It's time for another edition of Dupes Up! Today's contenders:

Barry M Copper

Retail Cost: £2.99 (approximately $4.75)

vs.

OPI: Warm & Fozzie

Retail Cost: $8.50

Another of the new Barry M collection and yet another discontinued OPI!  Coincidence?  Well...OK probably...maybe...it's likely!  I couldn't help but notice how similar Barry M Copper was to my already acquired Warm & Fozzie when I got it in the mail recently.  It looks a BIT more sparkly and seems to have a more overall copper tone in the bottle, but as I learned with the previous Barry M vs. OPI dupe...it's mostly down to the bottle shape.  Here's a close up of the two:

You should be able to see more what I'm talking about here.  the OPI has an overall more deep goldish green look in the bottle while the Barry M has more of an overall copper tone.  BUT, see that coppery streak down the middle of the OPI  bottle?  You'll also notice the green-gold halo around the edge of the Barry M  bottle.  It's the same tones just displayed in different ways.  Simply the way the light reflects off the bottle. On the nails?  Different story:

See?  If you can tell the difference between these than kudos to you.  This is taken in natural light.  The shift on the nails is the same.  They're both sort of a warm mahogany jelly, jam packed with tiny flakes of green, copper, and gold.  The Barry M is on the index and ring finger, while the OPI is on the middle and pinky.  There is literally no difference in the formula on these either.  I didn't notice any additional wear on one versus the other and both require a minimum of three coats for full opacity.  Here's another comparison for good measure:

This is the same lighting but a different angle.  In the other picture the OPI looked a hair darker but here you can see they're the same.  I will say the Barry M had a slightly better finish. It seemed more sparkly when it dried and more shiny.  A quick top coat of Seche Vite evened them out but it seems strange that the OPI finish would be sub-par.  Personally, even though Barry M is a drugstore brand, I prefer it to a lot of salon brands because I think it has a great formula!  These new colors are really making me love them even more!! 

Verdict: Dupes.  These are definitely the same in my book. Same color, same formula, slightly different on the finish but with a topcoat they are indistinguishable.

Availability:  Barry M Copper is available at Boots, Superdrug, and BarryM.com. OPI Warm & Fozzie is no longer available in stores but can be had for a reasonable price at many e-tailers including Amazon.com. 

Zoya: Edyta

Retail Cost: $8

vs.

Retail Cost: $14

Wallis is a polish I've been seeing 'dupes' of a lot over the past few months.  I bought Wallis the second it hit stores and I LOVE it.  The cost is the most common reason I hear from others as to why they haven't bought it yet.  It's so worth it and I'd love to find a dupe so that those of you who don't have $14 to drop on one polish can enjoy the subtle glory of it. But funny enough, when I swatch these polishes next to Wallis, even though they look SO similar in the bottle, I've yet to find one which looks anything similar on the nail. Odd how that happens, no?  So how did Edyta stack up? Well let's see...

Well here we go again.  Wallis is a green/gold color.  It reminds me of a golden apple.  It has a darker green base but a very noticeable olive/gold shimmer going through it.  While Edyta has the same dark green base, the gold shimmer in it is much less compact, much less large and much less noticeable.  It has an overall hunter green kind of appearance and while it shimmers in the sunlight and is very pretty, it just lacks the complexity of Wallis. 

 A close-up picture gives a better idea of what I'm talking about. Edyta is on the left in this picture and Wallis on the right.  If you blow the picture up (and please do!) you'll see that while the base color is very similar, the shimmer is less apparent and more true gold on the Edyta while it's more olive and much more noticeable on the Wallis.  

Retail Cost:$14.99

vs.

Retail Cost: $7.50

vs.

Retail Cost: £5 (approximately $8) 

I noticed while going through my collection recently, that I have quite a few of these shimmery greenish blue polishes.  Of course they are all gorgeous, but the real question is, are they different? In the bottle they all look very much the same.  The Illamasqua seems to have a bit more shimmer running through it and a bit more of a blue flash to it, but otherwise they seem more or less the same.

So let's check them out on the nail shall we?

Pretty much sums it up, no?  The index and little finger in this picture are the Models Own Peacock Green.  It was the only of the three that needed two coats for opacity but I did two coats of all of them anyway.  It's clearly much more blue toned than the other two and surprisingly so since in the bottle it looks VERY green.  It also lost some of it's shimmer when it went onto the nail.  In comparison, the Illamasqua seemed to get MORE shimmery and it's clearly a bit darker and a hair more blue than the Ulta Envy as well.  While it looks teal-ish in the bottle, the Ulta Envy is really more of a true green than the others.

