Today I’m putting on Waterweight!
Wait — that didn’t come out right… I mean, let’s put on our bathing suits, and take a dip back into the water with MAC Studio Waterweight foundation.
Hmm… That wasn’t much better, was it?
Anyway! Since my review a couple days ago, I’ve gotten some questions here on MBB and on YouTube about how the new MAC Studio Waterweight Foundation compares to MAC Face and Body, so I’m gonna try to answer those questions in this quick followup now.
Down below are also swatches of 21 of the 25 Waterweight shades (not shown are NC 25, NW 50, N12 and N18).
In a nutshell, Studio Waterweight is MAC’s foray into the world of serum foundation — medium coverage, with a lightweight, moisturizing formula and a velvety finish. My combination skin and I have been wearing it daily for the past week, and we’re really happy with it so far!
10 of the 11 MAC Studio Waterweight NC shades from the left: NC15, NC20, NC30, NC35, NC37, NC40, NC42, NC45 and NC50
11 of the 14 MAC Studio Waterweight NW shades from the left: NW13, NW15, NW18, NW20, NW22, NW25, NW30, NW35, NW43, NW45, NW47, NW50, N12 and N18
One of the main things MAC Studio Waterweight and Face and Body have in common is texture. They both have a similarly thin, watery texture, but I think the similarities really end there. They differ in terms of finish, their ability to blur pores, their coverage and their durability.
I’ve used Face and Body for years, and one thing I’ve always liked about it is how fresh and clean my skin looks after I put it on. When I work it in (I like to use a kabuki brush with a buffing motion), it becomes one with the skin and imperceptible, and once it settles down, it has a dewy finish — not shiny — that’s very distinct and beautiful.
Waterweight also becomes one with my skin, but I think the finish looks quite different. It’s much less dewy than Face and Body’s finish — more velvety — and while it still reflects a little light, it’s less obvious than Face and Body.
Serum foundations usually also excel at blurring pores and softening the overall appearance of the skin, and that’s another way in which MAC Face and Body and Studio Waterweight differ.
Face and Body? Hardly any pore blurring.
But Studio Waterweight blurs and blurs and blurs…
With Face and Body, it’s easy to build up the coverage. If you have the wherewithal, you can build it all the way from super sheer to just shy of full.. I used to do exactly that for pics all the time, but good golly, Miss Molly! — it took forever and A LOT of layers.
Studio Waterweight’s coverage isn’t as easy to build. Solid medium coverage is as far as I can get, and that’s with two or three layers. But I still think Studio Waterweight is easier to work with than Face and Body, and it definitely requires less effort to buff and blend. All I do is pat it on the skin with fingers or a BeautyBlender.