Revlon is more known for their ColorStay Longwear Makeup foundations, which I have both versions of, however, for my dry skin type this Illuminating Serum is more suited. There is also a foundation and liquid blushes in the same Illuminating range, but we only got the Serum Tint here in Slovenia and Croatia. It's meant to combine makeup and skin care in one, and Revlon boasts with claims it brightens the skin in time, with the power of added vitamin C and ginger. Like in a lot of foundations, the skin care ingredients are more towards the end of their ingredients lists. They added some niacinamide, hyaluronic acid, vitamin C in the stable form of Tetrahexyldecyl Ascorbate, trehalose, urea and ginger root extract. They included a modest SPF 15, which is even lower than they have in ColorStay foundation (oily-combination version has SPF 20). Despite the name I find this closer to a proper, albeit low covering, foundation in terms of coverage and it has quite a glowy look on the skin.

Texture: It's lightweight, liquid formula that reminds me of Maybelline Fit Me Matte + Poreless. It feels hydrating and doesn't set fast, so it's prone to wiping off if not set with powder. Application-wise, I find it performs best with a sponge. When I used my fingers, the finish wasn’t as smooth.

Coverage and finish: Coverage is light, verging on light-medium, so I wouldn't describe this as a tinted moisturiser on me, though some may want more coverage. All Revlon's other foundations I tried cover more. Finish is very glowy, with the shine lasting on the skin for hours. For that reason I find this formula best suited for dry skin and might appeal especially for those who think their skin looks dull and tired. It does tend to migrate into fine lines, which is it's main drawback, but a touch of powder over those areas helps keep it in place. It looks fresh and radiant, plus it looks more natural than their ColorStay formulas on my dry skin. It's a shame they didn't opt for an SPF 50 in this formula, that would make it brilliant.

Shade: I wear shade 117 which is a pretty great match for me, though this is a more forgiving formula in terms of shades, since the coverage isn't that high. I can wear 113 too (the difference between the two is more in the undertone, 117 is neutral and 113 cool).

Staying power: I never really check in the mirror, but it's a radiant foundation that doesn't set, so it doesn't last as long as ColorStay. 

Packaging: A basic squeeze tube with a screw on lid. I got two versions of the packaging or more accurately said the writing on the tube. I don't know which is new or what the deal actually is. They come in a box when you buy them. 

Price: It's almost 20 € here in local drugstores. At least it's on offer occasionally.

Overall this is a great formula for dry skin that looks fresh, radiant and natural - basically if you dislike their matte ColorStay foundations, this is a better fit. Coverage is decent, it's hydrating and there's a match for my pale skin. The minuses for me are the fact it settles into lines, so it needs powder and the low SPF.

*PR products. Paid promotion by Ilirija d.o.o.

A while ago Revlon expanded its iconic Super Lustrous lipstick line with twelve new shades, seven of which are available in Slovenia and Croatia. The collection features a mix of crème and frosty finishes, just like the classic Super Lustrous formula, which is praised for being both hydrating and lightweight. Interestingly, this remains the top-selling lipstick formula in the U.S., despite the wave of newer launches. I can see why it's so loved, since the formula is very comfy and that's probably what most want from their lipstick (though personally, I prefer their Suede Ink range for its matte finish).

The formula feels hydrating, comfortable and is very pleasant for dry lips. Pigmentation and colour payoff is good at all shades, though the lightest After Glow needs some building up. Staying power is average - these are creamy lipsticks and you can never expect them to be as good as matte formulas.

A frosty nude, more of a peachy-leaning one with gold frost.

 

A creamy warm-neutral nude. The best shade in this line-up in my opinion, the more neutral version of their very popular Bare it All.

A cool dusty light rose.

A vivid pink watermelon.

A medium coral-peach shade.

A frosty warm peachy red.

A warm, tomato red.

I own a few other Revlon blush shades, one of them is a long-time favourite (004), but at the moment, only two are available on our local stands. I've long maintained that Revlon's blushes are some of the highest quality ones in the drugstores here when it comes to staying power and they also tend to be quite pigmented. Both shades have a matte finish and wear beautifully throughout the day.

