To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
HoolioveldTof – :
LOVE, LOVE, LOVE. After searching for nearly a year found it.
Expensive but a 100ml bottle. FAB x
Female reviewing this.
alexn72 – :
I am reviewing a sample from the Illuminum website. Not really a review, just a heads-up, that this does not follow the usual Illuminum pattern, and for those of you who react badly to the kind of aldehydes present in Patou Joy, Van Cleef & Arpels First or Chanel No. 5, you will probably like me only receive a sour solanaceous reek which masks everything else.
So unlike Roge’ I have neither his Articulate Cool nor his ability to discern vetiver or anything else, and can only offer a weak warning to Aldehydophobes.
lomshoole – :
Yowsers. Was Ron Jeremy the inspiration for this? This is what I imagine a 1970s male porn star smells like. Bow chicka wow wow, and not in a good way.
Gileexisk – :
I have to admit I only have a vial sample, though I have applied it at least three times.
I have applied it and try to be objective but this is either a bad knockoff that I got on ebay or the Illuminum company has a terrible product on its hands.
I write this review after three tries and can honestly say that it smells something like a cheap mature women’s perfume. It does not impress, it is very generic at best.
Definitely, I would implore that you try a sample first before buying a regular sized bottle. The oud does not come through nor does any vetiver. It also does not seem to have any natural notes, just synthetic.
This brand asks high prices on its scents, for me, this scent seems diplorable.
scs628bedyWelty – :
A SAFE take on a common fragrance theme. The opening is a bright vetiver with aroma reminiscent to the bottom of a woman’s makeup bag mixed with a little lemon. Moments later the composition turns fresh/soapy and stays that way. With patchouli and oud headlining the base, the dry down was surprisingly clean(Can you say false advertisement anyone?) and puts one in the mindset of someone with perfect skin. For those not fond of the controversial note of tuberose need not to worry. It’s toned down to a barely noticeable degree. A niche offering for those still wet behind the ears. My final take: Don’t get caught up in paying for the statistics.