or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › As promised, pictures of my outfits
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

As promised, pictures of my outfits - Page 18

post #256 of 988
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinnyGoomba View Post
the only thing i noticed is that it looks like there may be a little too much material in the chest area, since it creates that fold near your armpit.

I had a jacket that did that and taking about .5" out of ethier side of the chest fixed it.

It's the drape cut at work. A 'clean' chest would be incorrect in this case, as Cravate_Noire points out. On most RTW jackets, it is impossible to give much shape to the chest that isn't already built-in--you either tighten or loosen. So if you're used to RTW, the natural inclination is to tighten for a 'better' fit.
post #257 of 988
Oh alright. Well reguardless, i think its a sharp look, and certainly no one's "laughing stock", at least no one with style. Then again i was told by some lady i attempted to assist in buying a tie at the mall today that everything except paisley was a hideous choice........so maybe i'm not as smart i think i am.
post #258 of 988
I am typically very slow to criticize that which others find stylish. That being said...

Damn.
post #259 of 988
heh, missed this one but caught his original post. I love those mule shoes! haha!
post #260 of 988
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post
Man, I knew that back shot was going to come back and haunt me. In your opinion, what's wrong with the shape? Too much, too little?

I am sure the pieces by themselves will looks sharp and detailed, but everything together isn't as pleasing.

Not an expert on tailored clothing, color coordination or photography, but your picture looks extremely top heavy with short legs as if you are a tumbler or a bubble-head. The suit gives an image of a wide/buff shoulder/back but your head looks larger than usual.

I believe part of the problem is the ratio of upper-lower body; your coat length is too long, yielding an inverse golden ratio with upper boy 60% lower body 40%. Also, head to shoulder ratio isn't perfect either. A wider/padded shoulder instead of a natural shoulder should be able to compliment your narrow shoulders.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinnyGoomba View Post
Well reguardless, i think its a sharp look, and certainly no one's "laughing stock", at least no one with style.

The lack of style/taste is a style of its own.
post #261 of 988
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post
Man, I knew that back shot was going to come back and haunt me. In your opinion, what's wrong with the shape? Too much, too little?

Apart from the crease in the back I think your cloths look great. It's perhaps a little long, but that may be the perspective of the camera (or that you have short legs). I wouldn't worry about it though, you look at lot better than Mr spiffy. In fact I'm not sure if you could even put your outfits on the same scale.
post #262 of 988
Quote:
Originally Posted by AMAR420 View Post


no offense

How many inches are the cuffs? Im over 6 foot tall and I decided that 2.25" cuffs look right to me.
post #263 of 988
Well... I would actually like to THANK the original poster. This thread has inspired me to go through my closet and throw out any ill-fitting clothes or ugly shoes that I've been holding onto out of laziness. Goodbye, Robert Wayne. Goodbye forever.
post #264 of 988
Quote:
Originally Posted by vitaminc View Post
I am sure the pieces by themselves will looks sharp and detailed, but everything together isn't as pleasing.

Not an expert on tailored clothing, color coordination or photography, but your picture looks extremely top heavy with short legs as if you are a tumbler or a bubble-head. The suit gives an image of a wide/buff shoulder/back but your head looks larger than usual.

I believe part of the problem is the ratio of upper-lower body; your coat length is too long, yielding an inverse golden ratio with upper boy 60% lower body 40%. Also, head to shoulder ratio isn't perfect either. A wider/padded shoulder instead of a natural shoulder should be able to compliment your narrow shoulders.



The lack of style/taste is a style of its own.

Considering that his look is better then probably 98% of the population, i'm not going to say he has a lack of style.

Maybe needing a slight refinement, but who am i to say, i'm still perfecting my wardrobe.

Looking closely, the jacket could stand to be a bit shorter.

I disagree on the shoulders, i think that shoulders that stick out look bad.

All this being said, i dont appreciate your insult, and at first i was going to respond with something nasty.

then i was thinking maybe your style of delivering a point is "lack of style"
post #265 of 988
Quote:
Originally Posted by vitaminc View Post
I am sure the pieces by themselves will looks sharp and detailed, but everything together isn't as pleasing.

