or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › FRIDAY CHALLENGE 10/15/2013: Double Breasted
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

FRIDAY CHALLENGE 10/15/2013: Double Breasted - Page 11

Poll Results: Who wore double breasted best?

Poll expired: Oct 14, 2013 This is a multiple choice poll
  • 7% (7)
    An Acute Style
  • 3% (3)
    archibaldleach
  • 32% (30)
    Claghorn
  • 12% (12)
    Coxsackie
  • 3% (3)
    DonCologne
  • 25% (24)
    EFV
  • 16% (15)
    Holdfast
  • 18% (17)
    ianGP
  • 2% (2)
    in stitches
  • 7% (7)
    kulata
  • 9% (9)
    Monkeyface
  • 4% (4)
    Mr. Claymore
  • 1% (1)
    Patek
  • 4% (4)
    PiCcolocV
  • 15% (14)
    Prof. B. Bear
  • 1% (1)
    PTWilliams
  • 15% (14)
    RogerP
  • 7% (7)
    Roycru
  • 48% (45)
    SpooPoker
  • 4% (4)
    sugarbutch
  • 4% (4)
    thatitalian
  • 17% (16)
    Tirailleur1
  • 4% (4)
    upr_crust
93 Total Votes  
post #151 of 203
Im tired. I will esplain tomorrow.
post #152 of 203

You better! 

post #153 of 203
Oh noes!! Teh threats. They are being issued.

I will defo esssplain my stance in the morrow.
post #154 of 203
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

clags, every last one of those fits falls squarely in the safe zone. i mean that in no negative way at all. on the contrary, its a good thing. but those are all safe looks.

That I posted those as an example of my more risky looks is a pretty good indication than I'm a fairly safe dresser.

They are a bit edgy in very small ways though. Stripes on stripes. White spread (though it was oxford cloth) with a narrower tie and a casual jacket/trou combo. A very warm colored tie in a very cool context. I'm practically James Dean.
post #155 of 203
laugh.gif watch out styfo! clags is on the loose!
post #156 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingMonkey View Post
 

 

All true. I am surprised there haven't been more votes for Coxsackie though... his fit was a great example of the opposite - how to do louche.

 

Louche? Louche?

 

[thinks]

 

 

 

OK, I'll take "louche". Thank you very much for your kind words! :cheers:

post #157 of 203
ok, CM, here is what i mean by safe.

in the 6 outfits clags posted as examples, while some of the colors may have been non standard, and PS aside, looking at the pants, jacket, shirt and tie, 5 of the 6 were all solid items aside from one pattern, and 1 of the 6 had a wide stripe tie with a very thin stripe shirt. and in all 6, the only pattern in the fits was stripes, almost all wide repp stripes. that is called safe dressing. all simple classic items, some interesting colors, sure, almost all solid colors, and one pattern, that is as safe as it gets.
post #158 of 203

Tom Wolfe is intrigued by this definition of safe in his solid white linen three piece suit worn with a french blue repp striped necktie and white shirt. (joking, btw)

post #159 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

ok, CM, here is what i mean by safe.

in the 6 outfits clags posted as examples, while some of the colors may have been non standard, and PS aside, looking at the pants, jacket, shirt and tie, 5 of the 6 were all solid items aside from one pattern, and 1 of the 6 had a wide stripe tie with a very thin stripe shirt. and in all 6, the only pattern in the fits was stripes, almost all wide repp stripes. that is called safe dressing. all simple classic items, some interesting colors, sure, almost all solid colors, and one pattern, that is as safe as it gets.

 

There is nothing standard, simple, or classic about a cobalt blue jacket. You seem to be looking only at pattern, whereas I am looking at the challenges of color combination, texture, and context appropriate attire. If his pictures were in black and white then I would agree with you. But in the world of color you are incorrect. Non standard color combination is, by definition, not safe. Simply because the patterns are not crazy, doesn't mean it's in the safe zone.

post #160 of 203
I'd say the true definition of "safe zone" is if you can walk down the street in the city where you live/work, without (non SF member) heads turning as you walk by.
post #161 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caustic Man View Post

There is nothing standard, simple, or classic about a cobalt blue jacket. You seem to be looking only at pattern, whereas I am looking at the challenges of color combination, texture, and context appropriate attire. If his pictures were in black and white then I would agree with you. But in the world of color you are incorrect. Non standard color combination is, by definition, not safe. Simply because the patterns are not crazy, doesn't mean it's in the safe zone.

i am not incorrect. i am disagreeing with you. deal with it, bro.

PoW/GP suit or SC, faint stripe or check shirt, or even solid shirt, and neat/dot tie, or something like that, now that would be the kind of thing i would call out of the safe zone and still very far from crazy.

we just have different definitions. no biggie.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EFV View Post

I'd say the true definition of "safe zone" is if you can walk down the street in the city where you live/work, without (non SF member) heads turning as you walk by.

in that case, i think clags fits above are quite safe indeed. they are very nice, but nothing that would make someone double take.
post #162 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by EFV View Post

I'd say the true definition of "safe zone" is if you can walk down the street in the city where you live/work, without (non SF member) heads turning as you walk by.

 

This is one big reason why I think it's not as safe as some think. 

post #163 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post


i am not incorrect. i am disagreeing with you.

 

But you aren't even really disagreeing with me. You said yourself that the colors were non standard. Being safe is... (wait for it!) being what people accept as standard! :D

 

 My disagreement isn't with your opinion, it is with the ontological inconsistencies of your reason for believing it. Oh... I just jumped the shark, didn't I? Oh well, screw it!

post #164 of 203
i dont know what you are talking about anymore, lol.

non standard =/= non safe imo.

you defined safe as:

"being what people accept as standard"

i have no idea where you got that from, but i think its fair to say, you made it up. as in, its how you defined safe.

here is the webster definition of safe as a medical term:

"having a low incidence of adverse reactions and significant side effects when adequate instructions for use are given and having a low potential for harm under conditions of widespread availability."

as related to clothing, id say clags fits are very safe. all unlikely to make anyone say, wow, that is odd and unusual! they are all very pleasant and put together based on adequate instruction he learned here. non standard maybe, but not anything daring or pushing the envelope. if lots of people went for that type of look, the likelihood for fail would be minimal imo.

in any case, there are many many definitions of safe, and many ways to relate them to dressing "safely." and to go a step further, as it relates to mode of dress, safe on SF might not be safe in other places. safe in one job might not be safe in another.

all that being the case, id call those fits safe, you wouldnt. i think the world will continue to exist despite our disagreement.
post #165 of 203
A few real eyesores here, guys. rolleyes.gif But then, double-breasteds are a dog to get right. The only one to hit the ball out of the park was Holdfast, so my vote fell on him. Runners up were Tirailleur1 (great styling but was demoted for not providing a clear shot of the jacket) and SpooPoker (button stance was a hair too low).
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › FRIDAY CHALLENGE 10/15/2013: Double Breasted