HOF: What Are You Wearing Right Now - Part III

Ahh what the heck...



PandArts said:

Ahh what the heck...

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

Click to expand...

Might get a better idea if I saw it closer up but the tie (and especially the knot) seem a bit skinny for the shirt collar and jacket lapels. Perhaps go with a double four-in-hand? Also, the shirt sleeves seem to perhaps be a bit short? Could just be your pose.

Other than that I like it a lot (per usual). The colors are subdued but the tie does a good job of being interesting enough to grab attention, while still fitting into the overall look.



Phat Guido said:

Breaking some rule & blowing some Meh Minds

​

Click to expand...

This is great. It is probably totally wrong, but it looks good and gives you the look of being very approachable even though it tends towards the cold in concept.

Phat Guido said:

Window Cleaning Day

Cussing Angry Birds

*deets at you know where ** I am still failing at multi-quote & worse is all the members I chose to have hidden are back!​

Click to expand...

I don't think this fits well. I guess it isn't that the fit is bad, it is that it gives the impression of being overly static and boring, and I think that has to do with a combination of a slightly less shapely middle section with the windowpane. Both can be really nice, but here, together, they make you look a bit tired.

Phat Guido said:

End of 1/2 day at work & 1/2 day looking after my Niece & Nephew..

Click to expand...

Contrast the above with the fit of this jacket. Much more dynamic in cut and fit. Also, I know a lot of people hate this kind of look, they don't think it projects enough power (lol, whatever that is,) but it is really good here. At least I think it is.



bourbonbasted said:

Might get a better idea if I saw it closer up but the tie (and especially the knot) seem a bit skinny for the shirt collar and jacket lapels. Perhaps go with a double four-in-hand? Also, the shirt sleeves seem to perhaps be a bit short? Could just be your pose.

Other than that I like it a lot (per usual). The colors are subdued but the tie does a good job of being interesting enough to grab attention, while still fitting into the overall look.

Click to expand...

Cheers bourbon! I appreciate the feedback. Here's a close-up of the tie and knot, which is a DFIH. I think the tie is in proportion enough with the lapels and shirt collar...I think that a lot has to do with the way I'm standing. That said this is not one of my better fitting jackets...it's a 38R Slim fit but I usually wear a 36R slim. I got the suit with the intention of getting it tailored but haven't gotten around to it yet...including having the sleeves shortened a quarter inch.



PandArts said:

Cheers bourbon! I appreciate the feedback. Here's a close-up of the tie and knot, which is a DFIH. I think the tie is in proportion enough with the lapels and shirt collar...I think that a lot has to do with the way I'm standing. That said this is not one of my better fitting jackets...it's a 38R Slim fit but I usually wear a 36R slim. I got the suit with the intention of getting it tailored but haven't gotten around to it yet...including having the sleeves shortened a quarter inch.

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

Click to expand...

Just as I suspecting. Why would God not give men with the taste to buy good clothes the ability to photograph properly at all times? Well, this thread would suffer for one.

Great stuff PandArts. Keep it coming.

I, for one, welcome iammatt back to the thread. There's too much bukkake and not enough criticism. Besides, friction makes forums fun no?

Lots of good looks and silly arguments in the last 10 pages. I multi-quoted a bunch, but gave up.

And for the love of Christ, please no g-d gym fit pics. This isn't Anthony Weiner's twitter feed.

I therefore throw myself to the wolves (pugs?). Should have pressed these trou better today, but with 95 degrees and 90% humidity, I doubt it would have made a dammed difference.

Lufty, today's fit is pattern overkill.
I hope your office is a fridge.

mktitsworth said:

Do you think so? Well I better not show you where the lemonade is made.

Click to expand...

This scares even me...

ndw said:

Today.

Click to expand...

Nice one.






On a more general note, I was reading iammatt's interesting feedback to PG. In particular, I was struck by the comment about approachability on one of the outfits. One area I'm interested in (which tends to be overlooked here) is not just how clothes fit, but how clothes affect perceptions and social dynamics, and more importantly whether you can adjust those dynamics to your benefit. Approachability is a good example. On a very simple level, sometimes you may want to appear approachable; sometimes that's the last thing you want. Choosing the right outfit for your intent (and your audience) is not to be underrated.

Using a personal example to illustrate this point: I tend to have a very conversational "chatty" communication style when talking to clients, considerably more so than some of my professional colleagues. As you all know, I like wearing quite contrast-heavy, really quite flashy, structured outfits. This visual/verbal disparity creates a certain dynamic tension which I've found immensely useful in aiding the extraction of relevant information, setting boundaries, concluding discussions positively, and generally keeping things flowing in the right direction. The clothes create a certain set of preconceptions that I can fall back on in subtle ways to cue behaviour when needed. The interesting thing is that over time, clothes and communication style interact, and you can adjust things as needed. At its crudest, if I happen to be more casually dressed than normal, I'll tend to formalise my interview style a touch to compensate, to ensure intent and purpose remain clear, as part of the overall half-subconscious kind of monitoring of the dynamic one would do anyway.

