Antonio Liverano, Florentine tailor

[unbelragazzo]



Lets not pretend that the only alternative to showing your ankle and half of your lower leg is having your shoes drowning in cloth.



The shortypants thing is a new (and awful) phenomena on either side of the pond. Looks like the offender outgrew his suit.

His leg is slightly bent, and the hem is still grazing the top of his shoe. If he were standing in perfectly straight robopose, his trousers would probably have a very slight break. This is a broadly accepted length both now and throughout the history of tailored clothing.

 

[archetypal_yuppie]



His leg is slightly bent, and the hem is still grazing the top of his shoe. If he were standing in perfectly straight robopose, his trousers would probably have a very slight break. This is a broadly accepted length both now and throughout the history of tailored clothing.

Let's discuss. 1) As I've suggested before, I don't want to judge clothes only by what they do or would look like in a robopose. Let's also judge them by what they look like when they're being worn. Doesn't that make sense? To me and non-SF/blogger-nuts, those pants look mis-sized in that shot. That he may be able to hide most of his ankle if he stands a certain way does nothing for me. FWIW count me as skeptical that there would be a slight break unless sagged, I'd expect no break, just lower. 2) His right pant leg managed to graze the tip of the "tongue-equivalent(?)" of his loafer. Not the vamp. His left leg has a gulf of sock between his pants and his shoe. While standing fairly normally. If you're sitting down, pacing, etc, I'm just fine with having your ankle show. But a big gap of sock between your shoe and your pants when you're standing normally even if your leg is a little bent make you look like a rube or otherwise poorly dressed. That it is currently a thing in menswear-blog-land, an abberation that has resulted by necessity from the cumpulsion for super-skinny pants, also does nothing for me. You (plural generalized) don't have to agree with me... but if you weren't sucked into this little sliver of internet style group think you'd realize you're not looking all different-superior, you're looking different-bad.

 

[unbelragazzo]

OJFC

 

[archetypal_yuppie]



OJFC

Idunno interent stuff

 

[lordsuperb]

 

[lordsuperb]



Idunno interent stuff

He just shortened the Lord's name in vain.

 

[dieworkwear]



Let's discuss.

1) As I've suggested before, I don't want to judge clothes only by what they do or would look like in a robopose. Let's also judge them by what they look like when they're being worn. Doesn't that make sense? To me and non-SF/blogger-nuts, those pants look mis-sized in that shot. That he may be able to hide most of his ankle if he stands a certain way does nothing for me.

FWIW count me as skeptical that there would be a slight break unless sagged, I'd expect no break, just lower.

2) His right pant leg managed to graze the tip of the "tongue-equivalent(?)" of his loafer. Not the vamp. His left leg has a gulf of sock between his pants and his shoe. While standing fairly normally.

If you're sitting down, pacing, etc, I'm just fine with having your ankle show. But a big gap of sock between your shoe and your pants when you're standing normally even if your leg is a little bent make you look like a rube or otherwise poorly dressed.

That it is currently a thing in menswear-blog-land, an abberation that has resulted by necessity from the cumpulsion for super-skinny pants, also does nothing for me.

You (plural generalized) don't have to agree with me... but if you weren't sucked into this little sliver of internet style group think you'd realize you're not looking all different-superior, you're looking different-bad.

 

[archetypal_yuppie]

Fail / Good / Fail. Sometimes 1/2" can be all it takes...

Awesome episode. If I knew how to do internet stuff I'd reply with a shot of cartman pooing on his mom during the game.

 

[Cantabrigian]



I'm also not a fan of the excessive taper/tightness. But the shortness is just wrong. Too much blogs.

I agree on the trouser length.

But there's nothing tight about that suit.

 

[dieworkwear]



I agree on the trouser length.

But there's nothing tight about that suit.

The leg opening of his pants is a little smaller than what might be considered classic for a suit, which is why I assume it's also cut a little shorter as well. The two often go together for practical and stylistic reasons. Otherwise, you'd ruin the clean line of the leg.

Anyway, as I said in my other post -- before I deleted it -- I think dismissing an obviously great fit over of such a minor issue is the kind of idiotic, missing-the-forest-for-the-trees kind of thing that only happens on internet forums. If you want no break on your trousers, they'll often look a little short anyway depending on whether you wear belts or braces, what kind of shoes you have on that day, and how you're positioned. Chogall criticized yfyf's fit for the same thing, which made me wonder if he's ever had experience with pants at all.

Jake looks great in that photo. Considerably better than most people on here, and I would bet much better than archetypical_yuppie.

 

[DutchW]

^Agreed. I think the armoury guys are some of the best dressed guys on the Internet.

 

[archetypal_yuppie]



I agree on the trouser length.

Yay!

But there's nothing tight about that suit.

I almost agree. I think the legs don't need to be that tapered, such that you have such a small hole at the bottom that you end up with either bunching or high-water nonsense. "Too tight" might not be the right words, maybe "too skinny" would be better.



Since we're on the topic of tightness, the two lower buttons on vest being unbuttoned looks a little weird/sloppy and makes it look like it might be too tight. But I assume it gets a pass here due to sprezz.

 

[archetypal_yuppie]



^Agreed. I think the armoury guys are some of the best dressed guys on the Internet.

Going next level here: On the internet, or for the internet?

 

[archetypal_yuppie]



Anyway, as I said in my other post -- before I deleted it -- I think dismissing an obviously great fit over of such a minor issue is the kind of idiotic, missing-the-forest-for-the-trees kind of thing that only happens on internet forums.

This is just a difference of opinion. I don't think it's minor. I think it takes something otherwise great and ruins it.

Jake looks great in that photo. Considerably better than most people on here, and I would bet much better than archetypical_yuppie.

You have 0.0% basis for making a judgment on him vs. me, but if it makes you feel better to think so, then enjoy yourself.

 

[DutchW]

Probably both, but maybe even more (like their store). To my knowledge they all seem rather young and are representing a somewhat conservative tailored clothing aesthetic. I think it looks great and I hope it influences and excites other young people like it has for me.