MAC Tropical Taboo Collection (2013)

[erine1881]

ithe difference i can see its that RT brush is flat out. and the mac one isnt. idk maybe erine can explain it better.

It depends on how it looks out of the packaging. Because to me it looks like sitting INTO the packaging, making me think it's round as opposed to flat like the 159??? :dunno: Yup. You can see that it's sitting into the packaging, which means it's rounded in circumference as opposed to flat.

 

[kimibos]

Yup. You can see that it's sitting into the packaging, which means it's rounded in circumference as opposed to flat.

i mean how the hairs are going out. and i saw the mac one and its flat with the hair going in. like the RT spread outwards instead of inwards. i obviously dont know how to explain it

but yeah the mac one is flat.

 

[kimibos]

The 159 is more symetrically round as oppose to being flat you mean?

no its flat.

 

[kimibos]

As for price hikes twice a year...geesh, are we going to eventually see shadows/ lipsticks going for $25 a piece? At some point they'll have to reach a point where its too much.

THIS IS MY OPINION. as for blushes, mac is getting very close to high end brands. like Nars and Estee L. their blushes are $29 mac MB are $25 with 1 less gram. and a lot of drama.
but when it comes to lipsticks they are still ok and affortable to me . im planing to buy other things from other brands but i some how cant let go of their lipsticks.
the $15 shadows too are still ok. urban decay and MUFE ones are like $20. its going to take a couple of years for a regular lipstick to be $25.

some high end brand have sales. usually friend and family ones in their sites, sephora or beauty.com. and mac never ever has a sale for regular costumers. so yeah im buying less and less mac. but cant let go at once! my body would go into shock, i need to do the one at a time therapy.

 

[erine1881]

i mean how the hairs are going out. and i saw the mac one and its flat with the hair going in. like the RT spread outwards instead of inwards. i obviously dont know how to explain it 

 but yeah the mac one is flat. 

Oh ok. Yeah the hairs are more frayed out than the mac one. It happens over time, but can easily be avoided or fixed. But it's harder to fix when they start out like that.

 

[erine1881]

The 159 is more symetrically round as oppose to being flat you mean?

It appears that the RT is round in shape, like the 187, 188 and 130. But the 159 is flat like the 190 and 191

 

[meaghanb123]

It appears that the RT is round in shape, like the 187, 188 and 130. But the 159 is flat like the 190 and 191

I actually have the RT brush and it is more flat which sounds like the 159...I'm not a fan of the RT brush as it isn't dense like the rest of their collection and feels...flimsy. I am such a brush whore that I want the 159 but I suppose ill wait to see it in person in July

 

[LiliV]

As for price hikes twice a year...geesh, are we going to eventually see shadows/ lipsticks going for $25 a piece? At some point they'll have to reach a point where its too much.

I never understand the end goal with price increases either. Obviously companies always want more money but realistically like how much are they planning to increase their product prices? Just keep increasing forever?I've seen this with a lot of brands (and not just make up) and I always wonder what their "this is where we wanted to be" goal is. I think the Mac nail polish prices have gotten crazy, they used to be like $12/$13 now they're like 16 I think? Ill pay for a Chanel or Dior polish but not for Mac one at that price

 

[meaghanb123]

I can't see myself paying more than $17 for a MAC lipstick/ gloss or eyeshadow. I mean at some point you do say well heck for a few bucks more ill buy NARS or Burberry! Last years hike made them go from $15 to $16.50 didn't it?

 

[liba]

It appears that the RT is round in shape, like the 187, 188 and 130. But the 159 is flat like the 190 and 191

The 159 has a rounded belly but then gets really flat and thin at the upper edge. The white hairs are short compared to the length of the black hairs, unlike a 131. So it's like a flat but chubby main part and a thin white edge to do really light feathery blending at the very end of your stroke. If you're sweeping it towards your ear, the thick part lays the color down and the white hairs trail along and sort of very lightly smooths everything in. Same thing if you pat along the cheekbone ridge - the black part will get the color down and the white hairs will just minimally blend the top edge of the patted line. The white hairs seem to be good about collecting any stray sparkle bits from the blushes too.

I can't wait to get my mitts on mine next Thurs.

 

[Lipstickdiva420]

As for price hikes twice a year...geesh, are we going to eventually see shadows/ lipsticks going for $25 a piece? At some point they'll have to reach a point where its too much.[/quote] Yes that would be too much and would def go into other brands.

I used my 187 for blush today. I can't using it for highlighting. I feel it's too big and spreads it all over. Am I doing something wrong? I'm having the same problem I don't have the perfect highlighting brush. This is why I'm getting the 159 also.

I should get it then right? i dun have any purple lip pencils, great now im thinking of getting violetta to match it lol

IMO heroine lip liner is a must have.

 

[IHughes]

In Spain the lipsticks cost 25.05 dollars at the moment! They're priced almost like a high end brand! Imagine what the price hike will be like for us!

 

[KMQE716]

*slow moment*

 

[KMQE716]

now im wondering what is the difference between the 159 and 131?

 

[Tahlia]

i'd happily pay anyy other price for MAC except for the australian price. perm lipsticks are $36, LE lipsticks are $38. thats like $12 away from a chanel lipstick if i'm correct. the blushes are $40 and lipglass $35. not to mention the SINGLE eyeshadows are $30. nobody has it worse than us australians do!

 

[Innatchka]

I agree! They have to stop at some point. I love MAC..but I wouldn't say all of their products are that great and unique. It's the brandname you pay the most for.

i'd happily pay anyy other price for MAC except for the australian price. perm lipsticks are $36, LE lipsticks are $38. thats like $12 away from a chanel lipstick if i'm correct. the blushes are $40 and lipglass $35. not to mention the SINGLE eyeshadows are $30. nobody has it worse than us australians do!

 

[MACina]

.....OMG

i'd happily pay anyy other price for MAC except for the australian price. perm lipsticks are $36, LE lipsticks are $38. thats like $12 away from a chanel lipstick if i'm correct. the blushes are $40 and lipglass $35. not to mention the SINGLE eyeshadows are $30. nobody has it worse than us australians do!

 

[snowbunny22]

You could use it with any purpleish/pink/red/orange lipstick.

I don't have heroine l/s or lip liner or any purple liner at all. I have feel my pulse and now this is kinda making me want the heroine liner haha! more to the list!

 

[Serenityy]

I think I'll only be picking up Heroine lipliner since I missed it in Fashion Sets.
I would pick up a skin finish since they look pretty in the pictures but I think it would be a waste since I don't think I use them properly *eyes my barely used Shape the Future*

 

[Spikesmom]

I never understand the end goal with price increases either. Obviously companies always want more money but realistically like how much are they planning to increase their product prices? Just keep increasing forever?I've seen this with a lot of brands (and not just make up) and I always wonder what their "this is where we wanted to be" goal is. I think the Mac nail polish prices have gotten crazy, they used to be like $12/$13 now they're like 16 I think? Ill pay for a Chanel or Dior polish but not for Mac one at that price

I would think the end goal would be to keep up with their suppliers price increases and their general overhead. Salary raises, malls raising their rent....