Raw denim VS Treated denim

[Tyrol]

.........................

[Geowu]

No distressed denim looks as good as a naturally worn one. So I go for the raw, and I'm starting to think it looks good being new, dry and shiny.

[Teddy Boy Rocker]

i've always been into the raw/dry look. i dont like the extensive distressing that happens to jeans, even when it is done so naturally over time. that is why i am in the very small minority that dry cleans jeans to keep them as close to new/dry looking as possible.

[Aotearoa]

I actually like a combination of both. So I'm happy with a pair of worn jeans and a pair of raw jeans as they are.

[rhythmandsound]

i love raw jeans and also like naturally-worn-in jeans

[Mateo22]

naturally worn denim is the best because each jean has so much charector. No two jeans will wear the same. I do however like distressed washes. Some of the companies out there do a good job. The washes need to look nautral. I hate when companies put distressed marks in areas on the denim that would never occur.

[wild_whiskey]

I like the raw denim look but only for a day or so, then I'm ready for the worn jeans again. Of course, naturally worn is preferred, but sometimes it's a bit out of reach. The problem is sticking with one pair long enough to get them really worn in, and then actually liking the wear you get from them.

[ringring]

I like both. I'm interested in jeans in general so dry denim (the milling process) is like half the equation. Washing is the other.

History, Dry/Wet, hand distressing, stones, chemical cocktails, speed...the laundrymans' art is complex and fascinating.

[r2]

i'm with you tyrol. i hate the dry look. i only bought my nudies dry to get the benefit in a years time. truth is, 3 months in, i shamefully gave up and sold them - 3 months and not a mark on them - when you can't wear them every day, its too damn hard. if you get a pair with enough distress so you're happy to wear them out all the time - and then you don't wash them, you can still get very good wear and it looks natural enough.

pre-washed is better for me, but as everyone says, the manufacturers are clueless - massive bleach marks across the knees and backs of legs look like shit.

finding a good pre-washed look is the holy grail for me - i think you dry jeans fiends have it easy. there's loads to choose from. pre-washed, there's nothing, they mostly suck.

anyone know of a quality / pre-wash distress make?

[velvetant]

Levis-Red Tab-511 (skinny fit)

very subtle markings, soft denim.......

[leviathan]

r2, in my view the 45rpm and Yohji Yamamoto jeans that spotted horsecraft wash are about as realistic as you can get. ££££ though.

I have exactly the saem issue with raw denims - great idea in theory to get the authentic worn in look, just about impossible in practice. I'm trying a different tack with my 44 repros - wearing as much as i Can (which is not everyday) and washing every few weeks rather than minimal washing. I don't really know what this will turn out like, but we'll see.

[r2]

funny you mention that - i did something even more shameful (may as well get it all off my chest) - i paid an unemployed mate of mine to wear a pair for 6 months.. worked out quite well.

thanks for the tips, i'll take a look.

if anyone is thinking of speeding up the wearing process (not on quality jeans, but a pair i wasn't much keen on anyway) - i have used a pumice stone followed by a hot wash, and repeated this process, 5 or 6 times. worked perfectly. much better than sandpaper.

[darknworn]

r2 - care you post a picture?