or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › What's your favorite mainstream designer?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What's your favorite mainstream designer? - Page 3

post #31 of 61
Quote:
I was informed I should buy my normal size and deal with errant billows of cloth all about.
I should probably move this over to "pet peeves," but count me as one who's fed up with designers who seem incapable of accurately using a tape measure. An inch is an inch, a centimeter is a centimeter. If pants are size 32 x 32 (US), then they should have an actual 32" waistband and 32" inseam (or, in the case of jeans, should at least shrink to that size after washing). If a jacket is a size 40 (US), then it should comfortably fit a man with a 40" chest, not a man with a 44" chest or a 36" chest. Someone over in "peeves" complained about people who don't know their own size. I agree; but, when designers don't even know what size a garment is, how are average consumers supposed to figure it out? This is not "style," it's stupidity.
post #32 of 61
Quote:
If pants are size 32 x 32 (US), then they should have an actual 32" waistband and 32" inseam (or, in the case of jeans, should at least shrink to that size after washing). If a jacket is a size 40 (US), then it should comfortably fit a man with a 40" chest, not a man with a 44" chest or a 36" chest.
I usually agree with pstoller, but have to disagree somewhat with this one. I think that designers should size their clothing according to how *they* believe a piece should fit. After all, they design on a standard form, and unless there has been some miscommunication with the manufacturer, I'm fairly sure that Tom Ford understands that his size 50 Gucci overcoat is meant to be oversized, same as Hedi Slimane realizes that his size 50 jacket will hug the torso of any man with a standard 33 inch waist. If a customer wants a tighter or looser fit, it is the customer's perogative, not the designer's to conform to his wishes. Sometimes, I see people wearing tight Comme shirts, when it's obvious that the shirt was meant to be worn oversized to emphasize the pattern. I've also seen people wear loose Dior (and he wasn't a small man. I have no idea how he found the size). Fine. But that's personal style or the lack thereof, and not necessarily how the designer envisioned his (or her) creation to look.
post #33 of 61
Quote:
I usually agree with pstoller, but have to disagree somewhat with this one.  I think that designers should size their clothing according to how *they* believe a piece should fit.  After all, they design on a standard form, and unless there has been some miscommunication with the manufacturer, I'm fairly sure that Tom Ford understands that his size 50 Gucci overcoat is meant to be oversized, same as Hedi Slimane realizes that his size 50 jacket will hug the torso of any man with a standard 33 inch waist. If a customer wants a tighter or looser fit, it is the customer's perogative, not the designer's to conform to his wishes. Sometimes, I see people wearing tight Comme shirts, when it's obvious that the shirt was meant to be worn oversized to emphasize the pattern.  I've also seen people wear loose Dior (and he wasn't a small man.  I have no idea how he found the size).  Fine.  But that's personal style or the lack thereof, and not necessarily how the designer envisioned his (or her) creation to look.
There may be a standard form, but fit models differ between designers. Obviously, not everyone has the same body type, so what may look horrid in "actual designer size" may look great going a size up or size down. There's a little subversion of a designer's vision going on, but personally, I'll go up or down a size for a particular fit. Sometimes sizes vary in a single designer's line, which is VERY annoying (should go in the other thread ) I have this one Dirk Schonberger shirt which fits perfectly (not too loose, not too tight, neck button can be done up comfortably) and it's an M. I had to get this one jersey type shirt from the same designer in a XXL because the neck hole in M was just too darned tight. And no, my neck hasn't grown lately, I've been a 16 neck for years
post #34 of 61
Quote:
I usually agree with pstoller, but have to disagree somewhat with this one.  I think that designers should size their clothing according to how *they* believe a piece should fit.  After all, they design on a standard form, and unless there has been some miscommunication with the manufacturer, I'm fairly sure that Tom Ford understands that his size 50 Gucci overcoat is meant to be oversized, same as Hedi Slimane realizes that his size 50 jacket will hug the torso of any man with a standard 33 inch waist. If a customer wants a tighter or looser fit, it is the customer's perogative, not the designer's to conform to his wishes.
I think I'll split the difference here. It's perfectly fine for designers to shape their pieces however they want. However, I have to side with pstoller that the conventional size measurements should be done precisely, and accurately noted on the piece. After all, a 32x32 pair of jeans doesn't say anything about the dimensions of the jeans in any place except for the waist and inside leg. Those should be precisely 32" each. A shirt labeled a size 41 should have a collar of precisely 41cm (16"), although the sizing convention leaves it free to have a body 41cm around as well, or sleeves twenty feet long for that matter. And a size 56 coat should have a chest dimension of precisely 46". With that "hardpoint" in place, it can be darted or billowed to the heart's content. As for the YSL RG coat I tried on, I agree with you that it was Mr. Ford's prerogative to design overcoats to be worn such that the wearer is swimming inside of it. However, pstoller is 100% right that it should be sized according to a hard measurement. He can indicate the manner in which it is to be worn either through a competent sales staff (I've never seen a YSL RG stockist lacking such people, and Quartier 206 certainly doesn't) or through a size-description such as "56 intended for someone who normally takes a 50". I guess another method is an entirely editorial sizing scheme, i.e. S/M/L or a numeric representation thereof. This method seems particularly French, being used by Lacoste for their tennis shirts and Yamamoto, etc. And all of the dispute about how things should be sized aside, it's also my prerogative to call his oversized coat design moronic.   Peace, JG
post #35 of 61
Quote:
I think that designers should size their clothing according to how *they* believe a piece should fit...Tom Ford understands that his size 50 Gucci overcoat is meant to be oversized, same as Hedi Slimane realizes that his size 50 jacket will hug the torso of any man with a standard 33 inch waist. If a customer wants a tighter or looser fit, it is the customer's perogative, not the designer's to conform to his wishes.
