Thursday, May 31, 2012

Comparison swatch

Good evening!

Tonight I bring to you a first from me- a comparison swatch. I enjoy seeing these from other bloggers I admire, so I hope I can do this properly. Now, my comparison won't be between two well known polishes; mine is between a well known and one of my creation :) So, I'll also being showing off my first dupe. Sit back and enjoy!

Ok, so I know most of you should know what OPI's Absolutely Alice looks like. You're prolly familiar with how hard to find and expensive it is, and can, be. I acquired my own bottle of AA last year without too much difficulty, but almost immediately with the first use, I wasn't totally happy with. I'll explain why.

My first complaint is how thick it was even on the first use. I tried and tried to get the coats thin, but that was impossible. AA only got thicker after that, no matter how much lacquer thinner I used.

My second complaint is how quickly it chipped, which was practically the next day. Yes, yes, I know, it's glitter. Glitter chips fast, especially with how dense AA is. Even still, I didn't expect it to chip that soon.

So, with these two things working against, I sought to create a suitable dupe. It took some, as I couldn't find what I needed. What, exactly, is my secret :P You'll notice right away in pics some obvious differences.

My dupe is made with a finer glitter than AA, which is, in my opinion, a chunky glitter. Because it's finer, it lays much smoother and has more shine to it, even without a topcoat (which I didn't use in these swatches). My dupe still has a texture and still is topcoat hungry, but it's no where near as bad as most of my other glitters. As for chipping, I don't know yet how well it lasts.

For the sake of my comparison, I applied 3 coats of my dupe against 2 of AA, which was achieved for opacity. No topcoat was used.

So, what do you think? Personally, I like my dupe better for the reasons I listed. The dupe is a bit darker, but to those who aren't too picky or familiar with AA, it could be a great substitute.

1 comment: