Discussion Thread 6/16: The Fit Bias

[Servo2000]

Welcome to the first discussion thread thus far. Let's see how this goes. I'm thinking that perhaps this was not necessarily a great first topic as I don't personally see too many people arguing against my view as 'fit' is such an all-consuming concept here at SuFu, although I personally would be very pleased to be proven wrong. This is a work in progress and I may modify the original post to include new ideas and new questions that arise.

The Fit Bias

Fade to Black recently mentioned that he, at times, willingly buys pieces of clothing that knows don't "Fit" 100%. His reasons are more practical than philosophical, but it seems to go against a singularly ingrained mentality that "fit" is king in fashion.

Is it reasonable to buy something simply for the feel of the piece, for the design in it, or the abstract "meaning" behind it, even if the fit is less-than-perfect?

The average "What Are You Wearing Today" poster is essentially judged on how well his clothes fit, and then secondarily how the pieces themselves are assembled and chosen and why. Is this always fitting? (pun not necessarily intended)

If a piece of clothing fails to flatter body, is it inherently worse than one that does, no matter how well-designer or (unlikely, but still possibly) "meaningful?"

My view: Fashion is primarily design and the end product to keep in mind is obviously the human body, and there is no getting around that. Consequently, I would argue that fit should still come before design, as if we examine it the other way around, we find that we are essentially arguing for concept before execution, which could be a valid argument, but is not one which I agree with at this point in time.

Your 2 cents, please.

[Pandemonium]

fit is much more important in comparison to design.

yes, design is a large deciding factor, but if the product in general does not piece well with the body of the buyer, then so too, the design won't be as aesthetically appealing as if it were placed on a model that the product was designed for.

wouldn't you say so?

[Comma H]

Nice thread.

Personally speaking, I would never buy a single article of clothing to wear just because it is " X " brand/ label if it did not fit me in a way that I was happy with or I felt suited my body. I truely think the majority of people that post here feel the same way. In my opinion, the people that are the best dressed in WAYWT often have one designer label on, and the rest may be American Apparel and a pair of basic Vans or Converse shoes. They are not decked out in haute fashion but they are still fashionable and look great.

Case in point, Dior Homme jeans. These are a very simplistic design, no exterior markings, patches or anything that would scream status to the untrained eye. But they are still very popular. What gives? This proves that the majority of people that wear these jeans wear them beacause the fit and cut is impeccable, and they havent decided to wear them just because they are a trendy, upmarket brand. The exact opposite of the equation are LV logograph bags. People choose these to be seen, and to show off, functionality plays a very small role.

There is a fine line when it comes to commenting on fit though. I wanted to try to avoid using specific names but I dont think I will be able to. Who? and Diamonds are a couple of the guys here that I consider to be best dressed, because in my opinion they choose items that fit them well. They wear great clothes too, but it is not the defining factor. They can make cheap brands look great because they incorporate them in nicely with the rest of their ensemble.

Streetwear to me is much more about exclusivity and brand names. I dont mean to offend anyone, its purely a matter of taste that I prefer a pair of plain white Chucks to a pair of artist collab nikes that are limited to 500 pieces world wide. All the guys I see wear streetwear all always decked out in respectable brand name expensive gear. Now this is where things get complicated. When compared to one of the guys listed above, I think people like termite_zee and 78 dont have clothes that are as appropriately fitted. But the thing is, when it comes to this kind of aesthetic, the fits that these guys display is probably perfect to people that are into street fashion. So its not even really an arguement.

I guess personal taste plays a large factor and that streetwear vs. the "sufu look" should always be looked at separately. The point I am trying to raise is that certain cheap clothing can be made just as fashionable as hi-fashion lines when the fit is the priority. To me fit and style is much more important than fashion.

[tweeds]

Comma H keeps a good level tone. props for that.

i'm wondering about the meaning of the word "fit".

in supertalk we are accustomed to assuming that clothes that "fit" are necessarily "fitted"--that is, they skim closer to the body in a manner that gives the person a lean, slim silhouette. however, i would suggest that there are many types of cuts that will fit equally well.

to draw on the example of termite_zee, his clothes may not be fitted or slim, but as an outfit they don't fall awkwardly on him, the proportions are handled right, etc etc. he even manages to keep the slouchy beanie in with the whole look, so that the overall impression i get of him is not that of sharpness but slightly rumpled, and yet not ill fitting, and not shabby.

FtB's comment is something that i sometimes feel, although my pocket does not allow me to follow up on it. sometimes when i see a piece of good design, i am inclined to buy it as i would buy, for example, a very intriguing trinket or a beautiful violin, even though i know it will not see much use in my hands. whether i would wear this well-designed piece is a different matter altogether, but i also know that having made such a purchase i would put in the effort to experiment with different looks, some of which might not be ones that i am used to, to make the piece work.

i suppose what i am saying is that yes, most of the time when i look for new buys i would be looking at fit--however i think an impulsive purchase of something out of the ordinary is also a fairly refreshing experience.

after all there is always supermarket for the terminally inappropriate purchases

[Tiranis]

Case in point, Dior Homme jeans. These are a very simplistic design, no exterior markings, patches or anything that would scream status to the untrained eye. But they are still very popular. What gives? This proves that the majority of people that wear these jeans wear them beacause the fit and cut is impeccable, and they havent decided to wear them just because they are a trendy, upmarket brand. The exact opposite of the equation are LV logograph bags. People choose these to be seen, and to show off, functionality plays a very small role.

Diors are a hype merchandise. A few posters on SuFu make them look good, fact is I hate how they look on 90% of those who wear them here. A lot of people on these forums wear stuff solely based on how it's hyped up. I have to admit I was kind of lured into that with W+H hoodies, even though now I realize they're not really made for someone tall and fairly skinny, but for people who are a bit shorter.

In any case, I think you're overestimating most SuFu poster. I honestly can't say that there's that many people who wear all the clothes properly. (And I'm not trying to say that they have to wear everything fitted for it to be a proper fit, baggy can be a proper fit—for example, MilSpex or 78).

-------

Back to the original topic though.

I think that wearing something that fits is a key to a good look. In my opinion, ftb2 wears clothes that still fit his physique fairly well. The fact that sometimes they look boring or feel like they wear him, is not because they don't fit him—although at times the fit is not perfect. When I say don't fit I mean: don't work with particular bodytype or the rest of the outfit. Somebody who has long legs and really wide hips, will look awkward in Diors for example. No getting around that. As such, even if you have clothes that mean something to you and convey a certain message, if they don't fit you that message won't be heard, because everyone who will see you will be drawn to the fact that something is wrong and doesn't quite fit well.

Basically, to use a fucked up analogy, when you write a message in netspeak, people who don't read it on day-to-day basis are likely to completely miss what you said, instead they will be trying their best to decipher what the hell you wrote or just label you as a retard, but if you write it in proper English then everyone will be able to read it.

in supertalk we are accustomed to assuming that clothes that "fit" are necessarily "fitted"--that is, they skim closer to the body in a manner that gives the person a lean, slim silhouette. however, i would suggest that there are many types of cuts that will fit equally well.

I wouldn't say that we're accustomed to fit = fitted. If that was true, then MilSpex and 78 would get no love what-so-ever. Personally, I also buy a lot of stuff that is not fitted. For example my YMC jacket with shawl collar is size larger than it should be, because I like it that way better and I think it looks better. I also have some oversized Raf tops, and some Material Boy stuff coming in soon...

Another poster who doesn't necessarily wear fitted clothing is Chris, who often wears stuff that is oversized, again mainly tops.

[Analog]

In my view, Fit is a result of Design. If design is seen as Problem Solving (simplification), then in the case of clothing design part of the "problem" is the question of how the item is worn on the body -- fit, silhouette, drape, volume, etc.

In other words, design encompasses practical problems -- fit, construction -- as well as those that are conceptual, aesthetic, political etc.

Even in the case of anti-fit, a properly designed item will address the issue of how it is worn, how it stays on the body, movement, etc. even if that means not staying on the body.

