Thanks for chiming in! Good example. After leaving the conversation, I had mentally sketched something similar and realized that, whatever you do with the bottom front quarters, it won't be like a SB because there's the overlapping sides of material. You'll get, well, what Finamore did here - some creative cornering, but still no "break" between the seams like an SB or when a DB has "the pull" with the hand in the pocket; that second layer of fabric behind it is, well, there. As an aside, I thought if someone got real radical with it, you'd end up with a split at the bottom, like an inverted V, that would (ahem) draw focus to the trouser's zipper which probably wouldn't work well either... Great observation and something that I now see was part of what I was sensing but not realizing. While I don't have wide hips, I also don't have that wide-shoulder-to-narrow-hip triangle that DBs really flatter. I suspect that's been part of what I haven't liked about them on me... edit: it occurred to me that men of more portly stature, think Churchill, look fine if not better in a DB. So it's almost as if you have to be the athletic triangle to get that rakish look, but it surprisingly also does well if you're a larger than usual gent; maybe the extra double layer actually reduces the visual "strain" of a single breasted jacket, taut across. Know what I mean? And maybe it's really the fellows in the middle, like me, where it doesn't work as well. I think there's something here.... Yep, you're understanding my points entirely. I'm just wondering, and maybe it's just not possible, how to capture the visual qualities of the "hand in pocket DB" look at rest without the actual hand in pocket. I'm almost convinced it's not doable. And, like you - and others have said - I might be agonizing over stills that, in real life, never really rest that way anyway; in motion the problem doesn't (hardly) exist. Hmmm. Still mulling. Regardless, thanks for the thoughtful insights!