[soft bright music]
- A good quality eyeshadow should be easy to apply
have great color payoff,
and avoid creasing in the eyelid area.
So today, Allure's giving me some mystery eyeshadows
and challenging me to guess which ones are most expensive.
[bright music]
So eyeshadow A definitely has
what we call specialty pigments.
Specialty pigments are those that do things
beyond just offering like a base color and coverage.
They could be iridescent
or duochrome, having two different shades.
They can have a color shift and that usually means
more expensive 'cause specialty pigments
can easily go up to be like $700 a kilogram.
In this case, this glitter has
a almost peachy pink to violet blue color shift to it.
And eyeshadow B also has some specialty pigments,
but they seem to be larger particle in that
it's in the glitter itself, like the plastic
and not any sheer or mica pigments
that are also in the shadow with it.
Glitter eyeshadows should have a hexagonal shape
if you look at it under a microscope.
If it's circular or even square, that can cut into the eye,
which is why you shouldn't use craft glitter
on your face because that one is not hexagonal shape.
So as I'm zooming in on A, I see very few hexagonal shapes.
So it looks like most of the shadow's made up of micas
or some maybe silica and mica and silica, of course,
they're minerals and in this case,
the minerals aren't like uniformly shaped
because you see all these tiny particles
that are kind of jagged,
but you can occasionally see a hexagonal shape that's bigger
and that's kind of pink in color.
So that lets me know that that is
in fact the glitter particle, but there's not much of it.
I don't think that's a high-priced eyeshadow
because if you're paying for a glitter shadow,
you want glitter.
And for sample B,
I'm definitely seeing more of the hexagonal shapes.
In this case, the color is blue
and notice that the silicas, the silicates, the micas,
like the smaller particle shapes
are a little bit more uniform
and smoother on the edges, less jagged.
And this seems to be like the higher quality,
higher-priced option because you have
way more glitter particles that are visible.
Glitter eyeshadows typically are made from plastic glitters.
Plastic naturally does not stick to skin well
so it has to have good adhesion
and it also has to be free from irritation
because oftentimes, glitter eyeshadows
are made with film formers that are dissolved in alcohol
or other solvents that can be irritating to the eye.
Product A, initial thoughts.
Mm, kind of patchy.
And in terms of the texture, it applied fine.
I'm noticing a slight warming sensation
so there's probably some film formers in here.
The purpose of the film former is to prevent the glitter
from flaking off.
Because it's such a large particle,
it has a hard time staying on the eyelid.
Now we're going to apply eyeshadow B.
This one definitely has a bit more coverage
and you can definitely see more
of the larger glitter particles.
And the other thing to look out for with glitter shadows is
that they can tend to clump because of the larger particle.
So I'm trying to see how easy it is to break up
those clumps with the brush.
So after the visual analysis and the application,
I feel like sample B is the higher quality
and more expensive shadow because as you can see,
it offers significantly more coverage.
It was more comfortable on the eye
and also this was easier to blend.
Let's look at some prices.
Starting with A.
Oh wow, 4.99, that's a pretty good price
for the shadow.
And B, $25.
B is the winner.
Going off for the ingredient list,
it's clear that there was like less glitter
in sample A versus sample B because the second ingredient
in sample A is Calcium Aluminum Borosilicate.
The Borosilicates were those jagged, varied-shaped,
smaller particles that we were looking at
versus the third ingredient,
which is the actual plastic glitter.
And we compare that to sample B.
The second ingredient is the glitter itself,
Polyethylene Terephthalate, in this case.
And the third ingredient in simple B
are the Borosilicate particles.
[upbeat music]
The differentiating factor between a powdered metallic
and a standard glitter is the particle size.
Powdered metallics are typically made
of finely-milled mica or borosilicate
or some mineral that gives you that nice even,
smooth coverage while still having a metallic sheen to it.
[upbeat music]
Initial impression, A is chunkier
and almost has like a glazing effect.
Glazing is when you have a large amount
of oil pulling up from the shadow itself.
We typically try to avoid glazing regardless
of how much you're spending on eyeshadow,
but it does happen especially in lower-priced shadows.
Shadow B has a more uniform texture to it.
[upbeat music]
The main things to look for
in a powdered metallic eyeshadow is how well it blends
and avoid creasing in the eyelid area.
Shadow A, in terms of picking up on the brush,
it kind of like broke apart a little bit,
which lets me know it's not going to be
the smoothest application, kind of applies
almost like glitter where there's some specks that fall out,
like half of it fell off of the brush,
but once I blended it out,
it came out more even and uniform, but still kind of sheer.
And now for shadow B,
this one sticks to the brush a lot better.
Oh yeah, that's definitely more pigmented
and it goes on much smoother.
So far, I think shadow B is the higher-quality item
because it had an easier application
and it had more coverage.
Now we're going to do what's called an oil test.
