Tag Archives: huge mac blush collection

MAC Skinfinish Colourstruck Blushes and Sunstruck Bronzers

Posted on by

Today’s post features the two makeup launches I’ve been the most excited about thus far in 2026!
Although I needed to Downsize My MAC Blush Collection, I have owned at least fifty different shades of their powder blushes within the past decade. My first MAC post, which covered nineteen of their blushes, currently has the highest amount of views on my blog. It’s thanks to that post, and the Follow-Up with an additional twelve shades, that I’ve been able to connect with many other people who love MAC’s blushes as much as I do! So, they have a special place in my heart.

I have to shout out NikkifromHR and TheMakeupPen as some of the bloggers I chat with about MAC!

When MAC started discontinuing shades from their “permanent” standard blush range in 2021, I knew it was only a matter of time before they revamped the line, but I had no clue it would take almost five years for that to happen! I also didn’t expect it would be three years before MAC relaunched the Sunstruck Bronzers.

MAC reused the model photos and swatch photos of the older Sunstruck Bronzers in the listings for the newer ones, in addition to them bearing the same shade names in the matte and radiant finishes. So, I don’t think there have been intentional changes to the bronzer colors.

Photo Credit: MAC Germany


Whether intentional or not, my version of Matte Rich Golden is slightly different. So, I will delve deeper into that in the bronzer review section.

The photos and videos I’ve seen, such as this one from lokalekatastrophe, have led me to believe some of the blush shades have been tweaked. Everyone’s version of Desert Rose looks lighter, for example on this reddit page. When I build up Raizin The Roof, I believe it can look pretty much like the original Raizin. However, Film Noir Buff is a muted brown-purple, unlike the original Film Noir that I believe had a reddish-purple tone, like in the YouTube short by CocoaSwatches.
I will do my best to share shade comparisons in the blush review section, but I don’t have access to my full collection anymore.

Skinfinish Colourstruck Blushes in Pony (radiant), Pink Flamingo (radiant), Thanks, It’s MAC (radiant), No Filter (radiant), Velvet Teddy (matte), Cheeky Chili (matte), Raizin the Roof (matte), and Film Noir Buff (matte)

MAC launched with 29 blushes in the Skinfinish Colourstruck line. I did not wish to repurchase shades I already own, so that narrowed down the list of blushes I wanted to buy. I created a table for anyone curious about which shades are completely new to MAC or might only exist in a different form, such as their lipsticks. My research was done to the best of my ability, but MAC has been around since before I was born, so I could have missed something.

Within the standard powder range, there used to be five categories: matte, sheertone, sheertone shimmer, satin, and frost. Now, there are just matte and radiant blushes.

It is said that the new matte version is intended to have a soft matte finish rather than flat. I’ve noticed that the Colourstruck mattes are smooth, but only softer than some of the older shades. The new blushes are a little less pigmented, apply the tiniest bit smoother (depending on which older shade it’s compared to), and leave some kickback, which may or might not be a significant amount depending on what kind of brush is used. Some of my older MAC blushes were hard-pressed and felt rough to the touch. Even without hard-pan, they became more difficult to pick up over time. However, some of my MAC blushes still feel silky and powdery to this day. I would be willing to buy replacements of my older blushes with a rough texture (such as Modern Mandarin and Frankly Scarlet), but none of my hard pressed ones got reformulated.

The radiant blushes are still nowhere near as glowy as the Extra Dimension Blushes. I would say the amount of shimmer is somewhere between the satin and sheertone shimmer level. When I’ve compared the swatches of the radiant blushes to the glowy blushes from other brands, MAC’s doesn’t look as shimmery. It’s only really when bright light is directly shining on my face that the sheen becomes obvious to see. I’ve complained about Gucci’s Glow Blush line not being glowy enough (review coming in perhaps 3 weeks), but I can say MAC’s Radiant Blushes are at least glowier than Gucci’s. Essentially, I view the Radiant line as satins, but it’s possible that the lighter shades could have more pearl in it, if MAC follows the trend in the past of having their frosty/highlighter-like blushes as mostly lighter colors. I would have to see those in person to know for sure.

Pony

I chose to show, in the photo above, how a single swipe of this blush looks prior to being smoothed out (like I did for the Colourstruck group swatch photo). For some reason, Pony picks up in chunks and has to be worked into my cheeks a bit to eventually appear as even looking as the rest of the blushes. By now, the top layer is completely flat, despite it being one of my least used blushes. The debossed “MAC” pattern still hasn’t worn away from any of the others!
I don’t know why this blush is so crumbly, but thankfully it only takes a little bit longer than the rest to blend in properly.

