STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.
Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.
Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!
Styleforum is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.
You good, Donatella era ****
**** I left it behind I gotta go back first thing in the morningYou good, Donatella era ****
Canon lens is a great find.Gonna get that boom boom pow
The Canon mug I've been wanting since they came out but been too cheap af
@Dirt any deetz on the 501?
View attachment 1205539 View attachment 1205540 View attachment 1205541 View attachment 1205542
View attachment 1205543
FWIW, here are some pics of my vintage pair that I thrifted few years back that are very similar to your pair. What’s the deal with the lens gap on yours? Are they prescription lenses that they couldn’t match the shape of the frame or something?The Carrera quest continues!
Authentication questions/hopeful small brag ensues. Please unspoiler only if interested:
So after after seeing so many of these posted, I won these almost by accident. (Low bid on an auction that ended mid-weekday. I forgot about it until an email told me I’d won).
They arrived with a vintage dust bag, but no info on the temples. The seller would accept a return, and offered that he bought them in 1987 (the same year they started appearing on Miami Vice, I noted) from a respectable optometrist who mostly sold B&L stuff. He assumed they were real.
The same pair is sold online (and also on eBay and Etsy) from what looks like a reputable vintage sunglasses place. Their model(s) have white printed markings on the temple that are beginning to flake away. (On one, a good deal of the ‘Carrera’ logo and stripes are washed away, too). I wonder if the model number, etc could similarly be wiped away on the ones I bought. I can’t tell any difference otherwise. Maybe someone will see something that sticks out...
I can’t tell if any of these things are vintage, good quality knock-offs or the real deal.
My concern is mostly just wanting to know I have the correct shape, as I’ve never seen another pair in person.
From an apparently reputable seller:
View attachment 1205227 View attachment 1205228
View attachment 1205199 View attachment 1205200 View attachment 1205201
The ones I bought:
View attachment 1205202 View attachment 1205203 View attachment 1205204 View attachment 1205205 View attachment 1205206 View attachment 1205207 View attachment 1205208 View attachment 1205209
I'm guessing they're like that for models that get sold with interchangeable lenses. @HansderHund will have the answer though.FWIW, here are some pics of my vintage pair that I thrifted few years back that are very similar to your pair. What’s the deal with the lens gap on yours? Are they prescription lenses that they couldn’t match the shape of the frame or something?
FWIW, here are some pics of my vintage pair that I thrifted few years back that are very similar to your pair. What’s the deal with the lens gap on yours? Are they prescription lenses that they couldn’t match the shape of the frame or something?
Thanks! That’s really cool. They look like they’re in great shape, too.
That lens gap is present in a lot of pairs for some reason; I’m not really sure why.
Here’s an epic pic of the lens gap (and also a good case for putting in some gradient lenses):
View attachment 1205604
@HansderHund thanks for the bridge bag info, I left one a couple of days ago, not as nice as yours and smaller(twss). I thought it felt good and hurriedly looked up another name it had on the inside but didn’t search ‘the bridge’ DOH, will have to go back in the morning and see if it’s still there
I did and it was!
View attachment 1204308
The Carrera quest continues!
Authentication questions/hopeful small brag ensues. Please unspoiler only if interested:
So after after seeing so many of these posted, I won these almost by accident. (Low bid on an auction that ended mid-weekday. I forgot about it until an email told me I’d won).
They arrived with a vintage dust bag, but no info on the temples. The seller would accept a return, and offered that he bought them in 1987 (the same year they started appearing on Miami Vice, I noted) from a respectable optometrist who mostly sold B&L stuff. He assumed they were real.
The same pair is sold online (and also on eBay and Etsy) from what looks like a reputable vintage sunglasses place. Their model(s) have white printed markings on the temple that are beginning to flake away. (On one, a good deal of the ‘Carrera’ logo and stripes are washed away, too). I wonder if the model number, etc could similarly be wiped away on the ones I bought. I can’t tell any difference otherwise. Maybe someone will see something that sticks out...
I can’t tell if any of these things are vintage, good quality knock-offs or the real deal.
My concern is mostly just wanting to know I have the correct shape, as I’ve never seen another pair in person.
From an apparently reputable seller:
View attachment 1205227 View attachment 1205228
View attachment 1205199 View attachment 1205200 View attachment 1205201
The ones I bought:
View attachment 1205202 View attachment 1205203 View attachment 1205204 View attachment 1205205 View attachment 1205206 View attachment 1205207 View attachment 1205208 View attachment 1205209
I'm guessing they're like that for models that get sold with interchangeable lenses. @HansderHund will have the answer though.
Noob the glasses are legit,that fading on the inner arm is quite common on the metal arm models I've seen it many times .however if I were u I would hold out a pair with the script still intact .
Or give me till the weekend,I think I have a pair with similar lens shape but without the lenses so you could swap those in.they are in mint condition but black with white accent.i can get a pic on Saturday when I drop by my storage .also i have like thirty pairs of sunglasses to post I think.at least.
Am I the only one here thinking the valuations on some of these are a bit... optimistic? I suppose sotheby's draws a clientele to whom price is irrelevant. Those Jeter 11's are possibly the most beautiful sneaker i've ever laid eyes on though.