy as what I normally reach for and it can emphasize my dry patches a little. It's not the sort of product I'd recommend to very oily skin, either, given how it performed on my nose. That doesn't change the fact that people looking for easy-to-apply light coverage with a skin-like finish will really enjoy Surreal Skin. Is every ounce worth three full days of my teaching salary, though? Eh...I'm on the fence about that one. I can see myself using this up, but unless it becomes my go-to in the warmer months, I'm not sure I'll repurchase.

RATING: 4 out of 5

You can purchase Surratt products at Sephora.

Pray for My Face, November 2018

One of the benefits of store credit, company PR, and free samples is that you can try a bunch of new stuff without spending your money. It's especially nice when you end up loathing a product; you don't want to feel like you've wasted that $30. Unfortunately, one of these products went beyond being "meh" and actually ate my face alive. Pray for this face, friends.

Ole Henriksen Banana Bright Eye Creme, $38 at Sephora 

This eye cream got a stupid amount of hype recently. Bloggers and YouTubers insisted that this cream's yellow color helped it correct your undereye circles, and they claimed that it was the most moisturizing, smoothing eye cream they've used. I think it's this level of hype that set me up for disappointment. Yes, it is quite hydrating and smoothing, even more so than a lot of other eye creams I've tried. But this did nada on my undereye circles. The people saying that must've had the faintest circles known to mankind, whereas my undereyes are a very strong, dark blue.

Still, it's a nice eye cream that hasn't irritated my skin, and I've almost emptied the sample pot. It works well at night as a soothing treatment or before makeup to make concealer apply better. I wouldn't spend a full $38 on it because I still prefer the Kiehl's eye cream, but I wouldn't turn my nose up another sample of the Ole Henriksen.

Glossier Zit Stick, $14 at Glossier

I continue to be stunned by Glossier's recent focus on skincare. While their makeup is often right up my alley, their skincare rarely tickles my fancy due to the run-of-the-mill formulas and unnecessary ingredients designed to make it smell nice. The ingredients for the Zit Stick looked fine, though, so I purchased one and brought it to a conference shortly after it arrived.

Let's get the bad out of the way. First, this is nothing new or revolutionary; it's a 2.5% benzoyl peroxide treatment with a dash of salicylic acid and tea tree oil packaged in a cute pen. It's not strong enough to get rid of my most horrendous, under-the-skin blemishes, and if you rub it on a blemish without a head, it can actually make it a bit redder, which is typical of benzoyl peroxide.

There are some positives for this product, however. The tiny tube is very travel-friendly and fits in my small purse easily. The formula comes out slightly pinkish-white at first, but rubs in and dries down clear, so you can wear it in public. When I was on a break during the aforementioned conference, for instance, I noticed a new zit appearing on my forehead, so I rubbed the Zit Stick in to it and it was noticeably smaller by the end of the day.

DHC Lip Cream, $9.50 at Dermstore

Lena got me interested in this lip balm, and the non-stop 5 star reviews pushed me to pull the trigger. I've been running low on my Nuxe Reve de Miel lip balm, which is becoming scarce in the United States, so I was hoping for a replacement. I do really like this balm, but I don't think it's the end-all-be-all (sorry, Lena), and it certainly doesn't replace the Nuxe for me.

The DHC Lip Cream has a smooth, very slightly waxy texture. It provides light to moderate hydration and is relatively weightless. It's not super glossy unless you really pack it on, so it should work well for makeup-free people, too. I personally love this in the morning to lock in the hydration from my humidifier and help my lipstick glide on. It's nowhere near as hydrating as the Nuxe is, but it gets the job done.

The downside is that this is a teeny, tiny tube. You get 0.05 ounces of product, and a month of using it in the morning and at night saw me finishing half of the tube. I might continue to purchase this one, but only when it's on sale (Black Friday, I'm coming for you!), and I'll avoid using it at night so that it lasts longer.

Sunday Riley Ceramic Slip Cleanser, $35 at Sephora

Shortly before I received this cleanser from Influenster, Sunday Riley got itself in to a bit of hot water when a former employee revealed that the company had planted positive reviews. This didn't change my opinion on their products that much, to be honest, because their high price tags and iffy ingredients lists never appealed to me. Still, Ceramic Slip has always been a popular cleanser, and it seemed like it would be right up my alley. I patch tested it for a week and had zero problems. When I used it all over my face, I noticed that it felt soft and was relatively scentless. It didn't strip my skin. That's...about it. Nothing terrible, nothing amazing, just a run-of-the-mill gentle cleanser.

I woke up the next day asking, "Man, why is my face so itchy?" I've been on medication and vitamin D supplements for my chronic hives for almost 2 years now, and it's worked marvelously, so I've forgotten what it feels like to wake up and immediately scratch my face off. I looked in the mirror, and...

