13 October 2009

By Terry Rose de Rose - 03 Amber Rose

Ok, the make up assistant in Space NK in Newcastle told me that the Fresh Rose was a better match for my complexion... did I listen - NO! Do I regret it? Yes, I'm afraid so.

I have to admit this blush is nice, but is it worth the £37 price tag? (wow that's actually painful to write never mind say out loud!). My personal opinion is no.

So I picked up shade No 3 - Amber Rose, as I loved how it looked in the rather lovely glass tube - like no other blusher I've seen, basically exactly as the name suggests - a kind of rosy bronze. The make up lady suggested, as my skin is as she kindly put it olive but I would describe more as pale and sallow, the pink colour would look fresher and show up more. But in my infinite wisdom, I insisted on the amber shade, without even trying it on as she had already applied the pink to my face (it did look nice and fresh but when I examined my face in the light by the door I freaked out as the pink and sparkles were very obvious).

This blush has been the choice of just about every beauty editor of late, but I have to admit (like Grace London who's also reviewed this on London Makeup Girl) to being somewhat underwhelmed. For starters I found it difficult to apply - it doesn't go on very evenly and also sinks into and highlights my pores, which aren't normally that noticeable, whilst the sparkle just seems to sit on my skin. Secondly, and perhaps this is down to me choosing the wrong colour, it just doesn't show up that much. I can see that there's something on my skin, but it's not quite a blush, not quite highlighter. I don't think it gives me the glow that many have raved about. Yes, it's pretty, but so are a lot of other blushers and highlighters that don't cost £££ (I'll be posting a review on my favourite highlighter, Shiseido Accentuating Colour Stick in Glistening Flush, shortly).

Ah yes, that brings me on to the subject of Clinique's Up-Lighting. I have a sample of this, which markets itself more as a highlighter than a blush, and I cannot see a whole lot of difference in the formulations of the two products, in fact I actually think Uplighting is slightly better (and half the price, I think it's about £18). It comes in four shades including a lovely rosy brown called 'Blush' which I've got my beady eye on, and although it doesn't smell of roses like Rose de Rose, I think it does a very similar job.

I'm going to play around with the Rose de Rose and see if I can make it work in different ways, perhaps by mixing it with a liquid foundation, but otherwise, this might be for eBay (although I'd be sad to see it go as it looks so pretty in my make up bag!). This was my first foray into By Terry - and although not blown away by this, I did at the same time purchase the Touche Veloute concealer which is AMAZING! Far better than Touche Eclat IMO - review to follow.

Thanks for reading, would love to hear your views on RdR!

PS I tried to get a decent photo of it on my face and had to apply loads for it to show up on the pic, which is either quite telling or perhaps a reflection of the awful light on this dull October morning in London! Either way it's not a great pic sorry.


  1. I didn't like the smell of the RdR either - too strong and a bit artificial smelling for me, and I also found it v sheer. For me it was one of those products I loved the look of in the jar and when swatched, but just didn't quite do it when applied.

    The Clinique one looks lovely - I will have to have a look for that. I'm really liking the Rouge Bunny Rouge Illuminator - I prefer to just add highlight on the top of my cheekbones, so blush + highlight works better for me than a combo product.


  2. i wore the clinique one today - i have it in natural, just on the cheekbones and brow bone. i'm so impressed, it gives a really nice sheen and makes my skin look healthy, and has lasted really well.

    i've never tried rouge bunny rouge, will look out for it