Jacques Marie Mage - Wolves, Obnoxious Acetate and The American Dream

[obecity]

Yes they were out of /100 I had and returned..

Bruh! Why return?!

 

[jordanesque23]

So thrilled to get my first pair of JMM which is a Molino 55 in Taupe. However I noticed that there is a bit of uneven finish or some sort of warp at the bottom of the nose bridge. I thought light was just distorting it but upon closer look, it is indeed uneven. This is my first handcrafted eyewear and unsure if this expected, within the quality control tolerance or if this is potentially a defect. Looking forward to your feedback. Thanks!

 

[obecity]

So thrilled to get my first pair of JMM which is a Molino 55 in Taupe. However I noticed that there is a bit of uneven finish or some sort of warp at the bottom of the nose bridge. I thought light was just distorting it but upon closer look, it is indeed uneven. This is my first handcrafted eyewear and unsure if this expected, within the quality control tolerance or if this is potentially a defect. Looking forward to your feedback. Thanks!

Congratulations on becoming part of the JMM (Jacques Marie Mage) club! It’s a great group of fellers here who are very helpful. There are just a couple rapscallions to watch out for, but they’re harmless.

I know alot about the brand and about a whole mess of other things in life, as most will tell you, but TBH (to be honest) I’m going to withhold my commentary on the above picture because frankly I just don’t know.

 

[Pakman161]

So thrilled to get my first pair of JMM which is a Molino 55 in Taupe. However I noticed that there is a bit of uneven finish or some sort of warp at the bottom of the nose bridge. I thought light was just distorting it but upon closer look, it is indeed uneven. This is my first handcrafted eyewear and unsure if this expected, within the quality control tolerance or if this is potentially a defect. Looking forward to your feedback. Thanks!

Would you pay 700 + dollars to deal with that imperfection? does it impact how it feels on your nose bridge? You will have to make those calls. Anything that is done partially or in whole by the human hand and eye will never be perfectly done. I think that is part of the "mystique" Jerome alludes to. That you know these slight imperfections lend a nod to the fact that your sunglasses were handcrafted by some person in Japan. whether its the edging work, beveling work, polishing work, or carving of that acetate in the nose bridge area.

To me, I would not accept that level of imperfection and return them. There are wire core being imperfectly set in the temple others have ruminated on this thread about, which I personally will live with, but others will not. Unfortunately using ww II era machines to manufacture eyewear also means that processes are imperfect vs. the new modern era machines in the eyeglass manufacturing space.

 

[teddieriley]

Agreed with the above and hand done nature of the process, which is pretty cool. Does it really bother you? If possible just order another pair and see if you like them better. And return the other. But don’t be surprised if something else minor might be off on that pair. I just checked several of my acetates and none of them are like that. So I’d prob try to get another pair myself.

 

[verver]

Return/exchange.

 

[Deangelo1555]

So thrilled to get my first pair of JMM which is a Molino 55 in Taupe. However I noticed that there is a bit of uneven finish or some sort of warp at the bottom of the nose bridge. I thought light was just distorting it but upon closer look, it is indeed uneven. This is my first handcrafted eyewear and unsure if this expected, within the quality control tolerance or if this is potentially a defect. Looking forward to your feedback. Thanks!

Can I see a zoomed out photo? Its hard to see what we are looking at.

 

[Prometheus195]

Yes they were out of /100 I had and returned..

Torino in Rover is available at the JMM boutiques if that is more your fit.

 

[constant struggle]

Torino in Rover is available at the JMM boutiques if that is more your fit.

Can tell me which?

 

[DorianGreen]

Would you pay 700 + dollars to deal with that imperfection? does it impact how it feels on your nose bridge? You will have to make those calls. Anything that is done partially or in whole by the human hand and eye will never be perfectly done. I think that is part of the "mystique" Jerome alludes to. That you know these slight imperfections lend a nod to the fact that your sunglasses were handcrafted by some person in Japan. whether its the edging work, beveling work, polishing work, or carving of that acetate in the nose bridge area.

