New Wet N Wild Primer PhotoFocus Eyeshadow Primer vs. (discontinued) Wet N Wild Fergie Eyeshadow Primer

Disclosure: Affiliate links.

Wet N Wild repackaged and reformulated a few of their products recently when they discontinued their Fergie line. I compared the new and old Pearlescent Pink blushes not long ago (not the same!), and I bought a tube of the new eyeshadow primer at the same time to do a similar comparison.

The Fergie primer was my favorite for years. I compared it to a a bunch of other primers (here and here), and for the price, it really couldn't be beat. So I was horrified to hear that it had been discontinued and disappointed when I read comments from some people who said that its replacement, PhotoFocus Eyeshadow Primer, wasn't quite the same. I was curious to find out for myself, especially since the ingredients list for the Fergie primer and the new PhotoFocus primer are identical. (You can see the new ingredients here and the old ones here.) How could it be different, then? In fact, Wet N Wild says "new look" on the product page for this primer--not "new product."

But I can confirm that the new and old primers do not seem to be the same. I don't know what that means. Different suppliers for the ingredients? Different factory/manufacturing process? Who knows!

The new primer has a decidedly thicker and firmer texture and it doesn't intensify eyeshadow quite as well as the old primer. Take a look:

I used a mediocre CoverGirl eyeshadow single to test the primer. On the far left is no primer, then PhotoFocus, then Fergie, and finally Black Radiance (reviewed here) for good measure, since it's made by the same company. It was harder to build up the intensity of the eyeshadow over the PhotoFocus primer--better than no primer at all, but not nearly as effective as the other two. The new primer also seemed to be slightly different in color/opacity from the Fergie stuff, in addition to being much thicker. You can see the difference faintly at the bottom of each of the swatches above, but I swatched all three on white paper to show it more clearly.

Again, PhotoFocus on the left, Fergie in the middle, and Black Radiance on the right. It's not the easiest photo to interpret, so let me help. The Fergie primer is the most opaque of the three and also the most yellow-toned. The PhotoFocus primer is sheerer, but not as sheer as the Black Radiance primer. None of these three products is identical.

Of course, I've also used the new primer on my actual eyelids. In the test pictured here, I used PhotoFocus on one eye and Fergie on the other, under Burberry Rosewood. I find Rosewood (swatched here) to be quite powdery and sheer, so it benefits from a good primer.

PhotoFocus, immediately after application:

Fergie, immediately after application:

I didn't see much difference, other than that my right eyelid is apparently more wrinkly. (I think it's mainly the raking angle of the light.)

And then I took photos again at the end of a very sweaty day, after about 8 hours of wear. You'll have to excuse the poorer lighting, since it was night and I had to take the after photos indoors.

PhotoFocus after 8 hours:

Some definite fading, but no creasing.

Fergie after 8 hours:

No creasing here either, but it has faded less.

Conclusions? I don't know exactly what the fuck Wet N Wild is doing with these replacements for products that were formerly well-loved and highly rated, which are ostensibly the same thing, but clearly aren't really. If your primary reason for using an eyeshadow primer is to prevent creasing, you should be fine using the new PhotoFocus primer (I have extremely oily eyelids, so I've put them to a rigorous test). If, however, you mainly want to intensify the pigmentation or opacity of your eyeshadow or to prevent fading, I would opt for something else, like the Black Radiance primer. Though it looks and feels more like the PhotoFocus primer than the Fergie one, the Black Radiance primer performs better. And it's cheap, too. Or you can stock up on leftover tubes of Fergie primer while you still can.

A possible dupe for the discontinued Wet N Wild Fergie Eyeshadow Primer? Black Radiance Eyeshadow Primer

Disclosure: Affiliate links.