Not an expert on tailored clothing, color coordination or photography, but your picture looks extremely top heavy with short legs as if you are a tumbler or a bubble-head. The suit gives an image of a wide/buff shoulder/back but your head looks larger than usual.

I believe part of the problem is the ratio of upper-lower body; your coat length is too long, yielding an inverse golden ratio with upper boy 60% lower body 40%. Also, head to shoulder ratio isn't perfect either. A wider/padded shoulder instead of a natural shoulder should be able to compliment your narrow shoulders.

I don't want to sound hostile to criticism, but I find what you're saying difficult to make sense of. You say I look "extremely top heavy" and my "suit" makes it look like I have "a wide/buff shoulder/back," but I should use a "wide/padded shoulder" to complement my "narrow shoulders." This is plainly contradictory on one level (you say my shoulders are both wide and narrow), and merely puzzling on another (padded, more extended shoulders would only make me look more "top heavy"). You also call what I'm wearing a "suit."

Quote:
The lack of style/taste is a style of its own.

I'm not sure if this was directed at me, but I would appreciate some explanation. What exactly is wrong?
post #266 of 988
@mfan: I've only recently started posting, but I've been a long time reader of this board. I wouldn't let these trolls bother you; try to ignore them. The general consensus is clearly that your outfit looks great- anyone who nitpicks a single photo of one back-ripple this much fails to realize that it is, in fact, just that- a single photo. Even if you owned the most perfect-fitting garment in the world, it would be possible to photograph it at such an angle or with a part of your body in such a position so as to suggest that it does not fit well at all. The fact that someone thinks you're wearing a suit is just icing on the troll-cake.
post #267 of 988
Do you take ,requests?
post #268 of 988
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post
I don't want to sound hostile to criticism, but I find what you're saying difficult to make sense of. You say I look "extremely top heavy" and my "suit" makes it look like I have "a wide/buff shoulder/back," but I should use a "wide/padded shoulder" to complement my "narrow shoulders." This is plainly contradictory on one level (you say my shoulders are both wide and narrow), and merely puzzling on another (padded, more extended shoulders would only make me look more "top heavy"). You also call what I'm wearing a "suit."

Yes you are correct, I should have frame my points better and perhaps learn to master my language.

By suit, I mean your suit/sports jacket, blazer or coat. I am still trying to learn the lingo.

My guess, from the photograph, is that you have a proportionally narrower shoulders (on your body) and larger head. The soft and natural shoulder (of your suit jacket) does not compliment/fix your body shape. The natural shoulder (of the suit jacket) slopes down and yields an illusion of a larger head size. The 'bulkiness' (for lack of a better word) of the arms (of the suit jacket) adds to the natural shoulder (of the suit jacket) and gives your top a overall round shape.

A sharper cut on the suit jacket shoulders, perhaps slightly padded (or pointy shoulders), should fix that problem.

Your photograph looks top heavy because your upper body to lower body ratio is 6:4 instead of 5:5 (jackets on) or the golden 4:6 (jackets off). A padded shoulder on your suit jacket won't harm or fix that ratio but a shorter jacket will definitely add 2" to your height.

Hopefully that makes a bit more sense and sorry about the confusion.

@ polar-lemon: I have not commented about his back ripple. But Mafoofan's outfit (or photographer) could actually use a lot of work. Falling into the general consensus makes mediocre men and nitpicking improves men from good to great.
post #269 of 988
Quote:
Originally Posted by vitaminc View Post
My guess, from the photograph, is that you have a proportionally narrower shoulders (on your body) and larger head. The soft and natural shoulder (of your suit jacket) does not compliment/fix your body shape.

. . .

Your photograph looks top heavy because your upper body to lower body ratio is 6:4 instead of 5:5 (jackets on) or the golden 4:6 (jackets off). A padded shoulder on your suit jacket won't harm or fix that ratio but a shorter jacket will definitely add 2" to your height.

I think you'll find that there is a palpable divide between those that believe as you do (that clothes should 'fix' one's body shape), and those who would rather make the most of their natural eccentricities. Now, as big-headed as I am (both physically and literally), I may simply prefer the latter because the former would be less effective personally. But don't you think hard formulas and ratios are a bit too reductive?
post #270 of 988
What is an inverse golden ratio?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › As promised, pictures of my outfits