To me, I would not accept that level of imperfection and return them. There are wire core being imperfectly set in the temple others have ruminated on this thread about, which I personally will live with, but others will not. Unfortunately using ww II era machines to manufacture eyewear also means that processes are imperfect vs. the new modern era machines in the eyeglass manufacturing space.

Also my feeling, it woud bother me knowing my frame has that imperfection, no matter how it impacts on the fit. At that price level I think they should have a better quality control. I had to return so far two pairs because of flaws, one Molino Rootbeer which had glue traces on the wirecore and a Fellini Olive which had a temple strongly misaligned (don't see how something like that could leave the factory).

 

[DorianGreen]

hemmings indigo up for preorder.... HMMMMM
feel like a hemmings and an enzo and then im done right?... right!?

Sorry can't help it, you seem to honour your avatar's name. First you return a pair of Hemmings Rover because they're too large and now you want to order the same frame in another colourway and think it would fit.

 

[obecity]

Sorry can't help it, you seem to honour your avatar's name. First you return a pair of Hemmings Rover because they're too large and now you want to order the same frame in another colourway and think it would fit.

Bah dah tssst (the sound made after a comedic zinger). That was a good one, DG (DorianGreen). ConstantStruggle, DG’s comment was just a good natured joke. Just some innocent ball busting.

 

[obecity]

This is going to sound like the crazy ramblings of a madman, but just hear me out on this.

I’ve been taking a lot of self photographs at various distances in my JMM (Jacques Marie Mage) collection to get a better idea of what others see when I am wearing them. I want to know if my face really is as fat/wide as I perceive because I’m boxing myself out of frames that I think are too small when in reality they may not be.

Here’s the problem: When a photo is taken selfie-style close up, all the frames look large. I’ve always discarded that impression because it just didn’t seem right for some reason. I have been using self photos done at far arms length or taken in a mirror at about 6 feet away to asses proper frame-to-face proportion. HOWEVER, I recently set up a tripod about 10-12 feet away and took self photographs of me modeling my collection. HOLY CRAP! At that range, even my widest frames look tiny! I’m so confused.

Which distance is an accurate representation of the frame-to-face width ratio? I AM SO CONFUSED AND DOWNRIGHT FRUSTRATED NOW!!!!!!!

TFR.

 

[DorianGreen]

This is going to sound like the crazy ramblings of a madman, but just hear me out on this.

I’ve been taking a lot of self photographs at various distances in my JMM (Jacques Marie Mage) collection to get a better idea of what others see when I am wearing them. I want to know if my face really is as fat/wide as I perceive because I’m boxing myself out of frames that I think are too small when in reality they may not be.

Here’s the problem: When a photo is taken selfie-style close up, all the frames look large. I’ve always discarded that impression because it just didn’t seem right for some reason. I have been using self photos done at far arms length or taken in a mirror at about 6 feet away to asses proper frame-to-face proportion. HOWEVER, I recently set up a tripod about 10-12 feet away and took self photographs of me modeling my collection. HOLY CRAP! At that range, even my widest frames look tiny! I’m so confused.

Which distance is an accurate representation of the frame-to-face width ratio? I AM SO CONFUSED AND DOWNRIGHT FRUSTRATED NOW!!!!!!!

TFR.

I think that you're pretty much overthinking that. I believe that many of us do wrongly restrain ourselves about shape and size. If it's certainly true that every face has a sweet spot, it's also true that the most can pull off different shapes and sizes, according to personal preference and style.
For example, I preferably wear medium sized frames, and also think they suit my face best, but, following vibe and mood, I also wear and enjoy small and large models.

 

[qubed]

This is basically what's happening: https://www.diyphotography.net/gif-explains-changing-focal-length-impacts-portrait/

Maybe not quite the same since focal length is the same, but distance is changed, but same idea.