Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by Claghorn, May 21, 2014.
Cleav, I've been trying to figure out what's bugging me in your combo, and I've decided that the shirt is too saturated for that tie. A paler blue would work much better IMO.
Today (2nd picture shows true colors):
Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
Yesterday (Light Grey flannels below):
Yes AAS.. the fit would have worked without the vest. The best is a no go IMO
Chelsea boots: +1000. Thanks. This made my evening.
@sugarbutch @chocsosa Thanks for the feedback. I think it's actually the jacket and not the vest. I think a brown jacket would have been much better. The last time I wore the vest I paired it with a light brown corduroy jacket. I think my brown herringbone tweed jacket would have been better today. Alas, the black watch has failed me. I'll try again next week sans black watch.
Not at all, thank you
Thanks man, interested to hear how it works out
Fair enough shugz, I may not necessarily agree bearing the suit in mind but will try your suggestion next time. maybe
Has anyone dared to have pants made with no pockets? That would be an interesting look and something to experiment. I'm trying it myself when I go to my first appointment with my tailor this afternoon.
^ Yes… they're called sweatpants.
I've seen sweatpants with pockets before.. by the way, why are you up at 2:23 am?
I was reading a thread by @mafoofan about it (although he asked about no rear pockets).
I mean, I'm getting them made, no one is going to see my arse; and I don't even use them. So, I don't see the point in having them.
My wife wears pants without pockets.
yes, only suits tho. I've experimented with the 4 combos and I like one pocket right side best. No pockets is just a little bit too feminine IMO - not that anyone other than work colleagues is likely to notice - and 2 pockets feels like more of an odd trew thing.
edit: I''m assuming u mean no back pockets. No pockets at all would be off.
Separate names with a comma.