Do the suit pants fit me? (PHOTO)

Hi guys, I've just invested 350€ in a suit so I want to look as good as possible. The thing is, I lack confidence wearing it because I consider my pants too long (even after a tailor of the shop shortened it). I can't shake the feeling that the way they drape near the shoe isn't very classy.

Is it only me? Jeans-spoiled? Or am I right and the pants actually don't fit? Your guess is right, I'm very young (19 in fact) and this is my first real suit. Sorry for the worse quality of the photos.







Thank you,
Peter.

likley a little long, but we'll need better photos overall.

SF approval is a single easy break in uncuffed pants. And is this suit black? I hope not.

1. It's long. Should be shorten.
2. If it's a suit, you should wear balmorals instead of bluchers.

I'd prefer them shorter with only a slight break, but the amount of break there isn't too excessive. To 99% of people they will look perfectly fine.

I'm sorry, I tried to look it up on the Internet, but I just couldn't google the difference between "balmorals" and "blunchers". It's probably a protocolar nuance and I'd be very happy if you could explain the difference in shoes to me. Perhaps I don't get it because I'm not a native English speaker. I'd really like to get into these formal clothes. Thank you so much. Peter.

For the rest of you, thank you for your advise. I'm going to make them shorter a bit then



Oriforever said:

I'm sorry, I tried to look it up on the Internet, but I just couldn't google the difference between "balmorals" and "blunchers". It's probably a protocolar nuance and I'd be very happy if you could explain the difference in shoes to me. Perhaps I don't get it because I'm not a native English speaker. I'd really like to get into these formal clothes. Thank you so much. Peter.

For the rest of you, thank you for your advise. I'm going to make them shorter a bit then

Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_shoe

Furthermore:

Men's shoes can be categorized by how they are closed:

* Oxfords (also referred as "Balmorals"): the vamp has a V-shaped **** to which the laces are attached; also known as "closed lacing". The word "Oxford" is sometimes used by American clothing companies to market shoes that are not Balmorals, such as Blüchers.
* Blüchers (American), Derbys (British): the laces are tied to two pieces of leather independently attached to the vamp; also known as "open lacing" and is a step down in dressiness.
* Monk-straps: a buckle and strap instead of lacing
* Slip-ons: There are no lacings or fastenings. The popular loafers are part of this category, as well as less popular styles, such as elastic-sided shoes.

Since they don't seem to be really slim, I'd go for a medium to full break. Any decent tailor should be able to give you that just by asking.

They look a little long to me.

Make sure you are wearing them at the tailor the same way you will actually wear them. Some people have a tendency to hike them up a bit at the tailor when they actually ride down a bit while you are wearing them. This could be a reason they aren't looking the way you want when you get home.



SlamMan said:

Since they don't seem to be really slim, I'd go for a medium to full break. Any decent tailor should be able to give you that just by asking.

Click to expand...

Good call on that. For me, if the pants are slim I would prefer no break at all. However, that looks weird on less tapered pants.


To the OP, I think your tailor is more on the 'old school' side, that's why he is so resilient to conform to your request. I once bought a suit at the Boss store and needed to get the pants hemmed. The tailor at the Boss store marked the pants to be hemmed at the point where the midsole and sole met, which gave the pants too much break. I had to tell him what I wanted, but still at that, we spent a good minute 'debating'.

don't think anyone could reasonable comment without seeing a full body shot of the pants. it might be too lose at the seat, or just too long at the back or inseam...



Oriforever said:

I'm sorry, I tried to look it up on the Internet, but I just couldn't google the difference between "balmorals" and "blunchers". It's probably a protocolar nuance and I'd be very happy if you could explain the difference in shoes to me. Perhaps I don't get it because I'm not a native English speaker. I'd really like to get into these formal clothes. Thank you so much. Peter.

For the rest of you, thank you for your advise. I'm going to make them shorter a bit then

Click to expand...

Don't worry about it. It's a silly rule, and one that you should feel free to ignore. The shape of the last matters much more. The same rules that determine that one say wingtips are completely inappropriate to wear with a suit, being informal country shoes. We've been past that one for 70 years or so. Open laced shoes have been worn with lounge suits for pretty much their entire existence (people forget with this discussion of formality that the suit as we know it today was originally casual), so I don't think you should care as long as the rest of the details are up to spec. As long as they're a nice leather, and sleek enough, they're fine. This is obviously not gonna fly:



This? Go right ahead. This (they were better quality back then) and a gray flannel suit were de rigueur for businessmen in the 50's.

We need decent photographs - they should also showing the whole trouser, front, rear and profile.

Thank you very much for your advise. I hope these new photos will help us solve the problem.

First, my shoes. Now I understand the difference between Balmorals and Blüchers, thanks to your explanations. But I think, for this time, I'll stick to these. I have bought them already after all. I think they're not a too horrible choice, and cptjeff's reply was quite reassuring.



Now, my suit:













I don't want to obsess too much, but it's a huge event I'm attending and I don't want to embarrass myself. And I really wouldn't like to experiment on this suit.

Thank you again,
Peter

You probably are becoming obsessive - will people really look at your clothes? However for what it is worth, the trousers are certainly too long, The break is excessive and the coat also looks a size too big.



Oriforever said:

I think they're not a too horrible choice, and cptjeff's reply was quite reassuring.

Click to expand...

They're pretty damn horrible. Worse, in fact, than the ones which cptjeff posted and said are 'not gonna fly', so how his reply was reassuring I don't know.