The Oxford-Shoe-Worn-Casually Appreciation Thread

[dieworkwear]

With most of these outfits, someone could always drop by and make a reasonable case that the outfit 'would look better with twills', like maybe a sweet cavalry twill or whipcord or moleskin even.

You don't often hear someone make that case, though.

But they wouldn't necessarily look better with twills.

 

[acapaca]

You can't really tell anything in these types of photos. They function as product shots.

Oh, I think you do get enough of a sense to start forming some opinions, even if just from the knee down. Think about what you already know, in any such case. A shoe's last says a lot about it, right? (I mean, it's part of the 'language' of dress.) Its material does as well. The condition it's in, as in whether it's beaten up or not, mirror shined or matte, etc. These are all semantic features. Often the pants/jeans or whatever it is that sits above the shoe gives something away as well, meaning you can spot right away the difference between frayed jeans and fresco. The sentence's meaning is starting to form.

In other words, even from such a shot you can often get a sense of where the outfit is, or may be, going. (In fact, you can often make a good guess about what comes up top!) Isn't it also a salient feature we talk about a lot when we talk about these things, how versatile an item is? Does that sportcoat go with different trouser fabrics, or is its range narrow...could you throw on a sweater with that lower half just as easily as a navy blazer...that kind of thing.

But yes, of course you get much more information when you see it all. Me, I feel like you're even getting an incomplete picture when you can't see the person's face. Especially the eyes. Much like George Bush and Vladimir Putin, you want to really see into the person's soul.

 

[acapaca]

But they wouldn't necessarily look better with twills.

You don't say...

 

[dieworkwear]

Oh, I think you do get enough of a sense to start forming some opinions, even if just from the knee down. Think about what you already know, in any such case. A shoe's last says a lot about it, right? (I mean, it's part of the 'language' of dress.) Its material does as well. The condition it's in, as in whether it's beaten up or not, mirror shined or matte, etc. These are all semantic features. Often the pants/jeans or whatever it is that sits above the shoe gives something away as well, meaning you can spot right away the difference between frayed jeans and fresco. The sentence's meaning is starting to form.

In other words, even from such a shot you can often get a sense of where the outfit is, or may be, going. (In fact, you can often make a good guess about what comes up top!) Isn't it also a salient feature we talk about a lot when we talk about these things, how versatile an item is? Does that sportcoat go with different trouser fabrics, or is its range narrow...could you throw on a sweater with that lower half just as easily as a navy blazer...that kind of thing.

But yes, of course you get much more information when you see it all. Me, I feel like you're even getting an incomplete picture when you can't see the person's face. Especially the eyes. Much like George Bush and Vladimir Putin, you want to really see into the person's soul.

I personally don't get anything more out of a shoe + pant cuff photo than I do out of a shoe product photo. I think it's basically the same as "watch guys" posting a photo of their watch. It's a specific photography format aimed at a certain community that's interested in a specific kind of object, so the photo is more about the object rather than the idea of creating outfits.

 

[acapaca]

I personally don't get anything more out of a shoe + pant cuff photo than I do out of a shoe product photo. I think it's basically the same as "watch guys" posting a photo of their watch. It's a specific photography format aimed at a certain community that's interested in a specific kind of object, so the photo is more about the object rather than the idea of creating outfits.

I think there is a natural connection between shoe and pant, in a more robust way than between watch and shirt/jacket cuff. There is also, though it's true it wouldn't show up in all such shots, a meaningful difference between shoes that have had some life experience to them, worn on the foot, and pristine uncreased versions propped up under studio lighting.

There is a gulf -- and I mean a gulf -- between weathered waxy suede boots and frayed jeans and weathered waxy suede boots and crisp creased trousers. A gulf. You can get that right away from a picture. If you aren't actively trying not to, that is. (Well, actually, you'd have to get it in that case even if you were actively trying not to, but you get what I mean.)

 

[dieworkwear]

I think there is a natural connection between shoe and pant, in a more robust way than between watch and shirt/jacket cuff. There is also, though it's true it wouldn't show up in all such shots, a meaningful difference between shoes that have had some life experience to them, worn on the foot, and pristine uncreased versions propped up under studio lighting.

There is a gulf -- and I mean a gulf -- between weathered waxy suede boots and frayed jeans and weathered waxy suede boots and crisp creased trousers. A gulf. You can get that right away from a picture. If you aren't actively trying not to, that is. (Well, actually, you'd have to get it in that case even if you were actively trying not to, but you get what I mean.)

I suppose? I guess I just don't get that much out of the photo. ?‍♂️

 

[Sirguywhosmiles]

Probably shouldn't have brought it up - just because he has always expressed much more prejudice for his background coming from that side of the pond than this one.

