Indochino suits?

[amplifiedheat]

People who look at Indochino's photos and say "Yeah, that's what I want" should be sent to re-education camps.

 

[Sanguis Mortuum]

Originally Posted by Pylon

Oh God, and I just looked at IndoChino's latest suits. The velvet ones are 100% cotton velvet? Not even silk/poly or silk? They might as well be drapes or a cheap throw pillow or something.

Almost everything uses cotton velvet these days afaik, silk velvet is very expensive.

 

[mjc]

Originally Posted by Pylon

And while, yeah, 100% silk velvet at probably $200/yard isn't in their range, if you're not going to do a nice-feeling/looking alternative, why bother at all?

I think the intent is that you will take it to a local artisan, who will paint an image of Elvis on the velvet. Or wolves.

- Mike

 

[musicguy]

Originally Posted by Sanguis Mortuum

Almost everything uses cotton velvet these days afaik, silk velvet is very expensive.

+1

I've actually seen some amazing cotton velvet. Incotex makes some beautiful velet cords.

I'm not using this as an endorsement of Indochino. I don't think Indochino should be an approved SF suit. Most of the pics I've seen here are just terrible. I also have a hard time believing that the ones that do look good are not posted by Indochino.

 

[LorenzL]

Originally Posted by musicguy

+1

I've actually seen some amazing cotton velvet. Incotex makes some beautiful velet cords.

I'm not using this as an endorsement of Indochino. I don't think Indochino should be an approved SF suit. Most of the pics I've seen here are just terrible. I also have a hard time believing that the ones that do look good are not posted by Indochino.

I realize one picture is not enough to judget the suit completely, but I'd really be interested in what you think is wrong about this one:

It's my blueprint windowpane suit - wore it at a wedding recently, hot day so I got rid of the tie after a while (I usually don't like suits without ties).

 

[musicguy]

Originally Posted by LorenzL

I realize one picture is not enough to judget the suit completely, but I'd really be interested in what you think is wrong about this one:

It's my blueprint windowpane suit - wore it at a wedding recently, hot day so I got rid of the tie after a while (I usually don't like suits without ties).

Looks good man! I think you're the exception to the rule.

 

[amplifiedheat]

Originally Posted by LorenzL

I realize one picture is not enough to judget the suit completely, but I'd really be interested in what you think is wrong about this one:

Inadequate rise, but otherwise solid.

 

[LorenzL]

Originally Posted by amplifiedheat

Inadequate rise, but otherwise solid.

not sure what that means? (not a native speaker)

 

[mossmadness88]

Originally Posted by LorenzL

I realize one picture is not enough to judget the suit completely, but I'd really be interested in what you think is wrong about this one:

It's my blueprint windowpane suit - wore it at a wedding recently, hot day so I got rid of the tie after a while (I usually don't like suits without ties).

Looks great

 

[amplifiedheat]

Originally Posted by LorenzL

not sure what that means? (not a native speaker)

The pants would look better if they went higher, on your waist instead of your hips.

 

[Professor Chaos]

Originally Posted by amplifiedheat

The pants would look better if they went higher, on your waist instead of your hips.
translate: "the pants would look better if you were an old man" By traditional standards, the jacket is too short and the rise on the pants is two low. But you're young and in good shape. The cut works very well for you. Sleeves look a bit wide, but it might just be the photo.

 

[LorenzL]

thanks for explaining! I specifically got this jacket 1 inch shorter than usual and the pants without pleats, my "work suits" are all a bit longer. I wanted one with a more fasionable cut/length.

The rise of my pants is usually lower, but that is mainly due to my somehow shorter legs and my slim waist - all pants I have just slide down, unless I close them very tight above the hip bone and then it don't like how it looks. Perhaps I should get the crotch of the pants a bit bigger? Not sure, I got used to the fact that all my pants sit rather low.

Btw, in the photo, there was some wind from behind (or my arm was just in motion), so the left sleeve appears bulky

 

[amplifiedheat]

Originally Posted by Professor Chaos

translate: "the pants would look better if you were an old man"

I don't think any reasonable people believe that. Low-rise pants throw off proportions. It's that simple.

 

[Professor Chaos]

Originally Posted by amplifiedheat

I don't think any reasonable people believe that. Low-rise pants throw off proportions. It's that simple.
Preferences for proportions are not universal. First, it depends on the person who is wearing it. I'm 6'5" with long lengs, and when my pants sit on my waist, it looks stupid. My legs are just way too long for that to look good. Sitting on the hips is also a more modern look. In this case, this looks like an informal, youthful suit. The low waist looks completely congruent with that. Pants rising to the natural waist would probably throw the whole thing off.

 

[amplifiedheat]

Originally Posted by Professor Chaos

Sitting on the hips is also a more modern look.

If you think that there is such a thing as a "modern look," I can't help you.