or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › GQ mag's (flawed?) take on Dry Denim
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

GQ mag's (flawed?) take on Dry Denim - Page 2

post #16 of 29
I agree with the GQ guy.

Washing clothes is generally a good idea.
post #17 of 29
I was not saying this like an expose. But I am curious how much, it surely is not all, but is it 25%? Is it directly affected by money, or a thank you and unspoken that goes with advertising?
post #18 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by HEWSINATOR
I was not saying this like an expose. But I am curious how much, it surely is not all, but is it 25%? Is it directly affected by money, or a thank you and unspoken that goes with advertising?
I think it would be the case that if GQ stopped putting a certain amount of, say, Polo Ralph Lauren/RLPL/RLBL clothing in its fashion spreads, then Ralph Lauren would stop paying for advertising space.

Apparently the Style Guy's - Glenn O'Brien's - favorite khakis are from Supreme. So there ya go.
post #19 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by HEWSINATOR
I was not saying this like an expose. But I am curious how much, it surely is not all, but is it 25%? Is it directly affected by money, or a thank you and unspoken that goes with advertising?
Almost all of the clothing that Conde Nast (CNP) gets for photo shoots gets returned. There's a few variables involved, but I think they include pieces from their advertisers because the advertisers are very efficient about lending. Bigger companies (RL etc.) have interns cranking out press packages etc. For the most part, the fashion director chooses what clothing is going in the spreads. I doubt the CFO tells the Fashion director what to include. Any magazine at CNP gets boxes of gifts everyday from companies big and small, who are hoping that someone in the mag will use their products, like it, and use it for a write up.
post #20 of 29
Whilst I'm loathe to defned GQ it has to be said there is a lot of rubbish talked about washing denim.
I can't remember if it was here or the other SF where someone actuallu said they'd vomited on their jeans and how could they clean them without washing them!
Regardless of the flaws of the piece it is possible to wear and wash jeans normally and have them looking good.
post #21 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by generic_guy
Whilst I'm loathe to defned GQ it has to be said there is a lot of rubbish talked about washing denim.
I can't remember if it was here or the other SF where someone actuallu said they'd vomited on their jeans and how could they clean them without washing them!
Regardless of the flaws of the piece it is possible to wear and wash jeans normally and have them looking good.

It's true. I just prefer not to be called a fashion victim. Fashion victims are the ones who read GQ and take it seriously. I'm a denim nerd.
post #22 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by lapu lapu
Q: What's the deal with raw or selvage jeans? I've heard that you can't wash them because they'll lose their color. True?

A: Trend victims are walking around in filthy jeans because they are afraid to wash them and make them look slightly lighter. There is a natural life cycle to jeans. They start out dark blue, they get washed and worn, and eventually they wind up abraded and maybe in Africa with all the old CK T-shirts. Made by using the old-style looms, new selvage jeans are full of dark dye. One way to try to maintain the dark color is to wash them inside out with cold water, and some people use Woolite Dark Laundry to prevent undue color loss. When they get too light for fashion, buy another pair and give the medium blue ones to a charity or a trend-insensitive friend.

Is it just me or has this guy got it all wrong here?

Am I the only one who thinks this guy doesn't have it wrong? He seems to be parapharasing all the threads that go on here about the care of dry denim. I guess the only thing he's getting wrong is equating dry denim and selvage denim. All selvage denim is not necessarily dry and vice versa.
post #23 of 29
Well, I think the whole "Trend victims" is the problem here, not the rest of it. Unless you're saying that 90% of the people in the Streetware forum are trend victims :P
post #24 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike C.
Am I the only one who thinks this guy doesn't have it wrong? He seems to be parapharasing all the threads that go on here about the care of dry denim. I guess the only thing he's getting wrong is equating dry denim and selvage denim. All selvage denim is not necessarily dry and vice versa.

I think that he is a bit off the mark (apart from his seeming to equate raw and selvange denim - although, to be fair, with some notable exceptions, most of the raw or one wash jeans popular among denim heads are constructed with selvage outseams.) The trend is not so much to keep the denim dark as it is to get as many contrasting "wear" marks as possible on a pair of jeans. This is why people are waiting ridiculously long to wash their jeans, and resorting to (I think that this will be as laughable in the long run as acid wash jeans) measures like drying the jeans without washing them and then "airing them out" to mitigate the smell and starching the thighs and the back of the knees.

But I think that Glenn O'Brien does have a point. Clothes should be washed before they get really dirty. And he was wearing raw denim (I think that APC was his preferred brand) before pretty much anybody here. They will develop wear naturally depending on your lifestyle.
post #25 of 29
seriously..the "style guy" from gq obviously doesn't know anything about jeans....i think he doesn't even wear them!!!i think dry denim is the best jeans that money can buy out there...and there's nothing they can do about it
post #26 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by jean_connoisseur23
seriously..the "style guy" from gq obviously doesn't know anything about jeans....i think he doesn't even wear them!!!i think dry denim is the best jeans that money can buy out there...and there's nothing they can do about it
Actually, he's the one voice of any reason left in GQ, along with Alan Richman. And as LA Guy said, he's been wearing raw indigo jeans forever. It's hard to argue that the increased awareness of dry denim is anything other than a trend, and one that will pass at that. Already "those in the know" are making noises that it's silly to wear puke-stained jeans and are searching out jeans that look good off the rack rather than those that require a corset to button and a year of dirtiness before they start to look good.

Tom
post #27 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkNWorn
American GQ is now a joke. I had a subscription years ago but discontinued when they morphed into a Maxim wannabe. I'll only read the British version when I can get my hands on an issue.

Have you actually read the British GQ? I bought one issue last year and I was so disappointed that I'll never buy it again. It's like FHM.
post #28 of 29
I agree. British GQ is a prime of example of British does not necessarily equal better. The articles are just as retarded as the American version. They do show full frontal female nudity, though.
post #29 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwiteaboy
I agree. British GQ is a prime of example of British does not necessarily equal better. The articles are just as retarded as the American version. They do show full frontal female nudity, though.

And that, in the end, is all that matters.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Streetwear and Denim
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › GQ mag's (flawed?) take on Dry Denim