or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › A Daily "Mens Clothing" and "Streetwear and Denim" Fit Comparison Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

A Daily "Mens Clothing" and "Streetwear and Denim" Fit Comparison Thread - Page 29

post #421 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThinkDerm View Post

mc gdl. the bigger news is - gdl from sw photo - thats your hairline greg??

nah, I just borrowed it for the picture
post #422 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThinkDerm View Post

mc gdl. the bigger news is - gdl from sw photo - thats your hairline greg??

I believe that's GMS (Grown Man Style).
post #423 of 486

Both examples below are two good reasons why it's generally better to wear shoes that are darker in tone than one's trousers/outfit. Although the SWS look seems an order of magnitude worse outcome than the MC look.

 

Some things are very tricky and/or difficult to pull off with a result that is attractive and not repulsive. And the mastery of the wearing of shoes that are noticeably lighter in tone than one's outfit is right up there with successfully sporting a tie lighter in tone than one's shirt. Neither task is something that should be undertaken without careful consideration, if not an outside opinion; preferably both.

 

For the MC look, it seems a bit silly if not pretentious to retain the gloves in the breast pocket, when it is obviously cold enough to pop the collar and use the hand warming pockets of the overcoat.

 

As a final note the bulky knit scarf look rarely works well for anyone and certainly not here. It seems more a satisfactory and more attractive look when balanced by the female form. But if a metro-sexual look is the desire, then maybe bulky knit scarfs are the solution.

 

Silk scarves provide a much more sophisticated silhoutte without sacrificing utility, primarily in the form of insulation. Cashmere is often a better choice than wool knits for the same reason, more warmth for given weight and bulk.
 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by F. Corbera View Post

Comparison #8: 03.30.12
288
[SW&D comments]


 

 

 

post #424 of 486
You are looking way too into it. They both work, light colored shoes and all. I usually hate really long sleeves but it works for artishard because even though both the inner sleeve and outer sleeve are black, there's still a nice bit of contrast between them which makes the outfit a little more interesting.
Edited by willy cheesesteak - 3/31/12 at 2:34pm
post #425 of 486
Both are good outfits.

SW&D: Re. the comment that the white shoes contrast and accentuate the feet comment. 1) That's obviously the intent, and 2) I think that it works particularly well here. The sleeves re meant to be long. It's not a particularly imaginative outfit (I dress like that a fair bit, which says something), but it works well. I think that people shouldn't talk about things about which they have no understanding, nor wish to understand.

MC: I'm conflicted about the scarf. On the one hand, it does make things a little more interesting. On the other hand, the jawline is really not particularly strong, and he already has a pocketsquare. Overall, though, a really nice "casual" look. The light shoes also look great here.
post #426 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by recondite View Post

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Both examples below are two good reasons why it's generally better to wear shoes that are darker in tone than one's trousers/outfit. Although the SWS look seems an order of magnitude worse outcome than the MC look.

Some things are very tricky and/or difficult to pull off with a result that is attractive and not repulsive. And the mastery of the wearing of shoes that are noticeably lighter in tone than one's outfit is right up there with successfully sporting a tie lighter in tone than one's shirt. Neither task is something that should be undertaken without careful consideration, if not an outside opinion; preferably both.

For the MC look, it seems a bit silly if not pretentious to retain the gloves in the breast pocket, when it is obviously cold enough to pop the collar and use the hand warming pockets of the overcoat.

As a final note the bulky knit scarf look rarely works well for anyone and certainly not here. It seems more a satisfactory and more attractive look when balanced by the female form. But if a metro-sexual look is the desire, then maybe bulky knit scarfs are the solution.

Silk scarves provide a much more sophisticated silhoutte without sacrificing utility, primarily in the form of insulation. Cashmere is often a better choice than wool knits for the same reason, more warmth for given weight and bulk.

  Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)





Are you OxxfordSJLiNY ?
post #427 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA Guy View Post

Both are good outfits.
SW&D: Re. the comment that the white shoes contrast and accentuate the feet comment. 1) That's obviously the intent, and 2) I think that it works particularly well here. The sleeves re meant to be long. It's not a particularly imaginative outfit (I dress like that a fair bit, which says something), but it works well. I think that people shouldn't talk about things about which they have no understanding, nor wish to understand.
MC: I'm conflicted about the scarf.

 

Honestly, this "no understanding" jive that comes from SW&D is trite with regard to this look. Overly long sleeves is recessive. 100% contrast between pants and shoes is opposite of the this. Emphasizing a disproportionate body part isn't a good thing MC or SW&D, and I say this as a < 6ft guy who wears 10-10.5UK = sub 8 inch leg opening is a bad idea *for me*, despite iGent approved status.

 

 

 

post #428 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by circumspice View Post


Honestly, this "no understanding" jive that comes from SW&D is trite with regard to this look. Overly long sleeves is recessive. 100% contrast between pants and shoes is opposite of the this. Emphasizing a disproportionate body part isn't a good thing MC or SW&D, and I say this as a < 6ft guy who wears 10-10.5UK = sub 8 inch leg opening is a bad idea *for me*, despite iGent approved status.

Playing with proportions is actually visually very interesting. Pair a slim sneaker with a pair of narrow jeans, and you have one fairly expected, "acceptable" look. Pair it with chunky battleship boots, and you have something considerably more interesting. You might not personally like it, it's not supposed to be "elegant", but it does make the look interesting.

Also, the contrast between the rest of the look and the sneakers, in more than one way, is what makes that outfit work, imo.

Looking back at this thread, I think that what Derek said about different types of Jazz and the difference between MC and SW&D is probably correct.
post #429 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by circumspice View Post


Honestly, this "no understanding" jive that comes from SW&D is trite with regard to this look. Overly long sleeves is recessive. 100% contrast between pants and shoes is opposite of the this. Emphasizing a disproportionate body part isn't a good thing MC or SW&D, and I say this as a < 6ft guy who wears 10-10.5UK = sub 8 inch leg opening is a bad idea *for me*, despite iGent approved status.

The chunkier scarf, long sleeves, and very slim pants are part of the look. To say that he should have shorter sleeves, regular scarf, and fuller trousers is almost like saying he should have a sport coat, wool trousers, silk tie, and linen pocket square. IMO, really slim pants don't look right on an MC ensemble, but that doesn't mean they don't work for this one.

I feel like many of the comments on this side of the board, with regards to SW&D looks, might as well say "I don't care for SW&D" and leave it at that. It's fine to not care for something. I don't like yogurt, for example. But I also don't think yogurt could be improved it if tasted like falafel.
Edited by dieworkwear - 4/1/12 at 12:10am
post #430 of 486
Thread Starter 
Comparison #9: 03.31.12/04.01.12


410


[SW&D comments]
post #431 of 486
both are bad:

MC
huge lapel DB with a ridiculously small gorge and a matching color tie that is huge, giving the impression of one huge block of navy. Its hard to tell from the pic, but it looks like the pants are almost purple.

Shoes are fine but would prefer brown.

SWD
The upper half is actually decent. I don't mind the jacket (although the buttoning points look weird to me). The pants seem excessively baggy, which is a strange contrast to the more tight fitting jacket. The shoes are plain and boring.

I give the edge to SWD, but reiterate the neither is real good
post #432 of 486

Today's comparison is like Tom Hanks' Castaway shot from a Styleforum perspective.

post #433 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by F. Corbera View Post

Comparison #8: 03.30.12
288
[SW&D comments]

don't like/understand(prolly) either shoes.

rest is pretty good, imo.
post #434 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by dieworkwear View Post

I like both, though I agree macaroni could have done without the scarf.

what?
post #435 of 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by F. Corbera View Post

Comparison #9: 03.31.12/04.01.12
410
[SW&D comments]

both are typical representants of their camp.

don't like the sw&d wheels, though.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › A Daily "Mens Clothing" and "Streetwear and Denim" Fit Comparison Thread