Skip to main content

making faces :: an armani quickie

manufacturing armani eye tints, not exactly as shown.
urgh. so this one's been sitting on my to do pile for a longer time than it should have. it's another review of the spiffy new liquid shadows, called "eye tints" from armani. i've already taken a look at rose ashes and emeraude, but i've kept forgetting to post a review of the third tint in my collection, a shimmery little number called "cold copper". if that name, redolent of chemistry and metal works and alchemy [no? just me?] doesn't appeal to you, it also responds to being called #9.

i'll make this quick, because i know your time is valuable and i've discussed this formula twice already. in the three shades i've tried, everything has been very consistent, which means that "cold copper" has the same smooth application and layer-able coverage that made me want to start collecting these.

the main difference in this case is that the shimmer is cranked, so that "cold copper" really does look like liquid metal. it's frostier than either of the other shades i've reviewed [neither of which was exactly matte], although it's possible to mute that effect by going for a lighter application. layered to full power, i found it a little overwhelming in the way that very frosty shades can get. it did give that "crinkly" texture to my lids [rather, it emphasized the crinkly texture that's already there], which was a bit of a disappointment, since i had no such problems with either "rose ashes" or "emeraude". with a lighter application, the texture looked much nicer, but still had a burnished metallic shine.

after swatching all the shades from the line a couple of times at different counters, i'm noticing that there are "subgroups" within the collection, depending on how much shimmer and what sort of shimmer is present. so i thought i'd give you a rundown of my findings:

low to medium shimmer :: obsidian, minuit, emeraude
high shimmer, softer finish :: rose ashes, flannel, senso, jade*
high shimmer, metallic finish :: cold copper, green iron
high sparkle [more than shimmer] :: gold ashes, onyx, shadow

*i think that jade would fit here, but every tester i've tried has been a dud. i think this might be a shade best avoided, which is too bad, since it's certainly unique.



the name "cold copper" is a bit misleading, since the shade isn't coppery at all. it is definitely cool. it's a medium, silvery taupe. yes... taupe. a girl can never have too many. i find that it looks darker on my eyes than i thought it would based on what it looks like in the tube and that it looks a little cooler and greyer as well.

cold copper [by name only]
the texture of these armani eye tints and especially something as metallic as "cold copper" makes this a difficult shade to duplicate. unless layered quite a bit, it doesn't have the heavy frosted effect of powdered shadows. on its own, it's gleaming and silky.

for the purposes of offering some kind of comparison, here's a shot of it next to its sibling, rose ashes.

l to r :: cold copper, armani rose ashes
i've been wearing this shade quite a lot, because wearing neutrals is extremely easy and i like playing around with different methods of using these shadows. my preference with this one is actually to apply it with my fingers, which seems to tamp down the shine. applying with a brush will amplify the shine, but it can also make the colour go on unevenly if you use too much pressure.

here's a quick look at the colour applied [with a brush] and layered to get the full-on metallic effect. i think you'll see why i won't be using this in the future. the silver overtone is much more obvious the more you add, so if you have smoother skin on your lids [i really don't], indulge, by all means.



if you're interested, i have chanel creme blush in "chamade" and "poudre signé" on my cheeks and rouge d'armani sheer lipstick in 602/ "black lacquer"."cold copper" is joined on the eyes with shades from the armani "orient excess" shadow palette.

here's a much better look at "cold copper", used on the outer third of the eyelids and into the crease.




in this look, i'm wearing nars blush in "deep throat", mac mineralize skinfinish in "perfect topping" and the limited edition mac lipstick "blood red", from their 2009 collaboration with designers d-squared. i can't fathom why mac hasn't repromoted this colour [although i say that about a lot of colours], but chanel rouge coco shine "fiction" is a reasonably close shade. alternately, if you have the limited mac shade "dish it up" or guerlain "lou ling", those would be comparable as well, although definitely not exact. [the links have swatches of "blood red" compared to all those shades, fyi.]

on the eyes, i'm wearing "rose ashes" on the inner part of my lids. don't the two eye tints look lovely together? i was a little nervous about blending them, not because i didn't think they'd blend, but because i was worried they'd blend too well. as it turns out, they were fine. if the difference in colour had been sharper, i probably would have used an intermediate powder shadow to bridge the gulf.

i'm also wearing the darker shade from hourglass "exhibition" in the crease and rouge bunny rouge "alabaster starling" as a highlight. [since "exhibition" has been discontinued, you can use the darkest shade from the new hourglass "exposure" palette. or any dark eggplant shade you have at your disposal.]

so yes, the love affair with these luscious liquids continues. will there be more? indeed, there may well be, beloved readers. there's one in particular that has captured my fancy... any guesses as to which one?

Comments

as long as you're here, why not read more?

fun-raising

no, i am not dead, nor have i been lying incapacitated in a ditch somewhere. i've mostly been preparing for our imminent, epic move, which is actually not so terribly epic, because we found a place quite close to where we are now. in addition, i've been the beneficiary of an inordinately large amount of paying work, which does, sadly, take precedence over blogging, even though you know i'd always rather be with you.

indeed, with moving expenses and medical expenses looming on the horizon, more than can be accounted for even with the deepest cuts in the lipstick budget, dom and i recently did something that we've not done before: we asked for help. last week, we launched a fundraising campaign on go fund me. it can be difficult to admit that you need a helping hand, but what's been overwhelming for both of us is how quick to respond so many people we know have been once we asked. it's also shocking to see how quickly things added up.

most of all, though, the ex…

losers?

just a short time ago, i waxed prosaic about trump supporters who felt betrayed by their candidate pursuing in office the exact things that he said he would. short version: i have no sympathy.

today is a bit different. in the wake of america's bombing of a syrian air strip, in response to a chemical weapons attack by the syrian government, my facebook and twitter feeds were peppered with plaintive shades of "we believed you". these are the people who heard trump say that he wanted the united states to step back and focus on defending its own. indeed, trump did say such things, over and over; america cannot be the policeman of the world. even arch-liberal cynics like me had to admit that this was a refreshing argument to hear from someone outside the paul family, and, could easily have been turned into trump's greatest argument against hillary clinton. [he chose to go another way, which also worked.]

trump also said, repeatedly, that america needed to invest heavily …

long division

after the united states election last year, there were the usual calls for the country to unite behind the new president. that never happens anymore, because, since george w. bush scored a victory in 2004, having launched the country into a war in iraq for no reason, the people on the losing side of a presidential election have been pretty bloody angry about it. democrats hated bush 43. republicans really hated obama. democrats really hate trump.

it didn't help that trump didn't make the typical conciliatory gestures like including a couple of members of the opposite party in his cabinet, or encouraging his party to proceed slowly with contentious legislation. barack obama arguably wasted at least two and as many as six years of his tenure as president trying to play peacemaker before he felt sufficiently safe to just say "screw you guys" and start governing around the ridiculous congress he was forced to deal with. not-giving-a-shit obama was the best president in …