Over the past two years, I’ve been favoring nude/natural blush tones, but I suddenly found Pony very appealing. I can’t recall ever owning a blush this vibrantly pink before, though it does remind me a bit of MAC’s Sweets for My Sweet blush in the Extra Dimension finish.

Pink Flamingo

I still love corals, especially pink-coral over coral-orange, so this was another shade I couldn’t resist. Aside from the blushes I swatched above, Pink Flamingo also reminds me of Nars’ Orgasm X and MAC’s Cheeky Bits Extra Dimension Blush.

This shade and Pony look completely different in swatches, but they’re ultimately both pink blushes. They look similar on me, with the main difference being that Pink Flamingo is a bit lighter and warmer.
That being said, I’m still unable to choose between them, so I’m happy I bought both of them.

Thanks, It’s MAC

I had the hardest time deciding between Thanks, It’s MAC and No Filter. Essentially, this shade is a little more of a yellow-orange brown (as opposed to pink-brown) and it appears lighter than No Filter on my cheeks. I swatched it next to a lot of my warm brown blushes and was surprised how few dupes I could find, but Maiden’s Blush is quite close.
Thanks, It’s MAC reminds me of the Hushed Tone Extra Dimension Blush (that I stopped using in favor of Faux Sure). This is pigmented enough that I can easily see it in person, but it blends in a lot with my skin in photos.

I like this color, but I prefer Benefit’s Starlaa and Suqqu’s Kafuu (discontinued). It’s tied with YSL’s Nocturnal Nude (also discontinued). So, perhaps I could have skipped buying this one in hindsight, but I always feel compelled to buy a dark nude blush when I see one because of how uncommon it is to find one suitable for medium-dark skin.

No Filter

I can see some shimmer particles in the pan, but this blush can pass for matte if I only apply a sheer layer.

Because it’s a little deeper, pink-brown, and easier to see on my cheeks than Thanks, It’s MAC, I prefer this color. I like to think of it as a toned down version of Faux Sure, which is my most used MAC Blush, and just one of the most used blushes in my entire makeup collection! There was no way I was going to pass on getting this shade!

Velvet Teddy

This blush looks so faint in the photos of MAC’s models, so I assumed it wouldn’t show up on me. However, it does, and this is literally my favorite color out of all 29!
The brand describes this as a deep beige. It looks more like a light pink on my cheeks and creates a youthful flush. It was extremely difficult to try and get color accurate photos where the blush can actually be seen. It’s very much visible in person.

In some photos I’ve seen, it looks warm. Some photos it looks cool-toned. On my skintone, it can look warm or neutral. As with most of MAC’s blushes, the undertone of one’s foundation can affect how strongly those tones will actually look. That’s how I’m able to wear some of MAC’s cooler toned blushes without it clashing. These blushes are great for combining into each other to customize the depth and tone. Now that MAC’s blushes are less pigmented than before, they’re even better suited for layering together.

Cheeky Chili

MAC describes this color as, “warm brick red,” which is basically orange mixed with brick red. I expected it to be redder and resemble Burnt Pepper, which remains discontinued, but thankfully there’s also enough brown to keep the color from venturing too far into vibrant territory. Cheeky Chili still pops on my skintone, but isn’t the kind of bold orange that I dislike.

Raizin The Roof

This blush is a great reminder of how tastes change over time. I rarely ever used the original Raizin because I thought it was too deep and bruise-looking on my skintone. I could never figure out why I didn’t like it considering it’s a reddish-brown blush and I typically like those kinds of colors. However, I started using and liking it again just before the Colourstruck Blushes launched. Perhaps if I had the Sonia G Soft Cheek Brush or Rephr Kōyō back then, my mind could have been changed sooner.

Raizin the Roof is described as a golden reddish brown, and it being slightly less red than Raizin is why it initially looks lighter when compared. However, if I build up extra layers, they look nearly identical on me.

I know some people are disappointed that Raizin The Roof isn’t as richly pigmented as Raizin. Raizin used to be one of the most recommended blushes for people with a deep skintone, so I’m sure it’s hard to see changes made to such an iconic color. Selfishly though, I can’t help but be happy because Raizin The Roof is easier for me to use. I really like this shade. It’s also a nice “blonzer” shade to add a toasty sunkissed look across the forehead or bridge of the nose instead of bronzer.

The difference between Cheeky Chili and Raizin The Roof is that Raizin the Roof isn’t as saturated. They both have red, orange, and brown, but Raizin The Roof leans redder. I actually like mixing the two together so that the end result has calmed down the orange from Cheeky Chili, but pops more than Raizin The Roof does by itself.

