Guys, how many of you can honestly tell if somebody is wearing a quality suit?

[poorsod]

I agree that cost doesn't necessarily equate to looking good.

Going though the pics.

1) Hugo Boss coat is too short.

2) Brioni is pretty good but I don't like the slick material.

3) Isaia. The coat is ok but the pants are a bit of a mess.

4) Brioni for Brosnan. Best of the lot. I like the DB vest.

5) J Crew looks pretty good on the model but their coats never fit my shoulders right IRL.

6) Brioni for Brosnan. A true 3 button isn't my style. But this picture of it is better

http://www.bonhams.com/auctions/15337/lot/175/

 

[VinnyMac]

To be honest with you, every suit in those pictures looks like shxt. Some of them look a little less shxtty than the rest, but I'd be very disappointed with all of them.

 

[spidercan]



Nobody really picked the OPs pics apart though, which tells me that most of us can't tell by just quickly looking.

I'll post the correct answers to the photos in a few days. Oh and editing the original post, it was not my intention for this to be a "does price=quality thread".

 

[FlyingMonkey]

I'll post the correct answers to the photos in a few days. Oh and editing the original post, it was not my intention for this to be a "does price=quality thread".

The most interesting threads often develop in ways that the OP did not intend.

 

[spidercan]



The most interesting threads often develop in ways that the OP did not intend.

It's developed in the way I intended it to, but the title may be misleading so it was corrected.

 

[MyOtherLife]

For the benefit of newcomers..
I would wager that if we could get all the ballers in here to go to Target and buy a complete outfit, they'd probably be able to demonstrate that a low end suit, shirt, tie, belt, shoes & socks can look passable, though not for as many wearings as those made of higher quality materials. Fit is always number one priority, then fabrics, colours, textures and patterns that compliment the wearers build and skin tones. Then comfort. Most people at a glance, would probably never know the difference between an expensive suit and a cheap suit, provided both fit well and are not shiny.

 

[MisterFu]

I agree that cost doesn't necessarily equate to looking good.

Going though the pics.

1) Hugo Boss coat is too short.

2) Brioni is pretty good but I don't like the slick material.

3) Isaia. The coat is ok but the pants are a bit of a mess.

4) Brioni for Brosnan. Best of the lot. I like the DB vest.

5) J Crew looks pretty good on the model but their coats never fit my shoulders right IRL.

6) Brioni for Brosnan. A true 3 button isn't my style. But this picture of it is better

http://www.bonhams.com/auctions/15337/lot/175/

Isn't number 1 Joseph Abboud, not Boss? (Not that it makes a difference as either one is overpriced at the 700 bucks Nordstrom's wants for it).

Everything on this list I had figured out pretty quickly except number 3 (the Brioni stuff being easiest). I am surprised at how poor that Isaia suit looks (I thought it was something a lot cheaper).

 

[MisterFu]

For the benefit of newcomers..
I would wager that if we could get all the ballers in here to go to Target and buy a complete outfit, they'd probably be able to demonstrate that a low end suit, shirt, tie, belt, shoes & socks can look passable, though not for as many wearings as those made of higher quality materials. Fit is always number one priority, then fabrics, colours, textures and patterns that compliment the wearers build and skin tones. Then comfort. Most people at a glance, would probably never know the difference between an expensive suit and a cheap suit, provided both fit well and are not shiny.

Everything you say is true. As I said in earlier posts, I have a glued wonder (a really cheap suit) that I do wear on occasion and with alterations and it doesn't look half bad (as long as I don't move my arms around too much). I have even been complimented on two occasions by ordinary people (non SF freaks) on specifically how it fits (though, admittedly, the alterations to get it that way cost more than the suit). Fit does trump construction by a wide margin.

 

[size 38R]

For the benefit of newcomers..
I would wager that if we could get all the ballers in here to go to Target and buy a complete outfit, they'd probably be able to demonstrate that a low end suit, shirt, tie, belt, shoes & socks can look passable, though not for as many wearings as those made of higher quality materials. Fit is always number one priority, then fabrics, colours, textures and patterns that compliment the wearers build and skin tones. Then comfort. Most people at a glance, would probably never know the difference between an expensive suit and a cheap suit, provided both fit well and are not shiny.

you said it. though, i'm pretty sure i could tell across a room, not on a screen.
p.s. - love the odd fit in the op's pics.