...HOLY FUCK, WHAT HAPPENED.

These pictures don't do the rash justice, as they were taken about an hour after I woke up, took Benadryl, and worked an hour at my online job while barely resisting the urge to scrape my face off of my skull. It was twice as unsightly, purple, and huge when I first woke up. I've had some reactions to skincare products in the past, but rarely one this intense. It was so bad, I had to call off work at my on-site job. And when I thought it was getting better, it started to puff up the skin around my eyes--see the middle picture.

Suffice to say that I threw the cleanser back in its box an tossed it under the sink. I have no idea what to do with it, since I don't want to give it to a friend and unleash the same horror on their face. A huge thanks to Sunday Riley and Influenster, though, for proving that I really don't need to spend that much money on overhyped skincare.

REVIEW: NARS Pure Radiant Tinted Moisturizer

Few things make you feel better about your spending habits and your "makeup rehab" progress than buying just two items and spending under $60 at a Sephora sale. While very few products tickled my fancy, I was definitely looking forward to testing out the NARS Pure Radiant Tinted Moisturizer. Admittedly, I haven't had much luck with NARS formulas, but I've heard nothing but raves for this sheer foundation.

The NARS Pure Radiant Tinted Moisturizer will run you $45 for 1.9oz. Yes, that's bigger than the standard 1oz tube, but you'll want to use almost 1/4 teaspoon of this product to get the listed SPF30 and some coverage, so you'll go through it faster. I've always been a fan of NARS's simple, sleek packaging, and this black squeeze tube is no different.

Natural light on top, flash on the bottom. From left to right: Buxom Show Some Skin Foundation in Tickle the Ivory, NARS Pure Radiant Tinted Moisturizer in Finland, NARS Radiant Creamy Concealer in Chantilly, Sephora Bright Future Gel Serum Concealer in 03 Fondant.

I went for the lightest shade in the range, Finland, which is listed as the palest shade with yellow undertones. I think the undertones look a bit peachy, and it's closer to NC15 than my usual base product choices, but it was workable for me. I'm more disappointed by the darker end of the range: there are only a couple of deep shades, and the gaps between them are pretty big. Given the shade ranges on their more recent launches, I know NARS can do better.

This is a tinted moisturizer, so I didn't expect much coverage. However, this product definitely gave me a more even, healthy-looking complexion, and he also concealed the pink post-inflammatory pigmentation I had on my cheeks. It generally looked smooth and natural on my skin, but it clung a little to the dryer parts of my face, especially my chin and the lower half of my cheeks.

The NARS tinted moisturizer also has a strong perfume-y scent that I could smell as I applied it. I didn't notice it throughout the day, but it was potent enough to make me go "ugh" while I rubbed it in.

Despite the strong fragrance and the bit of clinging, I really liked how this tinted moisturizer made my skin look shortly after application. It photographs beautifully, especially on a cell phone, and it looks incredibly natural. I definitely noticed the shine appearing on my nose around the 3 hour mark, but it still looked good. Then we get to the 8 hour photo, and wow, when is the last time you ever saw my face look that shiny?! (There's a secret part of me that wants to love the shine, since my skin is so dry that it only looks that shiny after I've applied moisturizer, but the logical side of me knows it's not a good look.) Besides the shine, you can also see that the tinted moisturizer has worn off of my nose completely.

I may have kept this tinted moisturizer for work days and just used a powder or a primer on my nose, but there's another problem: this irritated my skin. Every time I put it on, I would develop a new pimple or an angry hive within an hour. The ingredients list looks relatively benign, so if I had to blame anything for this, I'd blame the fragrance.

So I guess I can amend the introduction to this post: I'll be returning this tinted moisturizer and will therefore have purchased just one item from the recent Sephora sale. Hey, you gotta take your wins where you can get 'em.

RATING: 3 out of 5

I buy my NARS products from Sephora.

Charlotte Tilbury Mini Reviews

Charlotte Tilbury is a talented makeup artist, no doubt, but between her using the word "pop" a few too many times in her videos and her Into the Gloss interview that described wearing makeup to bed so her husband doesn't see her bare-faced, I've found it a bit hard to stomach her as a person. For a time, those feelings were transposed to her makeup line. I held off trying it for a couple of years.

Now that I have tried several products from the range, I have to admit that I'm impressed. Is every product as revolutionary and unique as she claims in her tutorials? Of course not; sometimes, a black eyeliner is just a black eyeliner. However, most of the range seems solid, and while there are some definite duds, there are also a few standouts that I would wholeheartedly recommend. So it's time to give them their due and write some mini reviews. (I've already written a full review of the Light Wonder Foundation, which you can read here.)

