Reader Rated: Urban Decay Stardust Shadows & Sin Primer Potion

A few weeks ago we had a bit of chat about Urban Decay's glitter shadows when we previewed the new Stardust line and some of you bemoaned the fact in comments that they have pretty heavy shedding issues. Urban Decay saw your feedback - who said blogs ain't powerful, eh? - and asked us could they send three readers out a selection of their new Stardust shadows and Sin Primer Potion to test.

Celia, Deirdre and Rosemary were the lucky trio: all had used Urban Decay's glitter shadows, so were familiar with the problem and well placed to judge the improvements - if any - in the Stardust line.

Wanna know how they got on? The full details are after the cut.

Shades received

Each gal got four shadows in shades like Bobby Dazzle (white), Space Cowboy (beige), Retrograde (deep purple), Moon Spoon (grey) and Diamond Dog (brown), plus Sin. So, a mix across the spectrum from lights to darks, giving them a good grounding in what the range has to offer.

Presentation and packaging

Rosemary wasn't impressed: "adequate, nothing exciting," she said, but Celia had a lot of love. "I personally loved the packaging for the Stardust shadows, but I doubt they will be to everyone's taste. The shadow is surrounded by a rubber casing, which you press at the sides to open. I also discovered that the casing acts as handy protection when you manage to drop the shadow and it bounces off the sink and the bathroom floor!"

Sin came under fire for its packaging, a problem a lot of people have with the original Primer Potion too. Celia noted, "I know a lot of people dislike this packaging as so much product is left in the tube, and you have to cut it open."

Ease of use, colour pay-off and longevity

Rosemary reckoned that the non-shed claims were bunk: "I found that they still shedded unfortunately, I had glitter down my cheeks mid-morning. Retrograde, a  dark purple, certainly didn't show up on the eye that colour, it was very light." While the shadows are marketed as a 'wash', meaning they're not intended to deliver a shot of Nars-alike pigment, the brand does claim that there'll be "no fallout, no chunky glitter… just stunning, sparkling eyes."

But Deirdre had the same experience as Rosemary. "Five minutes later I looked like I had wiped glitter under my eyes. Oh, I was a total fright." Celia had a better experience and found she got the best shade intensity when she used the shadows wet. "On the issue of fallout, there is definitely less with these," she said, adding "when you use them wet and with the primer, the colour has great longevity. But that said, I still ended up with some glitter on my cheeks after applying, just less than with their original shades."

The primer helped with longevity Rosemary reckoned as well, and she also liked the colour. So did Celia: "I loved Sin Primer Potion," she said.  "I have been wearing it daily since I got it -  I have the original Primer Potion, but I think that I now prefer Sin." By contrast, Deirdre wasn't keen. "The new one is not for me - too much colour and sparkle," she said, referring to the fact that Sin is champagne-shaded with added glitter.

Value for money

"As per usual the Euro pricing for Urban Decay is ridiculous in comparison to Sterling," Celia declared.  "On principle I definitely would not shell out €19 on the shadows, even though the pans do contain a decent amount (3.5g). I don't think I have bought any Urban Decay products for the Euro prices, and the pricing of these items will not encourage me to buy here," she finished.

Rosemary gave a firm no to the value-for-money aspect. "Too expensive in my opinion for the only fair pigment," was her comment. "As much as the colours of the shadows are great, I don't think Stardust is for me," said Deirdre.

Have you tried them? What did you think?