- Joined
- Dec 29, 2014
- Messages
- 106
- Reaction score
- 11
PART 1/4
This post is a continuation of and response to many previous posts on color, generally, and color theory specifically:
It's motivated by a visual art student's dissatisfaction with existing theories and a color-enthusiast's obstinacy in rejecting skepticism about the very possibility of color theory in the context of classic menswear.
Before we begin, though, let me deflate what's about to come by saying that the most important thing to know about colors, when it comes to menswear, is which and which combination to avoid. Yet because this is such common knowledge, I'm actually not going to talk very much about it. What I'm going to focus on instead are principles for good color coordination. This is the stuff that Alan Flusser or Carole Jackson, among others (Cognac, Kentner, Caygill, etc.), attempt to theorize but have done so problematically. Perhaps in an attempt to sell the audience, these authors never explicitly mention that the nut they're (and I'm) trying to crack is really of marginal significance to the evaluation of an outfit – esp. by anal SFers. With the exception of the aforementioned provocatively bad colors, there's really not much of a male culture of judging one's wardrobe on the basis of palette. And, without the culture, it's easy to focus attention on other elements of an outfit, which then steal one's attention entirely.
Yet, this being said, almost all the outfits that I've found memorable feature what I think to be particularly great colors. And, it must be emphatically stated, what follows reflects my (considered) sensibilities and mine alone – it's not the color theory but my color theory. It (i.e. my sensibility) is historically informed to the extent that readily accessible historical resources enable, but, beyond this, I've no evidence for its universality (though I've my suspicions). In fact, it's precisely in wanting some evidence that I'm sharing it on SF. I hope to go further than previous commentators by clarifying how I judge a palette so that anyone who disagrees with me will do so with a better understanding of his own aesthetic sensibilities.
Let's begin with some definitions. The following three concepts are, in my experience, all that one needs to consider to master color in menswear. Concepts like contrast and season popularized by Flusser and Jackson, respectively, can be analyzed in terms of these three concepts. And these three concepts constitute an arguably preferable toolkit when thinking about color as one of the biggest problems with previous alternatives, as we will see, is their tendency to inspire overgeneralization.
Hue is that property of a color that places somewhere on the wheel below. Some people call hues the pure colors, referring to the fact that a hue (e.g. orange) is neither tinted (e.g. light-orange) nor shaded (e.g. brown). There's some definitional confusion in such a reference, but it conveys the concept usefully enough.
Value is determined by adding black and white to a hue. When we add black to a color, we're increasing its value (or shading it) and when we add white we're decreasing its value (or tinting it). Brown or tan, as just mentioned, is a shade of orange and light-orange is a tint of orange.
Saturation is, very roughly, how much gray is in a particular color. Adding gray to a color tones that color, creating a tone of that color.
There is a host of additional resources for more technical details about these concepts (wikipedia, I've found, is quite useful for additional information). But this rough understanding is enough for the purpose at hand.
A few additional points must be taken into consideration at the outset. In the following posts, I will be using many comparison photos to illustrate my arguments. Preferences for different palettes are best est. by one-to-one comparisons. Our aesthetic judgments tend to be bent by thoughts introduced at the moment of judgment. To verify my arguments against your own taste, then, select which photo you prefer before reading the text. For the sake of time, I'm using several shortcuts on my photo editing software that leave sometimes unappealing residue. You'll have to take this into consideration as you evaluate my arguments. Finally, following the precedent, I will be focusing on the staples of classic menswear: jacket, tie, shirt and pocket square. With some creative imagination, of course. my arguments can be more generally applied.
This post is a continuation of and response to many previous posts on color, generally, and color theory specifically:
- http://www.styleforum.net/t/89372/color-and-complexion
- http://www.styleforum.net/t/228299/pocket-square-review-an-ongoing-series
- http://www.styleforum.net/t/36332/color-theory-wtf-is-it
It's motivated by a visual art student's dissatisfaction with existing theories and a color-enthusiast's obstinacy in rejecting skepticism about the very possibility of color theory in the context of classic menswear.
Before we begin, though, let me deflate what's about to come by saying that the most important thing to know about colors, when it comes to menswear, is which and which combination to avoid. Yet because this is such common knowledge, I'm actually not going to talk very much about it. What I'm going to focus on instead are principles for good color coordination. This is the stuff that Alan Flusser or Carole Jackson, among others (Cognac, Kentner, Caygill, etc.), attempt to theorize but have done so problematically. Perhaps in an attempt to sell the audience, these authors never explicitly mention that the nut they're (and I'm) trying to crack is really of marginal significance to the evaluation of an outfit – esp. by anal SFers. With the exception of the aforementioned provocatively bad colors, there's really not much of a male culture of judging one's wardrobe on the basis of palette. And, without the culture, it's easy to focus attention on other elements of an outfit, which then steal one's attention entirely.
Yet, this being said, almost all the outfits that I've found memorable feature what I think to be particularly great colors. And, it must be emphatically stated, what follows reflects my (considered) sensibilities and mine alone – it's not the color theory but my color theory. It (i.e. my sensibility) is historically informed to the extent that readily accessible historical resources enable, but, beyond this, I've no evidence for its universality (though I've my suspicions). In fact, it's precisely in wanting some evidence that I'm sharing it on SF. I hope to go further than previous commentators by clarifying how I judge a palette so that anyone who disagrees with me will do so with a better understanding of his own aesthetic sensibilities.
Let's begin with some definitions. The following three concepts are, in my experience, all that one needs to consider to master color in menswear. Concepts like contrast and season popularized by Flusser and Jackson, respectively, can be analyzed in terms of these three concepts. And these three concepts constitute an arguably preferable toolkit when thinking about color as one of the biggest problems with previous alternatives, as we will see, is their tendency to inspire overgeneralization.
Hue is that property of a color that places somewhere on the wheel below. Some people call hues the pure colors, referring to the fact that a hue (e.g. orange) is neither tinted (e.g. light-orange) nor shaded (e.g. brown). There's some definitional confusion in such a reference, but it conveys the concept usefully enough.
Value is determined by adding black and white to a hue. When we add black to a color, we're increasing its value (or shading it) and when we add white we're decreasing its value (or tinting it). Brown or tan, as just mentioned, is a shade of orange and light-orange is a tint of orange.
Saturation is, very roughly, how much gray is in a particular color. Adding gray to a color tones that color, creating a tone of that color.
There is a host of additional resources for more technical details about these concepts (wikipedia, I've found, is quite useful for additional information). But this rough understanding is enough for the purpose at hand.
A few additional points must be taken into consideration at the outset. In the following posts, I will be using many comparison photos to illustrate my arguments. Preferences for different palettes are best est. by one-to-one comparisons. Our aesthetic judgments tend to be bent by thoughts introduced at the moment of judgment. To verify my arguments against your own taste, then, select which photo you prefer before reading the text. For the sake of time, I'm using several shortcuts on my photo editing software that leave sometimes unappealing residue. You'll have to take this into consideration as you evaluate my arguments. Finally, following the precedent, I will be focusing on the staples of classic menswear: jacket, tie, shirt and pocket square. With some creative imagination, of course. my arguments can be more generally applied.
Last edited: