Wednesday, February 20, 2008

Maybelline Define-A-Lash Mascara and Estee Lauder Projectionist Mascara (Review)


*EDIT: After a few more days of using Define-A-Lash, I'm dumping this thing out. THANK GOOODNESS IT WAS FREE! Probably won't purchase again because it's making my poor lashes fall off more than usual! ;[

Thank God I have some mark in one of my eye which makes it easier which eye was which when I uploaded the pictures. Anyway, I just did a comparison of my new vs. my old mascara. I chucked out the Estee because it's been three months already since I first used it. Remember ladies... throw those mascaras away after three months whether you used it everyday or not.





The Estee had the traditional brush applicator that has the bristles while the Maybelline has the new kind of applicator which doesn't really have hair but its flexible. I found it kinda odd in the beginning since I was so used to a more sturdy wand. It just take some getting used to using it.


Let's begin...!

Lashes were curled using Shu Uemura Eyelash Curler



Round 1: Maybelline Define-A-Lash Mascara


Round 2: Estee Lauder Projectionist



And my take on it:

Maybelline: My lashes are pretty long to begin with but without mascara, it's not really that noticeable. The Maybelline mascara only defines my lashes (hence the name), and doesn't give it much volume compared to my Estee mascara. Maybelline gives that natural looking lashes minus the clumping. However, Maybelline mascara does not hold the curl at all. It just goes flat after awhile. What I like about it though is it separates my lashes without the clumping. It might be because of the wand applicator not your traditional one. For me this is ok for everyday use since I usually opt for a more natural looking lashes. I'll probably get more volume if I keep coating my lashes. However, the Maybelline mascara kinda reminded me of my old Fresh mascara that I really loved. It gave me natural looking, long lashes, and it curls your lashes even WITHOUT curling it before hand. Only drawback about the mascara was the price... $25. Would I purchase Maybelline Define-A-Lash again? No. Thank God for buy one get one free. This was the freebie. I would still use it only because it does a some what ok job and it's ok for my everyday wear. (The mascara is not waterproof.)

Estee: Estee mascara already lengthens and volumizes your lashes after one coat. However, more than two coats of it will my your lashes look really clumpy. It doesn't hold the curl too well, but it holds it better compared to the Maybelline. The only reason I've been using this mascara was because it was free. heehee. Probably would not purchase the full size though. (The mascara is not waterproof.)

In conclusion: I'm still in the search of my HG mascara with a pretty decent price. So I'll prolly test another on in three months when it's time for the Maybelline mascara to go. I still love my Fresh mascara... but I'm really just not willing to shell out $25 for it. Hopefully the pictures and my two cents on it helped a bit whether your the Maybelline or the Estee is worth purchasing.

4 comments:

  1. Have you tried Voluminous? Or Telescopic? I like that one right now. Its great for us pinays with fine hair. It's very precise. For me, at least... I like it a lot.

    ReplyDelete
  2. oooh im glad you did this review because i was thinking whether i should get the define a lash mascara!

    i love estee lauder mascaras. There the only mascaras that hold my curls and lengthens my short lashes.

    Im jealous of your lashes you have such long full lashes :(

    ReplyDelete
  3. Your natural lashes are luscious! You don't even need mascara. :)

    I second Voluminous, although I'm really love Clinique High Impact right now!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hey Anne, thanks for stopping by my blog earlier last week. I'll also throw my hat in for Voluminous! I really love this mascara, although it can get clumpy by the second coat.

    ReplyDelete