or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › The new official TOJ thread, 2011
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The new official TOJ thread, 2011 - Page 795

post #11911 of 44278
^ on another note, since you have both lamb and calf, can you compare the leather?
post #11912 of 44278
That just accentuates your hips, not a good look.
post #11913 of 44278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dbear View Post

^ on another note, since you have both lamb and calf, can you compare the leather?

Looks-wise the calf has a depth of colour and tonality that the lamb can't come close to, the lamb looks terrific, but the whiskey calf really does looks spectacular.

Touch-wise the lamb is buttery-smooth, soft and luxurious, everyone goes 'ooohhh...' when they touch it, and because it's so soft, it drapes beautifully and is wonderfully comfortable to wear. The calf is much stiffer to the touch, it has none of the luxuriousness of the lamb, and doesn't really excite the fingertips (as it were). But it does feel considerably more 'solid' than the lamb.

They're really quite different, but each is beautiful in its own way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloonz View Post

That just accentuates your hips, not a good look.

Maybe, but it still looks a hell of a lot better than it did when the jacket wasn't fitted (which also seemingly happened because my measurements weren't 'believed'):

475479
post #11914 of 44278

I agree with this. If you taper too aggressively at the midsection like you did on your moto, it effeminates the jacket, especially since you have wide hips and a thick upper block. That's not to say there shouldn't be any taper at all, but just enough to take away the bunching/flaring at the lower back and sides. In my opinion, I don't think the jacket should be much slimmer (along your torso) than the width of your hips at their widest point. 
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by cloonz View Post

That just accentuates your hips, not a good look.


 

post #11915 of 44278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grug View Post

479

What's wrong here? I like this fit better.
post #11916 of 44278
Quote:
Originally Posted by chaos View Post

I agree with this. If you taper too aggressively at the midsection like you did on your moto, it effeminates the jacket, especially since you have wide hips and a thick upper block. That's not to say there shouldn't be any taper at all, but just enough to take away the bunching/flaring at the lower back and sides. In my opinion, I don't think the jacket should be much slimmer (along your torso) than the width of your hips at their widest point. 

 

The problem is that the jacket is already the same basic width as my hips at their widest point. The reason it bunches and flares strangely is because there's about 8-9" of loose material around my waistline (43" around at the leather vs. 34" around at the body). It's just too much loose material to be able to hold any kind of shape.

I'm not looking for a fit quite as tight as my Moto is now (after its alterations), but it needs to taper a fair bit to get some semblance of shape.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GBear View Post

What's wrong here? I like this fit better.

There were swathes of excess material and it made me look fat and formless, which was the entire reason for going the ToJ route in the first place - to get something that would actually be fitted to MY body (since no one makes clothes for people with bodyshapes as weird as mine).

428
post #11917 of 44278
Ah okay. Honestly though, sometimes having it be too fitted isn't the best look, but it depends on your body type.
post #11918 of 44278
You should probably stay away from waist length jackets and go with longer coats. You look like a bowling pin with the fitted moto.
post #11919 of 44278
bowling pin rotflmao.gif
post #11920 of 44278
To make that jacket look good, you need a longer tee and much tighter jeans to go with the moto.
post #11921 of 44278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grug View Post

428
my black moto has almost exactly that much room in the body as well; it's part of the design to be honest
post #11922 of 44278
Thread Starter 
It is, actually. I have a long spiel to write up on that topic, I've been walking around all day and been thinking about Grug's fit. More on that in a second, I've got to get some pics uploaded.
post #11923 of 44278
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grug View Post

I don't think they could physically be brought up any higher, they sit right up under my armpits as is. The jacket just needs the taper through the waist that I have in my Moto (which is what it was supposed to have):
468464
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grug View Post

475[/URL]479

Here's my take on this, after thinking it through... and realizing I've never really explained this part either, I thought it was kind of a given:

If anybody looked at this jacket pre- and post-tailoring, they're gonna tell you that the pre-tailor photo is better* looking than the post-tailor version. It's now odd looking in the back, the mid, the sleeves look off now, it's definitely something we would not cut that way.
*I'm not saying that the pre-tailor version can't afford to be taken in some, but nowhere near the amount that was actually taken off.
I realize that what fits closer to the body makes you feel more aware and sharper, but what I am seeing is that you might be overdoing that, you're going to the other extreme and that is readily apparent - your body type is honestly really best suited for the pre-tailored look, where the jacket tapers down gracefully from the pits to the waist with no negative taper inwards, the pre-tailor cut negates your hourglass figure. In my opinion, that is an advantage and it means the clothes are actually working for you, it's part of dressing your body type.

