HOF: What Are You Wearing Right Now - Part IV (starting May 2014)

[Andy57]

Of course you think so. All your jackets could double as overcoats

Kidding, kidding.

For my money, the most important part to evaluate would be how the jacket looks in relation to your backside. If it's properly covered, you're good to go.

This.

^ Interesting that these "jacket is the right length" folks are eschewing the common barometers of proper length, namely these three:

1) The "bisecting" rule. The jacket should approximately split the body in half. Yours does not. Your upper half (as delineated by your coat hem) is quite obviously greater than your lower half.

2) The "thumb" rule. This is only a rule of thumb (no pun intended), of course. But it works 95% of the time, and I see no reason why it shouldn't work for you. The rule states that the jacket should align with the first knuckle of the thumb (going upward from the nail). By this rule, your jacket should be about 1.5" shorter. This is rather significant, especially for someone of short stature.

3) The overall look. Just looking at you, your jacket length makes your legs look short. Refer to 1) above. So again, I say your jacket is too long, and I'd like to see the above posters support their conclusions with reasoning.

The only metric that I care about is does the jacket cover ****** and my crotch? If not, then the jacket is too damn short. Don't care at all about your other rules.

 

[justinkapur]



This.


The only metric that I care about is does the jacket cover ****** and my crotch? If not, then the jacket is too damn short. Don't care at all about your other rules.

This bugs the hell out of me when a crotch isnt covered by a jacket. You could say it drives me nuts

 

[Andy57]

This bugs the hell out of me when a crotch isnt covered by a jacket. You could say it drives me nuts

 

[jcmeyer]

Hey-ooohhh!

 

[llamaone]



This jacket seems longer than most of your normal jackets but I always feel its good to have some sort of variety within the wardrobe. Its nice to have some more modern/shorter jackets and then some more traditional lengths. In this case I like the length a lot. I dont think it needs to be shortened

I don't see the logic/reasoning behind having different jacket length's for variety's sake. Would you also have a variety of sleeve lengths? No. There's an ideal length in both cases, and there's no reason to stray from it.

Once you find the correct jacket length for you, stick to it. I can understand a tolerance of say +/- 1 cm (since 1 cm won't make that much of a difference, visually speaking, and allows you to acquire otherwise excellent fitting jackets if the length is only slightly off), but I see no reason to purposefully get jackets of noticeably different lengths. YMMV.

 

[justinkapur]



I don't see the logic/reasoning behind having different jacket length's for variety's sake. Would you also have a variety of sleeve lengths? No. There's an ideal length in both cases, and there's no reason to stray from it.

Once you find the correct jacket length for you, stick to it. I can understand a tolerance of say +/- 1 cm (since 1 cm won't make that much of a difference, visually speaking, and allows you to acquire otherwise excellent fitting jackets if the length is only slightly off), but I see no reason to purposefully get jackets of noticeably different lengths. YMMV.

Do you have a wardrobe that consists of entirely one manufacturer? Im guessing no. Therefore you accept that different nuances from each manufacturer. Im not saying that there should be a vast difference but there can be a difference in length and it should be embraced instead of trying to get your entire wardrobe to be the exact same BOC length

 

[llamaone]



This.


The only metric that I care about is does the jacket cover ****** and my crotch? If not, then the jacket is too damn short. Don't care at all about your other rules.

Ohh.. kay? So by your logic, a jacket that reaches the knees is perfectly acceptable? After all, it covers your ass and crotch, right?

There needs to be "rules" for both upper and lower limits. Or more simply, rules that simply simply give you the right length, as the three that I mentioned above do.

 

[llamaone]



Do you have a wardrobe that consists of entirely one manufacturer? Im guessing no. Therefore you accept that different nuances from each manufacturer. Im not saying that there should be a vast difference but there can be a difference in length and it should be embraced instead of trying to get your entire wardrobe to be the exact same BOC length

Of course I don't. Which is why I said +/- 1 cm (or even more or someone who is particularly tall) is fine. But to purposely seek to acquire jackets of obviously different lengths, just for the sake of "variety", seems odd to me.