 

[jt10000]

Everything you say is true. As I said in earlier posts, I have a glued wonder (a really cheap suit) that I do wear on occasion and with alterations and it doesn't look half bad (as long as I don't move my arms around too much). I have even been complimented on two occasions by ordinary people (non SF freaks) on specifically how it fits (though, admittedly, the alterations to get it that way cost more than the suit). Fit does trump construction by a wide margin.

I'm not a high-end guy, and have gotten compliments on cheap suits (Uniqlo) I've had tailored and that fit well. By average people here in New York City.

Also got compliments on suit I now think looks not-so-good, so maybe the people I know don't know much. But still.....

 

[Dempsy444]



For the benefit of newcomers..
I would wager that if we could get all the ballers in here to go to Target and buy a complete outfit, they'd probably be able to demonstrate that a low end suit, shirt, tie, belt, shoes & socks can look passable, though not for as many wearings as those made of higher quality materials. Fit is always number one priority, then fabrics, colours, textures and patterns that compliment the wearers build and skin tones. Then comfort. Most people at a glance, would probably never know the difference between an expensive suit and a cheap suit, provided both fit well and are not shiny.

I'm inclined to agree that fit is the most important element followed by the cloth, as I usually notice fit first and cloth second. Maybe it is in my imagination but I tend to notice the fit of the shoulders on a suit and it seems most cheap suits have bad shoulders, like too much padding or just an unnatural look to them. I've certainly seen bespoke suits that also have relatively poor shoulders but if the shoulders look really good and very well fitted to the owner, I'm inclined to chalk that up as a pretty expensive bespoke suit.

Other elements that give away a cheap suit for me are thin plastic buttons, bad buttonhole stitching.

 

[Ivar]



For the benefit of newcomers..
I would wager that if we could get all the ballers in here to go to Target and buy a complete outfit, they'd probably be able to demonstrate that a low end suit, shirt, tie, belt, shoes & socks can look passable, though not for as many wearings as those made of higher quality materials. Fit is always number one priority, then fabrics, colours, textures and patterns that compliment the wearers build and skin tones. Then comfort. Most people at a glance, would probably never know the difference between an expensive suit and a cheap suit, provided both fit well and are not shiny.

This is my contention, as well. Although I would add that these photographs are more misleading than the novice probably realizes. First of all, they are highly edited, which reduces the observable difference between the different cuts and cloths. Second, these photographs are two-dimensional stills, which means (1) that it's hard to gauge how the different elements relate in the 3D spectrum, and (2) that it's impossible to see how the cloths drape in motion. The last part in particular greatly affects how a garment is perceived in real life, yet it's sadly overlooked when people talk about clothes online.

 

[Thanks SF (a new me)]

since discovering the Forum, I can honestly say it has changed the way I look at clothing, not in terms of pricing, but rather a better appreciation of fit, silhouette, texture, and quality. From time to time, my wife and I will discuss fashion and style in general. Last week , while watching some random TV show, she mentioned that the host' suit has a collar gap. I lol'd. I guess too much SF talk from me....

 

[CrimsonSox]

I would agree with RDiaz that the cheaply made suit gives itself away in motion. The chest and lapels are glued, and the prefabricated shoulder pads are rigid. The jacket does not move smoothly with the body, but stands stiffly away from it.



I had the same reaction to that grey fused suit:



Not all expensively made suits are well-constructed, but those that are have soft, hand-sewn collars and lapels. The shoulders are more natural, and the chests more flexible. The garment is held together by stitching, not by fusing. As Luciano Barbera says, you should be able to play golf in your suit. If you look at Slewfoot's pictures of his Steed sportscoat by Edwin DeBoise, there are a few where Slewfoot is running in a backyard, kicking a ball. His jacket collar and shoulders move fluidly with him.




So why do cheaply made suits sometimes look good online or in a catalog? It's because the shots are standing still, the jackets are pinned, and the pictures are photoshopped (as a friend who edits pictures for a catalog tells me):



I say cheaply made, because some suits have low-end construction, but high-end prices. But, what about fit? Can't a well made suit be poorly fitted? Yes, but good construction makes it possible for a suit to fit well in motion; it does not guarantee a good fit. It's like how fuel makes a fire possible, but you also need oxygen and heat for the fire to start.