If I had to choose between them, I would skip Cheeky Chili and just stick with Raizin the Roof. I’m just not as interested in orange, as evidenced by the fact that I left nearly all of my orange blushes behind when I was moving.

Film Noir Buff

I never owned the original Film Noir because it seemed too deep for me and I assumed it would be too red for my liking. However, Film Noir Buff is practically a muted purple-brown! MAC describes it as a “rich warm chocolate,” but those models on their website look like they’re rocking contours. I was thrilled when I noticed it had the potential to be my replacement for the purple contour/blush shade in ABH’s Gradient Blush Kit from 2017. I don’t have a single other blush like this in my collection because of that slight bit of purple. The closest comparison I can think of is the previous version of Dior Rosy Glow Blush in the shade Mahogany. That one had a similar depth level of brown, but also had some red from the ph-adjusting pigment. The tone of red was on the cooler side, but not quite in the same way as Film Noir Buff.

I’m confused as to why they call it “warm” when it’s listed as cool on their social media diagrams. Although Film Noir Buff does have some red in it (as it’s needed to make purple), there’s still some grey to cool it down.

In the photos above, I’m wearing no contour on the left. On the right, I used Film Noir Buff very lightly as contour. On my face, it’s like a muted red, but the depth level enhances the sculpted look. It’s more like a brontour.

It looks very red in these photos on my cheeks, and kind of pretty, but in person it looks like dirt. I don’t like it alone as blush, but it pairs beautifully with Velvet Teddy if I keep Film Noir Buff towards the back and Velvet Teddy mainly on the apples of my cheeks. So, this color is excellent for blush draping/soft contouring.

Some additional things I want to mention about the blushes overall is that the packaging was updated to be flat. They can now be stored flush next to each other or balanced in a stack without that domed lid. It’s more convenient to handle now, but it also looks a lot more generic.

In 2020, MAC blushes used to cost $25 per compact. So, $34 is quite a jump for even less product! In Germany, the full retail price is €34, but I found them less than a week after launch for as low as €25-€29 depending on the shade and retailer. I still find that to be expensive, but it’s a price I was willing to accept. I got some truly incredible deals on my old MAC blushes, so maybe that’s the cosmic tradeoff.

The longevity of the blushes are just as good. They don’t contain parfum. Other than Pony, these are easy to blend and work with while I’m using my regular products and skincare. However, if I’m wearing a gripping primer, a dewy sunscreen that leaves a slightly tacky residue, or some other product that makes my face essentially sticky, then I try to powder my face before applying these blushes. If I don’t do that first, then the blushes adhere a little too well and require more effort to blend.

I find MAC’s blush quality, whether matte or radiant, to be quite good. I do have blushes from other brands that are glowier, more blurring, even more finely milled, creamier and softer to the touch, etc. What has always pushed MAC powder blushes into holy grail status for me has been the shade offerings. Having so many dark-skin friendly options, especially less saturated ones and the variety of nudes, is why I’ve always regarded them so highly. I might be able to get a few of my favorite colors from a single brand, but only MAC has this many! The only other brands that come close are Fwee (though tough luck if you only want powder formulas) and Hourglass (for those who are around my skintone or lighter).

I’m happy with these new blushes, and I recommend them, but they aren’t something anyone needs to run out and immediately purchase. These may just be special to those seeking particular colors that are hard to find in a specific tone or depth.

Skinfinish Sunstruck Bronzers in Matte Rich Golden and Radiant Deep Golden

For those who may not remember, these bronzers launched on the 17th of March in 2023, were pulled two days later, and then made their return a month after. I don’t think the brand ever explained why, and it’s not as though MAC could have reformulated them that quickly before they returned to store shelves. I have more details and theories about it in my original review, but essentially how I was even able to order them was because I could add them to my cart using the quick shop feature. I wasn’t able to add them though the usual means and had just assumed it was a website glitch. Shortly after, the product page was missing, and so I thought perhaps MAC accidentally launched the bronzers earlier than planned. They did not cancel my order, and that’s how I ended up with two stinky bronzers!
I don’t mean that figuratively either. They literally had a terrible odor (like the vomit flavored beanbozzled jelly beans). Since the smell came and went for a while, I was hopeful that the smell would just eventually disappear. Nine months later, the worst part of the stink faded enough for me to be willing to bring one to Germany with me, but my fear of there being something wrong with it (actually rancid, contaminated ingredient, etc.) made me unwilling to use it that often. It felt like I was taking a gamble every time I used it, and the only reason I didn’t throw my original Matte Rich Golden away is because that has been the only yellow-golden bronzer I’ve ever found that was dark enough to show up on my skin year-round. I own neutral bronzers, ones that lean pink, orange, and red. However, all other yellow-golden ones are either the same color as my face (so basically invisible on me) or too light.