I would also like to clarify, when I said "you" I didn't specifically mean you-Sirguywhosmiles, I meant "you" more as general British citizen who might read this. Just echoing his sentiments expressed to me.

Anyway, probably generally poorly considered, and was typed while in a hurry at a coffee shop. Apologies if offense was given.

No worries-nuance can be hard to pick up online.

 

['patanoster]

To weigh in on the loafers in the UK debate...

As someone who lives in London, and spends a lot of time looking at other people's shoes on the underground most days, @yorkshire pud 's intuition is right, even from the distant climes of Yorkshire.

I'm also of a generation where most people are wearing something like NB or vans on their day to day. Even in the civil service, where I work -- albeit not in the heady senior heights -- the most common 'smart' shoe around are probably Clarks Batcombe brogues. Not that the civil service is a particularly fashionable institution. If I see someone wearing loafers, depending on what else they are wearing, I'll think they are either a mens fashion guy or an estate agent from Chingford.

Which is not to say that there aren't some around, but they don't feel that common. I've only been to America once years ago, so have no way of knowing if they are more or less common than over there.

 

[Stylewords]

To weigh in on the loafers in the UK debate...

As someone who lives in London, and spends a lot of time looking at other people's shoes on the underground most days, @yorkshire pud 's intuition is right, even from the distant climes of Yorkshire.

I'm also of a generation where most people are wearing something like NB or vans on their day to day. Even in the civil service, where I work -- albeit not in the heady senior heights -- the most common 'smart' shoe around are probably Clarks Batcombe brogues. Not that the civil service is a particularly fashionable institution. If I see someone wearing loafers, depending on what else they are wearing, I'll think they are either a mens fashion guy or an estate agent from Chingford.

Which is not to say that there aren't some around, but they don't feel that common. I've only been to America once years ago, so have no way of knowing if they are more or less common than over there.

Yes, you're right. I think it's been clearly established that loafers are not worn much in the UK, and if they are, they are viewed somewhat suspiciously.
And what else have you discovered about shoes in your underground research?

 

['patanoster]

Yes, you're right. I think it's been clearly established that loafers are not worn much in the UK, and if they are, they are viewed somewhat suspiciously.
And what else have you discovered about shoes in your underground research?

Trainers are getting uglier and not enough men wear cuban heels

 

[yorkshire pud]

I like Alden's LHS with jeans

View attachment 1690038 View attachment 1690039 View attachment 1690040

That first outfit, I like the coat jeans the knit and the scarf, it looks a cohesive cold weather outfit, but he has then made the mistake of pairing it with a Mercedes Baseball cap which I have noticed before in another of these "high fashion" pics, and then apparently forgot to put his winter boots on!!

Second outfit, Nice Jacket and Shirt Combo. "Jeans and Mankles" ruin the outfit unfortunately. Save the beat up cuffed jeans for an outfit that works.

Why make your legs look short!!!

Both outfits ruined by "fashion" for me I'm afraid.

If those Guys are wearing Mercedes Caps to signify that they drive one, it's the most ridiculous thing I have noticed on SF BTW (I'm guessing they aren't F1 fans)

 

[yorkshire pud]

To weigh in on the loafers in the UK debate...

As someone who lives in London, and spends a lot of time looking at other people's shoes on the underground most days, @yorkshire pud 's intuition is right, even from the distant climes of Yorkshire.

I'm also of a generation where most people are wearing something like NB or vans on their day to day. Even in the civil service, where I work -- albeit not in the heady senior heights -- the most common 'smart' shoe around are probably Clarks Batcombe brogues. Not that the civil service is a particularly fashionable institution. If I see someone wearing loafers, depending on what else they are wearing, I'll think they are either a mens fashion guy or an estate agent from Chingford.

Which is not to say that there aren't some around, but they don't feel that common. I've only been to America once years ago, so have no way of knowing if they are more or less common than over there.

Thanks for the kind words ?

I've spent a little bit of time in the USA (American Wife) and it's definitely one of the things I have noticed that has been "lost in translation" between us and our Cousins in the States.

 

[Cause Moe]

I suppose? I guess I just don't get that much out of the photo. ?‍♂️

Yet you obsess over a just a few square centimeters of the shoes. Hmmm.

 

[klawso9]

I like Alden's LHS with jeans

View attachment 1690038 View attachment 1690039 View attachment 1690040

This I can get with. I'd say the same for the AE Randolph in shell.

 

[mak1277]

This I can get with. I'd say the same for the AE Randolph in shell.

Personally think suede loafers go better with jeans than shiny calf or shell, but I'm not opposed to either.