001 Oh Baby! Pink is a bit of a misnomer for me. While it swatches as a very pale pink (reminiscent of Benefit’s Dandelion), the pink tone disappears on my cheeks, leaving behind more of an apricot-peach hue. To be fair my skin tone does have a tendency to make everything warmer, leaning more to peach, so on others this shade may look more pink. The pigmentation might seem weak, but that’s mostly due to how light the shade is. The formula itself is soft and buttery, and my brush picks up product easily.

003 Mauvelous is a classic pink though it looks more muted. Formula is highly pigmented. A light tap of the brush picks up plenty of colour, and while the formula is just as soft and creamy as at 001, the intensity can make blending a bit tricky. It tends to deposit most of the pigment where the brush first touches the skin, so a gentle hand is key.

I’ve got four out of the five shades currently available in Slovenia and Croatia. These are some of the longest-lasting lip liners I’ve used, but they can be a bit tricky to work with. The formula isn’t the smoothest when it’s cold, and like many twist-up liners, the tip has a tendency to snap. I usually stick to budget-friendly options like Essence, so I’m not used to lip liners that actually stay put for more than a couple of hours, but these are classic Revlon: impressively long-wearing and resistant to smudging or fading. The formula is thicker than your average liner, which makes it less ideal for filling in the entire lips, but great for precise outlining. These do like to snap unless you are careful. Thankfully, Revlon included a built-in sharpener at the back, so you can sharpen the tip easily when needed.

 

A neutral-warm nude. Revlon says it pairs up with their Bare it All Shade, which I find lighter, more peachy on me

Not pink on me, more of a medium muted almost coral. Revlon pairs it up with Pink in the Afternoon

Revlon's cooler version of the red lip liner, the warmer is called Ruby. Red pairs up with Super Red, Ruby pairs with their classic Fire & Ice.

A deep sort of burgundy-plum, though on me it leans to brown. It pairs with Revlon's shade Plumalicious.

I’ve had this formula in an older bottle, from probably two packaging updates ago (mostly label changes) and it still looks the same to me. While I can’t guarantee it’s exactly the same after all these years, I tested both side by side and they apply and wear almost identically (keep in mind my bottle is several years old, but mostly unused).

Texture and coverage: This version is runnier and lighter in texture compared to the Combination/Oily formula, though the coverage is quite similar, medium and buildable, with just a slightly lighter finish. Of the two, this one suits my dry skin better, though neither is particularly hydrating.

Finish: Both versions of ColorStay dry down to a matte finish on me, but this one looks less heavy and more natural.

Staying power: It’s long-wearing and holds up well throughout the day, which is typical for matte foundations on my dry skin that doesn’t get oily. While neither formula feels drying, this one looks fresher in the mirror by the end of the day. That said, I’ve noticed the Combination/Oily version photographs better.

Shade: Lightest shade 110, which I wear, is a pale tone with a cool undertone and works well for me.

I used this formula back before they added a pump, so it’s been a long while, but I think it's still the same. I haven't checked there reviews when the "new" formula came out, I think this one now has more hyaluronic acid, but usually when relaunches happen there's plenty of complaints about the new formula being too different. But like I said I don't notice a difference between this one and the one from many years ago.

Formula: is thick and I find damp makeup sponges are best for blending at such a formula. It still has that same smell I remember from years ago, something like a floral-powdery scented paint, which is different than the Normal/Dry version.

Coverage and finish: It's got quite high-coverage and it's very matte. On my skin this is too flat matte and I don't like how it looks in the area around my mouth, but this is obviously not a formula for me. I used this when my skin was oilier and it kept the face matte a long time. Now I use their Illuminance Serum Tint instead.

Shade: both shades 110 Ivory are pretty much the same, especially when blended out. Both are very light shades with a cool undertone.

*PR products. Paid promotion by Ilirija d.o.o. 

