or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Salary vs Suit prices
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Salary vs Suit prices - Page 15

post #211 of 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocHolliday View Post

Let's have another Steed picture, just because there's been a dearth lately.

steedoutstanding.jpg

Typical SF response:
"Shoulders are huge.
Gorce is embarassingly low.
Sleeves need slimming.
Tie is hopelessly outdated.
Shirt sleeves are too short.
Single button is runway fashion forward that is not CBD approved.
Hacking pockets are transient style that will look stupid tomororw."

"A true style expert knows how to avoid this crap.
Probably selling for $20 to clueless newbies on Ebay.
Verdict: Totally out of fashion and not SF approved."
post #212 of 263

Does your style reflect any particular era like Mlango's does?

 

We should really define what "style" means or what the goal is. I think that might be part of the confusion. If the goal is to "look good," then I assume it means to look good to others. As in, make people notice you, think highly of you etc. I think that even solid charcoal grey, sb, people want people to notice how understated they are etc. By your own admission, though, you "couldn't care less" if others like what you wear. Your goals are different. You just want to do it because... it is some sort of private hobby.

 

But do you really not care what people think? Would you wear a truly outlandish outfit if you liked it?

 

If that is the case, why don't you care?

 

I think it is fair to say most people do care what others think, dress *because* they care what others think and enjoy the social aspect of the outfit. I think on some level -- I mean here you are posting -- you must as well.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by yachtie View Post



I think that for some of us what's going on with fashion is much less influential that you think:

Let's look at Reevolving's list:

Giant lapels - Proportional for me, may be too big for someone else
Gorge at your chest - gorge height is driven by the relative length of your torso and legs, mine are about a handwidth below by shoulder
Padded shoulders - some- I have a dropped shoulder with large traps and I don't like the "natural shoulder" look
Long as fuck - Don't know what "as fuck" means re:length, but I like my jacket to cover my ass, so it does
Triple Pleats - 2 pleats, either forward or reverse as it suits me
Cuffed pants - you bet, they're not jeans.
Baggy as fuck - sort of the antithesis of bespoke, I like a clean chest so I skipped the whole "drape" thing here and elsewhere.

It's really is possible to have your own look. Some will like it , others won't. Couldn't care less.
 


 

post #213 of 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by projectrtown View Post

ome of these looks definitely look dated the way "big hair" from the 80s looks dated. The two obvious examples are large, padded shoulders and a boxy cut. Personally, I find that I don't like pleats anymore -


I'm thinking many of the things you think look dated are in that .


http://www.styleforum.net/t/250935/tom-ford-autumn-winter-2011

If by fashionable you mean looking like everybody else no. But then after a certain age you don't really give a damn about looking like everybody else.
post #214 of 263
Above, I claimed that shoes are the only item that have any chance of lasting 10 years without looking comically outdated (by SF standards) Well, even that is wrong. I distinctly remember a thread where I posted pics of a few inexpensive loafers, and some smug cunts on here were saying how one pair of the loafers were hopelessly 80s looking. Of course, no one could explain WHY they looked outdated, but that's besides the point. (I was unable to see why, b/c all loafers look the same to me) The point is, even some "timeless gentleman" shoes apparently look comically outdated within a few years, for SF standards (which is a slave to changing fashion) if you want to wear your crap for 10 years, you're on the wrong forum. Try the "Clothing Forum" section on the Home Depot website.
post #215 of 263
I can do the same:

700700

700700

OMG!!! Everyone dressed like these guys back then.
post #216 of 263

I am not saying any particular person is escalating here, but I think this is a pretty interesting debate that is likely to get lost in the noise.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by yachtie View Post



I've been here a good deal longer than you, boyo.

Better sign off, your momma's calling.


 

post #217 of 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reevolving View Post


Typical SF response:
"Shoulders are huge.
Gorce is embarassingly low.
Sleeves need slimming.
Tie is hopelessly outdated.
Shirt sleeves are too short.
Single button is runway fashion forward that is not CBD approved.
Hacking pockets are transient style that will look stupid tomororw."

"A true style expert knows how to avoid this crap.
Probably selling for $20 to clueless newbies on Ebay.
Verdict: Totally out of fashion and not SF approved."