Check out how I wear my leather jacket, and I wear it like this for a similar reason - I have wide shoulders, skinny ass arms and midsection, and a huge fuckin head - so to negate that I wear the jacket a little more relaxed and make myself look a bit bigger. I just can't wear skin tight jackets in real life, not a good look for me. I realize that and just go with the flow. I wear it with the same wideness in the midsection, as mentioned above. What has happened over time is that the leather relaxes, the sleeves get flattened and look really skinny head-on, same with the torso. It's truly about a size too big for me, but it's definitely more appealing looking than if I were to size down.

unzipped:
390533_10100499496072820_15904009_53579742_1055204380_n.jpg
386380_10100499496162640_15904009_53579743_1429940209_n.jpg
zipped:
316252_10100499496277410_15904009_53579744_1030627947_n.jpg
390091_10100499496606750_15904009_53579745_542560917_n.jpg


What we are addressing here with men's jackets, is basically that there are 'hard points' where the measurements should be more exacting, and then 'soft measurements' where the size doesn't really matter as long as they're within a taper, a range basically.

Hard points/fixed measurements would be:
shoulder to shoulder
pit to pit
waist
sleeve length
bicep width (kinda, but for average builds, this is better as just a proportion of the torso sizing)
cuff width (kinda, as above with the bicep)

'soft measurements'
midsection
elbow

Those soft measurements you don't want being too close to your body, you want some room there actually. It gives you room to twist your torso and extend and close your arm properly.
To put it another way, and I think Islander is the only person to have paid attention to this part (and also benefitted from it as well) - we use a set of propietary ratios to determine the jacket size from the body measurements, we're following a curved line on the outside. To the 'hard' points, except for the shoulders and sometimes the sleeve, we multiply those 'hard measurements' by about 1.05-1.09 depending on how tight/relaxed one would want the fit. The two 'soft points' though, we multiply by about 1.15 up to even 1.20 depending on how much of a drop one has and how they figure into the measurement set - basically reiterating the idea that the mid should not touch the sides, rather a natural taper that doesn't curve inward would be key.

Here are the measurements you gave me in the end for the MDR - I had kept saying the mid needs to be larger, but you wouldn't listen to me - I'll explain this below:

Leather: Medium-Whisky Calf
Shoulders: 18.75"
Chest: 23.8" across
Midsection: 19" across
Waist (5" from bottom of jacket): 19" across
Bottom of jacket: 20.75" across
Front Length: 23.5"
Back Length: 27"
Sleeve Length: 25"
Bicep: 7.75" across
elbow: 6.75 across
cuff 5.9 across

The problem is that you want a 5" drop in the pattern (that's 10" around) in a space only a few inches tall, from the 23.8 pit to the 19 mid - that is a pattern cutting/sewing impossibility. We work on approximate measurements and never guarantee an exacting measurement because there are limitations to the way a patter can be cut and then sewn up. I realized today that in the end, the guy did read your measurements but the jacket wouldn't have been able to be sewn up that way, because it'd flatten out the torso, whereas normally with less taper, the torso can round out cylindrically at the seams and they lay flat at your sides - 23.8 to 19 is such a curved stitch line between the pit to mid that if you were viewing the jacket from the bottom, that part of the jacket would not be round, rather trapezoidal and angluar at the seam. Try doing it with paper and see. Anyway, bottom line - that midsection was adjusted so that the jacket could be put together properly.
post #11924 of 44278
Thread Starter 
I guess to 'tl:dr' the post above, the points to make would be this

- we have to sometimes take over on the measurements, because the customer is usually not a pattern cutter and may be unaware of the physical limitations and geometry of pattern cutting and sewing. To see it for yourself, try this experiment at home if you want:

a) stack two pieces of paper, cut a deep curved line from one corner to the opposite corner. 'Deep curve' being about two inches or more deeper from where an imaginary straight line from the same point to point would be. Tape the 'seam' on the inside of the curve
b) do the same but cut a shallow curve - ie closer to that imaginary straight line. Tape those two pieces together.
c) lay both curved/'stitched' pieces on their sides like tents - you will see that 'a' with the deep curved doesn't lay flat and that it creates a pretty hard angle at the tape, whereas 'b' will lay flatter and the angle at the tape will be much wider

In the real world of sewing, both that p2p to mid taper, and the outside seam of the sleeve are drawn in the pattern using a 'hip curve stick/ruler' - looks like this:
Metal-Curve-Stick

It gives a consistent curve that you can adjust from measurable points, and also limits the amount of curve to what will be a seam that can be sewn and laid out properly when finished. As you can see, it's curved but not radically so.
post #11925 of 44278
All of which I understand, and all of which you have previously explained to me to some extent or other Drew. My issue is simply that it's not the jacket I ordered.

With my Moto I tried very hard to explain how important getting the taper was to me, and the result was so far off what I had asked for I had to have it altered. I never asked for suggestions on what would suit my strange old bodyshape best, but rather for the measurements that would achieve the fitted look I wanted (it being impossible to buy a jacket off the rack that would match my proportions - which is what brought me to ToJ in the first place).

If you'd said it was impossible to achieve the proportions I asked for I simply wouldn't have ordered the jacket. But given that my altered Moto manages to achieve them (indeed to a slightly more extreme extent than I had intended) I find it hard to believe that a slightly more relaxed fit couldn't be achieved from scratch with the MDR.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Streetwear and Denim
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › The new official TOJ thread, 2011