or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › I have a jean...(The Ultimate Jean Thread For Beginners) - ask questions here.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

I have a jean...(The Ultimate Jean Thread For Beginners) - ask questions here. - Page 1101

post #16501 of 20609
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bateman87 View Post




Your tone implies you're disagreeing with me, yet you just explained in detail what I summarized.  Confusing.

No he did not say that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by alzex View Post


I need some help deciding between the NS and PS :X 



 



First off, I have huge thighs, but my build overall is pretty lean. I measured the 511's i have right now and I like the knee width and leg opening. but the main problem is that the thigh to crotch seam measures (from bottom of the crotch seam to the outside seam) 10-11ish while the knee is 8" and the opening is ~7". My true waist is 30". Not sure what size or cut to even get, but I'm leaning more toward the NS in size 28/29 maybe. I'm 5'6 and 130 lbs. If anyone has the same w/h as me and has bought an APC jean I'd appreciate the help! Thanks



 



Can someone confirm that the NS will be the better cut for me?



 



Edit: Actually I was browsing this forum and I saw some guy with 23" thighs wearing a 30 PS. Now i'm utterly confused, but I think the PS will be a better cut? What size should I  get for ps then  :X 



 



So ultimately: should I get 28 NS or 28 PS?



A 28 PS would probably fit you. My brother is 5'9" but has similar measurements and he wears a 28PS. And 10-11' thighs are normal for a size 30 waist. APC stretches a ton
post #16502 of 20609
I was wondering if the PBJ XX-013's ran true to size? I am normally a size 30 waist and am interested in buying the raw XX-013's. Of course I will be giving these a hot soak before wearing to get any shrinkage out. Would a size 30 in the 013's be a good choice? Thanks!
post #16503 of 20609
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bateman87 View Post

Your tone implies you're disagreeing with me, yet you just explained in detail what I summarized.  Confusing.

Wow, seriously?

You linked sanforized jeans. Why the fuck are you talking about them and while quoting a description taken from a pair of STF, ie, unsanforized, jeans? Then, I go on to tell you that "raw" doesn't mean unwashed.

Let's try this again:
Quote:
Right, but isn't all Raw Denim "unwashed", even if it's sanfordized or not?
No.
post #16504 of 20609
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bateman87 View Post

Right, but isn't all Raw Denim "unwashed", even if it's sanfordized or not?  In the description for the Shrink-To-Fits, it says this, which is a lot more than just saying "unwashed":

Different people have different definitions of "raw" for denim. whodini knows a shitload about denim, but his definition of raw is a little bit different from mine. I go by Blue in Green's terminology, where they call unwashed denim "raw" and one-wash denim "one-wash". By my definition, what you are saying is correct, but by his, it is not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by htrieu View Post

I was wondering if the PBJ XX-013's ran true to size? I am normally a size 30 waist and am interested in buying the raw XX-013's. Of course I will be giving these a hot soak before wearing to get any shrinkage out. Would a size 30 in the 013's be a good choice? Thanks!

I've owned XX-013s before, and for me, they ran about 2 sizes larger than my actual waist measurement. From what you told me before about your other pairs of jeans, I think your true waist measurement is 31", unless your other pairs of jeans are too loose on you now. So based on my experience with that model, and keeping in mind that PBJ tends to stretch easily, you are probably a 29 in the XX-013.
post #16505 of 20609
why are there no raw skinny lighter colored jeans. fml.

i love me japanese denim but not everything i wear really gets along with repro cuts.... ugh

tempted to pick up some older dior hommes but would really rather some slubby grey denim that is raw or at least has good fading properties...




recs? thoughts?
post #16506 of 20609
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by commodorewheeler View Post

Different people have different definitions of "raw" for denim. whodini knows a shitload about denim, but his definition of raw is a little bit different from mine. I go by Blue in Green's terminology, where they call unwashed denim "raw" and one-wash denim "one-wash". By my definition, what you are saying is correct, but by his, it is not.
I've preferred the use of "raw" in a general, simplified sense for a variety of reasons. For example, just by typing in "raw" it immediately conjures an image of dark, unfaded jeans. It gets a lot trickier when I type "wash" because could I be talking about jeans that were merely soaked in water or were they treated jeans?

BiG plays to a very specific consumer and, given their inventory of the same pair of unsanforized jeans being sold as either pre-soak or post-soak, it would make sense to make a clearer distinction of their product so that there is little confusion. But in a broader context, using "raw" to describe non-distressed/treated and "washed" to describe everything else has personally made more sense. Once you start talking about "raw," then you get clarify it with further specifics and descriptions.

I'll give an example: you walk into a reputable store that sells jeans and ask the SA, "Hey, can you point me to the raw jeans." Is he going to point you to two separate areas on unsanforized and one-wash jeans?

If anything, "one wash" is a more confusing term than "raw." A "wash" can be anything, like Left Field's enzyme wash or other companies that soak their jeans in Woolite Dark and sun bake them so that they become stiff and take creases, or even just plain water. And yet how often is "one soak" used?