If you need style forum approval for anything you have no style.
post #218 of 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by projectrtown View Post

I am not saying any particular person is escalating here, but I think this is a pretty interesting debate that is likely to get lost in the noise.
 



 

Sorry, didactic teenagers sometimes get to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by projectrtown View Post

Does your style reflect any particular era like Mlango's does?

 

We should really define what "style" means or what the goal is. I think that might be part of the confusion. If the goal is to "look good," then I assume it means to look good to others. As in, make people notice you, think highly of you etc. I think that even solid charcoal grey, sb, people want people to notice how understated they are etc. By your own admission, though, you "couldn't care less" if others like what you wear. Your goals are different. You just want to do it because... it is some sort of private hobby.

 

But do you really not care what people think? Would you wear a truly outlandish outfit if you liked it?

 

If that is the case, why don't you care?

 

I think it is fair to say most people do care what others think, dress *because* they care what others think and enjoy the social aspect of the outfit. I think on some level -- I mean here you are posting -- you must as well.

 

 



 


Clothing has both a situational and a purely aesthetic aspect. So depending on the situation, I may be wearing a charcoal suit or in antoher situation a tweed one. So I'm not denying that there is a necessity to "look good to others". What I am saying is that if your clothes are in porportion to your body, that porportion will look good over a much longer time frame than the "fashion cycle". Lounge suits haven't materially changed in 70 years so if one avoids aberrations like Tom Ford "flood pants" etc, you can still look good long after Mr. Ford is just a bad memory.

The flip side , shown in posts here and most often in women's clothing is to follow the fashion no matter that a particular "look" that's popular this year may be completley wrong porportionally for you and make you look like a complete doofus. But hell, at least everyone else will look like doofuses with you.

Slavish fashion following is essentially a feminine attribute- one that's really amusing to watch. wink.gif
post #219 of 263
A suit should be well-made and flatter the body. The use of a natural fabric from a reputable mill in a sturdy construction is never a loser (assuming some traditional variant in tailoring). The fit should flatter the physique, complimenting the assets or mitigating the liabilities.

Cuffed or hemmed? Personal preference.
Rise? Also preference, but one which requires some attention.
Lapel: A product of its era.
Button number: See above
Vents: Really? People actually notice this? I have center, side, and non vented (continental?) jackets.


My preferences? They are a factor of my age, what I grew up seeing as "fashionable", and my judgment thereof. I like an overall slim fit in my suits. I prefer a lower rise...it just feels more natural and comfortable than wearing a belt near my navel. Fashionable qualities thereof probably bolstered that sentiment. I also like my pants hemmed. With my body proportions, cuffs make me appear shorter. On a personal note, cuffs also scream (to me) "seconds/hand-me-down/couldn't afford a tailor." On my jackets, I prefer the look of the double vent. It works well in contrasting ideally broad shoulders with a tapered lower torso. However, there is a spot in my wardrobe for that beaten up "professor'ish" 100% cashmere non-vented sport coat. My style can and does incorporate "older" pieces, such as full length overcoats...which have fallen utterly out of favor with my generation.

I'm 21. Will I be working these characters in my suits when I am 40? Most likely. With my attitude, friends and family have acknowledged that my style "works" for me. The attitude will also work for me. In 20 years, come hell or this: http://www.styleforum.net/t/263999/new-ralph-lauren-black-label-wide-legged-jeans-opinions, I will have my slim fit, low rise, double vents, slim-straight jeans, brown leather bomber jackets, full length cashmere overcoats, brightly colored (bordering on metrosexually prep) argyle socks, and hemmed trousers.

Here's a little secret. In 1830, 60 year olds were still kicking about in the fashions of their youth. Yes, that's right. They still had silk stockings and powdered their hair.

The message: Enjoy what you wear. Have the attitude to pull it off, if not perfectly in fashion. Go for quality. Pay respects at the temple of tradition where possible. Oh, and get off the fucking pulpit when dealing with others. Skinny tie God won't smite you for failing to convert a guy who loves his nearly 4 inch'ers.
post #220 of 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by projectrtown View Post

Does your style reflect any particular era like Mlango's does?