--------------------------

Fade to Black recently mentioned that he, at times, willingly buys pieces of clothing that knows don't "Fit" 100%.

I read this as well, but I felt what he was really getting at was that he is currently working from a different definition of Fit than what is currently prevalent on this board. In fact I think Silhouette would be a better point of discussion here.

I use the term Fit because it's part of the lingo on this board, but I do find it limiting because there are many posters who interpret it literally : Fit == Fitted.

--------------------------

No offence, but I don't think this :

Case in point, Dior Homme jeans. These are a very simplistic design, no exterior markings, patches or anything that would scream status to the untrained eye. But they are still very popular.

equals this :

This proves that the majority of people that wear these jeans wear them beacause the fit and cut is impeccable, and they havent decided to wear them just because they are a trendy, upmarket brand.

[designersheep]

I think it is impossible to totally separate fit and design. If there's a good design that makes you look better despite having sized up or down two, I would still say it's a good fit, because, afterall, there is no universal perfect fit, and some garments, especially knitwears, often don't have to fit the wearer perfectly in order to look right.

I do agree with you on your opening post Servo, but I think you are primarily speaking from a consumer's pov. Not that it's wrong, but I think it's pretty much impossible to disagree with you from us sufu'ers who buy clothes to wear them (mind you, I think there are plenty of collectors out there too) and make themselves look better. There are many aspects to consider when buying a garment such as how it falls on your body, how they feel, how they age, and so on; and most of them would fall on either looks or functionality.

I guess what I am getting at is that if something looks good on you, then it is a good fit, even if it may be oversized. The deciding parameters of looking good and what constitutes a good fit are subjective and may differ with other combinations of clothing you are wearing at the time, but if a design makes a garment look good on you then I guess it is the design that is making the fit better. For example, a suit should conform to your body precisely, but a hooded zip-up sweatshirt could look good even if the sizing is off due to the fact that it could be a good fit on one of the slim/normal/oversized aesthetics.

This thread also reminded me of a designer, whose name escapes me now, who designed a season's worth of clothing that are unwearable, such as a jacket with no neck hole and pants with three legs, and were shown on deformed mannequins.

Although none of the pieces were wearable, they would provoke the viewers to think about the garments and human body as much as the wearable ones, just like how most anti-art is still art. In this regard, as much as how unwearable these may be, they are as much about fit depite the fact that none would fit anyone. Hence fit is design.

[Comma H]

Diors are a hype merchandise.

Quite possibly true. But there is no getting around the fact that if you have the body type that works well with straight, thin jeans then Diors are one of the better cuts. Nothing fits me as well as my 19cm jeans, and I have quite a few pairs of different jeans. To me, Nudie and all the popular Japanese brands are just as hype as Dior Homme jeans.

I like to think of it this way. If a bunch of popular jeans were laid out in front of you, all without brand names, and all the same price, which would you pick? I will always pick the ones that are a) the best fit and, well made with quality materials. Right now, the 19cm's are those for me. Im sure I will find something better one day and will wear those instead.

There is an interesting example in the DH jeans thread. fade to black2 asks whether there is a market for 2nd hand Diors even if the "Dior" logo has worn off. For some people this may be an issue....these are status buyers. For me, all that would matter is how much the jeans themselves have worn. I could quite easily cut the tags off my jeans and still be happy. I am sure there are others here that are the same? A true test is whether these jeans sell in supermarket i guess!

[CTfunk]

I believe that at any one point, there is a threshold to the importance of fit, beyond this point, the essence of a person’s look shall be more dependant (so to speak) on the overall combination that is presented, and of course designs and etc… Often times we often equate a nice fit with fitted, but this is obviously not necessarily the case as pointed out in few of the above posts. Fit can’t be always a result of design, fit is also primarily a result of choice.

In terms of brand, certain brand will carry with it its style and design, if we decide to carry out a certain fit, then we would find a brand that best represent the fit we are looking for, whether expensive or relatively inexpensive, but whether we admit it or not, brand does play a big role. I think there is also the issue of following trend, which results in a fit that does not match its wearer. Just my .02 cents.