Basically we're going to take a skin-like oil, in this case,
a jojoba oil, and apply it to my wrist
and then apply the shadow on top.
This is to see how well and how likely
the shadow is to crease.
And because these are metallics and are already made
with mica, mica is a really great oil-absorbing agent.
I'm trying to recreate an oily eyelid in the area
that creases really easily and now I'm just flexing my wrist
back and forth just to see if I see any like creasing
or bunching in the center.
So far, I'm pretty good.
There is some slight creasing
in this divot here.
Okay, now for eyeshadow B.
And I notice when I'm picking up with my hand,
it has a very dry texture to it.
I'm not noticing much creasing here
except a slight line right there, but it's barely visible.
I'm not really feeling either of these shadows in terms
of application because they both were kind of dry
and crumbly upon just touching it
with your finger and they both kind
of bunched in the eyelid a little bit when blending it out.
So I think B is the winner here,
but by a very narrow margin.
It applied better.
It still had better coverage.
Also, shadow B did not have as much creasing
compared to shadow A when performing the oil test.
And now for the big reveal.
Shadow A,
$10, not bad,
and shadow B,
this is not worth $32.
It is the winner.
It is like the higher quality, higher-priced item
but because it bunches and how dry it was,
no, [laughs] I would rather have shadow A in this case
because you're getting the full price that you're paying
for versus this should be a lot smoother,
more luxurious in terms of how you apply it.
All right, looking at the ingredients.
Sample A is mica based and so is sample B,
but sample B uses a synthetic mica
called synthetic fluorphlogopite.
That's worthy of note
because synthetic mica tends to be more expensive
because it's created in a lab
versus natural mica that's mined
and oftentimes it has an unethical source.
So if you want something ethical,
you should have to pay more
for it because it's fair labor practices.
So that does justify the price a little bit more.
But you can definitely get synthetic fluorphlogopite
for less than $32.
Matte eye shadows are matte
because they're mainly made of pure pigment.
The mattes are pretty neon, which lets me know it has a type
of pigment called lake pigments.
Lake pigments are usually 30% dyes.
Dye stain pigments cover,
which is why sometimes you have eyeshadows
that stain your eyelids.
Pallete B also has some bright colors, but they're not quite
as neon and this one actually has a red.
That's interesting because it's kind of hard
to get a nice, full coverage red for eye makeup.
That's because you're limited in the pigments.
If it's iron oxides, the mineral pigments,
they're not very bright, but you get coverage from them.
However, if it's red 40,
it tends to be sheer and it always tends to pull orange.
Or you could use carmine
which is a nice purplish red but isn't vegan.
For the purposes of assessing the coverage,
I'm only focusing on these two shades just because the red
and the orange tend to be harder to get full coverage.
And the purpose of matte is
for it to be a nice, solid, flat color.
So that's the main quality we're gonna be evaluating
in terms of which one is the higher-priced item.
Shadow A, I'm going in with a narrow brush
to pack that pigment on.
So this color on my skin is more on the sheer side,
but still a nice, pretty color and it blends pretty easily.
So this color, while pretty, isn't nearly as vibrant
as I expected it to be because in the actual palette,
it's super bright and neon and bold.
But on my skin it's kind of subdued.
And that's something to note
because a lot of times when they're formulating shadows
they don't consider a wide variation
of skin tones when they're determining how well
it should blend and look on the skin.
All right, now let's apply shadow B.
I'm not really impressed with either of these colors.
Again, they both have a soft pastel look to it,
but they're not neon.
I'm putting on my lab coat
because we're about to do a very messy test.
What I'm looking for is how likely it is to bleed
into the alcohol and how much is left
at the bottom as sediments.
If there is a high concentration of color in the solution,
that lets me know that there is a high concentration
of lake pigments and a higher concentration
of the lake pigments usually means
a more expensive palette.
Solely going off of initial impressions,
A definitely has some lake pigments
because it's starting to stain the alcohol solution
almost immediately, whereas B has a slight tint,
but it's not concentrated.
But we're gonna let both of these sit
for two hours to give it time
for the lake to bleed into the solution of alcohol.
So looking at sample A,
there is a high concentration of dye in this solution.
As you can see,
like there's very little sediment at the bottom,
which lets me know that this one is definitely made
from some lake dyes and probably a large amount of it.
It might be a higher-priced eyeshadow
because lake pigments tend to be more expensive
than other types of pigments.
Now looking at eyeshadow B,
there is far more sediment at the bottom
and the color in the solution is not as concentrated.
So this might have lake pigments
but not as much as sample A.
So this one is tough because neither
of them had the coverage I was expecting.
They both had similar application.
Shadow A has more lake pigments in it.
So off of that alone,
I'm gonna say eyeshadow A is the higher-priced one.
This one is
wow, $49,
and this one,
$20.
Okay, that makes sense.
Neither of these lived up to my expectations,
but because this one has some bright neon colors,
that explains why it's more expensive.
