Hi! Exactly a week ago, I published a quick "master post" of sorts regarding MAC's February 2014 collection, A Fantasy of Flowers. You can visit that post here.
Of the five products I purchased, the first I wanted to review was the limited edition lipstick in "Dreaming Dahlia," a lustre finish (like all of the lipsticks in this collection, actually).
"Dreaming Dahlia" was actually the first lipstick I wanted from this collection, because it was described as a coral. Well, apparently I've misunderstood the definition of "coral" all this time, though that's not to say that I'm disappointed by this lipstick's color.
Name: Dreaming Dahlia (7M)*
Net Wt.: 0.1 oz./ 3 g.
Price: $16 (I purchased before the price increase for $15)
Finish: Lustre (glossy, creamy, lightweight)
*Apparently the "7M," as well as the other number-letter combos following the names of all lipsticks from this collection, are botany codes or something. I also realized that MAC lipsticks don't have a color number - the number I've been putting in parenthesis in previous reviews is apparently a batch code, so I will not be including that number in future reviews.
On MAC's website, "Dreaming Dahlia" is described as a "sheer red coral." I always thought coral was a pinkish orange, hence why I jumped on this color so fast. But it seems that "coral" pretty much means orange with red or pink in it...and in this case, it's a red-based coral.
The orange in this lipstick makes it a softer red. To me, it's a straight-up tomato-red. I may have mentioned this before, but oranges seem to go well with my skin tone. Still, they are simply not my preferred color choice.
What I've learned with the lustres that I own is that the lustre finish can either be very sheer or slightly sheerer than the cremesheen finish (in other words, buildable to decent opacity). The first lustre I reviewed on this blog, "Hug Me," falls into the latter category, and so does "Dreaming Dahlia."
Though it can be swiped on quickly for a wash of color, "Dreaming Dahlia" can easily be built up to a decent level of pigmentation. There are tiny shimmers in this color, but they add dimension and shine to the product's finish without making themselves known, which I wholeheartedly appreciate.
Even though orange isn't my go-to color, "Dreaming Dahlia" is most definitely a lovely color, and I think the lustre finish plays a big role in this success."Dreaming Dahlia" is clearly a bright lip color, and reds can already be difficult for some people - myself included - to wear. The lustre finish, however, allows this lipstick to be bright but not harsh. That's a characteristic I found to be true for all of the lipsticks I purchased from this collection: they're bright colors, and pastel colors, but they're still easy to wear on a daily basis.
They are also, as the lustre finish implies, very glossy, which makes them appropriate for spring, in my opinion. "Dreaming Dahlia" is fairly hydrating on my lips, though I've never experienced otherwise with any lustres I own. It lasts about three hours on me, without eating. I don't mind that personally because I tend to take my lipstick off right before eating anyway, and reapply it afterwards. I feel like a mess waiting to happen when I eat with creamier lipsticks on
|FACE: Physician's Formula Organic Wear CC Cream in "Light"|
CHEEKS: MAC's "Azalea in the Afternoon" Mineralize Blush
LIPS: "Dreaming Dahlia"
I am happy I purchased "Dreaming Dahlia" overall. It has the color payoff of more pigmented lustres, while keeping in line with the characteristic hydration, creaminess, and glossiness of lustres. Of the four lipsticks I purchased from A Fantasy of Flowers, I think that "Dreaming Dahlia" ranks second in terms of which lipsticks I enjoy the most.
I'm not sure if this lipstick is still available, as it is limited edition and was released the beginning of last month, but I know some websites have restocked the collection a few times, and some counters may still have stock left over, so you may still be able to purchase it.
Hope this review was helpful, and thanks for stopping by! ('<>')>