Chanel Royallieu #58 Rouge Coco Shine is currently a Limited Edition Chanel.com exclusive. It’s a relatively new release in the US and I would describe it as a lovely pale cool-toned pink. In the tube it appears slightly faded with a slight greyish undetone. If you look closely, you will see the prettiest tiny micro-sparkles. As soon as I opened the tube, I was worried it would be too pale on the lips. Royallieu Rouge Coco Shine is actually quite a bit paler than I anticipated, but I was pleasantly surprised to find that it is sheer enough to not wash out the lips, but pigmented enough to give a soft pale wash of pink shine.
Here it is swatched on my lips, I’m a Chanel Vitalumiere Aqua in 30 now:
If you love pale pinks, you will love Royallieu. It is similar to a few other shades I have so I wouldn’t say it’s the most unique, however it is a pretty pink that is very wearable. Of the existing Chanel lipsticks, it’s lighter/pinker than Mythic. Also shown below, Dior Urban (shown here) and Rose Comete. I find that Royallieu reminds me a bit of MAC Oyster Girl Lipglass (not shown).
Overall I think for me this fits the bill of a goof-proof go-with-everything lipstick. I will be able to wear it for any occasion and apply without needing a mirror. I love that it goes on smoothly and streak-free. I envision this looking great with a smokey eye, in particular the Prelude Quad from the fall collection!
Since reviewing Chanel Péridot 531 Le Vernis last week (see all three fall shades here) I’ve received a few questions asking to describe this color in a bit more detail. As fall trickles in-stores and you see more reviews of this color, you will see that Péridot is such a complex unique color making it almost impossible for to describe in words. Looking in the bottle, I see glowing yellow gold that flashes different variations of brown, green and yellow pearl. The closest thing I can think of is that it reminds me of a scarab beetle. Depending on the angle I hold my hand, sometimes I see a lot more green than gold – but regardless of lighting and angles, I always see more than one color and my fingers glow.
On my fingers it’s predominantly yellow/gold and the green flashes on the edges. Initially I did not like. After playing with it a few more days, I still am not completely won over. No matter what angle I look at it, Péridot just appears so unflattering on me. Still it’s extremely unique and the complexity keeps me interested. I hope these photos will give you a better idea of how it might look in real life.
See Péridot swatched here on these other amazing sites as well:
I was a lucky girl to get this from Paris while Café Makeup was traveling earlier this spring (see her review here). I wasn’t quite sure if this color would ever be released in the US, but thanks to KarlaSugar’s Sneak Peeks, we now know this will be released this year to the US with the Sophisticated Eye Collection (exact date to be determined).
Chanel Fauve #90 is a sparkly mauve taupe with a high shimmer factor (you can see silver flecks in the pan). It’s beautiful. See it reviewed on Delicate Hummingbird and Pink Sith (they have stunning eye looks featured as well). I’ve tried this a number of ways: dry, over a base, smudged over a liner, alone, combined with other bronzey shades and lighter champagnes. It’s extremely versatile and amazing enough that it’s one of those colors you can wear all by itself (just add mascara) and you have a nice polished look. The texture, although very metallic and sparkly, is smooth. There is surprisingly no fall out from the sparkle flecks, even when applied dry. Some mauves go on pinkish on my eyes. Chanel Fauve has enough taupe and silver to prevent this from giving me that dreaded pink-eye look.
I could not find a single dupe …
I pulled other shadows from Chanel, MAC and NARS. Here are Chanel Taupe Grise, Chanel Fauve, Chanel Misty-Soft, Chanel Safari, MAC Mauvement Pigment, Chanel Illusoire Illusion d’Ombre, Trish McEvoy Raisin, and NARS Ondine.
Swatched L to R (over a slightly moisturized arm): Chanel Safari, Chanel Taupe Grise, Chanel Fauve, Chanel Misty-Soft (lighter side), Chanel Illusoire, MAC Mauvement Pigment, MAC Style Snob, Trish McEvoy Raisin, NARS Ondine
Fauve is a beautiful color and something I find unique enough to justify the price. I am glad it will be released in the US (hopefully soon). I highly recommend.
