Huge shoulder divots as well... sorry mate, but that doesn't look good. Though better than the first one
KW doesn't do multiple fittings, so you're good.
Hello again. Bringing this discussion over here for further analysis:
Well so the issue with the vest for me is that it ruins the elongating effect of the tie and the lower buttoning point that helps compensate for my short torso and long legs. Without the vest, I think the top/bottom balance is better. But I also think the vest looks cool when I'm not wearing the jacket, so if I plan to take the jacket off at the office, the vest might then be a nice thing to have. For court, or depos, or any other day when I'll be keeping the jacket on most of the time, I'll probably skip the vest.
I asked my tailor about maybe narrowing the pants and his take on it was that I shouldn't do it. When he turns down work, I tend to trust there's a good reason behind his thinking. I'm still on the fence about this a little as I do think I could get away with maybe an inch of taper the whole way down and still have the full-cut look, but I hesitate to do anything that will throw the proportions off, and the whole point of this style, to me at least, is that it isn't a super-close-fitting tapered look.
As far as ties go, most of my ties are around the average width of 3-3.25" with a few being narrower and a few being wider. The narrow ones are being stored away for the most part now. In terms of colors and patterns, I tend to favor navy ties (who doesn't), and non-regimental stripes. I'm not a big fan or earth tones but a few will sneak in here and there.
I'd hesitate to apply 2015 standards to this jacket. Your points would all push this suit more toward what most guys in this thread are showing us, and that style is fine, but that's not what this suit is about. The longer length, lower gorge and buttoning point, and the overall shape were all selling points to me, and if I wanted something like what you're describing, I wouldn't use this as a starting point.
These shoulders have more structure/padding than anything else I've got so I'm not sure I know what you mean.
Sorry but I am not sure what you are asking or how to answer. It's not bespoke so I didn't order the cloth from anywhere. It's a jacket that Epaulet had made in a factory in Italy somewhere that they no longer work with so I imagine whatever it is will be pretty hard to find at this point.
I love that jacket, but I think the shape only works as a sport coat. If that were a suit jacket I'd say it's too short and the buttoning point is too high. But... I did have the thought to try this jacket with the YSL pants yesterday so I can post side by side comparison photos tonight and we can see what people think of the differences between the two when all else is equal. I'll take this to the GNAT thread at that point so as to not clog up this thread.
Here is the side-by-side:
what do you guys think?
Is it roomier in the chest & waist or just waist? Is the button stance lower than that of the Milano? I found the Milano to be very baggy when I tried it on in store. Wore 54L(normally a 52L/42L in most suit makers' sizing) to fit my shoulders, but the coat was so roomy. It required more than 3" of suppression in the waist and I'm by no means lean. Glad to hear the rise is higher. I friggin hate the low-rise trousers that are put out today. With the bottom of the crotch pulled up to the max, the waistband was 2" below my navel, and I can't even wear trou with the crotch touching my sack.
Comparing the same sizes, Roma is roomier overall. As for the jackets' button stance, it's about the same I would say. Maybe a hair lower on Roma because all the Roma jackets that I've seen are longer (BOC) than the Milano jackets. But noting that you'd notice. I can't fit into a 40R Milano, but do fit into a 40R Roma. As for the rise, it's considerably higher. You'll definitely notice the difference when wearing the trousers.
I would have sworn you were >>6 feet
I think the SC has better proportions for you. In my experience, one is looking more for the natural proportions of the coat than for the overall body ratios, because the coat and its lines are so prominent. The second coat is slightly wider at the shoulders and has more natural proportions. It is also more pleasing in relation to your head. The suit emphasizes the stretched look, in particular when one looks at the breast.
I recently posted this in the German forum (as part of a larger study of shapes and styles). These three SCs are of exactly the same length and A and C are the same shoulder width and waist. I was a little bit surprised that several people found A to be the most flattering. Btw I have the opposite problem of a long torso and short legs, broad shoulders and narrow hips. The long but narrow quarters of A achieve a slimmer look than the longer lapel opening of C.
Kent's pattern has front darts so I don't think that jacket was from him. I also couldn't see Kent putting someone in a coat where the shoulders are flat out too small, and he's also rather conservative about waist suppression.
What did you commission btw?