There's a considerable amount of buzz about two mascaras: Ôscillation from Lancôme ($34) and TurboLash ($30) from Estée Lauder. The dueling products both promise to add volume, length and curl to lashes through their vibrating wands. TurboLash sold out immediately upon its July debut, and Ôscillation had 21,000 names on a waiting list before launching this week.
Of the two, I've tried only TurboLash. It's a good mascara that delivers natural-looking, long and separate lashes. But it's not as though manually wiggling mascara through my eyelashes is a huge burden, so I doubt I'll replace regular mascaras with vibrating ones permanently. What about you — have you tried these? Are you interested?
Miss Sixty
Maison Martin Margiela
Mishumo
This sounds like the biggest load of crap from a cosmetic company, if ever I heard of one.
How about people just get hopped up on coffee and use their jittery, shaky hands to apply the mascara? That would get the same result and you'd save $30.
A few months ago, I was shopping in the mascara aisle at the drugstore and this lady asked me if I had ever used a certain kind that was on sale. I said I had, and added, "Not like it matters. They're all the same anyway!"
She started laughing in agreement.
I think mascara brands capitalize on the placebo effect -- they hype themselves up and you believe your lashes look longer/fuller/fatter/whatever, when really, it's the same as always.
1GIMMICK.
2I'd try it, they're not really any more expensive than Lancome's regular mascaras. And there is a HUGE difference between cheap mascara and expensive. Wear Covergirl or Revlon for a couple days, then try Christian Dior's Diorshow, and you can't deny there is a HUGE diff. I swear by Diorshow.
3I agree, the whole vibrating thing is gimmicky, but, I'd still try it.
4This is too gimmicky for me. Also it seems rather expensive, even Diorshow is cheaper than this.
5I think the vibration would probably make me mess up. I like having control and I don't need it to create great lashes, I can just wiggle the wand myself.
)
6I do however want to try the Givenchy Phenomen mascara (yes even more control
Why?
7I just bought the lancome mascara, and I LOVE it! I don't have to curl my lashes any more.
8I poke my eyes enough with a steady wand, I don't want to think of what would happen if it's constantly vibrating! ouch!
9I won't be trying them.
10No, way too gimmicky. And wayy too pricey...
11this is good
12I just think these are a bit silly. I definitely won't be buying them - I have enough issues keeping mascara off my lids as it is, I don't need extra help! Plus, like CCee said, the control issue is major. I like to control things in any/all aspects that I can.
Also, $30-$34 is like two or more of my usual mascaras. The most expensive mascara I've ever bought is Fresh/Firebird at $26. And that's 2x my normal mascara. So no way, José!
13This just sounds ridiculous.
14I've been a Hypnose girl since my high school years. After reading a numerous comments about not needing to spend tons on a good mascara, I decided to try out something cheaper, yet I couldn't fully trust drugstore brands. I went to try Zoomlash by M.A.C, and the result was atrocious. Zoomlash is supposed to be the 'it' mascara which lengthens and gives volume.
I eventually ended up getting Givenchy Phenomen. It takes more minutes than Hypnose, but it's great and fun. However, when I finish up my Phenomen, I might switch back to Hypnose.
When it comes to most beauty items, there's a reason that it's more expensive.
15I use everything MAC except mascara. I use another drugstore kind because I replace mine every 4 weeks. I don't advise using products that do animal testing but the Maybelline Define a Lash wand is amazing. I just keep the wand and use it in my Jane mascara
Works like a
charm.
If the wand went side by side it would be more useful than random vibrating. Even with the vibrating wand, I would buy it once and reuse the wand.
I used to be a Lancome and Dior fanatic. So many better things.
16I've seen video's of Givenchy's Phenomen and it really does work. I like to controll the mascara because I like more mascara on my outer lashes then my inner lashes.
17A definite no thanks!
18Definitely too gimmicky
19haha, so, i am totally surprised this is actually a real product. i was for sure, from the title, that it was a different kind of...ahem,,,'product.'
20Not even remotely interested...definitely too gimmicky.
21I had a friend try out the Lancome Oscillation one and she said it got all over the place and didn't work. It's an interesting idea for a mascara but if that is supposed to be better than all the rest... then why is Lancome/Estee Lauder/ etc. still selling the other non-vibrating stuff? I think formula is the most important part of a mascara.. well, that and a good brush. I think I brush the mascara on just fine - I don't need that part to be mechanized...And I certainly don't need to pay for it.
22haha, deanna that is hilarious! yeah, I just don't see how the vibration would have any affect. I'd try it though, why not?
23I agree that it's gimmicky. I know you're supposed to wiggle the brush back and forth when you apply mascara, but I'm thinking I could do it myself...I don't need already-expensive mascara to be any more expensive, thank you.
24I'd rather be more practical and wiggle my mascara wand than buy this.
25I'll pass.
26No thanks.
27Post New Comment
Please share your opinion with our community, but make sure it is on topic and follows our Community Rules. We moderate comments and prohibit personal attacks, threats, spam, lewd images, or the promotion of your personal website.