The last items I have to review for Chanel Fall 2011 include the new Rouge Cocos and Precision Lip Definers. For the lipsticks, we have Plumetis 79 (a nude pink-peach with silver flecks) and Étole 80 (plum brown). For the lipliners we have Coralline 46 (coral with silver shimmer) and Rose Cuivre 47 (rose brown with shimmer).
Rouge Coco comparisons to Stunning, Secret, Patchouli, Baroque.
The colors are pretty and will be usable year-round. I’m not wowed by them this season but perhaps this is because I already have too many lipsticks and lipliners. Lasting power is incredible though. The lipliners go well with the lipsticks, when used first they really extend the wearability of the rouge cocos.
This fall there are two new Glossimer shades, Pampille 156 & Braise 158 and one new shade of Rouge Double Intensite Rose Morganite 30. (Giggle 46 Glossimer and Rose Quartz 04 Rouge Double Intensite are repromoted this year.) I purchased the new shades sight-unseen and when I first opened the package I was not entirely wowed. At first glance, while beautiful and classic, the colors just seemed like slightly different versions of past releases. They did not appear to be all that unique. However after playing with them a bit, I’ve changed my mind.
Rose Morganite is a plum-pink stain (there’s shimmer in the tube but it goes on a cream)
Pampille is a pale clearish pink with sheerish sparkles (goes on very smooth)
Braise is a sheer warm reddish shimmer with gold flecks
A little disclaimer before you evaluate my swatches: For some reason these applied very different on the hand compared to what went on my lips. The glossimers are both very sheer, but on my hand look completely different from what I see in the tube and what color I get when applied to the lips. As always, please take these with a grain of salt. I don’t know why I get orangey from Braise on the hands while on the lips it’s not orangey, but a warm reddish pink. I’m not sure if you can see the sparkle in my Pampille swatch – it’s there but I’m afraid it’s virtually impossible to detect in the photo below.
Comparisons to Chanel Spark, Futile and Iris:
Overall beautiful for fall, but really these colors will take you year-round. The glossimers make lovely layering colors to add a natural sheen to lipsticks. I have a few Rouge Double Intensites but I’m not really used to using them. Those who have tried them will know that the colors really do stay put! I prefer a traditional lipstick but from what I’ve heard – those who have tried these REALLY love them. I personally don’t think they are must-haves – mainly because I have similar colors that will achieve a similar effect on the lips. They are however beautiful and I don’t regret purchasing them. I know they will be frequently used in the seasons to come.
Thanks to Becca for the question: How do the Spring Ombres Perleés de Chanel compare to the new Illusion d’Ombres for Fall?
Price: The Spring Ombres Perleés de Chanel retailed for $65 (see my review here) and was packaged in a black mirrored compact. I searched online and it appears to no longer be available for sale anywhere. If you’re still looking for this I highly recommend searching instore to see if they still have stock. (Do it now before they are gone forever!) The Fall Illusion d’Ombres retail for $36 each and come with a capped angled brush.
Texture: The Spring Palette is softer and smoother in texture with a slightly powder feel. The Fall shadows are stickier in texture, mainly because of the jelly-gel like consistency. They are not sticky upon application though.
From what I see (might not translate to what you see on the computer screen):
Spring White is a pearly white, cool-toned
Fall 81 is a brighter white, even more cool, with glitter flecks/chunks
Spring Pink/Peach is a pearly frosted pink with a slight hint of peach
Fall 82 is a straight peach, but on my skin looks strikingly similar to Spring
Spring Purple is a complex fusion of purple, red, blue shimmers
Fall 83 is a straight purpley-grey shimmer, almost lilac, no red
Spring Green is a multichromatic green that flashes pink, dark green, light green (no silver)
Fall 84 is a khaki silver, no pink tones, more metallic, more silvery
Spring Blue-Grey is a blue-grey smokey shimmer, also complex
Fall 85 is a black with blueish tones and big silver chunks
Pigment and Shimmer: I found the Spring Palette to be high-shimmer, but is more finely milled and luminous. The Fall shadows are high-shimmer and highly metallic with visible flecks of sparkle. They are more chunky. Pigment of both are layerable and blendable for either a sheer or pigmented look. I would say the Fall Shadows have the ability to be layered for a more intense look though (emphasis on intense).
