or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › gdl203's Highly Edited and Unexplained SF Best Looks
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

gdl203's Highly Edited and Unexplained SF Best Looks - Page 16

post #226 of 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wes Bourne View Post
To all the regular WAYWRN posters: does it ever happen that someone else snaps a picture of you that you could post here instead of your usual self-portraits? In particular, I've always found pictures taken when the subject was unaware infinitely more interesting than poses. While a lot of you guys crop out your faces, I figure it would still make the lifestyle shots more authentic than the staged self-portraits. As nice as some of the outfits can be, it's the context that gives them meaning. Just curious.

Maybe this is kind of a harrumph, but the new wave of pseudo-candid forvm photographs (influenced by Phatty and I think, The Sartorialist) makes for a new level of photographic interest that at the same time detracts a bit from the ability to use the photos for discussing clothes.

Doc Holliday had some good comments about this in another thread...I wish I could remember where. These new types of photographs up the ante for skill and time devoted to self-portrayal, and bring in tangential visual information that can be jarring or entrancing...stuff that used to be left to simple text.

For the last month, I've been doing them as well after getting a new camera that I keep in my case. It's kinda fun since I enjoy photography...but it is also time consuming.

What you are describing...true candid photography in volume...is essentially the preserve of celebrities. But even the biggest forvm celebrity of all...mafoofan...does not draw enough third party interest to produce a ready pool of candid shots.

Here's one of the few true candid photographs of me that I have posted:



And I agree with you that there is something about a truly candid photograph that communicates things that more contrived things do not. But, such is not plentiful enough fodder for an internet clothing discussion forum.

You make a thoughtful point, nonetheless.

- B
post #227 of 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wes Bourne View Post
To all the regular WAYWRN posters: does it ever happen that someone else snaps a picture of you that you could post here instead of your usual self-portraits? In particular, I've always found pictures taken when the subject was unaware infinitely more interesting than poses. While a lot of you guys crop out your faces, I figure it would still make the lifestyle shots more authentic than the staged self-portraits. As nice as some of the outfits can be, it's the context that gives them meaning. Just curious.
- Yes, some of my pics are shit by who ever I am with at the moment.. Which is most of the time.
- I also started to have my female friends to not only be featured but to take the pics as well
- FWIW, I tend to start with similar series to concentrate on the FIT then followed by life style & candid pics.
- I have started to crop my face out as my privacy started to wane via SF stalkers.. I don't mind meeting, but I have a had a few weird encounters..
post #228 of 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phat Guido View Post
- I also started to have my female friends to not only be featured but to take the pics as well

The fact that you use the phrase "female friends" is a double whammy for many StyleForvm Members, not only for the premise but also the plural. Keep in mind there are guys who post pictures here standing on their furry-topped toilets.

That reminds me...do you remember Laura from iLookOK? She posted here briefly, and now has timely video advice:



I hope that she comes back. Her advice is pretty good.


- B
IMPORTANT NOTICE: No media files are hosted on these forums. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website. We can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. If the video does not play, wait a minute or try again later.       I AGREE

TIP: to embed Youtube clips, put only the encoded part of the Youtube URL, e.g. eBGIQ7ZuuiU between the tags.
post #229 of 436
Quote:
- I have started to crop my face out as my privacy started to wane via SF stalkers.. I don't mind meeting, but I have a had a few weird encounters..

Tell us more !
post #230 of 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by voxsartoria View Post
Maybe this is kind of a harrumph, but the new wave of pseudo-candid forvm photographs (influenced by Phatty and I think, The Sartorialist) makes for a new level of photographic interest that at the same time detracts a bit from the ability to use the photos for discussing clothes.

I disagree with this perspective. Well, maybe not totally. I think the introduction of the pseudo-candid pics gives a lot of context to the clothing, and also can allow us to see the clothes worn more naturally than the living mannequin presentations. I agree that the posed still photos probably give us more material for discussing the technical aspects of tailoring, fit, etc., but then again, to me this is only a portion of the picture. As you mentioned in another post, clothing is for wearing and not for standing or posing. So while it's great to see posed pics to analyze the technical aspects of the fits, I think it is also great to see the pseudo-candid or action photos to understand how the technical interacts with the practical. I know you think your posed office pictures showcase the technical success of our clothing the best, but I was actually much more impressed to see how your wardrobe is worn. As impressive as it is in the kouros configuration, it's even moreso in the environments we can all relate to.

Likewise, I was really surprised to see how my clothing looks in action or in more relaxed and real settings. Sitting, walking, hands in pockets, arms folded, legs crossed, at my desk, in my car, etc. . . . in other words, the way the clothing actually sits on my body 99% of the time when I'm wearing it. In the still photos, it's easy to say, closer this, tighter this, shorter that, etc. etc. It is great to be able to analyze things from that perspective, but when you introduce pseudo-candid, action and context, you get even more of the picture.