Coverage: light-medium

Finish: glowy

My shade: Fair Porcelain

|Review|

This is one of the two foundations I wear most often. Many foundations turn matte on my skin, which isn't as flattering anymore as it was in the past - this one manages to feel hydrating for hours after application and I don't have combine it with a lot of skin care, which makes it lighter on my skin and removes the possibility of peeling. Formula is a typical liquid foundation and it feels lighter, less "rich moisturiser-like" than the original version of CC that's in the silver tube. I would include that one here as well, since I use it a lot, but since the lightest shade doesn't fit me, I mix it with Missha's Perfect Blanc BB, which is too light (that one is too matte on its own and not my favourite formula). Coverage of Nude Glow version is light-medium, so less than the original and it has a glowy finish, which is similar to the original CC. Ingredients are good - it has niacinamide high on the list, as it's meant to be a brightening formula. There's also snail mucin, adenosine and hyaluronic acid, plus there's the extra SPF 40. It's a formula that doesn't photograph well, but in person it looks fresh and it doesn't settle much into my smile lines. I wear shade Fair Porcelain, which is a great match for me.

|video|

Coverage: light-medium

Finish: glowy

My shade: Porcelain

|Review|

This is the other foundation I wear most often. The shade is one my best matches and this foundation always looks good on the skin. It blends so evenly into the skin, leaving it natural-looking. It's similar to how Bourjois Healthy Mix looks, so like there's no foundation on. Coverage is light to medium at most. Finish is glowy-dewy in the summer, while in the winter less shiny, more satin, but it's still very healthy looking. It's definitely a foundation most suited for dry skin. It has a little bit of SPF of 18.

Coverage: Medium

Finish: Glowy

My shade: 19 Ivory

|Review|

My discovery of last year. Missha had this great BB cream (RX), which they discontinued and it was my favourite - this is very similar and this is one of my best shade matches. Coverage is about medium with a thin layer of product and it blends with ease. Due to the shade match and this cushion format with a sponge this feels almost like an eraser to me. Finish is glowy and this feels nicely hydrating on my skin. The only minus is that the amount is quite small, so I'm sort of saving this one, but it's a great compact for a quick application. It has niacinamide high on the list, then centella asiatica, several extracts and oils, adenosine, and ceramides, plus SPF 50.

|video|

 

I recent got TIRTIR Mask Fit Aura Mini Cushion SPF30 PA++ in 15C Fair Porcelain, which is very similar to this and since I have a mini I carry it in my bag, so it quickly became one of my most used foundations as well. I wrote this post before I bought that foundation, but it belongs here too. I made a video here. Missha's is still better because of ingredients and a higher SPF. 

Coverage: light-medium

Finish: semi-matte

My shades: 100 Warm Vanilla and 110 Porcelain

|Review|

I've put this one on many of my favourites lists and it's still one of my favourites despite my skin becoming drier. It's a formula that makes the skin look its best, especially when I'm making videos. The formula is light and pretty much invisible on the face when you blend it and the finish isn't that mask-like matte, instead it's more of a semi-matte and unlike a lot of foundations, it looks nice over pores as it somewhat fills them up a bit, therefore provides a very smooth base. However, it doesn't suit me as much in the winter when my skin is drier, so I don't use it all year round. The name is deceptive, as this isn't a properly matte foundation that would hold back oils, so it's more suited for combination-normal to moderately dry skin. Coverage is light-medium, so those who love a lot of coverage, you won't like it as much, but for me it covers enough. They have so many shades since I first started buying it, but I wear 100 Warm Vanilla.

Coverage: light-medium

Finish: dewy

My shade: 50C

|Review|

While this isn't the same Healthy Mix formula I've loved for years, the new one still gets a mention. The previous version was perfect, except for the shade range that didn't suit me as the other ones on this list. The new formula is heavier, it never really sets to a dry-to-the-touch finis and, it's a lot shinier. While this suits my dry skin, I feel the previous version suited more skin types than just dry to very dry, plus it had the perfect level of glow. Level of coverage is light-medium and it's still one of those formulas that doesn't look like heavy makeup and blends into the skin seamlessly. It's a formula that doesn't emphasise uneven texture. Regardless of the condition of the skin, for example dry patches, big pores or lines, it never makes the skin look bad, it just evens it out and creates a nice finish. I own the new 2023 Serum version as well and its thin texture doesn't suit me as much as the foundation. The thicker formula helps the base look smoother on my skin. I wear shade 50C, which is a bit dark for me and certainly the wrong undertone - Bourjois tends to have strong undertones compared to others.

