Jacket fit

[caenorst]

Hello! First post here. I believe this is the right section but feel free to redirect me if it's not.

I'm looking for an unstructured jacket and found this one which I like. I'm hesitant between size 50 and 52, as the difference is minimal.

Also any comment on the fit in general?

Please disregard the trouser rise I know the rise is way too low to wear with such a jacket.

 

[jcortez]

Go with the 52. There's less puckering around the buttoning point. The sleeves are a bit too long on the 52, but that's a simple alteration whereas you can't really add fabric to the chest. Though both are a bit short IMO, the slight length increase on the bigger size also helps.

Not too sure what's going on with the sleeves. That's either a product of the material or a fundamental issue with the pattern which sizing can't really fix.

 

[KOz]

52 is better, but still too small. Certainly too short.

 

[breakaway01]

Yeah I like Eleventy’s aesthetic generally (like BC) but the jacket is way too short and the buttoning point is too high.

 

[LJ1891]

Yeah I like Eleventy’s aesthetic generally (like BC) but the jacket is way too short and the buttoning point is too high.

My first thought was “the button stance is really high”…Its a nice looking jacket and I can see why you like it but I would keep looking my friend.

 

[caenorst]

Thanks everyone for the comments! Is that impression coming from the amount of tissue under the button or from where the bottom is landing?

For the former, I thought wearing a higher rise would solve the issue (this rise is quite low).

Too bad I didn't think about taking a full-body picture. I have quite a long torse proportionally so when I try a longer jacket it feels to me a bit disproportionate with the ratio leg / torse. I'll try to get a full-body picture next time I try something.

Definitely glad I asked here, I will keep searching!

 

[breakaway01]

One can tell that the jacket is short because it clearly doesn't even come close to covering your rear. Generally a jacket of the proper length should (1) cover your rear and (2) roughly bisect your body visually.

There is usually a relationship between jacket length and buttoning point. In general you want the buttoning point of the jacket to sit at your natural waist. This is often at your navel or maybe slightly above. But when the jacket body is very short (as in this case), the buttoning point often ends up being too high so that the jacket itself looks balanced. A buttoning point that is too high causes the lapel line to be short; a longer lapel line is usually more flattering.

 

[Stylewords]

One can tell that the jacket is short because it clearly doesn't even come close to covering your rear. Generally a jacket of the proper length should (1) cover your rear and (2) roughly bisect your body visually.

He said he has a long torso. Therefore, meeting the two criteria is impossible.

 

[breakaway01]

He said he has a long torso. Therefore, meeting the two criteria is impossible.

hence the qualifier "generally". But this jacket is clearly too short even for a long torso. Do you think it's the correct length?

 

[Stylewords]

hence the qualifier "generally". But this jacket is clearly too short even for a long torso. Do you think it's the correct length?

It's difficult to see the proportions because of the photo. The buttoning point is too high and the trousers have a low rise. It's probably a little too short as a formal jacket. For a non-formal jacket, I'd have to see a better angle and trousers with a higher rise.

 

[breakaway01]

It's difficult to see the proportions because of the photo. The buttoning point is too high and the trousers have a low rise. It's probably a little too short as a formal jacket. For a non-formal jacket, I'd have to see a better angle and trousers with a higher rise.

We agree that the buttoning point is too high. I think that if you were to lower it by 1-1.5” you’d also have to lengthen the jacket.