Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by edmorel, Jul 16, 2012.
The last two could be saved just by changing out the ties. The check tie is a check too far, and the neat pattern of the last is on a grid almost identical to the shirt.
An unlined and untipped tie simply looks to me as if the wearer ran out of money while getting the tie constructed midway.
Ed Hayes does this high-wire act rather well:
This is from the Dandy Portraits by Rose Callahan, and features a second outfit too.
Quoted for posterity. I look forward to 6 months from now when SF has bludgeoned an obsession with unlined, untipped ties into you.
Going back through my archives...I don't think I've posted any of these yet...sorry for shitty picture quality:
I don't like the pocket square on the second one, but I think the third looks great. However, it looks like the jacket and square are the same in both the second and third pictures. Is this the case? The jacket color looks completely different in the two pictures on my monitor.
Yea it's the same jacket and square, the second picture is just much shittier. You can't even tell that the tie in that picture is a herringbone. I think it's the kind of blurry/motiony effect in the second pic, which exacerbates the effect of two small patterns worn together, that makes it look bad. In other words, in real life, it's fucking amazing and if you don't think so it's just the picture
In the first pic, I think the tie is too shiny for the rest of the ensemble. Same color/pattern in a more matte fabric would have been pretty damned good.
For some reason, I actually think this one works, but I can't for the life of me figure why. It's not ideal, but I think it's bearable. I think it's perhaps because there's enough contrast between all three elements, and because ultimately both shirt and suit resolve somewhat towards the solid end of things, helped along by their muted tones.
This one I really don't like; I even think the vest clashes with the rest of the suit.
More on linen. I saw a guy today in a linen pinstripe/chalkstripe and it looked awful. On the other hand, I saw a guy in a linen multicolor houndstooth, on the same block earlier in the day, and it looked great. I am having trouble understanding the blanket objection to patterned linen for sportcoats.
I think you're right about this. Somewhat of an excuse is that, IIRC, this was on a day when I was wearing one outfit from work to an evening function. But I think it would probably be better if the tie were more matte and the pocket square more shiny. All matte and no shiny would make me a dull boy though.
Dunno if this counts as a pattern on the suit....
I mentioned the two-plains-one-pattern rule a while back in a long forgotten thread and was roundly ridiculed on the forum. Manton, I think you remarked at the time that Levitt made up the rule and should be ignored. Maybe he did, and maybe some people can pull off the two or three pattern look. I don't know. It seems to me that 99 percent of the time I think two-plains-one-fancy or three plains looks a whole better than mixing patterns. I think part of the problem here is that when people look at a photo of a jacket-shirt-tie pattern mix - and usually just a picture of the top half of the torso-, they are looking at the patterns themselves and deciding whether this pattern can go with that one, instead of really looking holistically at the image presented by the entire combination. But when you step back and look at someone wearing an outfit, on the street or in a restaurant or something, the person often looks better wearing fewer patterns. They don't disappear into their patterns.
Levitt probably never wears a square now because he is dead.
Separate names with a comma.