When I found out that Wet N Wild was discontinuing their Fergie line, my first thought was BUT WHAT ABOUT THE EYESHADOW PRIMER? It's been my favorite for a few years now, and in all my tests it performs as well as or better than all the more expensive options I've tried: Urban Decay, Too Faced, and LORAC here, and Nars here. So despite still having half a very worn-out tube--i.e. at least 6 months' worth--of the Fergie stuff left, I panicked and bought a tube of Black Radiance Eyeshadow Primer. (This was in the short period after the Fergie stuff has disappeared but before the new Wet N Wild Photo Focus Eyeshadow Primer had appeared.) Black Radiance is owned by the same company as Wet N Wild, and so the packaging of their products is very similar, along with the price point. The ingredients of the Black Radiance primer and the Wet N Wild Fergie primer are also similar, though not identical.

Black Radiance Eyeshadow Primer:

Isododecane, Talc, Trimethylsiloxysilicate, CyclopentaSiloxane, Polyethylene, Disteardimonium Hectorite, VP, Eicosene Copolymer, Synthetic Beeswax, Propylene Carbonate, Pentaerythrityl Tetraisostearate, Sorbitan Sesquioleate, Boron Nitride, Aluminum Starch Octenylsuccinate, Phenoxyethanol, Sorbic Acid, Bisabolol, Octyldodecyl Stearoyl Stearate, Capric Triglyceride, Caprylic, Acrylates Copolymer, Magnesium Carbonate, Crithmum Maritimum Extract, Nelumbo Nucifera Stamen Extract, Bismuth Oxychloride (CI 77163), Iron Oxides (CI 77491, CI 77492, CI 77499), Titanium Dioxide (CI 77891)

Wet N Wild Fergie Eyeshadow Primer:

Isododecane, Talc, Cyclopentasiloxane, Trimethylsiloxysilicate, Disteardimonium Hectorite, Polyethylene, Vp/Eicosene Copolymer, Boron Nitride, Aluminum Starch Octenylsuccinate, Propylene Carbonate, Sorbitan Sesquioleate, Synthetic Beeswax, Pentaerythrityl Tetraisostearate, Methicone, Phenoxyethanol, Acrylates Copolymer, Magnesium Carbonate, Dimethicone Crosspolymer, Bisabolol, Sorbic Acid, Octyldodecyl Stearoyl Stearate, Caprylic/Capric Triglyceride, Dimethicone/Vinyl Dimethicone Crosspolymer, Crithmum Maritimum Extract, Dimethiconol, Nelumbo Nucifera Stamen Extract, Bismuth Oxychloride/Ci 77163, Iron Oxides/Ci 77491, Ci 77492, Ci 77499, Titanium Dioxide/Ci 77891 0812.

Note that there was also, I think, a pink, shimmery Fergie primer, but this is for the translucent beige version, called "For My Primas." (Yep.)

The things I'm looking for in an eyeshadow primer are as follows, in order of importance: prevents creasing on my extremely oily eyelids, intensifies pigment, and prevents fading. Ideally it will also provide a smoother surface for applying eyeshadow, but I can work around that.

So first, here is a comparison of how these two primers work to intensify eyeshadow, using a terrible CoverGirl eyeshadow single that I keep around at this point just to test primers. On the left there is a swatch with no primer, in the middle over the Black Radiance primer, and on the right over the Wet N Wild Fergie Primer.

I think the Black Radiance swatch looks slightly more intense here, but it may just be the angle. They looked about the same in person. You can see a slight whitish halo around the edges of the Fergie swatch. I'd read people who complained that the Fergie primer was too light and showed up as chalky on their eyelids. Because light beige things tend to blend in with my skin, it can be hard to tell if they are translucent or just pale, so I swatched the two primers over a black eyeliner (Urban Decay Zero): Black Radiance at the top, and Fergie on the bottom.

I used the same amount of each product, so you can clearly see that the Fergie stuff has more light pigment in it. The Black Radiance primer is also a little thicker, though, so it picked up a bit of the eyeliner when I swiped it. I haven't noticed that this difference in thickness makes it any more difficult to apply to the eyelid, by the way.