 

 

A full sun picture seals the deal.  Of the three, I think the Illamasqua is my favorite.  It has this really amazing blue flash along with a shimmery greenish tint.  It feels and looks very luxe on the nail.  The shimmer in it was also FAR more apparent in person than with the other two.  Overall though, these all have nice finish and texture to them and even though I forgot to use a basecoat (bad me) none left stains on my nails either.  :)

Retail Cost: $1.99 to $2.99

vs.

OPI: Teenage Dream from the now discontinued Katy Perry line

Retail Cost: $8.50

First I want to say, please excuse the 'noisy' pictures.  My camera setting got stuck and now the camera is dead so I can't retake them. :(  But the color is accurate and that's 90% of the point so I'm still going to post!  The new Jordana glitters are here (in some places) and when I saw this one I knew I had to swatch it.  I love my OPI Teenage Dream and as you can see in the pic, it's starting to get a little low. :P  I thought if they were similar then I'd have a cheap back-up since the Katy Perry colors are discontinued and are slowly dwindling from retailers.  So let's break it down, shall we?

A close up of the bottles pretty much says it all.  They're both micro pink glitter with larger, round holo glitter in a clear jelly base.  I was thinking the Jordana would likely be thicker and have a sub par brush (OPI famously has wide brushes).  But that was not the case.  The Jordana brush is quite thick and I actually found it a bit easier to work with than the OPI brush.  And both formula's were a bit thicker than normal polish but not so much so that they were hard to use. 

There was an ice storm here last night and try as I did to take pictures outside in the natural light, all I got was flash or shadowy pics.  So this is an indoor shot.  There is definitely more pink to these in person, the glitter looks less sparse and it's sort of a foil-y pink effect with larger hex chunks in it.  Either way the fact remains that there is zero difference between these on the nail.  The coverage is the same, the color is the same, the spacing of the glitter is the same.  If I had to guess I'd say the wear time on the OPI is longer, but otherwise...exactly the same.

A macro shot of the glitter confirms it.  For some reason, on this particular nail the holo glitter in the Jordana sort of all ended up in one place near the free edge.  But the application was the same for each.  These are not like Lippmann's which require a certain touch to get the glitter to apply evenly.  It's fairly simple to get an evenly sparkly nail!  

Verdict: Dupes.  These two are the same color and density.  In my personal opinion, there is no difference between the two other than the label and the brush.

Availability:OPI Teenage Dream was part of the now discontinued Katy Perry collection.  It still has limited availability at Ulta stores and all retailers where OPI is sold nationwide. Jordana polishes can be purchased at Kmart stores nationwide and online at Jordana.com.

It's time for another edition of Dupes Up! This weeks contenders:

 Essie: Pure Pearlfection from the LuxeEffects collection

Retail Cost: $8

vs.

Orly: Twilight  from the Holiday Top Coats Collection

I know what you're thinking. She's crazy, right? These look nothing alike.  I would agree with you at first glance...but there's more to these two than meet the eye. 

I apologize first for the awkward angle of my index finger in this picture.  It was the only way I could get the shimmer to show.  These are both swatched over Hard Candy The End and Ulta Snow White as per ususal.  I'm sure you've already noticed why I'm 'dupe testing' these.  They are both multi-tonal shimmers packed into jelly bases.  Yes, the Orly is packed into a lilac base while the Essie is in a clear one.  But tell me, do YOU see a difference?

Naturally I assumed that on a white base it would be blatently obvious which was the Essie and which was the Orly.  Not so.  The lilac base in the Orly didn't even show on white after THREE coats.  After which point I stopped trying.   To my eyes they look exactly alike.   In this picture, the Orly looks a bit murkier but I can assure you that this is mostly due to the lighting and the shadow in the picture.  It also seems that over white, they lose a lot of their multi-tonal effect and show mostly as a white-ish, silvery shimmer rather than a colorful one.

 Over black they look exactly the same as well.  The colorful shimmer is easier to see here than it is on the white but again, the murky lilac base of the Orly Twilight makes no appearance here.  From what I can tell, these polishes are essentially the same.

Verdict: Close enough for spades.