I don't like that they weren't really inclusive
in terms of the payoff for darker skin tones.
And that happens a lot in labs
because if the lab doesn't have any dark-skinned individuals
there's no way for them to test it
because they really rely on the contract manufacturer
or the chemist to do the testing but the chemist
is one shade, that's all the shadow is being based off of.
Let's look at the ingredients.
So looking at sample A, I was right.
There are definitely lake pigments in this color.
As you can see, there's carmine, red 6, red 28,
red seven lake, red 30 lake,
red 40 lake, yellow 5 lake, yellow 6 lake.
Yeah, this is a bright pallete.
Sample B on the other hand only has yellow 5 lake,
red 40 lake, and blue 1 lake.
Liquid eyeshadows can typically be broken up
into either water based or oil based.
The water-based ones tend to dry or set faster,
you know, producing a transfer resistant film on the skin,
but they also tend to be a little bit more irritating
because you have to add extra preservatives to account
for microbes that might grow in the water.
Things that are anhydrous or water free
don't typically need preservatives
like lip balms and lipsticks are often made
without any preservation system whatsoever
because microbes can't grow
in an environment that's absent of moisture.
So shadow A seems to have like
a mica-based kind of like metallic sheen to it
and it also tends to be more
of an attribute for water-based formulation
and oil-based that uses pure pigments.
And Shadow B also has some glitter mica particles in it.
So I'm thinking that these are both
water-based formulations just going off of how it looks
in the container itself.
And as far as color,
this is the more interesting combination
because it has a reflection
to it where you have this purple color,
but it has a golden reflectance making it
a specialty pigment and specialty pigments
are more expensive to produce versus shadow A
that has more of a solid tone.
It still has some slight reflection
but so far, it's not as interesting visually.
Now let's apply shadow A.
I'm looking to see if there's any burning
or irritation from the preservative system.
And there is some slight irritation.
The color is nice.
Again, not interesting, but it is still a nice solid color.
As far as dry-down time, it's important
that your liquid eyeshadow doesn't dry too quickly
because you don't have time to blend it with other colors
or if you want to do a smoky eye look
and add something on top, if it sets too quickly,
then it won't budge and blend in and mix in
with other shadow.
This one has a really moderate dry-down time.
I can still feel it's wet on the skin, so that's great
in terms of adding other colors on top if I wanted to.
Now for shadow B, this one also has some good coverage.
It's not as irritating as shadow A
and the dry-down time seems to be pretty good
'cause I'm able to go back over areas
to make sure it's fully blended and everything
is properly covered.
It also seems to be more opaque.
It's definitely shinier in terms of the sheen.
There's more light bouncing off of the eyelid.
Shadow B has the more interesting color,
but that doesn't necessarily mean it's the higher quality
or higher price.
That could just be the color option.
All right, now I'm going to soak a cotton round
in water and then wipe it.
If they're water based, it'll melt as soon
as the water touches it, but if it's oil based,
it'll kind of bead up on top.
Shadow A.
Yeah, a good chunk came off.
Now for shadow B.
Oh yeah, that one's definitely water-based.
If you're looking for a shadow that's easy to remove
at the end of the day,
you should go with a water-based liquid shadow.
If you're looking for more water-resistant shadow,
you should make sure that it's an oil-based formula
using something like isododecane's the first ingredient.
The other downside to a water-based formula is
if you're combining it with other makeup items
like concealer on your eyelid,
most concealers are oil based, so it may not appear well
with water-based shadow on top of it.
And I'll say for this category,
it was kinda hard to determine which one is more expensive
because they both had similar coverage.
They had similar dry-down time, similar application.
So based off of all the tests,
I feel like shadow A is the more expensive shadow
because it had a little bit of water resistance
whereas the other one came completely off,
which makes me think the only solvent in shadow B is water.
However, in terms of color, I prefer B.
But let's look at some prices.
Shadow A is
Woo, $36,
and shadow B,
$25, isn't surprising.
They're both in that mid-tier almost luxury-price category.
And as you go beyond 40 and $50, you're getting
in that luxury tier where you're expecting more
of a aesthetic and sensorial difference in application.
All right, now let's take a look
at the ingredient list to see
if these are both in fact water-based liquid shadows.
So sample B is a hundred percent water-based.
There's not really any oil-based ingredient in this formula.
The first ingredient, of course is water
whereas shadow A is kind of interesting.
It's like what we call an emulsion,
a combination of oil and water.
In this case we have water and then we have the isododecane
I mentioned earlier, and this kind of makes sense
because when I added water to the cotton round
and swiped it, only a fraction of it came off instead
of it completely coming off and completely staying put,
which lets me know it's more likely a combination
of oil and water.
And as I mentioned before,
they both had similar coverage and applications.
So the fact that they're kind of close in pricing
isn't surprising.
[upbeat music]