 

We should really define what "style" means or what the goal is. I think that might be part of the confusion. If the goal is to "look good," then I assume it means to look good to others. As in, make people notice you, think highly of you etc. I think that even solid charcoal grey, sb, people want people to notice how understated they are etc. By your own admission, though, you "couldn't care less" if others like what you wear. Your goals are different. You just want to do it because... it is some sort of private hobby.

 

But do you really not care what people think? Would you wear a truly outlandish outfit if you liked it?

 

If that is the case, why don't you care?

 

I think it is fair to say most people do care what others think, dress *because* they care what others think and enjoy the social aspect of the outfit. I think on some level -- I mean here you are posting -- you must as well.

 

 



 


Well-cut, well-proportioned bespoke clothing will flatter the wearers' figure and complement their physique, regardless of the details (e.g. lapel width, buttoning position, etc.). I would argue that, compared to RTW clothing, that an excellently cut bespoke (regardless of whether specific details are "dated" or currently out of fashion) will trump your average RTW garment, and hence "look good" to others by default, because it does flatter the wearers' figure.

The other point that you may be missing here is that there is in fact a (small) contingent of people on this forum (and indeed elsewhere) where clothing is in fact a hobby, and where what others think is actually secondary to gaining personal satisfaction.

I also think that the "outlandish" argument is hyperbolic and not really very convincing. If you do in fact look at the garments that Yachtie and other bespoke enthusiasts commission, very seldom are any of them "outlandish" or very exaggerated in terms of proportion or detailing. In many cases, I would say that many of the garments commissioned are incredibly restrained, and in many cases, conservative compared to garments designed by fashion houses like Tom Ford, Lanvin, Thom Browne, etc. Take a look at the Rubniacci, Unfunded Liabilities, A&S or NSM threads and compare any of those garments with those frequently seen gracing the catwalks.
post #221 of 263
Salary USD$ $75,000 to $100,000 - 400$ suit
Salary USD$ $100,000 to $200,000 - 1000$ suit
Salary USD$ $200,000 to $500,000 - 2k suit
Salary USD$ $500,000 plus - 3k+ suit
post #222 of 263

I'd say that you should buy a suit that you can afford to wear. I.e you shouldn't not wear it fearing that it will be worn out, get dirty etc. There is no point in having a piece of clothing that you don't want to use because it's too expensive. No I'm not saying that one should redecorate the house in his finest suit. 

 

Nice forum by the way. :)

post #223 of 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amelorn View Post

I'm 21. Will I be working these characters in my suits when I am 40? Most likely. With my attitude, friends and family have acknowledged that my style "works" for me. The attitude will also work for me. In 20 years, come hell or this: http://www.styleforum.net/t/263999/new-ralph-lauren-black-label-wide-legged-jeans-opinions, I will have my slim fit, low rise, double vents, slim-straight jeans, brown leather bomber jackets, full length cashmere overcoats, brightly colored (bordering on metrosexually prep) argyle socks, and hemmed trousers.

Here's a little secret. In 1830, 60 year olds were still kicking about in the fashions of their youth. Yes, that's right. They still had silk stockings and powdered their hair.

Here's another little secret you delusional little child. You'll be much fatter in 20 years.
Overwhelming odds are, your clothing won't even FIT you even a few years from now.

That is the other utterly laughable aspect of the idiots on SF claiming to buy this "forever timeless gentleman" nonsense.
Outside of shoes, none of this stuff will fit you 5 years from now,
not to mention how disgustingly out of style it will ALL be, to boot
post #224 of 263
I am a mulit-millionaire and buy my suits 2nd hand from Ebay (not bragging - just pointing out the ludicrousness of thsi thread).

It's a bit like saying to a skinny person "I would love to be skinny, then I could eat anything I want" .
post #225 of 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reevolving View Post


Here's another little secret you delusional little child. You'll be much fatter in 20 years.
Overwhelming odds are, your clothing won't even FIT you even a few years from now.

That is the other utterly laughable aspect of the idiots on SF claiming to buy this "forever timeless gentleman" nonsense.
Outside of shoes, none of this stuff will fit you 5 years from now,
not to mention how disgustingly out of style it will ALL be, to boot

You are a such fucking idiot
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Salary vs Suit prices