The £19 blusher being called a game-changer for mature skin - shoppers say it 'lifts' the face and is 'perfect for older skin'
Daily Mail journalists select and curate the products that feature on our site. If you make a purchase via links on this page we will earn commission -
Published: Updated:
Mature women are ditching powder blushers in favour of one cream blush that is 'perfect for older skin', and are reaping in the compliments.
For a pop of healthy colour on mature complexions, scores have recommended the brand Look Fabulous Forever. A beauty line specifically for older women with a 'pro-age philosophy', the brand's £19 Real Radiance Blush is being hailed as a great makeup tip for mature skin types, and it could be the game-changing tip you need.
Look Fabulous Forever Real Radiance Blush
Helping to bring life and a youthful flush to the skin, the Look Fabulous Forever's cream-to-powder blusher has become a bestseller.
It glides on smoothly as a cream and then dries as a powder for long-lasting colour. It's available in six flattering shades and is also available as part of a beautiful refillable compact set.
£19 Shop
Melting seamlessly into the skin, the Real Radiance Blush from Look Fabulous Forever has been touted as a great makeup tip for mature shoppers looking to liven up their complexion with a healthy flush.
Makeup founder, Tricia Cusden, created the range of make-up and skincare specifically formulated, made for and attractive to older women.
Enhancing beauty in older faces, this is a brand that will help you celebrate your age. And the cream blusher is a brand bestseller, with scores of happy users raving about the 'lift' it gives the skin.
'This is a very good stay put blusher,' wrote one thrilled shopper. 'I use Rosy Glow which really suits my fair colouring and gives me the 'lift' I need.'
As we get older, our skin loses hydration and becomes more absorbent, which can cause makeup to settle into fine lines and make the skin appear dry and dehydrated.
Swapping to a cream blusher can help to liven up the face with a healthy flush without enhancing the look of fine lines and also create definition by adding structure and depth to the cheeks.
The £19 Real Radiance Blush could then be the under £20 beauty product that could make all the difference to your radiance. A perfect hybrid of cream to powder, the formula glides on smoothly as a cream and dries as a powder for lasting colour. And shoppers are seriously impressed.
'I must recommend the blusher to you, it is so nice to use,' confirmed another Look Fabulous Forever fan. 'Easy to blend and looks so natural, I had so many compliments about how well I looked. The blusher really lifted my colour and stayed all day.'
For the best results, Look Fabulous Forever recommends swirling your fingertip in the blush compact, then gently dab the blush on the apples of your cheeks, bringing it slightly up and out towards your temples. You can also take a blusher brush and use light sweeping motions to blend into your skin for an airbrushed finish.
'So pleased to have found a blusher with such a good texture that stays put unlike so many that soon disappear' agreed another. 'I have been using Rosy Glow for a while now and would be lost without it.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Blake Lively makes shock move and drops 'intentional infliction of emotional distress' claim against Justin Baldoni
By Published: | Updated: Blake Lively has sensationally dropped her claim that Justin Baldoni intentionally caused her emotional distress, after his legal team demanded to see medical proof. A new court filing, exclusively obtained by shows the embattled actress has also withdrawn a second claim of negligent infliction of emotional distress and try to avoid having to share her health records with the 41-year-old's legal team. But there was a sting in the tale for Baldoni – who now has two fewer claims to defend himself from – after the actress demanded to drop the claims without prejudice, meaning they could be refiled. The attempt has prompted a new round of legal letters, with Baldoni's team angrily insisting the mom-of-four is trying 'to have it both ways' and demanding that she comply with their 'reasonable' request to see her medical documents. An insider told that Lively's lawyers had hoped to quietly ditch the emotional distress elements of the lawsuit to dodge having her records scrutinized. Lively had claimed that the emotional distress allegedly inflicted on her by Baldoni had 'severely impacted her physical, psychological and emotional wellbeing' – all of which could show up in her health records if true. A new court filing, exclusively obtained by shows the embattled actress has also withdrawn a second claim of negligent infliction of emotional distress and thus try to avoid having to share her health records with the 41-year-old's legal team has reached out to Lively's representative for comment. Although the actress has now dropped the emotional distress claims, Baldoni will still have to defend himself over her other claims which include sexual harassment and the orchestration of a smear campaign against her. The 41-year-old is also pursuing a $400m countersuit of his own that also claims defamation and accuses the glamorous blonde of damaging his reputation and career. The withdrawal is the latest twist in a tsunami of legal developments that in recent weeks has seen the warring pair battle it out over his attempt to subpoena her one-time bestie, Taylor Swift. Swift, 36, was dragged into the saga in January due to a now-notorious claim by Baldoni that Lively referred to the megastar and husband Ryan Reynolds, 48, as 'my