So I'd call them even in terms of intensifying eyeshadow, but the pigmentation of the two might make a difference for you: if you have light skin and prefer a translucent beige primer to even out the color of your lids, you won't get that from the Black Radiance primer--which makes sense, since this is a brand designed for black women. Personally, I am happy with the more translucent primer, because I will just use a beige eyeshadow if I want to. It's more versatile.

As for the other factors in performance, creasing and fading, the Black Radiance primer is amazing at preventing creasing. Even on my sweatiest and oiliest days, if I use this, my eyeshadow does not fucking crease at all. Most of the time the Fergie stuff doesn't crease either, but sometimes with cream eyeshadows, at the end of a long day I'll notice some mild creasing. Probably only I can see it when I wink at the mirror from 6 inches away, but still. The Black Radiance is that tiny bit more effective.

On the other hand, my eyeshadow does seem to fade more using the Black Radiance primer than the Fergie primer. The Fergie stuff keeps it at the same intensity pretty much all day, while it looks a little lackluster after a day of wear over the Black Radiance stuff.

For that last reason, the Black Radiance primer isn't a perfect replacement for the Fergie primer, but it's an excellent alternative, if you can find it. This brand is, unfortunately, not available everywhere. My local Walmart sells Black Radiance products, but not all of them do. I bought this tube from drugstore.com--and it's only $4, slightly less than the $5 Wet N Wild option.

I've heard conflicting reports of the new Wet N Wild Photo Focus primer. Supposedly it has the same ingredients as the Fergie one, and the packaging looks a lot alike, but some people report that it doesn't work as well. Others say that it is, in fact, identical. I'll probably pick up a tube when I am running low on the Fergie stuff to compare them. In the meantime, if you are desperate for another tube of the Fergie primer, you can get it for $13 on Amazon--still cheaper than Urban Decay etc.!

Have you tried the new Wet N Wild primer? I'm curious what the consensus is--if it has the same ingredients list as the old one, it should work the same, right?

Primer vs. Primer: Comparison and review of e.l.f Mineral/Studio Eyeshadow Primer and Nars Smudge Proof Eyeshadow Base (plus Wet N Wild Fergie Eyeshadow Primer)

Disclosure: This post contains affiliate links.
Here is a quick comparison of a couple of high and low end eyeshadow primers to supplement my previous post on the subject. This time we have e.l.f. Mineral Eyeshadow Primer, which sells for $3 for 0.15 oz., and Nars Smudge Proof Eyeshadow Base, which sells for $25 for 0.26 oz. (I got a mini tube as a gift-with-purchase). The e.l.f. primer is labeled "Mineral" on the tube, but confusingly listed under "Studio Eyeshadow Primer" on their website. It's the same product. I have it in Sheer.

I swatches these two primers next to Wet N Wild Fergie Take on the Day Eyeshadow Primer in the shade that is ridiculously and unhelpfully named For My Primas. It's the sheer version with no shimmer. This is my favorite primer, so it serves as a good basis for comparison. You can see it compared to other primers in the old post.

These are the things I look for in a primer, in order of importance, since I have fairly oily eyelids: (1) prevents creasing; (2) prevents fading/prolongs wear time; and (3) intensifies the color/opacity of the eyeshadow. So these are the criteria I use to judge a primer, which you can keep in mind if some of them are of less importance to you.

Here are swatches of the same eyeshadow alone and over each of the primers. I gave away the blue Covergirl shadow that I used last time, but I still have this equally crappy one, because the gorgeous color keeps me hanging on: Covergirl Eye Enhancers in Turquoise Tempest. As you can see, it barely shows up at all without primer, so it's a serious test for a primer.

Comparison swatches (left to right) with no primer, over Wet N Wild Fergie Take on the Day Primer, e.l.f. Mineral/Studio Eyeshadow Primer, and Nars Smudge Proof Eyeshadow Base.

You can see from the swatches that the WNW outperforms both the e.l.f. and the Nars in terms of intensifying the shadow. It also outperforms the other two in both other categories as well. No creasing and little fading for 8 hours+.

