I expect this will be true of brightly colored trou as well, a fad that seems to be on its way out.I like patterned trou that effectively resolve to solid. Fine herringbone, for example. But I almost never wear them.
My interest in shell has waned the longer I've had mine. The ripples are coarse and only get coarser, the blooming is ugly and requires removing, the shell itself is erratic, the potential for water marks is unfortunate and unpredictable, and, for some reason, my boots have required a lot of moisturizing. Too much hassle. I can see why shell was saved for the servants back in the day.
Mine does, to a degree, but then they dry and look OK again. But I'm in the minority here in thinking shell is a coarse material not well suited for dress shoes in general. Wouldn't consider another pair except for work boots/casual wear/abusive use.
That's what I do with my shell boots and consider it money well spent (though, admittedly, I bought mine on sale.) It's a coarse material suited to such tasks. They've been quite resilient to the abuse, though I found the shell met its match when up against a shovel.
Right now my shell boots are sitting outside without trees, the poor things. It's a sad life for nice boots.
Yes, that's what I mean. They look like work boots. They're not "clunky" by work boots standards, so maybe that's not the word. But they're too coarse for city suits.I'm surprised that SF, with its hyper-vigilance about coherent combinations, hasn't turned its back on suede blucher boots.
Definitely not. Nice boots but too clunky for a gray flannel, at least for the purposes of traditional good taste. Though pairing that combo with a bunch of bracelets and a murse might get you on a blog.