My Chanel Collection- Hots and Nots!

image1 (6)Don’t get me wrong, I will always hold a special place in my heart for Chanel. It’s like my child. But, it still has its bad moments, which I’m going to share in my hot or nots.



Roussy and L’Exuberante [left to right]

I don’t have one secure feeling about these, to be honest;


In the shades ‘L’Exuberante’ (Rouge Allure Velvet) and ‘Roussy’ (Rouge Coco) [left to right].

some are amazing, others… not so much.

Favourites: Most in the Rouge Coco Collection, the Rouge Allure Velvet Collection

  • Smooth, Creamy
  • Highly Pigmented
  • Luxurious Packaging
  • Long- Wearing
  • Very faintly but pleasantly scented

Meh’s: Barcelona Red, (Sheer) Romance

In the shade Barcelona Red

In the shade ‘Barcelona Red’.

Barcelona Red

I love this colour for fall, and I don’t have a colour like it, which is why I’m so disappointed with how drying it is on the lips and the shorter wear time compared to other lipsticks. It doesn’t feel as smooth, so I wouldn’t spend the money on this.

Rouge Coco Shine Hydrating Sheer Lipshine

Rouge Coco size versus Sheer Lipshine

Rouge Coco size versus Sheer Lipshine.

That’s a mouthful. These are nice lipsticks, don’t get me wrong- the sheer range is moisturising, and much more suited to everyday wear. However, I noticed they are smaller than the average lipsticks, and considering the lack of pigmentation (which I understand, since they’re obviously sheer) I don’t think these are worth over £20 either when they’re essentially tinted lip balms. There are lots of drugstore products that do the same thing, such as;

Barcelona Red and Romance [left to right]

‘Barcelona Red’ and Sheer Lipshine ‘Romance’ [left to right]

  • Revlon Colourburst Lip Butter
  • Burt’s Bees Tinted Lip Balm
  • L’Oreal Colour Riche Balm

soleil de tan Chanel bronzing makeup base

Basically- a cream bronzer. This thing will last you a lifetime. I’ve had it for about a year and a half and I’ve barely made a dent in it.IMG_1012 (1)

Chanel claims it can be worn over or under your foundation, or just on its own. I have never used it underneath my foundation, but it has a lovely consistency that would give it hold if you wanted to use it for that. Its a lot denser than other cream bronzers I’ve tried, which means it lasts ages both in the pot and on your face. It still blends out effortlessly though, and gives a natural glow.

My one nitpick is the fact that it has one shade. One. It claims to be universal, but anyone can see it would NOT work on darker skin tones. Paler tones is a maybe, but it does have warm undertones so you would have to be so careful.


Oh, and the smell. It has a strong chemical perfume fragrance when I sniff it, but

Chanel Bronzing Base

Chanel Bronzing Base

you can’t detect it when applying it, unlike the Chanel Perfection Lumiere foundation which I’m talking about next. My Decree (for tan skin):hot sign

Chanel Perfection Lumiere Foundation

It claims to be a  “fluid foundation that ensures long-wear makeup for 15 hours straight.IMG_1014
Result: a matte, luminous and perfectly even complexion.
Adjustable coverage: medium to intense”.
My aunt gave this to me because it broke her out, as I’ve heard it does to many people who have tried this foundation. It has the same sharp chemical perfume smell as the bronzer but ten times stronger, and does not make me want to use it.

It also gives a sheer coverage, not medium to intense whatsoever even if you build up with it. Without blemishes involved it does make your skin look flawless. However, any redness and imperfections are left bare, which is why this product does not work for me.IMG_1021

There is a good 1 fluid ounce of product (or 1 ounce of that smell, whatever way you wanna look at it). As for fifteen hours wear time, I do think it could last that long with a primer and setting powder, not that I’ve ever needed it to.

In conclusion, this product is a:nottemplate

CHanel natural finish loose powder

I use this everyday to set my makeup; it doesn’t look cakey, its super smooth, UGH. I love it, IMG_1013basically.

It comes in four shades (I have 30-Natural), three of which are translucent. The other, called Beige Lumiere, I haven’t heard much about. It is very finely milled, and I would say gives a semi-matte finish.

Although the initial price tag is hefty, its well worth it. You get 1 ounce of product for £36, which is substantially more than other brands which charge the same for 0.3 ounces. There is so much product it will last you a good couple of years, probably saving you money rather than losing it.

It claims to even out skin tone, which I don’t fully agree with. I do think it makes your base look more perfected using “photo-reflective pigments”, blurs pores and doesn’t draw attention to fine lines, but it hardly makes red marks disappear.

This powder does have a couple of small problems. One is that it does nothing for oil control. I have an oily t-zone, and I’ll arrive back home to see my forehead shiny- not a good look.

The other is the packaging- its definitely not travel-friendly, and even using it at home I get quite a bit of fallout on my vanity.

Overall I have yet to find a better powder, loose or otherwise, so its definitely a :hot sign

chanel lumiere d’artifices iridescent powders

This has to be the worst product of the lot; claiming they can be used on the eyes and cheeks, IMG_1017this compact of three is no longer even sold by Chanel anymore (thank GOODNESS). Still, I thought I’d throw it in anyway because I’ve seen people selling some for ridiculous prices on Ebay.

The first thing you immediately notice is the excess powder going everywhere when you plonk your brush in. You sweep the brush on your eyes to find literally no product on it. I know they are ‘iridescent’ powders butIMG_1020 this is ridiculous. Even dousing it with Mac Fix Plus I had to dig my brush in there to get anything show up.

What’s sad is that they do swatch very nicely- but just turn into a chunky, powdery glitter on the eyes and cheeks. I don’t understand the function or need of this product.

The other thing is the appearance of the product- I just do not like the circular sequin-type style. Overall, this is just a bad, bad product, so its a big:nottemplate

chanel glossimer lip glosses

Onto the final product! These glosses claim to be an “ultra-shiny gloss, an endless palette of IMG_1015shades and effects. Easy and quick application. A creamy, non-sticky gel that moisturises and shapes the lips in an instant.
Result: ultra-shiny, fresh and sparkling makeup”.

They are definitely sparkly, is all I have to say. The tiny specks in the gloss make the lips appear to have more volume, and the shine polymer ingredient that is claimed to be in it makes them SO shiny. They also feel moisturising, not sticky, which is a nice change from other brands that fall short in that department.

I will say that they are sheer; dont expect to get the colour you see in the tube. And I found that

In the shade 166, ‘Amour’.

you will need to reapply quite often, especially after eating and drinking.

And, of course, the price. It’s up to you whether you think the product is worth £21, but for those of you looking to give yourselves a natural pop of colour, shine and sparkle, I would say these are one of the best glosses in that department.

Overall, I think its a:hottemplate

I’ve just realised I’ve somehow managed to alternate between hots and nots without realising. I’m mildly impressed. Anywho, that concludes my Chanel favourites and not-so-favourites. I don’t think their makeup has the steadiest reputation, but they do have some gold mines if you try them out. Don’t forget to comment at the bottom of the post to tell me your opinions on Chanel products, and what you’d like to see me post about next.


MySophisticatedBeauty XO

Leave Your Thoughts!

1 Comment on "My Chanel Collection- Hots and Nots!"

Notify of

Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted

[…] because its a very similar colour to the Chanel Barcelona Red Lipstick which I spoke about in my Chanel Hot or Nots, but without the feathering, its more moisturising, and natural for […]