"Raw" is just a more accurate description because it's giving visual information, and it's logically why it's used so often for many different contexts. Is a soaked pair of unsanforized jeans any less raw than a pair of "dry" sanforized? That would seem a bit pedantic because both jeans would be starting out their wear raw.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cowsareforeating View Post

why are there no raw skinny lighter colored jeans. fml.
No one wants to fade light jeans, so raw doesn't make much sense nor would it have much of a sale advantage to the average consumer. Good greys are hard to come by. Loads of cheapies, though...
post #16507 of 20609
Quote:
Originally Posted by whodini View Post

I've preferred the use of "raw" in a general, simplified sense for a variety of reasons. For example, just by typing in "raw" it immediately conjures an image of dark, unfaded jeans. It gets a lot trickier when I type "wash" because could I be talking about jeans that were merely soaked in water or were they treated jeans?
BiG plays to a very specific consumer and, given their inventory of the same pair of unsanforized jeans being sold as either pre-soak or post-soak, it would make sense to make a clearer distinction of their product so that there is little confusion. But in a broader context, using "raw" to describe non-distressed/treated and "washed" to describe everything else has personally made more sense. Once you start talking about "raw," then you get clarify it with further specifics and descriptions.
I'll give an example: you walk into a reputable store that sells jeans and ask the SA, "Hey, can you point me to the raw jeans." Is he going to point you to two separate areas on unsanforized and one-wash jeans?
If anything, "one wash" is a more confusing term than "raw." A "wash" can be anything, like Left Field's enzyme wash or other companies that soak their jeans in Woolite Dark and sun bake them so that they become stiff and take creases, or even just plain water. And yet how often is "one soak" used?
"Raw" is just a more accurate description because it's giving visual information, and it's logically why it's used so often for many different contexts. Is a soaked pair of unsanforized jeans any less raw than a pair of "dry" sanforized? That would seem a bit pedantic because both jeans would be starting out their wear raw.

Fair enough. I've always thought of raw denim as being defined as unwashed and untreated (other than the standard pre-assembly starching and/or sanforization).

I will say that the only time I've ever walked into a store that actually carried both unsanforized and one-wash jeans and asked for raw denim, the SA did make a distinction for me between the unwashed and the one-washed models, though the jeans themselves were all on the same rack.

I've never seen the term "one-soak" used in any retail establishment, but in jeans that are sold with one soak, I've also never seen them referred to as "raw". In every case that I've seen myself at least, they were referred to as "one-wash" or "rinsed".
post #16508 of 20609

For nudies grim tim ddo should I size down (how much) or go tts?

 

i'm also looking for a brand new belt to go with indigo jeans. not sure what to get regarding color, width. etc. i wear vans/sneakers/db's mainly so would a natural belt be good for me or..? any suggestions?

thanks


Edited by alzex - 11/26/11 at 2:06am
post #16509 of 20609
Quote:
Originally Posted by whodini View Post


No one wants to fade light jeans, so raw doesn't make much sense nor would it have much of a sale advantage to the average consumer. Good greys are hard to come by. Loads of cheapies, though...



fair enough but for those of us spoiled by denim quality i cant bring myself to buy shit denim...

pants it is then.
post #16510 of 20609
How much stretching can I expect from N&F? Is there a general rule on how much to size down?
post #16511 of 20609
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by commodorewheeler View Post

Fair enough. I've always thought of raw denim as being defined as unwashed and untreated (other than the standard pre-assembly starching and/or sanforization).
I will say that the only time I've ever walked into a store that actually carried both unsanforized and one-wash jeans and asked for raw denim, the SA did make a distinction for me between the unwashed and the one-washed models, though the jeans themselves were all on the same rack.I've never seen the term "one-soak" used in any retail establishment, but in jeans that are sold with one soak, I've also never seen them referred to as "raw". In every case that I've seen myself at least, they were referred to as "one-wash" or "rinsed".

Again, I think the distinction is made at the retail level more out of necessity than staying true to a term's definition. Further, "one wash" doesn't suggest that the denim is sanforized or not, on top of what I explained about using water or other chemicals in the process, which is another ambiguous term that probably needs correction. I can't say I've seen jeans marketed as "one soak," either, but doesn't that sound more concise?

If anything, the big definition that you use for "raw" is interchangeable with "dry." Why not just use "dry" to mean "dry?" And this is really the heart of the problem I have with the big definition: they're going by their own retailer's definition but not necessarily a manufacturer's. The proof is in the number of brands that market jeans as being "raw washed," "raw rinsed," etc. These aren't just mass-market brands that have a tendency to include buzz words, either. I'm talking about reputable brands like RRL, PRPS, etc. that get what we say on here all the time about water not greatly changing the state of the fabric, that a soak won't kill or change raw jeans. It's only water.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cowsareforeating View Post

fair enough but for those of us spoiled by denim quality i cant bring myself to buy shit denim...
pants it is then.
That's easily the less headache-inducing route. Lighter jeans exist (RRL makes a ton) but there isn't a big reason to sell them as raw.
post #16512 of 20609
call me picky i was hoping denim quality on par with pbj cause i would love me some slubby greys.. then again there arent many mes so i doubt they even exist
post #16513 of 20609
I just purchased my first ever pair of RRL's (30x34) and they don't fit too well; I'm wondering if it's the cut. They actually look pretty nice in the picture, but they're extremely tight in the thigh area. The waist fits and the calves are good, so I'm a bit confused. It's basically uncomfortable to sit down in them.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

photoczl.jpg
post #16514 of 20609
Quote:
Originally Posted by cowsareforeating View Post


fair enough but for those of us spoiled by denim quality i cant bring myself to buy shit denim...
pants it is then.


Not sure what shade you want exactly, but these are lighter than most...

 

 

http://www.nakedandfamousdenim.com/collection/men/weirdguy/vintage-blue-selvedge.html

post #16515 of 20609
thanks for the reply mate but i really detest n&f denim and that blue is god awful

lol

was looking for grey, like damp concrete.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Streetwear and Denim
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › I have a jean...(The Ultimate Jean Thread For Beginners) - ask questions here.