• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Pit Fashion Thread

Here's some more looks from the 20s and 30s as well:



1920sjazz_suit.jpg
 
I dig the 3-piece suit look. Really wish I had a reason to wear them more often.
 
Thanks vad. I hoped you'd come through with visual evidence, i was having trouble with gis.
 
Late to this high hem tailored look conversation, but one important piece of this is that you MUST have nice (looking) shoes to pull this off. You can't do this with scuffed, worn, clunky shoes. They gots to shine and look sharp.

As for the tie convo, IMO there is nothing wrong with spending $125 on a tie. Sometimes, for something you really like, the price is the price.
 
vadimivich said:
That's the classic men's look if you are fairly athletically built. It's possible to take it too far, and then yes - it looks clownish ... but wearing your hem down the sole of your shoe? Jesus. You might as well put on a fucking burlap sack and call it a day (to be fair, that's what men in the US effectively did for about 20-25 years, and it was hideous).
Click to expand...

and here's part of the problem. this ONLY works on guys who are very slim. on everybody else, it looks AWFUL (kind of like skinny jeans on bigger girls). honestly, even on slim guys it looks like they outgrew their pants and never bothered to get them altered. but a couple of those guys look nice (kennedy). age them about 10 years though, when they've probably put on 10 or so pounds, and they would look terrible in the same style. straight leg pants with a slight break at the top of the shoe are a more classic look that work for a wider range of guys.
 
Last edited:
AnonymousDeac said:
Eh, I'm not saying owning a $125 tie is silly, I'm just saying if you're smart, you can buy $125 ties for a fraction of the price. And I'm not talking about Men's Wearhouse fake discounts or anything.

Gilt, HauteLook, etc.
Click to expand...

Sure, but if I find a tie that looks great with a few of my shirts or jackets (along with white and light blue), I'm better off dropping $100 on the tie in the store than scouring websites for weeks waiting for something appropriate to appear for $45.
 
DeacHoops said:
and here's part of the problem. this ONLY works on guys who are very slim. on everybody else, it looks AWFUL (kind of like skinny jeans on bigger girls). honestly, even on slim guys it looks like they outgrew their pants and never bothered to get them altered. but a couple of those guys look nice (kennedy). age them about 10 years though, when they've probably put on 10 or so pounds, and they would look terrible in the same style. straight leg pants with a slight break at the top of the shoe are a more classic look that work for a wider range of guys.
Click to expand...

Kennedy's probably about 40 years old in that picture during Eisenhower's second term. Age him by ten years and maybe he's starting to turn into a fat slob like Ted, especially when you consider his physical problems, but most of the dudes on this thread are well under 35.
 
I want to know where hoops has seen these fashionable fat men undermining business casual.
 
I usually a wear a full break if I'm having a pair of khakis hemmed as they may shrink a bit. Otherwise I go with the slight break.
 
This is subjective and I don't care what is trendy; my pants will always have at least a slight break. I try to get my pants to break about like that picture of Connery above.
 
deacphan said:
I want to know where hoops has seen these fashionable fat men undermining business casual.
Click to expand...

Seriously. WGAF what 50 year old conservative dudes who never leave the office wear. Some people equate business casual with a suit with no tie or a sportcoat, dress shirt, and gabardine slacks (no tie). I barely even see the point of having a business casual environment if you expect men to spend as much on clothes as they would on a few suits, while giving them a greater challenge when shopping and getting dressed.

These guys think super casual is an ovesized golf shirt with a pair of jeans.
 
wfudkn said:
Late to this high hem tailored look conversation, but one important piece of this is that you MUST have nice (looking) shoes to pull this off. You can't do this with scuffed, worn, clunky shoes. They gots to shine and look sharp.

As for the tie convo, IMO there is nothing wrong with spending $125 on a tie. Sometimes, for something you really like, the price is the price.
Click to expand...

Also late to this conversation, but I'm not a fan of pants without any break in them. I much prefer a slight/quarter break, like this:
pt3-trousers.jpg


And I agree 100% with dkn; nice shoes become a requirement when the hem is shortened.
 
leftcoastdeac said:
And I agree 100% with dkn; nice shoes become a requirement when the hem is shortened.
Click to expand...

I'd argue that solid shoes are a requirement, period. It's the one item of apparel you wear the most, and it directly effects your comfort more than any other as well. Good, solid shoes that you care for are a long term investment and the single best place to start a business wardrobe with.
 
HeavyPetter said:
Kennedy's probably about 40 years old in that picture during Eisenhower's second term. Age him by ten years and maybe he's starting to turn into a fat slob like Ted, especially when you consider his physical problems, but most of the dudes on this thread are well under 35.
Click to expand...

He's president elect in that photo - so he's 44.

There's no reason to look like a slob, unless you are a slob. In which case, clothes are the least of your issues. Hit the damn gym, go for a run, etc
 
ha, fair enough. if your argument is that people shouldn't be fat in the first place, so therefore everybody should be able to wear slim fit stuff, that's fine. i guess i'm just saying that business casual, in my opinion, is a very classic look (or should be), and should work for a wide variety of sizes, not just the super slim guys. i also think that good business clothes should be able to be worn for several years (never super trendy). i believe that about women's fashion too. you can put a little more money into classic looks for work, because you'll be able to wear them for years. turn your pants into high-waters with bright colored socks, and it becomes a one-season trend. in my opinion, trendy stuff doesn't belong in the office. (also, i don't doubt that it's different in europe, which is obviously known for being more fashion-forward than america.)
 
vadimivich said:
He's president elect in that photo - so he's 44.

There's no reason to look like a slob, unless you are a slob. In which case, clothes are the least of your issues. Hit the damn gym, go for a run, etc
Click to expand...

43 actually; but close enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top