Lasting Power: As mentioned in my previous post, I have not yet had a chance to test lasting power of the fall shades. I found the lasting power of the Spring Palette to be medium-wear. It did not last the full day from 6 am to 8 pm, but it did last well into the afternoon.
Application: I used fingers for the spring palette. For the fall shadows, I prefer the brush since it helps pick up more color and allows for more control.
Swatches in different lighting/angles/etc.
The colors: Are the colors the same? I would say no. They have similar undertones. The shimmer blinded my camera and when you add the cloudy lighting, it was hard to get an exact photo. The Spring Palette shimmers are multi-colored. The Fall shadows are metallic with different intensity of flecks and sparkles but not quite as multi-colored as Spring.
Overall: I personally prefer the Spring palette by far. While it might look untouched, I’ve actually used this palette on a regular basis with my fingers. (Finger application seems to smooth out the surface.) I had ordered everything from Fall sight unseen so I didn’t really know what to expect. I know these won’t make me look like the models on the Chanel runway, but I couldn’t help being completely blown away by the gorgeous looks Peter Philips created for the metallic smokey eyes. How could I resist trying these?
I will need to experiment more with the new Illusion d’Ombres to find an application technique that is wearable for me (as in not-too-metallic). I think they are definitely worth checking out. Even if they don’t seem to be “you” (they aren’t very “me”) it’s always nice to try something different once in a while, even if it’s just for fun.
Availability: I bought mine from Bergdorfs. The whole collection is on Chanel.com. I haven’t seen it anywhere in-store on the West Coast although I suspect any day now. Last year Fall hit stores on June 27th. (No, my memory isn’t that good, I just looked at my archives.) From what I heard last time I checked my local Nordstroms and Macys – all sales associates said “sometime in July.”
And to answer 1 more question: what camera do I use? See this post here.
The makeup looks on the Chanel Fall 2011 runway designed by Peter Philips were amazing (see them here from Cafe Makeup). The highlight of his collection includes a new cream-gel eyeshadow called Illusion d’Ombre which comes in 6 shades this fall. These are small potted shadows with a twist-off lid and small capped angled brush. The shades are:
81 Fantasme – a frosted sparkly white
82 Emerveille – a soft shimmering nude peach
83 Illusoire – a complex purple shimmer
84 Epatant – a highly frosted khaki silvery shimmer
85 Mirifique – intense black with silver sparkle
86 Ebloui – a reddish maroon with silver and plum sparkles
The shimmer: Each shade is complex with multi-dimensional sparkles. They are all intensely metallic and sparkly except for 82 Emerveille which is a soft luminous peach (still shimmery but the most natural). 81 is the most chunky in sparkle. 84 is the most frosty. 82 is the most natural. The others are somewhere in between.
The texture: These are cream-gel like shadows. Compared to Armani Eyes To Kill Shadows, these come domed without an insert inside. These have a bit more bounce with a squishy texture. Almost like jello, but not as jiggly. The texture is smooth even though there is high shimmer with rich metallic flecks. Mine might have jiggled too much while in transit – the product was on the lids of some of mine.
Application: I tried these with fingers and with the brush. The brushes are surprisingly useful and help pick up the color for an intense application. They are perfectly designed to pick up the color in a way that allows for intense application. The first shade I tried was 86 Ebloui (the red one). I applied it with my fingers and the result was an absolute mess. Red-eye gone bad. I removed everything and started over, this time using the brush. The difference was amazing – rich pigmented and smokey. These definitely require experimentation. I think the lighter shades will be easier to apply with fingers. 82 Emerveille is the easiest for me to apply with the fingers (goof-proof color).
Lasting power: For this I still need to experiment more. I haven’t been able to wear these for a full day to test how long they wear. So far, no smudging for the short period of time I’ve worn them though.
Overall: Very shimmery, but intriguing texture. I find both Armani Eyes to Kill and Chanel Illusion d’Ombres highly metallic, just different in texture and finish. It’s difficult to describe, but although they are both metallic cremes, they are just very unique and different. The finish will be different depending on application technique and how much you apply. The Chanel are very fun to play with. I highly recommend going to the counters to try these out in person. Once they hit the west coast, I will for sure be running to the counter to get application ideas from my local Chanel artists.
A few other resources I found helpful (they have amazing swatches):