Three years later, my old Matte Rich Golden is nearly odorless, but still not 100% free of the smell. So, it’s no surprise that I decided to repurchase it in order to stop worrying about whether or not there is something wrong with it. Unfortunately, the new one is a warmer than the original version. If I keep the application super sheer, it passes for golden, but it looks orange when I build it up. I’m a bit disappointed about that, even though MAC at least improved upon the formula. It no longer darkens like crazy when I swatch it or wear it on top of a dewy base. I don’t see any other performance differences though in terms of smoothness, blendability, and longevity. The old and new ones are equally great, but I still have even better ones in my collection (though at twice the price). If this bronzer leaned more yellow than orange, I’d have put it in regular rotation!

If you’re around my skintone and prefer yellow bronzers as well, I’ve had better luck finding some in cream formulas, but by now they’re discontinued. One that’s still available is the Charlotte Tilbury Beautiful Skin Sun-Kissed Glow Cream Bronzer in Tan, but that is more on the yellow-olive side than yellow-golden.

Matte Rich Golden

*How orange Sienne appears depends on what proportions of the three shades in its pan are used.

I have mixed feelings about this bronzer based on the shade. While I’m happy about the performance aspects that improved, and I acknowledge that the color isn’t overly orange, the shade of the new version isn’t as unique to my collection. This means I won’t be reaching for it over my top ranked bronzers. It also means that I don’t feel like this replaces the old version.

Radiant Deep Golden

I made brush swatches, since the 2023 version of the bronzer darkens when rubbed with my finger.

As for my original Rich Rosy, the depth level was correct, but I didn’t think the color suited me. The only reason I didn’t get Radiant Deep Golden sooner is because I assumed it would look like a highlighter and be unable to bronze me. Unfortunately, mine seems to be inconsistently mixed. Sometimes, the base color is visible underneath all that shimmer and actually bronzes me. At other times, it does look like a highlighter!

The amount of shimmer is less than the Too Faced Sun Bunny Blushing Bronzer and the 2nd version of baked bronzer from Kosas. I’ve considered using Radiant Deep Golden as a bronzer topper to add radiance to a matte bronzer. Unfortunately, it is so hard-pressed that I get annoyed every time I use it. The powder is so stiff and rough that it feels like I’m wiping dirt off a clay tile while trying to get product onto my finger to photograph swatches. The surface is so hard that it feels baked. My natural hair brushes are too soft to pick up much product, and even my dense synthetic brushes require a lot of force to practically dig into the pan.

Even after I stopped swatching this bronzer with my finger, it continued to get hard pan until I scraped off enough of the surface to flatten the top layer. Now, I no longer have hard-pan, but I still can’t use this bronzer with my natural hair brushes. The surface is too tough.

Another strange thing is that this doesn’t wipe off my finger the way a normal powder does on my Makeup Eraser cloth. It grips almost like dried paint! Normally, a few swipes across the dry cloth is enough to clean my fingers between swatches. The exception is when it’s a pressed pigment or dye that stains my fingers. I can’t explain why the consistency of the new Radiant Bronzer is so much worse than my old one. At most, I’ve heard others say theirs is hard-pressed too (such as Audrey Michelle), but so was the 2023 version. It doesn’t seem like anyone else’s is as messed up as my new one. There’s hard pressed, and then there’s this…

Just like eyeshadows that stain my fingers when swatching, I can use a little Bioderma with the cloth to completely and easily remove it. It’s just unusual that I would have to do that with a bronzer that isn’t technically staining (just clinging like there’s too much binder or something in the formula).
Radiant Deep Golden adheres to my face in a way that makes it a little challenging to blend out, but I can at least remove most of it with a dry cloth.

Considering my issue with the blush-half of the Too Faced Sun Bunny Blushing Bronzer and my issue with Tom Ford’s Soleil Bronzer specifically in the shade Panarea, I don’t think I simply got unlucky to have gotten a dud. Something is going on with these Estee Lauder bronzer reformulations!

The bronzers cost $35 in 2023, and are now just $36. That’s about €31 in Germany, but for some reason they are actually €47 ($55) here. I’m not sure why MAC hiked up the price so high for the bronzers, yet didn’t raise it as much for the blushes.
The matte bronzer formula is worth getting on sale, but I absolutely don’t recommend the radiant bronzers. I know some people are loving theirs, and my experience with this botched bronzer is not the norm. However, I still thought the 2023 matte bronzer was superior to the radiant ones back then. I suspect it would be the same for the 2026 bronzers, even if I had a “good” one.

