[quote name="Mac-Guy" url="/forum/thread/174559/mac-semi-precious-discussion/2970#post_2140778"]
If you buy one more, you should get QF. It looks stunning in the pan. When I swatched it, the fall-out was not bad at all. Maybe those you already purchased can give a better review, but it is a beautiful color. I have qf and love it. It is the one shadow in the collection that has fallout in my experience but the colour is fab so it's worth it imo. I just treat it like a pigment and put a bit of powder under my eyes to catch any fall out. I have paired it with mineral mode and also rare find and it's lovely
[/quote][quote name="macnc50diva" url="/forum/thread/174559/mac-semi-precious-discussion/2970#post_2140811"]I am reading the reviews for semi-precious and I feel like I have to have a bad eye or something??? I LOVE the brushes except the 179 buffer one-I just dont get how that one is so much more helpful than a 182 and why they had to make another brush number 179 perplexes me...lol (Those of you who also have the 179 body buffer might know what I mean...) Gem of roses ok. Musky Amethyst ok...
But the shadows and skinfinishes...OMG I am NOT a fan of them AT ALL. I was totally looking forward to having them in my arsenal after I tried them at a training class I went to a few months ago, and those were pigmented and PERFECT. But the ones I received in my shipment? They are ALREADY in the clearance bin! Honestly, I haven't been a big fan of the way they look since I saw the previews of them (I've never been into applying anything that looks like vomit to my face-I never even buy those mixed bronzers or color swirled shadows) but after trying them originally and seeing the awesome pigmentation I couldn't wait to order the whole lot. So can you imagine the disappointment when these duds arrived? I keep thinking maybe MAC made some formula changes after I tested the samples? I don't know... but the ones I received from my online order are either too chalky (i.e. mineral mode) or too glittery (i.e...quartz fusion, crystal pink) with very little pigmentation! Chalky is an understatement actually! I am hardly getting any pigment at all from them, and even on the darker ones that do give off better color (i.e. golden gaze, smoked ruby, blue sheen, dark indulgence) they're still a bit more sheer than what I tried a few months back. Do I think I received a bad shipment? Maybe...So I figured go see them in store. I actually tried them all while I was there to see if there was a difference and NO they were exactly the same. So far I have tried to scrape off a few layers then apply, I've applied them wet, dry, with no base, with different shadow bases, on different skin tones and no matter what I feel like whomp whomp
![Frown :( :(]()
Thumbs down.
I CAN'T BE THE ONLY ONE WHO FEELS LIKE THIS ABOUT SEMI-PRECIOUS??? No disrespect to those of you who LOVE the collection but I'm sorry I'm not feeling the shadows or skinfinishes in this collection AT ALL. I was starting to think there were bad batches of the collections around as some of the reviews and swatches are polar opposites. But at the end of the day I think it's personal preference and the type of colours and textures you like to work with. I have been blown away by this collection. I have been collecting mac for 12 years and I have never come across such unique eye shadows and the pigmentation and longevity are great. As for the 179, I love it. It's bigger than my 182 and because of the synthetic hair I prefer to us it for liquid foundation than my 182 I use nars primer and painterly pp and get 12 hours+ wear on the mes
[/quote][quote name="mac_aiken" url="/forum/thread/174559/mac-semi-precious-discussion/2940#post_2140775"]What is the best base with these? I use either TFSI or NARS primer then usually Bare Canvas paint. I am open to any suggestions. I have SM, RF and Clarity.
[/quote]