or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › (Old) What Are You Wearing Now/Today? Part II - pictures only - no discussion
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

(Old) What Are You Wearing Now/Today? Part II - pictures only - no discussion - Page 1619  

post #24271 of 38322
different shoes with that, man. black boots or something Cold out today. What's with florida, lately? Reminds me i don't own a single cold weather jacket anymore. Again, apologies for the bad mirror picture. All these fits look much better outside/better angle. I need to set aside one fit a week or two where i properly take it. click for slight alt pic since i took two. may as well not let it go to waste dark tealish raf patchwork sweatshirt dark navy cdg h+ wool pants double identity sneaks
post #24272 of 38322
Quote:
Originally Posted by aak View Post
Wow. Can't believe you spent all that money to achieve an extremely generic outfit.

This board is fucking hilarious. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
post #24273 of 38322
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoCal2NYC View Post
This board is fucking hilarious. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Your fit was good but you needed more chucks/m65s
post #24274 of 38322
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoCal2NYC View Post
This board is fucking hilarious. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

For what it's worth Justin, if I saw someone on the street dressed in that exact ensemble, I'd be pretty damned sure he wasn't wearing Gap and/or was clueless towards fashion.
post #24275 of 38322
Maybe not, F2B, but for anyone else he'd look sloppily dressed. Ugly shoes, ugly jeans, ugly topcoat... Yeah, yeah, retro schmetro. Money can't buy taste. (Socal does sometimes have taste, however!)
post #24276 of 38322
there's nothing "retro" about that look, it's perfectly modern. as much as people say they can 'develop' an eye for clothing, i don't quite think so. You can educate yourself about clothes and then learn to assemble them, like many people browsing fashion forums do, but 'education' only gets you so far. like Rye GB's comment about being a "Garmento"...you either have the eye or you don't.
post #24277 of 38322
Jil Sander single chalk stripe overcoat Jil Sander cashmere double line turtleneck Raf Simons x Fred Perry flannel trousers Jil Sander black boots
post #24278 of 38322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fade to Black View Post
there's nothing "retro" about that look, it's perfectly modern. as much as people say they can 'develop' an eye for clothing, i don't quite think so. You can educate yourself about clothes and then learn to assemble them, like many people browsing fashion forums do, but 'education' only gets you so far. like Rye GB's comment about being a "Garmento"...you either have the eye or you don't.
We refer to this in my office as "You're born with taste or not." and much to our chagrin we are unable to find a new assistant given this. Edit: I think people also fail to realize that people may actually dress situationally and not just for the Internetz. It's one of the first stormy days in New York, you don't have any vendor appointments and you have a half ass cold...yah let's wear a Lanvin tux.
post #24279 of 38322
I honestly think your dimly lit photos are your biggest problem. In person, I don't think there would be any doubt as to whether or not your items came courtesy of the GAP.
post #24280 of 38322
Quote:
Originally Posted by mulansauce View Post
I honestly think your dimly lit photos are your biggest problem. In person, I don't think there would be any doubt as to whether or not your items came courtesy of the GAP.

I'll give you some free clothes if you come and take detail shots of my closets.
post #24281 of 38322
The circle-jerk here is ridiculous.
post #24282 of 38322
Quote:
Originally Posted by mulansauce View Post
I honestly think your dimly lit photos are your biggest problem. In person, I don't think there would be any doubt as to whether or not your items came courtesy of the GAP.

The photography is an issue, but it's not the main one. The outfit SoCal posted just now in the all black is one that would more easily be recognized as something worn by someone 'in the know'...yet the blue jeans outfit was one of much greater subtlety that would take a more trained eye to differentiate, which 99% of the population who does not really give a damn about what they wear would not.

Today I wore an asymmetrical weave Yohji Yamamoto henley, loose cotton Comme des Garcons trousers and Visvim Kiefers - yet to the average passerby it would look like i was wearing a brandless t-shirt purchased at some random bargain bin, trackpants and Chucks.
post #24283 of 38322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fade to Black View Post
yet the blue jeans outfit was one of much greater subtlety that would take a more trained eye to differentiate, which 99% of the population who does not really give a damn about what they wear would not.

please elaborate
post #24284 of 38322
there's nothing to elaborate on. actually i said trained eye - maybe not 'trained', but 'skilled' is more like it. It seems many people here pay a lot of attention and detail to developing and refining their clothing tastes, so it is a given that the majority of regular posters here are quite 'trained' in their clothing vocabulary. Yet there were comments about that outfit being on par with early 90s, tagutcow steez. I can assure you anyone who has extensive experience immersed in the world of high fashion can pretty damn quickly differentiate an outfit like SoCal's and someone like tagutcow. It's just people are often times conditioned to think something is "stylish" if it fits certain check boxes. eg. braidkid, who is by definition someone who generically fits into the definition of what most people would call "well dressed." (Not a dig at you, braid, your outfits are fine for the most part, it's just you are the easiest example i could think of) It just so happens SoCal's pic was not that well taken, and from a digital camera photo posted online it would easily seem to many who have a preconceived notion of what makes up 'style' he was wearing pedestrian clothing like many people slumming it to buy milk would.
post #24285 of 38322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fade to Black View Post
there's nothing to elaborate on.

actually i said trained eye - maybe not 'trained', but 'skilled' is more like it. It seems many people here pay a lot of attention and detail to developing and refining their clothing tastes, so it is a given that the majority of regular posters here are quite 'trained' in their clothing vocabulary. Yet there were comments about that outfit being on par with early 90s, tagutcow steez. I can assure you anyone who has extensive experience immersed in the world of high fashion can pretty damn quickly differentiate an outfit like SoCal's and someone like tagutcow. It's just people are often times conditioned to think something is "stylish" if it fits certain check boxes. eg. braidkid, who is by definition someone who generically fits into the definition of what most people would call "well dressed." (Not a dig at you, braid, your outfits are fine for the most part, it's just you are the easiest example i could think of)

It just so happens SoCal's pic was not that well taken, and from a digital camera photo posted online it would easily seem to many who have a preconceived notion of what makes up 'style' he was wearing pedestrian clothing like many people slumming it to buy milk would.

That's what I thought.


You'd find some comfort in the CEespool.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Streetwear and Denim
This thread is locked  
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › (Old) What Are You Wearing Now/Today? Part II - pictures only - no discussion