FRIDAY CHALLENGE 10/15/2013: Double Breasted

[in stitches]

Im tired. I will esplain tomorrow.

 

[Caustic Man]

You better!

 

[in stitches]

Oh noes!! Teh threats. They are being issued.

I will defo esssplain my stance in the morrow.

 

[Claghorn]



clags, every last one of those fits falls squarely in the safe zone. i mean that in no negative way at all. on the contrary, its a good thing. but those are all safe looks.

That I posted those as an example of my more risky looks is a pretty good indication than I'm a fairly safe dresser.

They are a bit edgy in very small ways though. Stripes on stripes. White spread (though it was oxford cloth) with a narrower tie and a casual jacket/trou combo. A very warm colored tie in a very cool context. I'm practically James Dean.

 

[in stitches]

watch out styfo! clags is on the loose!

 

[Coxsackie]

All true. I am surprised there haven't been more votes for Coxsackie though... his fit was a great example of the opposite - how to do louche.

Louche? Louche?

[thinks]



OK, I'll take "louche". Thank you very much for your kind words!

 

[in stitches]

ok, CM, here is what i mean by safe.

in the 6 outfits clags posted as examples, while some of the colors may have been non standard, and PS aside, looking at the pants, jacket, shirt and tie, 5 of the 6 were all solid items aside from one pattern, and 1 of the 6 had a wide stripe tie with a very thin stripe shirt. and in all 6, the only pattern in the fits was stripes, almost all wide repp stripes. that is called safe dressing. all simple classic items, some interesting colors, sure, almost all solid colors, and one pattern, that is as safe as it gets.

 

[Victor Elfo]

Tom Wolfe is intrigued by this definition of safe in his solid white linen three piece suit worn with a french blue repp striped necktie and white shirt. (joking, btw)

 

[Caustic Man]

ok, CM, here is what i mean by safe.

in the 6 outfits clags posted as examples, while some of the colors may have been non standard, and PS aside, looking at the pants, jacket, shirt and tie, 5 of the 6 were all solid items aside from one pattern, and 1 of the 6 had a wide stripe tie with a very thin stripe shirt. and in all 6, the only pattern in the fits was stripes, almost all wide repp stripes. that is called safe dressing. all simple classic items, some interesting colors, sure, almost all solid colors, and one pattern, that is as safe as it gets.

There is nothing standard, simple, or classic about a cobalt blue jacket. You seem to be looking only at pattern, whereas I am looking at the challenges of color combination, texture, and context appropriate attire. If his pictures were in black and white then I would agree with you. But in the world of color you are incorrect. Non standard color combination is, by definition, not safe. Simply because the patterns are not crazy, doesn't mean it's in the safe zone.

 

[EFV]

I'd say the true definition of "safe zone" is if you can walk down the street in the city where you live/work, without (non SF member) heads turning as you walk by.

 

[in stitches]



There is nothing standard, simple, or classic about a cobalt blue jacket. You seem to be looking only at pattern, whereas I am looking at the challenges of color combination, texture, and context appropriate attire. If his pictures were in black and white then I would agree with you. But in the world of color you are incorrect. Non standard color combination is, by definition, not safe. Simply because the patterns are not crazy, doesn't mean it's in the safe zone.

i am not incorrect. i am disagreeing with you. deal with it, bro.

PoW/GP suit or SC, faint stripe or check shirt, or even solid shirt, and neat/dot tie, or something like that, now that would be the kind of thing i would call out of the safe zone and still very far from crazy.

we just have different definitions. no biggie.

I'd say the true definition of "safe zone" is if you can walk down the street in the city where you live/work, without (non SF member) heads turning as you walk by.

in that case, i think clags fits above are quite safe indeed. they are very nice, but nothing that would make someone double take.

 

[Caustic Man]

I'd say the true definition of "safe zone" is if you can walk down the street in the city where you live/work, without (non SF member) heads turning as you walk by.

This is one big reason why I think it's not as safe as some think.

 

[Caustic Man]

i am not incorrect. i am disagreeing with you.

But you aren't even really disagreeing with me. You said yourself that the colors were non standard. Being safe is... (wait for it!) being what people accept as standard!

My disagreement isn't with your opinion, it is with the ontological inconsistencies of your reason for believing it. Oh... I just jumped the shark, didn't I? Oh well, screw it!

 

[in stitches]

i dont know what you are talking about anymore, lol.

non standard =/= non safe imo.

you defined safe as:

"being what people accept as standard"

i have no idea where you got that from, but i think its fair to say, you made it up. as in, its how you defined safe.

here is the webster definition of safe as a medical term:

"having a low incidence of adverse reactions and significant side effects when adequate instructions for use are given and having a low potential for harm under conditions of widespread availability."

as related to clothing, id say clags fits are very safe. all unlikely to make anyone say, wow, that is odd and unusual! they are all very pleasant and put together based on adequate instruction he learned here. non standard maybe, but not anything daring or pushing the envelope. if lots of people went for that type of look, the likelihood for fail would be minimal imo.

in any case, there are many many definitions of safe, and many ways to relate them to dressing "safely." and to go a step further, as it relates to mode of dress, safe on SF might not be safe in other places. safe in one job might not be safe in another.

all that being the case, id call those fits safe, you wouldnt. i think the world will continue to exist despite our disagreement.

 

[Ivar]

A few real eyesores here, guys. But then, double-breasteds are a dog to get right. The only one to hit the ball out of the park was Holdfast, so my vote fell on him. Runners up were Tirailleur1 (great styling but was demoted for not providing a clear shot of the jacket) and SpooPoker (button stance was a hair too low).