 

[Andy57]

I think @justinkapur made his point. And if that's how he wishes to build his wardrobe, I don't see an issue. It's not how I would go about it and I'd probably tell him if I thought a jacket was too short. But that's how it goes: we all have opinions, but in the end, for each of us, there is only one that counts.

Ohh.. kay? So by your logic, a jacket that reaches the knees is perfectly acceptable? After all, it covers your ass and crotch, right?

There needs to be "rules" for both upper and lower limits. Or more simply, rules that simply simply give you the right length, as the three that I mentioned above do.

Don't be an idiot.

 

[justinkapur]



Of course I don't. Which is why I said +/- 1 cm (or even more or someone who is particularly tall) is fine. But to purposely seek to acquire jackets of obviously different lengths, just for the sake of "variety", seems odd to me.

Im sorry you are taking this way to literally. I dont actively search for different lengths on my jackets. I guess ill agree with @Andy57 and say dont be an idiot.

 

[llamaone]



Don't be an idiot.

I'm not. Just taking you at your word.

 

[llamaone]



Im sorry you are taking this way to literally. I dont actively search for different lengths on my jackets. I guess ill agree with @Andy57 and say dont be an idiot.

Perhaps I'm taking you too literally, but how else was I supposed to interpret...

...I always feel its good to have some sort of variety within the wardrobe. Its nice to have some more modern/shorter jackets and then some more traditional lengths.

Did I misconstrue anything you said?

 

[Coxsackie]

Actually I'm siding with @llamaone on this. His cited rules are well-known and accepted, and his arguments are sound.

I would also prefer to see @jcmeyer 's jacket about 3cm shorter. But I don't think it's a dealbreaker.

 

[justinkapur]



Do you have a wardrobe that consists of entirely one manufacturer? Im guessing no. Therefore you accept that different nuances from each manufacturer. Im not saying that there should be a vast difference but there can be a difference in length and it should be embraced instead of trying to get your entire wardrobe to be the exact same BOC length

Perhaps I'm taking you too literally, but how else was I supposed to interpret...
Did I misconstrue anything you said?

Hopefully this answers your question

 

[ericgereghty]



^ Interesting that these "jacket is the right length" folks are eschewing the common barometers of proper length, namely these three:

1) The "bisecting" rule. The jacket should approximately split the body in half. Yours does not. Your upper half (as delineated by your coat hem) is quite obviously greater than your lower half.

2) The "thumb" rule. This is only a rule of thumb (no pun intended), of course. But it works 95% of the time, and I see no reason why it shouldn't work for you. The rule states that the jacket should align with the first knuckle of the thumb (going upward from the nail). By this rule, your jacket should be about 1.5" shorter. This is rather significant, especially for someone of short stature.

3) The overall look. Just looking at you, your jacket length makes your legs look short. Refer to 1) above. So again, I say your jacket is too long, and I'd like to see the above posters support their conclusions with reasoning.

Only because I like to argue:

1) the bisecting rule will naturally, if rigidly adhered to, create oddities in a look on someone who has a seriously wonky shape, as JC admits to having. In this case, i think he'd (lord knows I would) be happier being wrong than adhering to this rule.
2) thumb rule is another terrible one in this case, I'd argue. If applied to myself, I'd probably have at least 25% of ****** popping out from under my jacket when standing at ease, and probably 50ish% when in movement. Complete non-starter in my case, and I think JC would have a similar result if he took the 1.5" approach.
3) the look test in my view is your best argument, which is a rather backhanded compliment.

At the end of the day, I don't think it's going out on a limb to say the first two points, while lovely in theory, don't jive at all when put to practice, at least in this case.

Here is my rationale for keeping status quo:

I do like the way it looks. So, my only argument is the opposite of the best argument, yet neither is anything beyond subjective.

It's certainly fine to disagree, but let's not pretend like one side of this debate has a legitimate leg to stand on beyond opinion.