If you’re darker than me with a golden undertone too, I recommend trying Antique Velvet as a bronzer. It has more warmth than Film Noir Buff, and the shimmer in the blushes are more refined than the shimmer in the Radiant Bronzers (or at least it’s more refined than my messed up bronzer).

That’s everything for this week’s post! Thank you so much for stopping by!

-Lili ❤

MAC Black Panther, Holiday ’22, and More

Posted on by

We’ve got ourselves another MAC Cosmetics post! These are the products from MAC that I purchased during the final few months of 2022. I’ll begin with the two item types I haven’t purchased or reviewed from MAC before, but the blushes and highlighters are formulas I’m very familiar with and will probably not have much new to add. For those interested in my previous MAC posts, the list with links can be found on this index page here.

Additional MAC Items

MAC Glow Play Lip Balm in Floral Coral

This is one of a few items I redeemed as a free birthday gift from MAC’s Reward Program. It’s a sheer product in a soft formula. The top layer of the bullet instantly melts when it touches my lips. If I apply the amount of balm to my lips based on how it feels, I get almost no color. I can build it up to show a pink tinge, but the amount I need to apply for that leaves my lips feeling excessively wet in a way that isn’t quite greasy or oily, but it’s a similar enough sensation that is uncomfortable for me. After I wear it for a short time, it gives me the feeling of dripping around the edges and a strong urge to wipe it off.

For this reason, I haven’t been using this beyond the handful of times I wore it to test it out. And even though it feels moisturizing, my lips aren’t actually being conditioned. The moisture lasts a few hours before I feel like I need to reapply, even if there’s still some balm left on my lips.
If I want to wear a slightly colorful balm for a short time, like in photos, this is fine. If I want a balm that’s actually lip conditioning and having color isn’t a necessity, I’d reach for plenty of other balms instead. So, I don’t really recommend this. According to a sneak peek I saw on IG, MAC might be releasing a Valentine collection of new and/or existing shades of Glow Play Lip Balms and other lipsticks. I won’t be purchasing them.

MAC Studio Fix Fluid SPF 15 Foundation in NC47

This was a Black Friday purchase when MAC had 40% off complexion. The pump for this foundation is sold separately, and unfortunately was full price. I wish the package with the pump came with an extra cap that could fit over the foundation instead of the little dispenser cover piece because I always lose tiny parts to makeup and skincare (like the little spoons to scoop out products in jars).

With “fluid” in the name, I expected this foundation to be watery like the Uoma Beauty Say What Foundation or Kosas Tinted Face Oil, but it’s more viscous than those while still managing to feel lightweight on the skin. MAC describes it as being a, “buildable, medium to full coverage [foundation] in a natural matte finish.” While I agree with the buildable claim, the amount I would normally pump out and blend in with my Blendiful gives me light coverage, and I have to use quite a bit more product in order to get a solid medium. I can technically build it up to nearly full, but I have to focus on targeting my areas of discoloration specifically, and at that point it can look a little mask-like since it’s not my absolute perfect shade. So, I keep it at a nice medium and use concealer in the areas I need more coverage.

Additional photos of me wearing this foundation, under a different lighting situation (using my ring light), is in the highlighter section.

When I wore it the first time, I thought it was a pretty good color match, but upon subsequent usage and building it up to medium-full coverage, I realized it’s about a half a shade off in depth and it’s my correct undertone family but not perfect. The fact that I can wear it at all is quite surprising because I remember a time when I tried a sample of NC47 and it was too light for me, but the next shade NC50 was way too dark. I figured the hypothetical NC48 shade (if it existed) would be my perfect shade, but apparently NC47 can work for me in winter. Since I plan on wearing this at medium coverage level, it’s good enough of a match for me to keep it in rotation.

I do like the natural-matte finish of the foundation. It’s supposed to be sweat and humidity resistant, but I challenge that as well, since I managed to look sweaty on a day that was only 75 degrees Fahrenheit outside (and even colder in the house) when all I was doing was taking blog photos and rearranging my makeup drawers in the span of under two hours. It makes me wonder how this will look on me in the summertime when it’s between 85-98 degrees.
After I noticed how it was looking, I powdered my face (I initially skipped that step) and that helped to take away the extra shine. The other days I wore it were not hot days and I wasn’t doing anything that would make me produce sweat, so my face remained looking matte even without powder. So, I’m not sure what to make of those results. I will say that I love the fact that this sets on me to the point of being dry to the touch without a trace of wetness/creaminess and no transfer on my fingers that I can see. I love my natural and dewy foundations, but those usually come at the price of various levels of being transferable. I’ve had to train myself to just not touch my face and to be careful when switching outfits and hugging people. It’s actually a relief to have a foundation with some coverage again that I don’t have to be so careful with. I just wish they had my full on perfect shade in depth and undertone.

