Saturday, December 29, 2012

Urban Decay Naked Skin Versus Revlon Nearly Naked Skin

Urban Decay has started a trend with their naked line and I believe most of us think that Revlon's Nearly Naked Skin is their answer to UD's version. I'll compare a few things I noticed and let you all decide.  I would love to hear some feedback if you've tried one or both.


I really don't worry too much about the looks of the packaging but rather how the product is dispensed.  I really like the the UD Naked Skin has a pump to help with dispensing and control how much.

The packaging isn't bad but I wish it had a pump.  I had a hard time getting it out the first time I used it and that hasn't gotten much better--though I suppose most drug store foundation have this type package.


 UD Naked Skin. More runny in consistency than Revlon version.  I really do think the change in consistency helps with application and attributes to the coverage.

Revlon Nearly Naked Skin is also a bit runny but a little thicker.  

Both go on very well and have a more natural appearance than "regular" foundations.  In my opinion the thicker consistency of the Revlon version makes it a touch more heavy feeling on my skin, but doesn't make the coverage any better than its UD counter part.  


 I hit on coverage above but to sum it up I think Urban Decay's Naked Skin has a better coverage while not being as heavy in feel as the Revlon version.  In the Revlon versions defense it does have very good coverage for a "naked foundation" its just a bit heavier in feel than its counterpart.

Staying Power

I consider this "category" (since I just starting picking things to rate the two) to be a drawl.  I use a primer with both ( I used Urban Decay's pore perfection with both while trying them out) and found that both foundations stayed on all day long.  I have also tried both without a primer and found my skin to be oily, especially around t-zone but I didn't notice either "allowing" my skin to get more oily than the other.  Both foundations wear very well.

 Availability of Shades

Naked skin has 18 shades and it seems Nearly Naked has just about as many (I believe I counted 16 online).  I wear the lightest shade in the Nearly Naked and it is a good match but I would say its about the same as other foundations, I'm not sure its my exact match (but its not noticeable).  I was able to find a slightly better match with UD.  I'm not sure if that would be true for others or just because I am so fair.  I really don't know if I could use color match along (its really not that much) as a deciding factor for others unless you're in the same shoes as me with matching.


UD Naked skin is considerably more than Nearly Naked at $38 while  Nearly Naked is $9.99.    Naked Skin is definitely much more expensive than Nearly Naked so it really comes down to if one is willing to pay the price for it.

Bottom Line

 To me the purpose of the idea of a naked foundation is to provide as much coverage as possible while still maintaining the natural look.  In my opinion Urban Decay's Naked Skin is the most light weight in feel while providing the best coverage. I also prefer the shade match on the Naked Skin because I feel it to be an exact match for me rather than a "good enough match".   To be fair to Revlon's Nearly Naked Skin it is a drug store foundation so its not going to be exactly the same.  I do think they did a very good job of providing a more natural feeling drug store foundation.  I  like that it is  the most light weight drug store foundation I've worn and the coverage is very good to boot.  I'll even go on to say that some drug store foundations do not wear well at all while the  Nearly Naked feels really nice on my skin.   I think to directly compare the two is like apple to oranges but I will say money aside I would pick the Naked Skin for its coverage and match to my skin.  

I hope my ramble/logic makes sense to others.  I would love to hear other's opinions.

Thanks for reading.

Em  :--) 

No comments:

Post a Comment