MAC recently had some 25% off sitewide business + 6% eBates, so I just HAD to get something, right? Sure…
MAC Pro Longwear Nourishing Waterproof Foundation, available in 16 shades, for $35. This foundation is only 0.84 oz of product, which is LESS than the usual 1 oz of product. If you saw my video, you will know that this is strike THREE!). Get it here.
Like most MAC foundations – finding my shade is extremely difficult. I think they purposely make it difficult online so that you have to physically go to the store and ask for help. It took me a very long time to realize that their shade names stood for NOT Cool and NOT Warm… But anywho, enough about me.
I picked up the shade NW20 (NOT Warm) which they describe as “rosy peach with rosy undertone for light to medium skin”. Below are some swatch comparisons to the only other MAC foundations I have.
- Studio Fix Powder Plus Foundation – NW20 ( to show comparison 1-to-1)
- Pro Longwear Nourishing Waterproof Foundation – NW20
- Pro Longwear Nourishing Waterproof Foundation – NW20 after oxidizing (which literally happens before your eyes)
- Pro Longwear Foundation (the regular/classic one) – N18
- Studio Fix Fluid SPF 15 – NC15
The Studio Fix Fluid was one of my firsts, when I thought the “C” shades meant “cool” because WHY WOULD THEY MEAN ANYTHING ELSE, MAC. Jeeze. I can’t be the only one, right?!
Again – I find it difficult to navigate MAC’s foundation options on their website. There is no way to sort by skin type they are best suited for, and upon expanding the claims of most of them they pretty much just say “all skin types”. Which I personally find to be a LOAD OF HOT GARBAGE.
Here is what MAC has to say:
- for all skin types
- provides instant and long-term hydration
- medium to full coverage
- can be used as a foundation or concealer (TO CONCEAL WHAT?)
- natural satin finish
- long-wearing, 24 hours (FALSE)
- provides stay-true color (WRONG AGAIN)
They also point out that it is
- dermatologist tested
- ophthalmologist tested – isn’t that….eyes??
WHAT’S IN THIS STUFF?
If you watched my video, I made a big ol’ stink about how there was so much silicone in this product. I did it about the last foundation I reviewed too. So that got me thinking – what makes my Holy Grails so different? What is in their ingredients that make them better? What should I be looking for in a foundation?
And you wanna know what I found in my favorite foundations?
In the top 5 ingredients.
Of every. single. one. of them.
So obviously… it’s not that. I’m sorry I was so rude to you Dimethicone. And hey – I can admit when I’m wrong. I used to be strictly OIL-FREE everything, but now I know it only matters which oils are included.
In fact, I’m having a pretty hard time finding ANY popular foundation that does not contain silicone. Only truly natural brands (which I have not fully dived into testing foundation from these types of brands yet) have face makeup without these.
So let me just correct myself and say – IT’S NOT SILICONE’S FAULT. It is true that silicone does not play all that nice with oil, and the oils on your face. BUT, it shouldn’t be a reason to discount or judge a foundation so harshly. Everything you read in the next two sections will be plenty of justification for judging this foundation harshly 🙂
As far as this foundation – it does also contain some skin benefiting antioxidants. Lecithin, caffeine and sodium hyaluronate (hyaluronic acid) are in this formulation. Which I guess is why they can call it nourishing.
ON THE SKIN
Check out my first impression of this foundation on my YouTube channel – and don’t forget to subscribe while you’re there!
I did not love the way this looked on my face. Overall, it applied MUCH better with a damp sponge, but even then it looked very patchy and made my skin look extremely dry (um, hi – OIL SLICK HERE.) The shade was also very off and just weird. It was oxidizing SO fast, but I still felt like I looked very pale.
This foundation, even with a smoothing primer, was settling into every single line and pore on my face. It somehow made my oily skin (which I feel I properly prep and prime every time) look extra dry and flaky. So instant hydration I think NOT. Natural satin finish – I think NOT!
I also did not find this to be anywhere close to full coverage, much less have enough coverage to conceal a pimple on my chin. The coverage was buildable on a second “paint” layer, but I could still see a lot of freckles coming through.
See it in action here:
24 hours is a hard no. This looked very bad at the end of 14. I was very oily – and while there was no transfer (like wtf did it go?) I was missing foundation in areas. It just looked awful.
I did try this on subsequent days, and I did have a little better luck with a different primer. I applied over the Tarte Timeless Smoothing Primer, mixed with CG Healthy Elixir – it wore SO much better.
I did not test the waterproof claims of this foundation. However, I would like to note that the swatches on my arm above – the regular Pro Longwear Foundation swatch lasted way longer than any of the other swatches on my arm, even after showering. So – I’d say if you are going for a long wearing one, go for that one!!
This doesn’t last long on my skin like it claims. So using it as a mix in to prolong the wear of other foundations is off the table. It doesn’t have super high coverage, so mixing it in for that purpose is pointless. The finish doesn’t lean heavily in either direction in any sort of flattering way, so I can’t mix it in to make something more matte and poreless or dewier.
Have you had luck with this product? What is your skin type if so?
Get the MAC Pro Longwear Nourishing Waterproof Foundation HERE (if you dare). But I’d recommend the regular Pro Longwear 😉