January 21, 2010

Foundation review #13: Makeup For Ever HD

The same day I had ordered Nars Sheer Glow, I also ordered MUFE HD.
Why order 2 foundations at the same time, you will ask. Why not? I guess I had been wanting to try these 2 for a long time and since the reviews were so good, I kind of expected to be disappointed by at least one of them, and then I'd have the other one. Silly, uh?

Courtesy to the local MUFE online store, I had to wait over 2 weeks to get my order, and in the meantime I had fallen in love with the Nars foundation (which had arrived from abroad in 3 days, hum) and didn't see the point in trying HD anymore. But you know me, I'd do everything for my foundation reviews encyclopedia. So I gave it a try.

First things first, I looked at the packaging: this one comes with a pump, and that's always nice and handy. The bottle is transparent, so you can always see how much product is left, that's convenient too. It's not glass and doesn't feel easily breakable, which is good when you're clumsy or still asleep.

I applied with a Mac 190 and I thought it felt a bit heavy. But I tried again with a Mac 182 kabuki, which is the brush I usually use for all liquid foundations, and it worked much better since I didn't need as much product.
The finish is very nice, not totally dewy but certainly not flat matte. The coverage is medium and very easy to build up to full.

The result was flawless and beautiful. Probably as beautiful as Nars Sheer Glow. Damned, here I was with very similar products that I liked a lot! Once applied, the only difference was in the shade. Since MUFE HD in 117 was reported to be very yellow, I was afraid it would be too much for me and ordered 115. This is a fair beige with a tiny bit of pink in it but it's still a very good match for me, slightly less warm than Sheer Glow in Gobi.

But I finally found a slight difference: HD starts looking oily on my t-zone quicker than Sheer Glow. It still lasts a reasonable 6 hours before I need to touch up with powder, but since the Nars lasts particularly long on me (which is great), HD doesn't do as well.

This being said, it still is an excellent foundation, something I can rely on if I have a long day or if I am going to be photographed (don't know how Nars performs in HD pictures) and I would definitely recommend it. I am glad I have it even if Nars works slightly better for me, because it's really a brilliant product.


  1. YOu know, I've been wanting to try both of these foundations but haven't gotten around to it yet. I could never decide which one I wanted!

    What kind of skin do you have? My skin is pretty dry in the winter, so I should probably lean towards the one that is more moisturizing if anything.

  2. @ Fabulous: welcome :) My skin is combination, my T-zone can get pretty oily and my cheeks pretty dry, especially in the winter. For me, MUFE felt a bit more moisturizing (which is probably why it didn't last as long on my t-zone) but I think Nars also gets a lot of good reviews from people with dry skin.

  3. hello !

    J'ai finalement acheté le Revlon photoready ...beaucoup moins de "couverture" que le colorstay mais tout léger...

    Caro xxx

  4. so just to confirm...you are a nc15 in mac..and you got nars sheer glow in gobi? cos i want to try it but i dont know what colour to go for!! it would be tres helpful :) xx

  5. @ dollygirl73: yes I'm NC15, more neutral then realy yellow, and Gobi is perfect for me

  6. hey dear, i am around nc20-nc25, do u reckon i shld get deauville, fiji or ceylan for NARS? i'm asian with no pink undertones. thanks dear!

  7. @Anonymous: you can find swatches on Karlasugar's website, they're here: http://karlasugar.net/2009/10/nars-sheer-glow-foundation/

    Deauville will probably be too neutral and too light for you. Fidji is more golden and Ceylan is more yellow, as you can see on the pictures.


I love getting comments, thanks for sharing your thoughts!