Sorry for the ramble, my wife is giving me this look like get off the computer and pack. LOL
post #231 of 436
As long as we don't start posting little videos of ourselves twirling around I'll be fine.
post #232 of 436
Because I don't twirl. I sparkle.
post #233 of 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by voxsartoria View Post
Maybe this is kind of a harrumph, but the new wave of pseudo-candid forvm photographs (influenced by Phatty and I think, The Sartorialist) makes for a new level of photographic interest that at the same time detracts a bit from the ability to use the photos for discussing clothes.

Doc Holliday had some good comments about this in another thread...I wish I could remember where. These new types of photographs up the ante for skill and time devoted to self-portrayal, and bring in tangential visual information that can be jarring or entrancing...stuff that used to be left to simple text.

For the last month, I've been doing them as well after getting a new camera that I keep in my case. It's kinda fun since I enjoy photography...but it is also time consuming.

What you are describing...true candid photography in volume...is essentially the preserve of celebrities. But even the biggest forvm celebrity of all...mafoofan...does not draw enough third party interest to produce a ready pool of candid shots.

Here's one of the few true candid photographs of me that I have posted:

And I agree with you that there is something about a truly candid photograph that communicates things that more contrived things do not. But, such is not plentiful enough fodder for an internet clothing discussion forum.

You make a thoughtful point, nonetheless.

- B

I remember the points raised by Doc as well. I don't know, maybe it's that I find it a bit self-indulgent to take self-portraits all the time. When it's specifically for the sake of posting them on a men's forum, isn't it all a bit ghey (and I don't mean that in the homosex way)?

While I agree that there is true merit in taking pics to discuss clothes (your Steed threads come to mind), WAYWRN often has a `Hai guys, this is what I'm wearing. You like?` vibe.

As for candid pics: just this past weekend, I was over at our good friends' new house for a Labor Day weekend BBQ. Most in attendance ended up in the hot tub at some point. A few had cameras so I received pics of me horsing around with the kids' super soaker water guns... Surely I can't be the only one who gets his picture taken by friends, whether truly candidly or posed (but at their friends' request)?

Since you mentionned Foo, a candid pic of him that does come to mind is the one where he's raising a glass at his wedding. Why? Probably because he was snapped while actually doing something rather than just posing. In that instance, the subject was much more interesting than the clothes. Other candid pics I recall involve the 1st SF SF meetup if I'm not mistaken. Among them was one of LK and PSG chatting it up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phat Guido View Post
- Yes, some of my pics are shit by who ever I am with at the moment.. Which is most of the time.
- I also started to have my female friends to not only be featured but to take the pics as well
- FWIW, I tend to start with similar series to concentrate on the FIT then followed by life style & candid pics.
- I have started to crop my face out as my privacy started to wane via SF stalkers.. I don't mind meeting, but I have a had a few weird encounters..

PG, my comments weren't aimed at you or anyone else in particular for that matter. In fact, I do like a lot of the pieces you post, both when considering the garment on it's own, as well as how you wear them and how well they suit you.

An alternative could be to hand the camera over to whoever is with you and have them snap away while you go about your business.

To be honest, I don't really know why I brought this up. While I enjoy clothes and discussing them, I only consider them a means to an end. Still, I do get a kick out of WAYWRN when I pop in from time to time. I just think it'd be better if there were more candid shots. Of course, that would mean there wouldn't be nearly as many posts. On the other hand, a digest might not then be necessary...

Quote:
Originally Posted by TC (Houston) View Post
I disagree with this perspective. Well, maybe not totally. I think the introduction of the pseudo-candid pics gives a lot of context to the clothing, and also can allow us to see the clothes worn more naturally than the living mannequin presentations. I agree that the posed still photos probably give us more material for discussing the technical aspects of tailoring, fit, etc., but then again, to me this is only a portion of the picture. As you mentioned in another post, clothing is for wearing and not for standing or posing. So while it's great to see posed pics to analyze the technical aspects of the fits, I think it is also great to see the pseudo-candid or action photos to understand how the technical interacts with the practical. I know you think your posed office pictures showcase the technical success of our clothing the best, but I was actually much more impressed to see how your wardrobe is worn. As impressive as it is in the kouros configuration, it's even moreso in the environments we can all relate to.
Likewise, I was really surprised to see how my clothing looks in action or in more relaxed and real settings. Sitting, walking, hands in pockets, arms folded, legs crossed, at my desk, in my car, etc. . . . in other words, the way the clothing actually sits on my body 99% of the time when I'm wearing it. In the still photos, it's easy to say, closer this, tighter this, shorter that, etc. etc. It is great to be able to analyze things from that perspective, but when you introduce pseudo-candid, action and context, you get even more of the picture.
Sorry for the ramble, my wife is giving me this look like get off the computer and pack. LOL

+1.

