or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › whnay.'s good taste thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

whnay.'s good taste thread - Page 424

post #6346 of 12564
I know it may cause some sf hearts to skip a beat, but I think there is good reason why there is only one person I know of that dictates the foo fold: It's contrived. I've never seen anyone who anybody would consider a style icon use anything like a foo fold. Why should we?

Okay, shoot me.

Rob
post #6347 of 12564

I think it might be a modern solution to an antique problem. In the heyday of handkerchiefs you could do whatever you pleased with them, but today, wearing pants and socks out of doors is considered foppish and avant-garde. In that context, almost any expression of a handkerchief is going to seem affected and ridiculous. This is why many have abandoned them with sport coats, thinking the jacket pleasing enough. I see this fold as a way of sublimating some of the inherent goofiness and flair of the handkerchief by keeping it to a minimum ovoid form -- i.e., the opposite of a pimp-style pointed fold.
 

post #6348 of 12564
Just noticed this little gem in the UCBD thread from years back. Not quoting to accuse anyone of confusion/poor taste/hypocracy/fashionism/changing their mind at any point ever, just for general interest. Who among us are ultraconservative anyway? Not me that's for sure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by [URL=http://www.styleforum.net/t/33066/conservative-business-dress/200_100#post_467605]Manton[/URL] View Post




Is a blue shirt okay?


Once every two weeks, at most.

post #6349 of 12564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Pink View Post

The dominant background color is actually the salmon, but the green/turquoise is fairly prominent. That's why I asked.
FYI, this isn't me. Its from the Alan See's blog and something I liked but never would have thought of, let alone done, so I was interested in your thoughts. Thanks for the commentary.
The great thing about this thread is that it has me thinking about how I dress. Much of the time, I'm on autopilot, a grey or blue suit, any blue or blue and white shirt, any blue or maybe grey tie, white linen pocket square, little thought about pattern or texture and none about saturation. Foo's commentary made me start thinking about these things. And since Foo is the most vocal of the knowledgeable posters, there's a tendency to try out his suggestions. As for the newly reviled cream silk square, I haven't taken mine out of the drawer two years, but I've tried it a number of times recently in response to Foo's advocacy. I'm wearing it today after deciding it was better than white linen.

Today:


Yesterday w/ default white linen:



Incidentally, that's the Minnis 520 I'm wearing today and the pic is fairly accurate on my monitor. Yesterday's suit was the hated by Manton Premier Cru which feels a little flimsy but barely wrinkled through a very long day.

Second photo is great.

The white linen doesn't cut my eye at all.

In fact, the combination looks fantastic.
post #6350 of 12564
Quote:
Originally Posted by sugarbutch View Post

You're high. No one is looking at me in grayscale. And I'll take my rumples over your semicircle any day of the week.
It's good that you stated at least some of this in the first person instead of as a universal. Anyway, that shit's bangin'.
Funny stuffed-square = one foo.gif

Let this be a lesson to you all.

NO FUCKING SHIT people don't look at you in grayscale. But based on what you've put together, they can probably detect brightness and contrast better than you can. I suggested looking at your outfit in black and white so that the colors don't distract you from the fact the brightness of your square and suit are almost dead-on with each other, while your tie is far, far darker than anything else. I could tell this immediately because the outfit "clashes" and the tie "sticks out," but wanted to give you a more technical walkthrough of what you did wrong and give you a way to see it more clearly. I'm sure you think you look great--but, uhh, no.

So let me give you what you really want:

AWESOME STEEZ MAN!!! WHEREDOIKOP???