dragons' and threatened to unleash them upon him if he refused to go along with her changes to a scene. According to a legal letter sent along with the subpoena, Lively allegedly threatened to leak a decade's worth of text messages if Swift failed to issue a statement in support of her. Lively's team quickly hit back and denied the claims, and also demanded the subpoena be withdrawn – a request later granted by Judge Lewis Liman. Subpoenas against Lively and Reynolds were upheld and the actress is facing a deposition, although that too is the subject of wrangling due to her reluctance to be grilled by Baldoni's lawyers. The dropping of the emotional distress claims is yet another legal setback for the 37-year-old actress, who has been the subject of a deluge of negative headlines for months and has seen her friendship with Swift publicly deteriorate. On top of that, some of her allegations have begun to look increasingly dubious including the claim that Baldoni had nuzzled her neck and told her 'you smell so good' during a dancing scene. Although Lively claimed it had been filmed with microphones off, obtained raw footage that showed the sound was on and that the conversation had instead been about the scent of Lively's fake tan. She has also faced scrutiny over some of her team's legal maneuvers, among them a shell lawsuit filed in October that was used as the basis to subpoena publicist Stephanie Jones for a phone used by her former employee Jennifer Abel. The messages on the phone between Abel and crisis PR Melissa Nathan were later used as the basis for Lively's claims of a smear campaign, although Baldoni's team hit back saying the texts were selectively edited and released the conversations in full. Jones had hotly denied handing over the texts as a favor, arguing in court papers that she turned the device over only after receiving a subpoena last October. But that led to the existence of a 'sham' lawsuit being revealed – a now-dropped case filed by Lively's company Vanzan against anonymous Does 1-10. The revelation prompted a furious response from Baldoni's lawyer Bryan Freedman who described the Vanzan suit as a 'sham'. 'Ms. Lively's and Mr. Reynolds' company Vanzan had nothing to do with this case and they knew it,' Freedman said in a statement. 'This sham lawsuit was designed to obtain subpoena power without oversight or scrutiny, and in doing so denied my clients the ability to contest the propriety, nature, and scope of the subpoena. 'There is nothing normal about this. Officers of the court have a duty of candor to the court and an obligation not to file fictitious lawsuits that have no basis in fact or law. 'This was done in bad faith and constitutes a flagrant abuse of process.' has also revealed that Baldoni has added a powerful female litigator to his legal counsel who could make a 'meaningful difference' to his acrimonious battle with Lively, according to insiders – and she has an unlikely connection to Taylor Swift. Ellyn S. Garofalo, who previously worked with Venable LLP – the law firm used by Swift – has joined Baldoni's side as part of the Wayfarer legal team in a move that has prompted fans to question the singer's involvement in the ongoing war. The pop superstar, 35, was dragged into the feud between Lively, 37, and her It Ends With Us costar and director Baldoni, 41, in early May when she was officially subpoenaed as a witness. A legal letter filed last month by his lawyers alleged that Lively had attempted to 'coerce' Swift to issue a public statement in support of her and urged her to delete text messages between them. Lively's lawyers later filed a motion asking the court to strike the accusations from its docket as 'baseless, unnecessary, improper and abusive,' and Lively's motion to dismiss Baldoni's letter was granted. But Baldoni's team withdrew the subpoena in late May after Venable LLP objected that it amounted to an 'unwarranted fishing expedition.' It was branded 'tabloid clickbait' by Swift's representative. Garofalo, who worked at Venable LLP from 2018 until 2021, reportedly joined Baldoni's team 'after Venable was able to get the Taylor subpoena tossed.' 'For Ellyn to join the counsel is huge,' an insider exclusively told the Daily Mail. According to her biography, Garofalo is a seasoned trial attorney with over three decades of courtroom experience. Her focus is on 'civil, criminal, and regulatory matters, including SEC enforcement actions,' and she has previously worked on high-profile cases involving Anna Nicole Smith and Alyssa Milano. 'Baldoni's team is thrilled because of her track record in the courtroom,' the insider said of the Pepperdine Law School grad. 'She not only brings exceptional legal expertise but also fulfils their desire to include a prominent female litigator.' News of her involvement comes days after an unnamed insider in Swift's inner circle allegedly provided documented evidence to Baldoni's lead attorney Bryan Freedman detailing how Lively's attorneys had 'threatened to leak' the actress's private exchanges with Swift, in a failed attempt to coerce the singer into publicly siding with her against Baldoni. The Daily Mail exclusively revealed that the 'leaker' was none other than Scott Swift - the singer's 73-year-old father. 'Garofalo was compelled to join the case after reviewing its circumstances, feeling strongly that an injustice was unfolding and that her participation could make a meaningful difference,' our source said. The legal dispute began when Lively sued Baldoni for sexual harassment. Baldoni has countersued for defamation. Both parties have denied all the allegations against them. Their trial is scheduled for March 2026.
