Wednesday, May 4, 2011

FOLLOWUP ON It! Cosmetics Bye Bye Undereye....Its falling into the PASS category.


I have given this a couple go-arounds now, and even several months before coming back around at it, and I am NOT impressed, not at all. I am wondering what product(s) were actually used on the models on the QVC presentation because the consistency and the total lack of opacity does not jive with the results they showed on the presentation--at all.

Its like a ...wet, gellish, slightly greasy texture, but it's annoyingly sheer on the skin. But then I just spotted the words BUILDABLE COVERAGE on the packaging, which is an automatic FAIL for a concealer. Concealers should be opaque, because they're designed, in theory, to COVER THINGS. So why in the hell would anyone want a "buildable" concealer? Make it opaque out of the tube and quit wasting the time and money of everyone needing to cover things.  I cannot even imagine using this on a zit, not only would it not cover it, it wouldn't stay put, and probably would make the zit a million times bigger.

On it's own the coverage is..well...laughably awful. It just simply does not cover anything on it's own. It requires many, many, many coats to start making a dent in anything.  It also requires powder to set, or it just never dries.

When I layer it with the Mary Kay which IS almost opaque, one of the rare ones that is, it seems to help boost the blending ability of the Mary Kay, but obviously sheering it out. It does assist in the setting power, where I still need powder, but not right away.  I mixed the two on my hand this morning after doing a side by side with one on each eye, and that was a little better. But the color it created was great.

All in all, it's getting a big ole pass from me.  I don't get the point of paying over $20 for a tube of a concealer that doesn't really conceal anything.

No comments:

Post a Comment

What do you think?