I know the price difference on these two isn't much BUT if you weren't lucky enough to snag the Essie LuxeEffects polishes you may have been able to score the Orly at Sally during their winter clearance sale for just $1.67.  Yes, you read that correctly. One dollar and sixty-seven cents.  Orly's do also contain a SMIDGE more product than their polish counterparts.  The Essie is a 15mL while the Orly is 18mL.

Where to buy: Both of these are from 'limited edition' collections this winter.  The Essie was available at Ulta and select drugstores nationwide.  Orly can be purchased at Ulta and Sally Beauty Supply stores.

Rematch!!

Essie Pure Pearlfection 

vs.

Retail Cost: 4.99

It's time for another edition of Dupes Up! This weeks contenders:

Nails Inc: The Wyndham Top Coat from the Special Effects Sets

Retail Cost: $10 (set of two with Kensington Teal for $20 at Sephora.com)

vs.

Finger Paints: Flecked  from the Special Effects Collection

I'll start by saying these were incredibly hard to photograph in the bottle.  I tried in artificial light, natural light, sunlight...it just wasn't working.  This didn't make it any easier:

Everytime I bring polish out Aoife just HAS to come investigate.  She's made off with more than one polish while my back was turned.   At any rate they are both green flakies which flash blue in certain lights.  The basic appearance of them in the bottle is the same but the Nails Inc. is a bit clearer where the Finger Paints is in an almost yellowish base. (It reminds me of the glow in the dark polishes.)

This is the result of them on the nails. Can you tell the difference?  

Much like the Essie and Deborah Lippmann gold glitters, the only real difference here is that the Nails Inc. flakie has a little more coverage on the first go than the Finger Paint version.

A closer look at them in the sun.  You can see better in this picture that the Nails Inc Wyndham top coat has much better coverage.  I thought it also had a better formula.  The flakies spread easier on the nail and the brush is MUCH superior to the flimsy, thin Finger Paints version.  However, Finger Paints doesn't require you to purchase their flakies in a two pack and they're more widely available and HALF the cost.  So like the Lippmann before it, you could easily use two coats of the Finger Paint to get the same coverage and thus have an actual dupe. There is also a blue/purple leaning flakie in the Finger Paints special effects collection which I'll be swatching next to another Nails Inc top coat. So stay tuned for that!  

Verdict: Close enough for spades. :)  

Where to buy:  Nails Inc. Special Effects two packs can be purchased at Sephora.com for $20 and at Sephora.co.uk for £20 each.  Finger Paints Special Effect polishes are available at Sally's locations nationwide on January 1, 2012.

It's time for another edition of Dupes Up! This weeks contenders:

Deborah Lippmann: Here Comes the Queen from the Juicy Couture exclusive three pack

vs.

Essie: As Gold As it Gets from the Luxe Effects collection.

Retail Cost: $8

A close up shot of the bottle shows that the two are nearly identical.  They're both gold glitters in clear jelly bases and both have a coppery gold shimmer to them.  The glitter is not uniform and is almost a tiny flake type glitter rather than your standard round, square or hex shape.

 I swatched these over both black and white polish.  The effect over white is very subtle.  Even in person you don't get much gold from one coat though the subtle shimmer is nice.  This is one coat each over Hard Candy The End and Ulta Snow White.  You can already tell from the black swatches that that Lippmann glitter is much more compact.  One coat of it nearly covers the nail with flecky gold glitter while the Essie is a bit more sparse.  

Indoors the effect is a bit more pronounced but it's still apparent that the Lippmann has more oomph per swipe.

 A close up of the black swatch.  The Lippmann is on the left and the Essie on the right.

And the white.  Since the jelly base is clear it's really more of a glittery effect than an overall gold appearance.  I like the Essie but I think I like the Lippmann better.  It's more expensive, sure, but since you get double the effect in every coat it seems to me the cost is really roughly the same.  One thing is for certain, while they may not be EXACT dupes owing to the Lippman's more compact glitter you could certainly use two coats of Essie to achieve the same effect.  If you're looking for a flecky gold glitter this season, one of these two is sure to satisfy the want!

Essie As Gold As It Gets can be purchased at Ulta and drugstores nationwide. Deborah Lippmann Here Comes the Queen  is available exclusively through JuicyCouture.com. 

It's time for another edition of Dupes Up! This weeks contenders:

butterLONDON: Wallis from the Winter/Fall 2011 collection.