Daily Mail
6 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Taylor Swift splashes out eye-watering sum on revenge look to dine with BFF Selena Gomez after buying masters
Taylor Swift looked dressed for revenge in a stunning head-to-toe Gucci ensemble after finally gaining ownership of the master recordings of her first six albums. While celebrating the end of her very long and public battle to own her music, the pop star, 35, emerged for a rare girls' night out with her longtime friend Selena Gomez. For the occasion, the Lover hitmaker rocked a black and silver tank top complete with a sequined trim and matching miniskirt, which showcased her toned legs. The 14-time Grammy winner paired her timeless look with a pair of silver metallic platform sandals ($1,190) and Gucci Bamboo 1947 mini bag, which retails for $4,700. Swift's accessories included her custom $6,875 diamond friendship bracelet from her boyfriend Travis Kelce and $3,490 ring from Shahla Karimi Jewelry. From A-list scandals and red carpet mishaps to exclusive pictures and viral moments, subscribe to the DailyMail's new showbiz newsletter to stay in the loop. The most expensive and dazzling part of her outfit was her $36,000 Arpeggia One Line earrings, which brought up the total of her look to over $55,000. Meanwhile, Gomez, 32, turned heads in a khaki suit with a plunging brown halter top and a sharp blazer tied over her shoulders. The pals were enjoying a girls' night out at The Monkey Bar in New York City, known for its $36 ice-cold martinis, Crab Rangoon, dry-aged New York strip and truffle monkey bread. Although it is unknown who picked up the check at dinner, Gomez may have put her card down as Swift just splashed out around $360 million to purchase the rest of her music catalog. On Friday, the Cats actress revealed that she struck a settlement with private equity firm Shamrock Capital, which purchased the rights to the records from music mogul Scooter Braun in November 2020. In a hand-written letter posted on her website, Swift, who is worth over $1 billion, claims the money she made from her lucrative Eras tour last year has helped bankroll the purchase of her old material and 'her entire life's work'. She said: 'All I've ever wanted was the opportunity to work hard enough to be able to one day purchase my music outright with no strings attached, no partnership, with full autonomy. ' Swift then thanked Shamrock Capital for their 'honest, fair and respectful' way they handled the deal, adding: 'I really felt like they saw it for what it was to me: My memories and my sweat and my handwriting and my decades of dreams.' She then joked: 'My first tattoo might just be a huge shamrock in the middle of my forehead.' Justin Bieber's old manager Scooter controversially acquired the rights to Taylor's material for S300million after buying her old record label, Big Machine Media, in 2019 before selling them on to Shamrock Capital for profit. The Love Story singer, who branded Scooter a 'bully' for tactics, was unaware of his plan and also claimed when she previously approached Big Machine label head Scott Borchetta about buying her masters beforehand, he allegedly would only sell her them one at a time, starting from her earliest, least-profitable recordings. In exchange for the option to buy the masters back, Taylor claimed she would have to record a new album for the label in exchange for each old recording she bought, shackling her to Big Machine for years to come just when she was eager to leave the label. The singer posted an emotional Tumblr telling fans she made the 'excruciating choice to leave behind my past. 'Music I wrote on my bedroom floor and videos I dreamed up and paid for from the money I earned playing in bars, then clubs, then arenas, then stadiums.' She added: 'Never in my worst nightmares did I imagine the buyer would be Scooter. 'Any time Scott Borchetta has heard the words 'Scooter Braun' escape my lips, it was when I was either crying or trying not to. 