This is a pretty nice foundation. I like it, but I still prefer my Rose Inc and Estee Lauder Futurist Hydra. I can also think of past Nars Foundations and the original Makeup Up For Ever HD and Ultra HD that I preferred as well when I owned them. I haven’t been using this very long, and normally I don’t review a foundation until I’ve worn it at least 10 times, so there’s still room for my opinion to change. If that happens, I will try to remember to update this post.

My Latest MAC Highlighters

I make it a point now to try and make my MAC purchases via Selfridges because of the price difference being in favor of USD, or from MAC’s website when they have a sale of 30% off or higher. However, it was only the MAC Indulgent Glow Face Kits that came to Selfridges, so I had to purchase the others elsewhere. Of course, I could have waited until a potential sale for the collaboration items, but I didn’t want to take the chance of them selling out, so I purchased the Black Panther Royal Challenge and Whitney Houston ones at launch. I did at least get 20% off on Black Panther’s Royal Vibrancy when I bought that one from Ulta. At the time I’m posting this, the Black Panther Collection is on a deeper discount on MAC’s website, along with last year’s holiday items.

For those who may be curious, in all four highlighter photos I’m wearing the MAC foundation in NC47, The Anastasia Beverly Hills Cream Bronzer in Terracotta (newest shade addition to the line that came out after my review), and the Pat Mcgrath Divine Rose III blush.

MAC Indulgent Glow Face Kit/Set in Sparkling Wine

These kits came in two versions: Sparkling Wine and Rosé. I was impressed by the presentation of the box in a beautiful creamy light pink color and with a raised pattern on the surface.

The bag the items come in is quite cute. I haven’t found a purpose for it yet, but it’s a nice “free” addition considering MAC Extra Dimension Highlighters have risen in price to $40 (or $44 for collaboration versions). This set being $44 normally, means the bag and brush that come with it are essentially free. I paid $35 for it from Selfridges, so the deal was even better.

I didn’t have high expectations for this brush, but it actually surprised me!
The more deeply shaped and intricate the embossed pans are from MAC, the harder it will have been pressed. That makes the top layer a bit tougher to pick up product from when using softer bristle brushes. This one feels soft, but the strands themselves are strong enough to really dig into the highlighter while still dispersing the product softly across the skin. Rather than following the direction of the brush, I swirled it roughly in the pan in a circular motion to get the most product pickup with the least effort.
I’ve used this brush enough times that it softened the surface of Sparkling Wine, so I can now pick up the product with my natural hair brushes. Prior to that top layer being broken into, it was extremely difficult.

I’ve also used this brush to apply blush and bronzer in a sweeping motion and it’s pretty good with those as well!

The highlighter embossing encapsulates the “Bubbles and Bows” theme MAC chose for holiday 2022.
MAC Highlighters tend to be smooth to the touch, but even when I rub my finger across the smoother part of the bow, it feels slightly rough and dry. However, it has such a healthy glowy sheen with a few twinkling sparkles that are just enough for me to feel like this is a festive highlighter I would want to wear to a holiday event, and not enough to be considered glittery. This contains medium size sparkles instead of large ones, which is probably why I actually find them to be quite pretty and wearable.

Ever since Fenty’s Trophy Wife highlighter came into being, I have feared pigmented deep yellow highlighters because of how terrible they look on me. So, I was afraid this one might be too yellow because of the way it looks in the pan, but then my fear switched to worrying it might be too light after seeing the swatch. However, on the face, it looks so pretty to me! Sparkling Wine has a semi-transparent base with just a hint of a yellow tinge to it. The color that peeks through blends with the undertone of my skin while not being pigmented enough to cause a stripe with the low amount of product I apply to my face. It also balances out the pearly looking particles within the highlighter. It looks lighter than Royal Challenge in swatches because the color of the inside of my arm is lighter than my face, but on my cheeks, the fact that Royal Challenge has a more pigmented and lighter base color gives it the lighter appearance, whereas Sparkling Wine’s slightly tinted base allows my darker cheekbone color to show underneath which makes it look darker than Royal Challenge overall. I really like this! As the embossing starts to wear down, I know I’m going to struggle with that part of me that doesn’t want to ruin it versus the side that wants to make sure I get good use out of the products I own. However, this embossing is lingering quite well so far, so I guess I have a ways to go before I need to start worrying!

MAC x Whitney Houston Extra Diminision Skinfinish in Just Whitney

This is another highlighter that was hard-pressed in a way that just affected the very topmost layer and is now getting easier to use as the print is fading. And, once again, I’m reaching the point where I want to keep it intact, but want to be able to wear it. This is slightly smoother and less drying feeling than Sparkling Wine. It’s certainly closer to the kind of deep golden highlighter shades I tend to prefer to wear. Just like all my other highlighters from the brand, this lasts all day and remains shiny without losing its reflectivity as the day goes on. It’s a solid product, but because it’s the most common type of color in my collection, I instinctively compare it to everything else I own, and then it doesn’t seem quite worth the $44 price tag. If the highlighter was in standard packaging, I believe it should be within the $28-$35 range. Because of the collaboration with such a powerhouse of an icon (or at least Whitney’s Estate on her behalf), the pretty limited edition packaging, and the highlighter embossing, the special factor is there. So, I don’t mind it being the price I paid, but I’m just not sure this particular color being added to my collection would be worth it otherwise. For anyone else though, I would recommend it with the acknowledgement that it could be considered a bit overpriced.

MAC x Black Panther Extra Dimension Skinfinishes in Royal Challenge and Royal Vibrancy

I still haven’t watched the Black Panther sequel, but I loved the first one, so I felt an inward obligation to purchase at least one thing from the collection. I tried to purchase the Black Panther Cosmetic Bag, but that was an utter mess. Even though I purchased it at 2am EST (I assume it launched at midnight), my order ended up canceled due to being “sold out,” but they didn’t cancel it until three weeks later after it was sold out at other retailers too. The most irritating part is that I called them about nine days in to ask them about the fact that they priced it at $35 whereas everywhere else had it for $25 and then they later changed the price to $25, but I hadn’t been reimbursed. That call, had the bags truly been out of stock, would have been the prime moment for them to let me know there weren’t any left and to cancel my order so I could have time to buy it somewhere else. However, they didn’t do that, so I don’t believe their statement to me about the bag being out of stock since the launch day, yet it somehow took weeks until it read “sold out” on the website.

Anyway, these two shades are gorgeous, but a better combination for me is to have Royal Challenge on the bottom and a little bit of Royal Vibrancy added on top. That way, I can get some of that darker shimmer without the dark cast when I turn my head at certain angles. In photos, Royal Vibrancy looks perfect for me, but I’ve been unsuccessful in capturing the dark cast I’m referring to from it being a little too deep bronze-red for me.

The texture feels soft and smooth. It’s softer than the others, but it’s also not as hard pressed because the embossing isn’t as detailed/intricate. Also, it’s lasting me quite a while. I forgot to take a photo of Royal Vibrancy prior to being used (or at least I lost the photos of it if I took them) so the picture I included above shows it after about eight uses and it looks nearly untouched! Granted, I was swiping highlighter across the entire pan and not just zeroing in on one specific spot in order to keep it looking even.

At the same time that I purchased these two, I also bought the Tom Ford Shade Illuminate Highlighting Duo in Tanlight that reminded me of a combination of those shades. However, in swatching them together, I see that the tones are slightly different. The lighter shade in Tanlight is more flattering on me than Royal Challenge and the deeper shade is not as dark, and therefore works on its own for me better than Royal Vibrancy. Most of the time I just mix the two Tanlight shades together for a highlighter shade I love a lot and it’s in an even smoother finish than the ones from MAC. Considering I paid around the same price for Tanlight (it was slightly discounted at Nordstrom) as the two MAC highlighters combined, it’s funny that the Tom Ford one was the better purchase for me. However, I also bought these as Black Panther/Wakanda Forever merchandise, so I don’t regret it.

While I could have waited for these highlighters to go on a deeper discount, I like the franchise and didn’t want to chance missing out. So, for me, these were worth having. I think I will stop using Royal Vibrancy though, in order to keep one looking pristine, and just start using Royal Challenge mixed with a different darker highlighter, such as the R.E.M. Interstellar Highlight in Miss Mars.

My Latest MAC Blushes

I currently have 35 MAC blushes in my collection (this number fluctuates as I get rid of some and purchase others) which is by far the most blushes I own from a single brand. Despite having so many, I can’t help but remain interested in them because MAC makes some of my favorite finishes, plus they’re pigmented, and are very long wearing. These four I’m discussing today are the remaining few that hadn’t been reviewed yet on this blog.