Retail cost: $14

vs.

Loreal: Owl's Night from the Project Runway Colors Take Flight Collection.

Retail Cost: $5.79

It's starting to look like the color of Fall might be olive green shimmer.  I've seen this same color from butterLONDON, Loreal, Julep, and numerous others recently.  I bought the butterLONDON Wallis when it first came out a few months back and I LOVED it.  Still, how many of the same shade does one collection need?  I skipped signing up for Julep because, even for the $5 start up fee it seemed silly when the polish I was meant to receive was a close relative of Wallis.  So naturally, when everyone started going crazy over Loreal's Owls Night, I remained unimpressed.  I saw it a few times in various stores but always felt the same, "Isn't that JUST like Wallis?"  Well, eventually, I broke down and bought it.  And here's the answer:

In the bottle, they do look quite similar although they are most certainly NOT dupes.  The real question is, dupes or no, is it still necessary to have both in your collection?  Wallis is much more olive than Owls Night.  And it's shimmer is more compact.  A close up reveals the difference:

Owls Night is on the left here.  You can see that it's a deep olive/brown base with golden olive shimmer.  It's not as compact as Wallis and the base is more evident.  Wallis is brighter, greener, and has more compact gold shimmer throughout.  Here's the results on my nails.  These pics are artificial light and no topcoat.

Dupes? Definitely not.  Similar...well, maybe.  But in my opinion they're not even really cousins.  Owls Night could be mistaken for a brown rather than a green (although next to the browns in my collection it looks decidedly olive) while Wallis is unmistakeably green.  Wallis also has an obvious gold flash to it while Owls Night is more of a subtle shimmer.  If you can still find Owls Night, it was part of the Project Runway Colors Take Flight Collection,  it's definitely worth having in your collection.  Both were opaque in two coats and both are shiny and smooth on the nail.  If I could only have one of them, I'd go for Wallis since I feel the color is more unique.  But they're both beautiful!

Thanks for following! What's your favorite color for Fall?

I've been going through my polish collection lately trying to catalogue everything and also get everything swatched so it's easier to find and get to.  Going through I've realized that I have quite a few possible dupes, so I thought I'd take some time and swatch them together and see what really is and isn't the same!  My camera skills are not great yet (though I'm working on it!) so I'll try to provide links of swatches other, more talented swatchers have done! But I think you'll get the idea! 

Left to right: Bluey, Halley's Comet, Teal of Fortune. Shown in natural light.

Contestants: 

butterLONDON Bluey from the Fall/Winter 2011 collection

Retail cost:$14

vs.

Orly Halley's Comet from the Cosmic FX Collection

Retail cost: $10

vs.

Retail cost: $1.99

Left to right: Bluey, Halley's Comet, Teal of Fortune. Shown with flash.

Round 1: Bottle Color

It's pretty obvious from this picture that Teal of Fortune and Halley's Comet are very similar in color.  Though they look the same at a distance, Bluey looks much darker and the glitter much smaller when you put them up next to one another.  The Halley's Comet seems to have a more concentrated gold glitter than the Teal of Fortune, but still the two are very similar.

Left to right: Bluey, Halleys Comet, Teal of Fortune.  Shown in sunlight.

Round 2: Application and Nail Color

As I expected, the Bluey had the nicest formula.  It was streak free, opaque in two coats and had a wonderful smooth, shiny finish. I fully expected the Halley's Comet to be the next in line at application but I was surprised at the sheerness of the first coat.  It was three coats (four probably would have been better) to opacity and the color still could have been more intense.  The Wet & Wild was pleasantly surprising with a nice opacity in two coats and a fairly smooth formula.  (I didn't wear these to test longevity).

Halleys Comet on the left and Teal of Fortune on the right. Shown in natural light.

Round 3:  The verdict

 Bluey was out of the running for dupes quite quickly.  It's darker and the shimmer more compact than the other two.  However, the Teal of Fortune and the Halley's Comet are strikingly similar.  These pictures don't show it as well as in person, but there IS a difference in color.  The Halley's Comet has a more intense gold glitter, almost like a foil while the Teal of Fortune is more of a glitter than a foil and doesn't have the same gold flash. That said, they're similar enough that you could certainly save yourself the $8 by purchasing the Teal of Fortune and no one but the most trained eye would ever know the difference. What do you think?

Left to right: Halleys Comet, Teal of Fortune. Picture taken in sunlight.