Lasting Perfection, Worth Saving Your Money Over?

Whilst searching the net for beauty reviews I stumbled across some hype over the latest Collection 2000 range, Lasting Perfection. In need of an everyday foundation and concealer and with the bargain price tag of £3.99 each I thought why not? But the answer is not as easy as you would think. The products have many things going for them, including up to 16 hours wear and an SPF of 20 which with a high UV warning and a heat wave approaching is a must. But really I think we need to talk about each product individually. 

Starting with the concealer Collection Lasting Perfection Ultimate Wear Concealer which I got in shade 2, I was impressed with the coverage it gave. The formula is creamy and thick which successfully covers imperfections and dark circles. It has a matt finish which works better for covering spots and redness but can feel a little drying under the eyes. However, creasing wasn't a major factor here. I thought it actually looked best left alone without powder as it sets all by itself and powder tended to break up the formula a bit. But there are some snags. This stuff dries fast so you only have a small window to work with it. Also the bottle leaks for me. Every time I open it and screw it back on product oozes out of the lid's bottom which is really annoying. But for a universal concealer (and may be one which didn't ooze product) it is a great cheap alternative. But it is the price ultimately which is its saving grace. Because if I had bought this from Nars or Bobbi Brown I would not be repurchasing. 

Collection Lasting Perfection Ultimate Wear Foundation has a limited colour range, similar to its matching concealer and I picked up shade 3. I found it strange how 'light/cool beige' wasn't the same number in the foundation to the concealer. My initial reaction to trying the foundation was really positive. I couldn't believe how nice my face looked for such an affordable price. My skin did look flawless and even in tone with a semi-matt finish. At the end of the day it was still there as promised and I thought I was on to a winner. But the second time I used it I noticed some flaws. The foundation brush I used to apply it the day before had actually gone hard over night from the residue of the foundation. Something which has never happened before. It was like this stuff was part glue. Then in the light of day I noticed how difficult it was to work with the formula that shared a lot of characteristics with the concealer. It is pretty heavy coverage for me. Like a medium - high. It is quite thick in consistency and you have to work quickly with it before it sets too. Even when I mixed it with my St. Tropez tinted moisturiser. Also there are no touch ups or buildable qualities here, once it has set that is it. Putting more product on top ruins it entirely. Another point is how noticeable my pores were with it which is odd because I wouldn't say I have large pores. And to wear during the daytime I missed my normal dewy glow. The end result is nice and there is some subtle radiance to the face but the process and foundation brush aftermath makes me question whether it is A) worth it and B) bad for my skin.

I think anyone who loves Mac foundations would like this foundation and concealer duo. They share a lot of Mac product's properties. For me Mac foundations are thicker than others and have that setting aspect which doesn't allow for you to spend time working it in or touching up throughout the day. However, you probably don't need to because they are long lasting. But for an everyday foundation it is way too heavy and difficult to work with. However, the inclusion of such a high SPF makes it inappropriate for evening wear when flash photography is more than likely. I will continue to play around with these products and use them up - especially the concealer - but I won't repurchase them. I think there are far better options from the likes of Maybelline and Bourjois on the high street which aren't much more expensive. So the answer to the first question 'why not?' turns out may be next time won't apply.