Lalavesi have three main formulas, the SS, SF and FW formulas. Both SS and SF have Classic and Natural versions of the formula. But for FW there is only Classic. Though that doesn’t mean there is only one FW formula.
There was the original FW, which was released in 2014(?). This was replaced in 2015 with the release of the FW 2016 formula. But not long after, say about 2 months, the FW 2016-304 was released to replace the FW 2016. And then the FW 2015 (which I think is the original FW) was (re-)released! So currently, there is the FW 2016-304 and the FW 2015 available for purchase on the website. The FW 2016 is no longer for sale. Yes, very confusing… So what are the differences between each formula? This post is basically for those like me who are confused about the Lalavesi FW formulas. Here’s a quick look :)
All three formulas have very fine pigments and a very smooth liquid formula, but the three formulas are different in finish, shade and coverage.
The original FW has a dewy glowing finish. A very typical hydrating Autumn/Winter formula.
The FW 2016 has a slightly less dewy and glowing finish. There is noticeably less glow and it doesn’t feel as hydrating on the skin. It settles to a slightly glowing finish.
While the FW 2016-304 is the least dewy and glowing. It’s more like a satin finish. But at the same time, it still feels hydrating enough to wear in autumn. Probably not in winter though.
From the swatches you can see the shades have been getting lighter. The original FW shade is the darkest and leans yellow. The FW 2016 was a bit lighter in shade and leans neutral. While the 2016-304 is even lighter and also leans yellow.
Although the swatches look quite different, both the original FW and the 2016-304 look similar on the skin because of similar tones. While the 2016 is more noticeably different. On my yellow toned skin, it isn’t as brightening and looks a little more ashy.
All formulas have Y2 and Y6. None of the formulas have pink tone shades.
Both the FW 2016 and 2016-304 have similar coverage. Which is medium to high. But the original FW has the highest coverage. With the same amount of product, my dark circles still peep through under the 2016 and 2016-304, but isn’t visible under the original FW.
ingredients & Fcn
From what I can tell, with my limited Korea, all three formula descriptions say they provide: coverage, moisture, adhesiveness to the skin, water retention, skin care benefits, whitening (tonal correction), anti-wrinkle properties and UV protection.
The original FW says it provides 24 hour moisture, but this doesn’t appear in the description of the FW 2016, nor FW 2016-304. While the FW 2016 and the FW 2016-304 have diamond powder to help with glow and anti-darkening (not oxidizing?).
And while the FW and FW 2016 both use NZ honey, the FW 2016-304 seems to use French honey.
Which one do I like?
Personally, I prefer the original FW and the FW 2016-304, because of the tones in the shade. They match my skin tone better. So I’m not sad that they discontinued the FW 2016. I think the 2016-304 is a good formula for those who don’t like the really dewy and glowing finish, but want something that still hydrates in drier weather. It actually reminds me a little of the Mamonde Moisture Mask Cushion. But I think my favourite is still the original FW formula. So I’m really hoping that the FW 2015 is a re-release of the original FW!
Happy Shopping Everyone! :)