Given the "over" in "overcoat," I accept that such garments are going to be sized loosely to allow for suits, sweaters, and the like. It's hard to be precise with such a garment, even if you're Hedi Slimane. And, as for M.Slimane's jacket, if it requires a man with an 8 drop, that's fine...but there's no good reason he shouldn't say so. (A note on that: my Dior tux jacket leaves virtually no room for me to have a larger waist than I do. However, the pants that came with the jacket were 2+ inches too large, requiring a recut. I have seen Dior Homme outfits on the runway, and the look is NOT to have your pants falling off your ass. So, why didn't the pants fit me off the rack, when the jacket did?) I'm not simply talking about tighter or looser fit: I'm talking about does or doesn't fit. There are designers who clearly want you to look like you're a kid wearing your dad's clothes (Rei Kawakubo comes to mind), and I suppose I can make exceptions for such designers even if I can't take their jackets seriously. Dave's point about fit models is well taken; I don't expect the line of a jacket to work for me just because it's "my size." But if something fits me perfectly when I go up or down a size (or two), it's not the fit model. Regarding YSL, Might not Ford be using French sizing rather than Italian? Not that I understand what the basis is for the sizing system, but I wear a size 40 in YSL pants, whereas I wear a 46 (usually) in Italian sizing. Obviously, Ford doesn't mean to bisect his customers when they zip their flies.
post #36 of 61
I voted, with ease, for Dior with Slimane at the helm. This man really knows how to cut cloth. Especially for us tall skinny guys (I'm 6', 140 lbs). His designs aren't for every body type, but if you can pull them off, they make you look so good. Take for instance the suit he cut for himself for the fall 2001 Dior show. This is him at the end of the show: http://www.firstview.com/MENfall2001...DIOR/P107.html http://www.firstview.com/MENfall2001...DIOR/P108.html http://www.firstview.com/MENfall2001...DIOR/P109.html
post #37 of 61
The only label that doesn't produce anything I wouldn't buy is CP Company... so, Massimo Osti, but I don't think that's mainstream. I chose Ralph Lauren, then, I guess, for Purple Label...although that clothing doesn't really seem "designed".
post #38 of 61
Thread Starter 
CP Company is well known but as it has (to my knowledge) only entered the mainstream in terms of casual, non-hard-labour wear, I left it off the list. I love the rereleased Mille jacket... I used to wear my father's, but it was always too big in the arms. Now, everything fits perfectly. European Interloper
post #39 of 61
Where's Neil Barrett?
post #40 of 61
Thread Starter 
What?
post #41 of 61
i don't think neil barrett has been around long enough nor is well known enough to be considered a mainstream designer; although his designs would not differ that much than any other of the other designers listed
post #42 of 61
It's nice to know Mr. Armani and Mr. Lauren's advertising dollars are well spent,
post #43 of 61
.... and of all the names listed, likely the lauren company is the one that spends the most ad dollars, in north america at least (other than calvin klein)
post #44 of 61
Thread Starter 
Certainly. It's ridiculous that a brand like that even gets votes- I have seen nothing inspirational or beautiful out of RL. It's sad that such a poor brand, with so little to offer, has found such a niche in WASP, and consiquently, American society (and its imitators- I saw a frenchman in a Purple Label suit, shudder...). I hope that RL gets the jolt it needs and puts some of that money to where it should be- fashion development. Corporate weight like that can provoke, almost oximoronically as corporations TEND to behave like RL presently does, immense innovation. European Interloper
post #45 of 61
Quote:
Certainly. It's ridiculous that a brand like that even gets votes- I have seen nothing inspirational or beautiful out of RL. It's sad that such a poor brand, with so little to offer, has found such a niche in WASP, and consiquently, American society
I don't think that's entirely fair. And besides, RLPL does have some nice pieces. The velvet morning coat from last winter, for instance. Or any number of the peak-lapeled SB suits. Besides, being conserative and relentlessly aspirational in a petit bourgeois kind of way has worked for them thus far, I doubt RL is going to hire the sartorial equivalent of Chris Bangle to shake things up, at least in Mr Lauren nee Lifshitz's lifetime. Peace, JG
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › What's your favorite mainstream designer?