Lorac has jumped onto the CC cream bandwagon, and unfortunately its attempt to cash in on the craze is a bust. This CC cream (the "CC" stands for "Color Correcting") is supposed to eliminate skin's flaws, but in doing so, it creates another set of problems altogether!
Before we discuss this specific CC cream, if you're wondering what the difference is between CC creams and BB creams, here's the answer: It's all about marketing language, nothing more. Generally, a BB cream from a U.S. brand is akin to a tinted moisturizer, while a CC cream tends to be more like a liquid foundation. In reality, there is no rhyme or reason behind the product names when companies launch their versions of these products—they can be completely different from what you expect and we're not quite sure what you should expect as there is no consistency.
BB and CC creams typically provide sun protection and may, or may not, include beneficial ingredients such as antioxidants or skin-lightening agents (but the best ones do). Neither BB nor CC creams are as revolutionary as they're made out to be—it's just a new twist on tinted moisturizers and foundations.
Lorac claims their CC cream instantly neutralizes redness and has a "natural-looking, semi- matte finish." This medium-weight cream applies easily enough, and does a good job neutralizing redness. But the finish is far from natural, and gets worse the longer it's on. Instead of a semi-matte look, CC Cream appears almost chalky, and tends to gather in (and emphasize) fine lines and wrinkles. It also lacks the "flexibility" of today's best foundations, meaning that if you smile, smile- line "marks" will be left in the makeup. The result is a look that actually ages the face instead of making it look younger and more refreshed. (True story: this reviewer actually had two people ask her to take off the makeup because it looked so unnatural and unflattering!)
Lorac's CC Cream comes in three shades. The lightest shade is only suitable for the fairest of skin tones, while the medium shade should be workable for most people in that color range. The tan, however, is far too orange to look natural on anyone. All in all, this just isn't worth the investment, especially considering how many other brands have similar products!
Water, Jojoba Esters, Isohexadecane, Propanediol, Caprylic/Capric Triglyceride, Isopropyl Isostearate, Glycerin, Ethylhexyl Palmitate, Sorbitan Stearate, Glyceryl Stearate SE, Polysorbate 20, Xanthan Gum, Trisodium Ethylenediamine Disuccinate, Retinyl Palmitate, Ascorbyl Palmitate, Tocopheryl Acetate, Silica Dimethyl Silylate, Camellia Sinensis (White Tea) Leaf Extract, Camellia Oleifera (Green Tea) Leaf Extract, Aloe Barbadensis (Aloe Vera) Leaf Extract, Butylene Glycol, Hyaluronic Acid, Chamomilla Recutita (Matricaria) Flower Extract, Calendula Officinalis Flower Extract, Laminaria Japonica Extract, Paeonia Albiflora Flower Extract, Phenoxyethanol, Ethylhexylglycerin, May Contain: Titanium Dioxide, Iron Oxides.
Strengths: Mostly great foundations in a neutral shade range; beautiful pressed powder and bronzing powder; several super blush and lipstick options; one superior lip gloss; awesome collection of shimmer products.
Weaknesses: Limited, average skin-care options; average to problematic concealers; unimpressive eyelining and brow-enhancing options; the Lotsa Lip products; the mascaras are a mixed bag with mostly disappointing results; no brushes.
This Los Angeles–based independent cosmetics company launched in 1990 and is the brainchild of makeup artist Carol Shaw (Lorac is "Carol" spelled backwards). It is well-publicized that Shaw has a long list of celebrity clients, but then so do all of the other makeup artists who have their own products lines—there are a lot of famous faces that need attention—so that boast is hardly unique. Compared to competitors Bobbi Brown, Trish McEvoy, or Stila, Lorac doesn't offer the same caliber of foundation colors or the array of products, yet most of what's available is impressive. The company holds its own when it comes to blush, eyeshadow, and lipstick. You will find that, for the most part, the older, established products perform better and are more attractive than many of Shaw's latest inventions. In particular, the latest lipstick, lip gloss, concealer, and waterproof mascara are true disappointments. Lorac hasn't done a great job on the innovation and performance side of the business since the last edition of this book, while her competition (particularly Stila and Laura Mercier) continues to consistently impress. There are still plenty of reasons to shop this line, but focus on the long-standing products rather than on what's new.
For more information about Lorac, call (800) 845-0705 or visit www.loraccosmetics.com.
The Beautypedia and Paula’s Choice Research teams have one mission: To help you find the best products for your skin, whether they’re from Paula’s Choice or another brand. By combining efforts, we’re able to share scientific research and remain committed to the highest standards based on our decades of experience objectively reviewing thousands upon thousands of skincare and makeup formularies in all price ranges.
Beautypedia cuts through the hype to bring you product insights and recommendations you won’t find anywhere else!