MAC Glow Play Blushes in Just Peachy and Groovy

That’s Peachy was the other free birthday item I chose. Based on how it looks, I thought there was no way it would show up on my skin. However, I felt the same way about Peaches ‘N’ Dreams, which ended up working on me too, so I tried it on a whim and was floored! Granted, I have to build it up a ton to get a flush of peach, but it still works and I think it’s beautiful!

Groovy looks like a deep coral-orange on me, and thankfully not a pure orange. As much as I love Heat Index, which was previously my favorite shade, Groovy dethroned it after just once use. I avoided getting this color for a long time because Nikki and a few others mentioned the formula difference in Groovy compared to the other Glow Play Blushes. It’s been a few years now since the Glow Plays launched (January 2020), so I think the original disappointing batch of Groovy are no longer being sold. Or at the very least, I was lucky and got one with the same texture as the others. I was more willing to chance it because I waited for a 40% off sale on blushes.

The Glow Play line remains one of my favorites from MAC and in general because they have the softness and sheen of a cream/putty with the benefit of drying down. They’re buildable and blend right into the skin. It’s a really gorgeous product that I highly recommend trying for those who haven’t.

Because there are such subtle differences among the shades I own, I figured it would be helpful to show the ones I own all together and in swatches.

And for those who like limited edition packaging, MAC currently has the shades Heat Index and So Natural in their Lunar New Year 2023 packaging for their “New Year Shine” collection.

MAC Mineralize Blush in Hey, Coral, Hey…

I included a picture of how the blush looks on my finger, plus a swatch that isn’t fully blended, to demonstrate my issue with this particular Mineralize Blush. The deep reddish-coral pigment is gorgeous and is a tone that looks pretty and suitable for me when I pick it up, but it’s got a light base powder that when blended lightens the shade overall and turns it ashy on my skin. This is even evident looking at the surface of the blush itself between the darker and lighter patches. It’s not super ashy, but just enough on the cusp to make me not want to wear it.

I’ve had issues with most of the Mineralize Blush shades I’ve tried in the past (and said it looked too matte and dry and lighter on my skin than it looks in the compact), and now I’m starting to wonder if the base color in this particular line of blushes from MAC is the reason most don’t work for me. Love Thing and Flirting with Danger are currently the only two that I’ve liked and don’t look ashy on me because the pigment is deeper than I’d normally wear, but is more toned down and lighter when blended on my actual cheeks. It’s unfortunate that it took me buying six of them to finally realize why some shades of Mineralize Blushes work for me, yet others don’t. But, I’m happy that now I know that if MAC creates more colors in this formula, it’ll be safe for me to get them as long as they are the deepest ones (and deeper colors than I normally go for). Any of the colors that look medium-dark or lighter in the compacts just won’t work for my skin tone.

Hey, Coral, Hey… isn’t staying in my collection, but I still recommend the Mineralize Blush line overall, as long as it’s well established to be careful selecting the right colors if you have a dark/deep skin tone. The two shades that work for me are in my top favorites, not just among MAC blushes but among my blush collection as a whole.

MAC x Stranger Things Powder Blush in He Likes It Cold

This color makes me think of MAC’s Flirting with Danger and Frankly Scarlet blush shades. I’ve tried several times to capture the variations in undertone, but they barely show a difference on my skin tone. I retook the photos again, but had to do brush swatches because my older powder blushes from MAC really don’t like to be finger swatched anymore. Nikki, who I’ve mentioned several times here, did a clear comparison of those three shades that can be found here on her blog for those interested, as well as a ton of other MAC content and more. Essentially, the undertone of those shades are going to make a bigger difference if you’re lighter than me (and then perhaps on the other end of the spectrum, if you’re much deeper).

I tried my hardest to skip buying this blush because I had similar enough shades to it, but I think I ended up paying $15 for it when it went on sale, so I couldn’t resist. This release celebrates Stranger Things Season 4, but I only watched seasons 1-3, so I don’t understand the “He Likes it Cold” reference (but it sounds creepy). It’s a pretty color, applies smoothly (even smoother than MAC’s older matte powder formula), and performs as fantastically as I expect from a MAC blush, so I’m happy I bought it. I just caution using a light hand with this particular shade.

That’s everything for today! I’m on another year long low-buy, so I would love to say it will be a long time before I do another MAC post, but that feels unrealistic as it’s one of the brands I purchase from the most. It can be expected that additional new releases from MAC will be reviewed here at some point, if not at launch, then perhaps after a big sale.

Thank you for reading!

-Lili ❤

Disclaimer: Other than free birthday gift items everyone who joins MAC’s free reward program is entitled to (I can’t recall if you need to be a certain tier for it though), I purchased all the other items with my own money. I am not affiliated with the brand. There are no affiliate links in this specific post.