I am a bit on the fence with the whole business of skin care. Having abused my skin in my 20s and 30s through chronic sunworshipping, when I finally started an active moisturising regime in my 40s - and all but gave up sunbathing through circumstance as much as anything - part of me thought it was all rather like shutting the stable door after the collagen had bolted... I persist with my efforts even so, like smokers who give up in their 50s, hoping for health benefits from that point onwards.
Then recently - partly mindful of the fact that I now have an unintentional Wikio Beauty Blog ranking to maintain ; - ) - I have been dabbling with Indeed Laboratories' Nanoblur, available from Boot's in the UK for £19.99. Indeed Laboratories Inc is based outside Toronto, and Nanoblur is on sale via specific retailers in Canada and a handful of other countries; it can also be ordered online. The name Nanoblur was an immediate draw to me, because of course the prefix "Nano-" is such a Zeitgeist-y word, along with "offset mortgage", "carbon trading", "bluetooth" (also as a verb!) and "vuvuzela". "Nano-" takes me right back to a company I interviewed in California in 2010, which made an array of products, including actual "arrays"(!), fashioned out of epitaxially grown silicon wafers (I believe). I strongly suspect nanotechnology was involved somewhere along the line...
I have just Wiki-ed the term and it means "the study of manipulating matter on an atomic and molecular scale". So what is this cream then, and why is it on nodding terms with atomic and molecular matter, if it is indeed? "Indeed" being of course the operative brand name!
That is not the happiest of grammatical constructions, but we will overlook it, given the generous nature of the promise and its super speedy delivery.
"This product is based on advanced optics technology and is not makeup."
The packaging then refers you to the company's website for more information, where I firstly learnt the rationale for developing this product, namely to make people look better on TV.
"Since the advent of high-definition technology, skin imperfections have become far more apparent on camera and Nanoblur was created so that celebrities could 'blur' out imperfections that were previously not visible with traditional cameras."
And the most meaty additional information I could glean on the website is as follows:
"It is not a cream. It is a suspension of millions and millions of particles that reflect light perfectly in billions of directions to make the skin’s surface appear completely flawless. Within seconds, pores appear to disappear. Fine lines appear to vanish. The skin texture appears nearly perfect. With one application on any skin surface (even on your hands), you will be convinced that Nanoblur will make you look up to 10 years younger in a matter of seconds. It’s just that simple."
Not a cream? Yet it is described as an "advanced optical cream" on the packet. Moving on...
That is a very big claim, especially the 10 years younger bit. I will see if I have a photo of me when I was 10 years younger, so you can use it as a point of reference. Okay, here is my current passport photo, which is 9 years old...let's not set the bar too high. : - ) Actually, I am not sorry to have lost the hair and glasses, though I think the grooves either side of my mouth were less pronounced back then.
Oddly, the accompanying before and after photos on the website (completely untouched, and of the subjects' naked faces) look quite honest to me - but there again I don't see a whole lot of improvement either!
Further research on the Interwebs unearthed the fact that at only 700 nanometres (sounds big, but clearly isn't!) the "nanoparticles" in Nanoblur are smaller than the ones used in YSL's iconic product Touch Eclat, for example. This means they do a better job of diffusing the light in a flattering manner, like looking at skin through the soft focus medium of frosted glass. They are, however, too big to be absorbed by skin, which people may be glad to know.
Having tried Nanoblur a few times - and arguably you are only supposed to need to try it once for 40 seconds to see the years roll back.... - I will say that my vertical lip lines looked fainter, no question. Downside was that my top lip was slightly pushed out and appeared thinner, which it can ill afford to do. Though at the same my cupid's bow appeared more prominent, which I was quite pleased about. There is a pleasant sensation of tautness and no disagreeable smell, as with the Avon product.
BEFORE (SOME MONTHS BEFORE, BUT NOT TO WORRY)
ME MINUTES AFTER APPLICATION
ME SLIGHTLY MORE FACE-ON, THOUGH I DON'T THINK IT MAKES MUCH DIFFERENCE
The "not a cream" - or "advanced optical cream" as you prefer - had its work cut out with the long lines either side of my mouth, which have rather disconcertingly started to sprout tributaries lately at the ends - they also remind me a little of a snake's forked tongue... I would say that the effect there was of a slight plumping out and softening and then over time I thought I might even have detected a slight flattening of the grooves. However, I wouldn't say they vanished, or even appeared to vanish. Probably because they weren't "fine" lines to start with. The lip lines (which I would call "fine") do appear visibly reduced in photos and in the mirror. The effects also seemed to last till the following day, which may say more about the sloppiness of my so-called skincare regime than any inherent merit of the product. : - )
The members of Makeupalley rated this product 3.1 out of 5, which isn't a great score. Anything under 4.0 counts as a lukewarm response over there, I'd say. Some people found it didn't work well OVER foundation, the recommended method of application - or even UNDER it, for those who like me decided to flaunt the instructions - and I would agree with that. So that could be a stumbling block right there for anyone who usually wears full coverage foundation. People who had a good experience with the product talked of its "smoothing" and "mattifying" effect, which was the finding of my next-door-neighbour, who also bought herself a tube.
So I get the feeling that Nanoblur is a product that works best for obscuring fine lines (and possibly large pores or bits of unwanted pigmentation, though I wasn't trying it out for that). I would recommend it in a guarded way, as I think different people may get different results. As for the taking off ten years, I don't think so. Up to ten years - well, that's a more forgiving timespan.
And according to the website, Nanoblur comes with a customer satisfaction guarantee, so if you find you can't blur back time, you can get your money back at least...