|video|

Coverage: Medium

Finish: matte

My shade: C40 Light Ivory

|Review|

This looks great on the skin - smooth, there's no foundation sinking into pores, it covers about a medium and the finish is a non-dry looking matte. But it's not brilliant for dry skin, so I have to combine it with a more hydrating base. It's a foundation that looks great on pictures, so it more than deserves its place here. Formula is thick and this needs a damp sponge for best application. Shade C40 Light Ivory matches me ok and it's a slightly deeper shade than Revlon's Colorstay 110 Ivory.

|video|

Coverage: Buildable from very light to about medium

Finish: matte

My shade: 002 Ivory

|Review|

I wear this almost exclusively in the summer, on hot days over SPFs that stay shiny. I get coverage like at a liquid foundation and a setting powder in one. So there's less layers of makeup on my face and the skin is dry-to-the-touch. Coverage is surprisingly good and buildable. It's capable of covering red blemish marks and under eye circles, but some of my darker freckles are visible. Shade 002 Ivory is a good match for me.

Oriflame had an Age Defying foundation before, which was sent to me in a dark shade, but regardless the formula impressed me and I used it on others, on who it always looked so good. This formula is different. I also own Oriflame's Giordani Gold Pure Uforia foundation, which is one of my favourites especially in the winter months and honestly, I don't see a difference between the two. The old Age Defying version had a medium coverage and a dewy which turned to satin. New formula has a prebiotic serum, promises to smooth & blur fine lines, cover dark spots, is hydrating and promises a radiant finish.

Formula: It's a light liquid foundation, thinner than I remember the old formula. It blends easily, especially with a cushion sponge applicator. I don't find it blurs lines or pores, but it doesn't make them look worse like a lot of matte foundations do.

Coverage and finish: It has light-medium coverage and a very glowy finish. It's a great formula for dry skin and is very hydrating. Like I said it's very similar to Pure Uforia, though the latter may look a bit better on the skin. This is a foundation that doesn't look best on photos and camera, but it's great for every day for dry skin - this is type of formula my skin likes best.

Staying power: due to dewyness this has a tendency to wipe off and it never really sets, so a powder is almost a must to set it.

Shade: I got probably the lightest shade, which is called Vanilla Neutral, though based on Oriflame's swatches, there are three shades in about the same depth, just with a different undertone. It's the same depth as Porcelain I use at Uforia, except the undertone is yellow. Pure Uforia is my perfect match, but I can pull of this one too.

Packaging: This has the same bottle as Pure Uforia. Both are make from glass and have a precise pump. Only difference is the plastic gold cap design.

This foundation isn't always in Oriflame's catalogue, I don't know why. But the full price is 27 €, which is often reduced a lot. I buy Oriflame on Notino.

|video|

Based on the name I imagined this foundation very differently, something more lightweight and hydrating, but to me it looks like they just reused the formula of their True Skin foundation when I compared them side by side. It's yet another Catrice foundation that doesn't suit my skin.

Formula: It's a thick foundation that's pretty much the same as their True Skin. I find that foundation paste-like and this one again lacks something that would make it melt/blend into the skin better. There is nothing "invisible" about this on my skin. It this looks a bit dry in places and I need a good hydrating or oily base to make it work better. I use a cushion foundation sponge and due to the thickness of the formula I find it has the ability to fill in the pores, but it doesn't always look good and I don't like how it looks on textured skin.

Coverage and finish: It has about medium coverage and a matte finish. It looks flat and obvious on my skin. Powder is out of the question, unless I want to make it worse.

Shade: The shade range looks very good. I picked 012 C which isn't the lightest one and it's perhaps a bit pale for me. It's a shade with cool undertones while they have a version of this depth with warm and neutral tones. Shades don't correspond to their True Skin range, as 002 at the latter is about the same depth as 012C at Invisible Cover.

Packaging: It's the same glass bottle with a pump as their True Skin one, just that it's black.

If you like True Skin, you might like this one too, but it's a no-go for my skin. I'm still waiting for Catrice to release something more hydrating, light and not texture-emphasizing that would work for my dry skin.

|video|

I was hoping Essence used the same shade as at the stick version of under eye brightener, which is a good match for me and has a nice brightening effect, but the stick format isn't brilliant on my dry skin. This shade is deeper, closer to Catrice's Under Eye Brightener in a pot, the lightest 010 shade, meaning it's not a pale pink, but a light salmon pink.