'He knew what he was doing; they both did. Controlling a woman who didn't want to be associated with them. In perpetuity. That means forever.' She added that when she heard the news: 'All I could think about was the incessant, manipulative bullying I've received at his hands for years.' Swift then listed a string of examples accusing Kim Kardashian and Kanye West – then Braun's client – of bullying. Shamrock acquired the master recordings to Taylor Swift, Fearless, Speak Now, Red, 1989 and Reputation – which Taylor has now regained ownership of, having previously led a campaign to re-record her first six albums, four of which she's successfully completed. Reputation (Taylor's Version) was heavily tipped to be her next release and the singer addressed the rumors in her open letter, saying it's the 'one album I thought couldn't be improved upon by redoing it' but teased she may still record another version, as well as offer up 'unreleased Vault tracks' from that album. Taylor says she has re-recorded the entirety of her debut self-titled album which, like Reputation, will 're-emerge when the time is right.' Music sources had previously claimed Scooter played a role in helping Taylor and Shamrock Capital agree a deal for the buy-back, in a bid to claim much-needed positive PR in wake of her career imploding following his feud with the singer. In a hand-written letter posted on her website, Swift, who is worth over $1 billion, claims the money she made from her lucrative Eras tour last year has helped bankroll the purchase of her old material and 'her entire life's work' Swift then thanked Shamrock Capital for their 'honest, fair and respectful' way they handled the deal, adding: 'I really felt like they saw it for what it was to me: My memories and my sweat and my handwriting and my decades of dreams' But according to sources close to the contract negotiations, he played zero part. An insider told MailOnline: 'Contrary to a previous false report, there was no outside party who 'encouraged' this sale. 'All rightful credit for this opportunity should go to the partners at Shamrock Capital and Taylor's Nashville-based management team only. Taylor now owns all of her music, and this moment finally happened in spite of Scooter Braun, not because of him.'
Daily Mirror
12 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
Baby name expert shares six names parents should never give their child
Two baby name consultants have revealed the half-dozen names they believe are 'old-fashioned' and should be avoided by new parents when choosing a the perfect name for their newborn Choosing a name that your newborn will happily use for the rest of their lives can be tricky, but two baby name consultants have shared six old-fashioned names that new parents might want to avoid. British professional baby namer SJ Strum and Boston-based consultant Colleen Slagen have compiled a list of names they recommend to clients, but there are a select few they suggest bypassing. Colleen advises against sturdy, old-school monikers like Linda, Karen, and Janet, which she believes are falling out of fashion, while SJ warns parents off what she terms "1990s norm-core dad names" such as Gary, Stuart, and Ian. Speaking to the Daily Mail, SJ described pregnancy as "such a bamboozling time. She added that picking a name is just one of the overwhelming number of decisions expectant parents face. She believes that enlisting an expert to choose a baby's name can transform the process into "one of the most joyous and bonding parts of your pregnancy." "Couples want a name that tells their story," she says, delving into personal details such as hobbies, university studies, and where they first met to find the perfect fit. SJ also mentioned receiving last-minute messages from delivery rooms, with parents desperate for naming assistance. She offers sage advice for resolving deadlocks when one parent is fixated on a name the other detests. If your partner is fond of a boys' name you simply cannot abide, SJ suggests claiming it's the name of an ex. "That normally gets them off it pretty quick," she reveals. For those pondering what name to bestow upon a bouncing baby girl, sticking with the classics such as Olivia, Emma, Charlotte, or Sofia is a solid choice; James, Henry, Lucas, or William hold the same charm for boys. On the other hand, SJ points out some fresh twists in naming trends: "'Nature names are becoming popular: River is rising up the ranks. I'm also seeing a lot of whimsical names that hark back to virtues, such as Sage." Following the deaths of celebrities or other notable individuals, there's a tendency for their names to surge in popularity, SJ says: "We saw lots of variations on Elizabeth after the late Queen passed away, and Bowie after David died in 2016." Before settling on a potential name, SJ stresses the importance of trying it out: "What does it feel like to say it out loud?". She underscores practical considerations with a personal anecdote: "Will you be asked to spell it in a coffee shop? I had a client who loved the name Persephone, but did the coffee shop test and decided it was far too much of a mouthful."
