Hi Sebastian,
thanks for this thread (as well as the 38L thread). Lots of useful information in here. I'm not quite as lanky as some of the members in this thread, but I'm still of the tall and skinny type.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sebastian_Flyte 
Rule #2: pants can be tapered below the knee for $30
Funny how I didn't learn this till the age of 27. The beanpole man can usually find pants that fit passably in the waist and thighs-- it's his tiny calves that create his dilemma. Well, dilemma no more: your tailor can easily taper pants below the knee. Experiment with different hem (i.e. pant leg opening widths). I go with 7.75'' or 8'', myself. To go full GQ, go even smaller.
Rule #3: 100% wool pants. Cotton is your sworn enemy!
By cotton, I mean khakis, chinos, etc. Not jeans, which is a different topic.
Since our legs are basically long sticks, most cottons and wool blend pants will branch off from our bodies and create odd angles on our legs, especially under the knee. Ever wonder why khakis look like utter shit on you? This is why. Even slim-cut and/or tapered. Since cotton and blend fabrics form edges easily and our legs are not filling them out, fabric pops away from the knee, the hem gets caught in shoelaces easily and starts bending and folding. 100% wool, however, drapes softly-- straight down-- and provides the most flattering look for us, especially in the lower leg and where the pants meet the shoes. 98% 2% Lycra is preeettty good still, but not as good as 100% wool; the fabric is decent but a bit too stiff. One exception I know to this general rule is 75% Tencel 25% cotton found in some brands (Marc by Marc Jacobs is one), which hangs more like wool.
Needless to say, get slim-cut 100% wool pants.
This is something I have also noticed, and in fact my most recent chinos I bought with the intention of having them taken in below the knee - it's nice to see that someone else can confirm my idea.
Also great to get some concept of what hem width works, I'll try 8", and depending on how happy I am, maybe go to 7" from there.
Cotton pants do tend to stick out at random angles, especially below the knee. Corduroy is slightly better, but not perfect. Wool and linen are much better in this regard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
obiter dictum I remember reading somewhere that tall and thin people shouldn't wear vertical stripes/patterns, because it exaggerates the tallness/thinness. Horizontal stripes/patterns work well on us, for the same reason. Makes sense to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Tck13 Horizontal stripes on the shirts/sweaters help widen the upper half...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
thinman (2) Horizontal details are my friend. This means I wear plaids, checks, horizontal stripes, and extra pockets (ticket pockets on jackets and suits, two chest pockets on shirts), epaulets on shirts, and shirt sleeves rolled up near the elbow. Until very recently I wouldn't wear vertical stripes, but I get away with them on top, since I have very long legs and a striped shirt elongates my torso. Beware plaid or checked suits, though. Most are made with longer vertical than horizontal lines to make the average hefty Joe look taller and thinner...not something I need.
Seems to be a consensus on horizontal stripes here. However, I'm wondering, how can one integrate horizontal patterns into a formal outfit? Of all my shirts, I only have a single horizontally striped one (polo shirts excepted), and that one is very casual. I attempted to integrate it with a blazer, but I don't think it went so well. Does anyone have any good working examples of horizontal patterns with a suit / sports coat?
If you're showing a bit of bottom on the 42L, don't sweat it I say. Jackets have been getting higher and higher over the past decade anyhow.
Im about 6.5-6.6 and weigh around 165. isnt wearing alot in the attitude? ive seen alot of tall skinny guys wearing clothes against the rules with outmost good results, looking sharp. cant we break the rules somehow. because we can look a way that the "normal" built man cant do..