Since I'm so pale, I find this doesn't work as well for me. When I use it under a concealer or foundation, that pinkness shines through and just looks like I still have circles, but on skin tones deeper than mine this should work well. 

 

If you like Catrice's version, but would like a liquid format, this is it, though it is a bit lighter. Formula is a nice hydrating one, good for dry skin and it reminds me a lot of their Stay All Day concealer.

Formula is lovely, but I hope they release a lighter shade, something just like their Stick version.

|video|

A powder with three colour correcting colours: a pink and peach for under eye brightening and a lilac for counteracting yellow tones. You can also mix all the shades for a neutral powder.

There are three separate compartments and a removable disk that allows you to shake the powder out of just one compartment.

I saw no colour correcting or brightening on my skin tone. I checked the before/after pictures and videos and I don’t think there's a difference, just that it mattifies. Mixed together it also appears to be just a basic mattifying powder. Maybe the colour correcting is more obvious on deeper skin tones. I don't notice any blurring or smoothing on my skin and currently my skin is so dry that this can look obvious on the skin, especially over Catrice's Invisible Cover foundation.

Honestly, this was another miss for me, but it may work a lot better as a basic mattifying powder on oily skin.

|video|

I have the pink shade 10 Tickle me Pink, which is one of my favourites. I picked this one online, so it was a blind buy and the colour of the packaging is luckily deceptive. This is a peachy pink, less bright than the Blush Affair Stunning Strawberry, but in the same colour family. Formula is creamy and I can easily swipe it on the cheeks, then blend with fingers. Pigmentation is more intense as at Tickle and the shade is deeper. This shade looks good on the lips too.

This quickly became my most used blush. It's so easy to apply and blend, plus it gives the cheeks an uplifting flush.

|video|

The textured part is the cream blush and the other a classic powder one. This is a very intense and pigmented formula on both sides. Both sides are nice quality, as is usual for Catrice's blushes. I only need the smallest amount of both shades, since I'm so pale.

Stunning Strawberry is a vibrant peachy pink shade, much stronger than anything in my collection and both shades have a natural/matte finish. The cream side is a hint more pink. This is best suited for deeper skin tones.

|video|

I also have this formula in 03 Soft Beige and 07 Classic Red. Formula is soft and glides on the lips easily. There's an added sharpener in the back, but even without using it, I find it precise enough.

 

It can feel a bit dry on its own, but not always. It doesn't wipe off easily, so it has quite a decent staying power. Cushion Talk is a light-medium mute pink with peach tones.

|video|

Usually pastel pencils suck, but this is creamy and has a good colour payoff, though this is a very pale shade, almost off-white. In the waterline it looks more white than blue, but it does brighten the eyes. On the top lash line it doesn't glide as smoothly as for example Deborah 24 Ore Waterproof Eye Pencil, but going over the line twice gives an almost fully opaque look.

I expected more from this, especially after seeing it on video what a nice holographic effect it has. The holo effect is not that visible, not like at my ancient Depend nail polish that has been discountinued. It's more like a basic silver nail polish - still pretty, but I miss more holo reflects. First coat is quite sheer, while full opacity is achieved with three coats.

|video|

|video|

A deep cool red with a glossy creamy finish. It's opaque in one coat, but for better staying power it's best to apply two.

|video|

This applies glossy and it slowly turns matte. It takes over a minute for it to become fully, velvety matte. The matte effect disappears eventually due to any type of oil you might pick up, that includes hand creams.

I've been using Seche vite for many years, but it's hard to get, so I wanted to find a decent alternative. The only thing I care about at top coats is that it dries the nail polish as quickly as possible. Seche Vite does that well, but it thicken quickly, way before you have a chance to use up the bottle. This Catrice version is very decent and easy to get (provided they don't discontinue it, which knowing them will likely happen). It dries the nails almost as quick as Seche, though it's not the promised 40 seconds, but in a minute or two it's dry to the touch, but you still have to be careful to avoid dings for maybe 15 minutes or a half an hour.