Lengths of pants for different sized openings

[Toiletduck]

Different sized leg openings require different pant length to look proper on me. Any thoughts on this? My preferences have constantly been changing since I started getting various types of pants done, and this seems to affect the pant sillhouette drastically

Opening type
- very slim (14 inch opening/or proportionally, shows most of my whole shoe)
Pant Length
- full break when standing
(shows very little sock, more "standard" look)
- no break when standing
(shows a lot of sock when walking, everyone thinks they are too short, I like em)

Opening type
- slim (15 inch opening/or proportionally, shows most of my whole shoe but back length drops down to lower of shoe)
Pant Length
- half break

Opening type
- "standard" (proportionally goes to 2nd/3rd lace eyelet?)
Pant Length
- half break


And finally something else I like more recently on fuller cut pants

Opening type
- large
Pant Length
- full break

 

[xarope]

Definitely. Even for the difference between cuffed and non-cuffed, my tailor was telling me cuffed pants have to be cut straight, so may be shorter than non-cuffed (and hence less break), where the hem can be cut fish-tailed (I think that's what he called it), so it can be lower at the back.

 

[j]

I agree - I just hemmed a pair of quite full cut pants and they really don't look right without a full break. At some point I will probably taper the legs down a lot and then I will hem them 1/2" shorter, most likely.

 

[Toiletduck]

Yup, just sharing my various results of various experiments I had done w/ my different tailored pants....I am going to try some more specimens w/ fuller cut as most of my current pants are all slim.

 

[babygreenspots]

Would we say that no break works best on the very slim opening?

 

[nioh]

Originally Posted by babygreenspots

Would we say that no break works best on the very slim opening?

Yes we would and I do.

 

[Toiletduck]

No break w/ "fishtail"...or whatever the term is when you have it lower in the back

 

[maomao1980]

Originally Posted by Toiletduck

No break w/ "fishtail"...or whatever the term is when you have it lower in the back

They call it a horse's hoof here in HK, which seems to be a popular option as I am asked about it every time I have pants hemmed. I don't like it though, the act of doing such seems too artificial to me. I like my clothe to fit naturally, not to be a trickery to the eyes of others. Having said that, as a shoe fanatics, I hem my pants on the short side, except for jeans.

 

[Tomasso]

Originally Posted by maomao1980

the act of doing such seems too artificial to me. I like my clothe to fit naturally, not to be a trickery to the eyes of others.
Interesting. Some would say that the best tailors are those with the biggest bag of tricks.

 

[Toiletduck]

Originally Posted by maomao1980

They call it a horse's hoof here in HK, which seems to be a popular option as I am asked about it every time I have pants hemmed. I don't like it though, the act of doing such seems too artificial to me. I like my clothe to fit naturally, not to be a trickery to the eyes of others. Having said that, as a shoe fanatics, I hem my pants on the short side, except for jeans.

Depends what you call a "natural fit"

I find that for my trousers and shoes, the break seems a bit too full yet isn't long enough at the back when cut straight. It looks more normal/better when I get the "horse's hoof" done. I guess thats my "natural fit"

 

[j]

FAIK, it's usually just referred to as a slanted hem, and has been standard for a very long time on uncuffed pants. I do it on my hems. Otherwise, you either have too much bunching in the front or not enough coverage in the back.