I ramble, again, but I wonder if others have found themselves adjusting patterns this way to ensure, for want of a more accurate phrase, a continuity of the overall construct?



mktitsworth said:

Do you think so? Well I better not show you where the lemonade is made.

Click to expand...

Holly moly, thx have quite remarkably changed since i´ve last posted here (using "Spoozy")....

Anyways, you guys have been constantly killing it, as always.



Holdfast said:

I ramble, again, but I wonder if others have found themselves adjusting patterns this way to ensure, for want of a more accurate phrase, a continuity of the overall construct?

Click to expand...

To be honest I recently stumbled upon this experience. I was told by a girl at a bar over the winter that she was glad that she took a chance to meet me, despite the fact that the formality of my attire made me look stuffy and unapproachable from across the bar (I went straight out from work). Granted I am young, and therefore people assume that I should be wearing the same baggy jeans and graphic t-shirts as the next Natty Light drinking schlub at the bar. However, I have such a laid back and fun-loving personality, it struck me as quite the shock to hear that a young lady, and a VERY good looking one at that, would make such a comment.

Welcome back Dennis/Spoozy.



Holdfast said:

This scares even me...



Nice one.






On a more general note, I was reading iammatt's interesting feedback to PG. In particular, I was struck by the comment about approachability on one of the outfits. One area I'm interested in (which tends to be overlooked here) is not just how clothes fit, but how clothes affect perceptions and social dynamics, and more importantly whether you can adjust those dynamics to your benefit.

Click to expand...

I'm glad you mentioned this, because I think it is important as well. Many posters, for example Mr. Daniels, seem fixated on the idea of "power" in dress, when in reality I believe that this fascination is probably something that tries to make up for a personal feeling of inadequacy. It is really hard, perhaps impossible, to overcome the fact that you lack power or respect through a certain combination of clothing. It just doesn't work in any situation in which a person can be judged on his competency, or on whatever power he does actually hold. Maybe if you dress powerfully to the used car lot you will get what you think is a good deal, but likely you will be on the short end. It is a concept that has cycled through the forum for years, generally to the detriment of all of those trying to learn to dress better. True power dressing is dressing however you like, because it doesn't matter. On the other hand, what we are discussing is a way to shade small nuances of your appearance so that people may react to you slightly differently on a personal level. It is an interesting language that few use well. You can appear softer, more sensitive, more talkative, etc, but it probably takes a pretty realistic self examination in order to use that to your advantage. Personally, I don't do it, because I don't really care to, but I do notice on others, particularly in these pics, when people seem more approachable, more dynamic etc. Anyway, that was, perhaps, a whole lot of nothing. Oh, and Dennis Walter, that is very well done for the style.



Dennis Walter said:

Holly moly, thx have quite remarkably changed since i´ve last posted here (using "Spoozy")....

Anyways, you guys have been constantly killing it, as always.

Spoiler

Click to expand...

Switch out the tie to something more harmonious and I'd be sold. Are the coat sleeves a tad long?



Holdfast said:

This scares even me...



Nice one.






On a more general note, I was reading iammatt's interesting feedback to PG. In particular, I was struck by the comment about approachability on one of the outfits. One area I'm interested in (which tends to be overlooked here) is not just how clothes fit, but how clothes affect perceptions and social dynamics, and more importantly whether you can adjust those dynamics to your benefit. Approachability is a good example. On a very simple level, sometimes you may want to appear approachable; sometimes that's the last thing you want. Choosing the right outfit for your intent (and your audience) is not to be underrated.

Using a personal example to illustrate this point: I tend to have a very conversational "chatty" communication style when talking to clients, considerably more so than some of my professional colleagues. As you all know, I like wearing quite contrast-heavy, really quite flashy, structured outfits. This visual/verbal disparity creates a certain dynamic tension which I've found immensely useful in aiding the extraction of relevant information, setting boundaries, concluding discussions positively, and generally keeping things flowing in the right direction. The clothes create a certain set of preconceptions that I can fall back on in subtle ways to cue behaviour when needed. The interesting thing is that over time, clothes and communication style interact, and you can adjust things as needed. At its crudest, if I happen to be more casually dressed than normal, I'll tend to formalise my interview style a touch to compensate, to ensure intent and purpose remain clear, as part of the overall half-subconscious kind of monitoring of the dynamic one would do anyway.

I ramble, again, but I wonder if others have found themselves adjusting patterns this way to ensure, for want of a more accurate phrase, a continuity of the overall construct?

Click to expand...

Nice rambling, H. I've read about how attorneys adjust their attire depending on its audience and the message they want to project and I've tried to apply the principles. However, in my country the projections are mostly between big timers, corporate, criminal or small town attorneys. Nonetheless, I do notice what you are saying because my approach towards my colleagues sometimes is affected by my visual perception of them, and of course, the first impression is their attire.