The e.l.f. primer helps with creasing a bit, but it's not great. By that I mean I can go an hour or two before creasing instead of 15 minutes without primer. It does not make eyeshadow last much longer in general - most of it has worn or faded away after a few hours. It also only slightly improves the pigmentation of eyeshadow. It isn't completely transparent, either. It has some pale pigment in it, which affects the color of the eyeshadow, making it a little lighter. It's hard to tell on my very pasty arm, but if you look at the few millimeters surrounding the swatch, you may be able to see a light halo. This could be a problem for people with darker skin than mine.

The Nars primer does prevent creasing pretty well, so that's good. It helps prolong the wear of the eyeshadow a bit, but not all day. And the intensification of the eyeshadow color is good but not great. It's completely transparent when it sets, and it does create a smooth surface for your eyeshadow, if that's something that's important to you. I don't really care about that, personally. I like that it's not sticky, but I don't particularly need smoother eyelids.

I can't really think of any good reason to spend $25 on this Nars stuff, unless you really like a completely transparent or smoothing primer and have a hard time finding one. It has a lot of positive reviews out there, so I guess it's doing something for someone. I wonder if they are from people who haven't tended to use primers in the past (since it's certainly better than nothing) or who are mega-fans of Nars.

This e.l.f. primer should be skipped entirely. If you want a super cheap primer, go for the $1 e.l.f. version (also reviewed here), which is much better  If you want a very cheap primer, buy the Wet N Wild. I still haven't found anything better, especially when you take the price into account!

Do I Need This? Eyeshadow Primer (with comparison, reviews, and photos of seven primers)

Disclosure: This post contains affiliate links.

Here is the latest installment of "Do I Need This?", a series about new and trendy beauty products (or just those that might be unfamiliar and baffling to both of us). I'll offer my experience and opinion about whether or not I think the product under consideration is worth shelling out for. Obviously, you don't need ANY beauty products, so the answer is always going to be no, a little bit. But is it going to change your life (or face)? Is it going to make things easier? Are you going to notice any difference at all if you use it? That's what I'm getting at. You may disagree with my verdict, because we all have different bodies/faces/brains/desires, but I'll try to give you a starting point at least.

Short answer: Yes, if you wear eyeshadow or eyeliner.

My Not-Cheap Favorites (and How to Avoid Paying Full Price for Them, If At All Possible)

See my cheap favorites here.

Okay, I confess, not every makeup/skin care product I use is super cheap. Sometimes I manage to get something fancy for a good price. Other times I haven't found a cheap option that I like as much as the pricier one. I feel like it occasionally makes financial sense to pay the extra $5-10 when you know something is just right, rather than to experiment with a bunch of cheaper options and end up spending more in the process. Your threshold and mine for what is a reasonable price to pay to avoid gambling on something new will differ. For example, I know there are other gel moisturizers that might substitute for the Paula's Choice one I've listed below. For $17 (on sale), I'll just buy the Paula's Choice version, because I love it. If it cost $20+, I would probably look around for a substitute.

I'm linking to all of these products and giving you their regular price, but honestly, I don't think I have ever bought one of them for full price. If I have tips for finding these for cheaper, I've included them below.

The Balm Stainiac in Beauty Queen, $17

This stain has an awesome gel formula, so it doesn't bleed all over the fucking place like Benefit Benetint. That means I can actually use it to outline my lips and then fill them in.  It can be used for cheeks too, but I tend not to use it that way. On my lips it leaves a nice, deep pink stain. Sometimes I wear it under another lip color so that when that inevitably wears off, I'll be left with this. It also feels somehow really soft and luxurious to apply. I know that sounds weird, but I like it. 

I got this for free using my Birchbox points, so if you have any of those saved up, this would be a good choice. At the time I'm writing this, it's $14 on Amazon, which is a little better, at least.

Nouveau Cheap's review of Wet N Wild Fergie Take On The Day Eyeshadow Primer

Looks really impressive!