Thursday, June 23, 2011

Revlon PhotoReady Compact Makeup: Not As Easy As It Looks



Foundation. We wear it daily. We don't like applying it, but-----only the most flawless skin doesn't need foundation, just a bit of concealer. At least that is what professional makeup artists have told us.

And we DON'T have perfect skin. But what foundation does, is provide a balance to skin tone, a bit of warmth to complexion, a nice base on which to layer on blush, concealer, shadows, etc. Plus, foundation provides some coverage from the elements.

We wear Revlon's ColorStay Soft-Flex Foundation in Nude. It's a liquid for oily/combination skin. And it's the best for us, so far. We sample a number of foundations along the way, but this particular product has served us well. And it's not a bad match for our skin tone.

We were quite curious then, to try Revlon's PhotoReady Compact Makeup ($13.99, at drugstores). This ain't your mama's foundation, ladies. This is a high-tech compact makeup. It contains a liquifying screen that actually transforms the cream foundation into a iquid foundation for 'superior blendability.

Heck, we're all for that. But wait a minute-----------It's not as easy as it looks. From the photo we're providing of Revlon's PhotoReady, it would appear to be a simple makeup compact. But there's a certain technique you must use:

The cream makeup visibly liquefies as it filters through a screen (when pressed). Then it transforms into a weightless liquid for smooth, even coverage. A sponge applicator is used in the process.

It gets a bit messy trying to get the product out and onto your face. We're not wild about the screen. Revlon says to "Gently press on screen with sponge. Blend with sponge across face, starting in center of face blending outward." ... It's a very lightweight consistency And it takes some practice.

We give Revlon's PhotoReady high marks for its 20 SPF rating. That is great. Plus the finish to this foundation leaves a soft, airbrushed look. But we think we will stay with our Revlon ColorStay, instead.

No comments: