CG TruBlend vs. Chanel Double Perfection Powder Foundation

After seeing the impressive things that EMD had to say about TruBlend I
had to give it a try. I've been using the Chanel PF which I thought was
very nice. But the CG is creamier, blends more easily, and the finish
is noticeably prettier. I bought the Ivory which is almost too light
for me even though I'm so pale you can read the newspaper through me.
I'm a MAC NC 15. And that was after careful deliberation of the SA's
about taking me even lighter. The CG is the best PF I've encountered
since the demise of OoO. The moral of the story is...save your money!
Buy CG!
Pam

I think you just sold me!
Stevie


"Qintes" <rn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:dn_gf.12926$8o6.9...@trndny03...

I will second your recommendation of CG's PF.
Before I was using the Lancome dual finish but found the two so comparable
except for price.
Jennifer


"Qintes" <rn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:dn_gf.12926$8o6.9...@trndny03...

Yay, Pam! I'm so happy to spread the good word about CG's TruBlend
powder foundation. It really is the best thing since OoO bit the dust.
I'm actually liking it more than the OoO because the CG is lighter
weight, i.e. even less mask–y.
I'm pretty well convinced that there's almost no high–end foundation
out there that's extraordinarily superior to drugstore stuff.

LOL! :D Good!
Stevie wrote:

lilacjennifer wrote:
I couldn't stomach the stong scent of the Lancome. I've never smelled
makeup that strong before. Blah.
Pam

EMiriamD wrote:
:D You know, I think you're the one who turned me on to the OoO too!
*GASP* Were you struck by lightening after typing that? ;) It's been
so long since I used the OoO that I can't say for sure if the CG is
better but if it's not better then it's darn close.
Maybe not superior quality but I think it's much easier to find a good
color match with high–end. Mostly because the SA's do it for me and
save me the stress!
Pam

I bought some when it first came out (I never tried the OoO, so I had
nothing to compare it to). At first I wasn't all that impressed with
it, but I don't think I tried it on my entire face.
This morning I put it on after cleansing & moisturizing, and wow, I
really like it now! I'm a little sorry that I have a full compact of
Studio Fix in my stash, since I think I like the CG better. I didn't
think I'd ever find anything I liked better than Studio Fix or Aveda
Dual, but this is definitely a new favorite.
––
Jen in ND

On 23 Nov 2005 15:56:39 –0800, "EMiriamD" <emiri...@gmail.com> wrote:
How do you think it compares with Aquasmooth?
KC

Qintes wrote:
The CG is the best PF I've encountered
I feel a magnet drawing me to my Walgreen store. Does it have a built
in spf? Anyone have any breakouts? (I am remembering the original CG
stuff of the early 60's).

KC wrote:
I'm not a good one to ask. I HATE Aquasmooth. It always looked like
crap on me.
Pam

val189 wrote:
Yes, 15!
No but I'm not usually prone to breakouts anyway. The finish is sooo
pretty. I can't quit looking in the mirror when I put it on.
Pam

Qintes <rn...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:dn_gf.12926$8o6.9...@trndny03:
Yep, yep, this was the product that finally weaned me off the pricey
Chanel DP powder once and for all. I switched several months ago and
haven't looked back since. My only problem has been finding it, because
my closest Target doesn't even have a spot for it in the regular display.
But I managed to grab 2 (or 3) more compacts when I was in St Louis
visiting the in–laws last week. :)
Michele
––
"I'm not mad at you, I'm mad at the dirt."
–– Joan Crawford in "Mommie Dearest"
Take out the NOT to get the correct email address.

On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 18:52:41 GMT, Qintes <rn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
How do you think it compares with Aquasmooth?
The Aquasmooth looked good on me; it was my foundation of choice for a
long time. I gave up on it because it didn't have staying power on
me. The CG TruBlend powder foundation made me look cakey and wrinkly,
but I've never read another negative review on it (other than mine!)
so I think I'm the exception for the CG.
Lauri in WA

On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 22:35:35 –0800, Lauri
<lau...@despamcharter.despamnet> wrote:
Thanks. I just scraped the last of my Aquasmooth out of the container
and although I was loving my Dream Mousse, lately it has been looking
cakey on me at the end of day. The Aquasmooth stays for me, even in my
oily areas, but some days it seems too makeupy.
I may try the CG, just to see. Thanks for your thoughts.
KC

Oh Michele, you know what the sick thing is? I just bought 2 compacts
of the Chanel for myself for Christmas. Oh well, at least we have back
up choices. It's good to have more than one foundation that you love.
If the CG is ever discontinued we can always go back to the Chanel.
Pam

Qintes <rn...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:5k%jf.40$Yh...@trndny01:
Yes, having the choice is a nice luxury, isn't it? Enjoy!
Michele
––
"I'm not mad at you, I'm mad at the dirt."
–– Joan Crawford in "Mommie Dearest"
Take out the NOT to get the correct email address.

On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 12:45:05 GMT, KC <cmk1...@earthlink.net> wrote:
I know what you mean about the Aquasmooth seeming too "makeupy"
sometimes. I liked it for a long time, but am now using the Dream
Matte Mousse. :) I am wanting to try a mineral foundation but Google
turns up some pretty scary posts, including a few noting that they can
look metallic or "sparkly".
Lots of people are raving about it, so it's sure worth a shot!
Lauri in WA

ok. got questions. went to rite aid and bought the liquid. not the
powder. went back and LOOKED at the powder. the colors are scary..
how do they blend out? do they sort of adjust to your skin tone? some
of these look orange, some look too peach/pink.. some don't look yellow
enough. I want to buy/use this
thoughts?
help?
please!
Stevie

On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 20:00:59 –0800, Lauri
<lau...@despamcharter.despamnet> wrote:
I have the Bare Essentuals and while I have tons of fun with the eye
shadows and liners (where I make an eyeliner paste with water and the
shadow powder, then add a bit of one of the glimmers), and the
blushes, I have trouble with the foundation. Because I have an oily
t–zone, I shy away from anything with shine, though I've scared myself
with the matte–ness sometimes! The BE foundation isn't metallic or
sparkly, I would use the word "glow" maybe, but it's a subtle and
healthy looking effect. However, if you're oily, words like glow and
dewy and all that make you run for the powder. When I use the
foundation, it's when I am just running to the store and I don't need
all day lasting and oil control power. It's one more tool in the bag,
for me, not my main foundation.
One thing I do love, though, if you need a great concealer: I have a
couple shades of the Multi–taking mineral Bisque (there are 3 shades,
IIRC) and I dip a concealer brush into water, then into the power and
mix it in the cap. It makes a very sheer concealer that I use under my
eyes, but especially on blemishes and tiny capillaries and such around
my nose. You have to work quickly, because it dries quickly, but it is
light and not cakey and it lasts. Sometimes, I use just that and then
a little powder for the face.
Oh the blushes are nice, too, because they are sheer and you can
always mix them with some foundation or a bisque shade to mute the
color.
If you like to play, then a kit with a shade of foundation and a
couple of eyeshadows and a blush would give you a chance to see what
you like.
KC

Stevie wrote:
The colors run very light despite how they look in the pan but they are
supposed to adjust to your skin tone. I looked at the MUA reviews and
found someone with similar skin as mine and went by her shade
recommendation. I couldn't tell just by looking at them either. Good luck!
Pam