Nail Stencils in their various forms are all the rage at the moment, they are a quick and easy way to create striking nail art. When smART Nails contacted me about reviewing some of their designs I jumped at the chance. I have recived a packet in a swap when I first started getting into nail art and really liked them and couldn't wait to see if these ones were just as good.
One of the designs I chose was this swirl design (P053) as it reminded me of water-marble nails (which is something I just can't get right!).
In your packet you get 10 stencils which have a few differing designs which I really like as it adds a randomness to the pattern. On the back of your packet you also get a set of instructions.
I decided to use China Glaze Too Yacht To Handle as my base colour, which is a pastel turquoise creme. Once it was dry I applied my stencils to my nails. I like the fact they aren't too thick as it means they wrap easy around my rounded nail beds, you need to make sure these are stuck down securely as and gaps will allow your colours to bleed under the stencil and you won't get a crisp line.
I then applied A England Avalon as I wanted a colour that was opaque in just one coat. While the polish was still wet I carefully removed the stencil. I then used my Seche Vite topcoat to seal down the design.
I love how bold this design is! It is really striking on the nails! They are also so simple to use! I would highly recommend these stencils if you want nail art without having to break the bank or spending hours of your time trying to perfect and intricate design! I have some other designs to show you from smART too so watch out for those in the next week or so.
These cost only $1.99 per pack which is really a steal if you ask me. smART also ships worldwide (they are based in Romania). Also during November, there’s a 25% discount – just use code NOV25 at the checkout!
You can also find out more about smART Nails at the following places:
The product above was sent to me for review. All opinions are honest and all information is correct at the time of writing. For more information please refer to my disclosure and PR policy.