I can hand those out all day. Vapid shit like that is easy to spew out. If that's what you want, move on over to WAYWRN.
post #6351 of 12564
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post


AWESOME STEEZ MAN!!! WHEREDOIKOP???

nod[1].gif
post #6352 of 12564
Quote:
Originally Posted by sprout2 View Post

I think it might be a modern solution to an antique problem. In the heyday of handkerchiefs you could do whatever you pleased with them, but today, wearing pants and socks out of doors is considered foppish and avant-garde. In that context, almost any expression of a handkerchief is going to seem affected and ridiculous. This is why many have abandoned them with sport coats, thinking the jacket pleasing enough. I see this fold as a way of sublimating some of the inherent goofiness and flair of the handkerchief by keeping it to a minimum ovoid form -- i.e., the opposite of a pimp-style pointed fold.

 

Antique problem? I have no idea of what that means. Wearing pants outdoors is foppish? Avant garde? Okay, so this is a joke, right?

Rob
post #6353 of 12564
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post

NO FUCKING SHIT people don't look at you in grayscale. But based on what you've put together, they can probably detect brightness and contrast better than you can. I suggested looking at your outfit in black and white so that the colors don't distract you from the fact the brightness of your square and suit are almost dead-on with each other, while your tie is far, far darker than anything else. I could tell this immediately because the outfit "clashes" and the tie "sticks out," but wanted to give you a more technical walkthrough of what you did wrong and give you a way to see it more clearly. I'm sure you think you look great--but, uhh, no.

So let me give you what you really want:

AWESOME STEEZ MAN!!! WHEREDOIKOP???

I can hand those out all day. Vapid shit like that is easy to spew out. If that's what you want, move on over to WAYWRN.

You seem to be easily unhinged.
post #6354 of 12564
Quote:
Originally Posted by rob View Post


Antique problem? I have no idea of what that means. Wearing pants outdoors is foppish? Avant garde? Okay, so this is a joke, right?

Rob


I believe it's what the Greeks call hyperbole.

post #6355 of 12564
Quote:
Originally Posted by rob View Post

You seem to be easily unhinged.

Not easily, no. But I am nonetheless at that point.
post #6356 of 12564
Well, then, the answer is easy. Take a good long swig or draw and another breath or two. Repeat.
post #6357 of 12564
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post

NO FUCKING SHIT people don't look at you in grayscale. But based on what you've put together, they can probably detect brightness and contrast better than you can. I suggested looking at your outfit in black and white so that the colors don't distract you from the fact the brightness of your square and suit are almost dead-on with each other, while your tie is far, far darker than anything else. I could tell this immediately because the outfit "clashes" and the tie "sticks out," but wanted to give you a more technical walkthrough of what you did wrong and give you a way to see it more clearly. I'm sure you think you look great--but, uhh, no.

So let me give you what you really want:

AWESOME STEEZ MAN!!! WHEREDOIKOP???

I can hand those out all day. Vapid shit like that is easy to spew out. If that's what you want, move on over to WAYWRN.

Actually, I just went through and computed the difference in brightness and contrast between the elements of the pocket sqare and the suit, and there's a pretty significan't difference. The suit averages out to somewhere around

a0 = {134, 138, 183};

in RGB and the main colors of the PS are

b0 = {79, 19, 73};
c0 = {160, 114, 117};
d0 = {217, 195, 208};
e0 = {60, 70, 97};

so computing the brightnesses yields

N[Mean[a0]]=151.667
N[Mean[b0]]=57.
N[Mean[c0]]=130.333
N[Mean[d0]]=206.667
N[Mean[e0]]=75.6667

with extremal differences in brightness of 55 and -94. Not insignificant distances in color space. Contrast is similar, with a mean contrast from the suit of 120.509 and extemum of 171 and 74. All in all, you're just wrong.
post #6358 of 12564
Quote:
Originally Posted by sprout2 View Post


I believe it's what the Greeks call hyperbole.

Or where I come from, it's called pretentious.
post #6359 of 12564
can we hit the reset button on the last page before things get out of hand?

It gets rather frustrating when threads continually devolve into name calling and sarcasm.
post #6360 of 12564

Submission for reality check. I have a personal critique of each, but interested in a second perspective (or third or fourth...)

 

FIrst:

 

 

Second:

 

 

Third:

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fourth:

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › whnay.'s good taste thread