Anyhow, enough blabbing. To end this on a good note: PG, I really like that green woven bracelet I saw in you wearing in some recent pics. I'll like it even more if you said it only costs $5.
post #234 of 436
I actually like the true candids. Man of Kent's photos, for example, are always a pleasure, in that I can see him, in his clothes, in interesting environments. They never seem contrived. But sometimes it can feel like the WAYW "candids" are every bit as posed as the mannequin shots, only calculated for entry into a lifestyle competition. Those don't do much for me, as the technical details of the clothing can't be appreciated and the context doesn't feel genuine. I'd rather just look at the clothes.

Maybe my interest is more narrow than most.
post #235 of 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocHolliday View Post
I actually like the true candids. Man of Kent's photos, for example, are always a pleasure, in that I can see him, in his clothes, in interesting environments. They never seem contrived. But sometimes it can feel like the WAYW "candids" are every bit as posed as the mannequin shots, only calculated for entry into a lifestyle competition. Those don't do much for me, as the technical details of the clothing can't be appreciated and the context doesn't feel genuine. I'd rather just look at the clothes.

Maybe my interest is more narrow than most.

Imo, what you describe contributes to the bigger picture TC was alluding to. It also reveals style (when present) that mannequin shots or faux candids lack.
post #236 of 436
It's possible that Internet clothing forums are getting mined out of material.

In other words, it only took a few years to discuss, photograph, and describe nearly all aspects of classic tailored clothes as worn today.

For example, can anything new be said on dinner clothes?

Office pants?


- B
post #237 of 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by voxsartoria View Post
It's possible that Internet clothing forums are getting mined out of material.

In other words, it only took a few years to discuss, photograph, and describe nearly all aspects of classic tailored clothes as worn today.

For example, can anything new be said on dinner clothes?

Office pants?


- B

I heard when people get bored on the internet, they start making digests.
post #238 of 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by voxsartoria View Post
It's possible that Internet clothing forums are getting mined out of material.

In other words, it only took a few years to discuss, photograph, and describe nearly all aspects of classic tailored clothes as worn today.

For example, can anything new be said on dinner clothes?

Office pants?

I just received a tony menswear catalog that touts the versatility of a certain sweater, noting it can be worn on the weekends or with office pants.

SF: Taking over the world of menswear one catalog catchphrase at a time.

To your greater point, I don't believe the forums have exhausted the topic of classic tailored clothing. In fact, I don't even think we've really scratched the surface. I do, however, think SF is nearing the limits of the SF house style. The forum has, in places, adopted certain aesthetics that can sustain interest only so long. It's the knit tie writ large. First there's a novelty, then a saturation. Now, more than ever, I understand why fashion must be so fickle.

I will be interested to see how SF reacts as the "skinny" trend exits.
post #239 of 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocHolliday View Post
I actually like the true candids. Man of Kent's photos, for example, are always a pleasure, in that I can see him, in his clothes, in interesting environments. They never seem contrived. But sometimes it can feel like the WAYW "candids" are every bit as posed as the mannequin shots, only calculated for entry into a lifestyle competition. Those don't do much for me, as the technical details of the clothing can't be appreciated and the context doesn't feel genuine. I'd rather just look at the clothes.

Maybe my interest is more narrow than most.

I hear what you are saying and I see the distinction as well. If the end result is the same as if you photoshopped someone out of his closet/bathroom/office and into some other scene, it doesn't really matter and is a diversion if anything, at least for purposes of what we purport to discuss here. Does add some variety though, and maybe some better or at least different lighting. LOL

Quote:
Originally Posted by voxsartoria View Post
It's possible that Internet clothing forums are getting mined out of material.

In other words, it only took a few years to discuss, photograph, and describe nearly all aspects of classic tailored clothes as worn today.

For example, can anything new be said on dinner clothes?

Office pants?

- B

Since I'm new to this a lot of the discussion probably appears more novel to me than it does to you and the more seasoned posters. But just since I've been around it is pretty interesting to see how quickly things change. I think it will be very interesting to look at WAYWRN in 5 years. Hell, it will be interesting to see what PG is doing in 5 months.

On dinner clothes, you're right in that it appears the same classic standards are recited time and time again. But I suspect there are a lot of people out there who secretly deviate, either out of preference or practicality, and it is interesting to see those examples for discussion. Hell, some jackass posted a two button dinner suit with flap pockets a few weeks ago.
post #240 of 436
Thread Starter 
September 10, 2009
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › gdl203's Highly Edited and Unexplained SF Best Looks