I purchased the Beauty Light Wand from Nordstrom earlier this year, and I gotta say, the hype is real. It's a beautiful champagne gold highlight that maintains a wet, glossy look even after drying down. It looks amazing in photographs and always garners compliments in real life. I've also used it on my eyes without any irritation or issues--your mileage may vary. I am a bit weirded out by the sponge tip applicator because you can't really clean it, but I like that you can lock the tube so it doesn't leak in your bag. It has become one of the stars of my highlighter collection.

The other three products mentioned in this review were sent to me by Influenster in preparation for Charlotte Tilbury's big Sephora launch. Let's start with the Hot Lips lipstick, which I expected to get in a more muted shade like Secret Salma and instead received in the very nude color Kim K.W. This is one of two satin shades in the range, and if by satin they mean "not matte," then okay, I'm fine with it. But for me, "satin" has always been between a true matte (with no shine) and a glossy, rich-looking cream, ie, most of the Besame Classic Color lipstick range. Charlotte Tilbury Kim K.W. has more of that plush look I associate with cream finishes.

Quibbling aside, it's a good lipstick. It feels comfortable on the lips, it isn't drying, and it photographs really well. It can look a bit smeary on me in real life, but I think that's just because the color is so light, and using a darker lip liner around the edges of my mouth definitely helps. That said, I won't spend $34 on another tube unless they make a shade I desperately want. It doesn't beat the aforementioned $22-a-tube Besame lipsticks, so it's not worth the extra $12 to me.

If any of the Charlotte Tilbury makeup products disappointed me, it was the Colour Chameleon Eye Shadow Pencil, which I received in the shade Champagne Diamonds. It's not awful, it's just...very meh. Based on the name and the description ("mineral, soft-focus effects transform and enhance eye color for a range of looks"), I expected something complex and versatile. What I got was a pretty but plain champagne color with some flecks of glitter, which looks ordinary and one-dimensional even in the above macro shots. Eh.

That said, the actual formula of the eyeshadow pencils is just fine. It's a bit dryer than I expected, but it applies smoothly and evenly, and it definitely sets. I had no issues with creasing, and I didn't notice any of the glitter dropping down on my face. Again, this is not something I'd purchase with my own money, but I'm not opposed to wearing it or recommending it. It's a wonderful product for long days at the office, for instance. I just expected a little more shade complexity from a $27 eyeshadow called Color Chameleon. I'll stick with the cheaper Butter London Glazen Eye Glosses for now.

Now...let's talk about the Magic Cream. I'm trying to be more restrained with my skincare snark, since I've gone through half a dozen bottles of a $24 cleanser that is objectively rather basic. But I think a $100 cream that claims to contain "patented anti-aging, hydrating, and youth-boosting ingredients" that can "fight the aging process" needs to back up its claims with more than run-of-the-mill cloggers. I'd joke that reading this ingredients list gave me nightmares if it weren't all so generic. Butylene glycol and glycerin are cheap-as-dirt moisturizers included in most affordable options. Dimethicone is a form of silicone, and it's often used in skincare to make it seem smoother and more softening than it really is. Shea butter is a lovely ingredient, but it clogs my face like crazy. So on and so forth. Basically, it's $100 worth of hype based off of a mixture of other moisturizers Charlotte used to slap on runway models' faces.

Even if I weren't rolling my eyes a little too hard at this cream, I wouldn't be impressed. As expected, it didn't patch test well on my face, but I could use it on my neck and hands. It was a wholly average moisturizer with a thick lotion texture that took some time to soak in, then provided adequate moisture. And that's it. I'm sorry, but for $100 a tub, you'd better make my dry-as-a-grilled-chicken-breast skin plump, soft, and super-hydrated.

The only thing I liked about Charlotte's Magic Cream was the soft baby powder scent that reminded me of my mother, and I only liked that smell when it was on my hands. I certainly wouldn't want my face to smell like that.

I know that three out of four mini reviews ending with "I wouldn't spend my money on it" sounds like a lot of negativity. It's not: the makeup is usually good, sometimes great, occasionally shit, just like most other brands. It's just that I have found cheaper products I like just as much (Besame lipsticks) or better (Butter London Glazen Eye Glosses), and in those cases, I'm always going to save a few dollars. The Charlotte Tilbury makeup products are still worth recommending, say, if you want a nice nude lipstick or a quick and easy eye color for work.

The skincare range? Not so much. I've looked at some of the formulas for other products, and I'll take a hard pass on trying those in the future.

Charlotte Tilbury products will be available at Sephora on September 13.

This product was sent to me by Influenster in exchange for an honest review.