[fade to black2]

great thread topic and idea for ongoing series, Servo. I like what you are doing with this subforum, keeping discussion active on not just the consumerism aspect, but also going deeper into individual SF'ers perspectives on personal style.

haven't had the chance to fully digest everything said here, but just a few quick thoughts:

- When you mention that my starting point is from a practical, rather than philosophical view in regards to what i've said about fit in the past few days (and even in the past), i would add to this by saying it's a bit of both. In one aspect, I like wearing clothes that don't necessarily fit not just as a message of rebellion to the idea of bodily, symmetric perfection, but it's just a matter of comfort with being able to wear clothing that doesn't conform to rigid ideals, both physically and mentally. From that aspect, you nailed the practicality issue. But philosophically, i am also inspired to have this mentality by my designer-idol, Mr. Yohji Yamamoto, as he has reiterated many times the necessity to break the mold that often times people have of perfection in garments, whether in fit or design. I find this inspiring because it is liberating, hence I believe ultimately, if a piece of clothing can reflect the wearer's personality, rather than just adhering to a very strict notion of pleasing aesthetic as related to body contours, that is where true style radiates from.

Perhaps Tiranis saw that there were some aspects of my style that were less than ideal, maybe in fit and suitability for body type. I'm guessing a lot of this is based on stuff I posted in WAYWT while at school. I was going through somewhat of a transitional phase still, wearing things i was not necessarily comfortable with but thought it would enhance my image as long as i could pull it off reasonably well, because it was 'fashionable.' Case in point: Dior jeans. I am honestly more comfortable in a Dior suit, and find it not only more flattering to my personality and physical appearance than the jeans, but I continue to support Dior's suits because well, it 'fits' in every aspect you can come up with for the word. Hence I'm getting rid of all my Dior casual wear for this reason.

Oversize/baggy can be a proper fit as well, no disputing that. What i'm getting at is the finer, more subtle medium between something being deliberately oversize yet still 'fitting,' and the actual notion of 'fit' being form fitting. Something that looks neither here nor there...a lot of the stuff i wear is basics anyway, so it's not necessarily for the design aspect (well, it IS for the design if you include things such as quality, craftsmanship, and overall effect once worn by me).

Ultimately, my thoughts on this issue can be summed up in one quotable, again going back to Yohji's words...he once said in response to a question, how would he respond if he saw someone who wore his clothes in a way that didn't look right, or perhaps the way it is intended to be worn, to which he said "Bravo." That's what I think differentiates between the styles of different people, even though the physical garments may be the same. It's about the attitude and philosophy in your approach to dressing.

That said, there's no right or wrong...some people look good in things that 'fit' well, others like to approach it from a different angle. Different strokes for different folks...

[fade to black2]

although i'd like to add that i am keeping my dust wash 19 cm DH jeans from the f/w 06-07 season, if there's one pair of Dior denim out of the ones i've tried that i think 'fit' me, it's those.

[ProfMonnitoff]

I do think that once a garment is put onto a person, the fit, whatever it may be, is of utmost importance. While it is true that a garment enhances the person who wears it, the person should also enhance the garment. This is done by having it fit well and combining it with other garments in some way. If the issue is looked at from the side of the clothes and not from the side of the wearer, it is better to not wear a piece at all if it doesn't fit well because the poor fit will only detract from the true qualities of the garment.

I think streetwear is a much clearer example for this topic than most other aesthetics, simply due to the amount of hype there is for various pieces. People aren't looking for a well-fitting t-shirt, they're looking for a certain t-shirt by a certain designer/brand. And yet, even though these people are so particular about their clothes, only few end up looking good. On this board, off the top of my head, A.L., MilSpex, termitezee, 78, sXXXe, and only a few others, manage to successfully wear streetwear clothing in a way that is visually pleasing to those who do not generally follow that particular aesthetic. I think what these people are able to do is determine the ideal fit for these various pieces that they are wearing that make them look much better than other people wearing the same clothes.

[martinj]

Would be interesting to see what people's definition of fit is? As is baggy jeans and a t-shirt a good fit if it fits well onto the person? Are tight t-shirts and jeans a good fit on a fat person?

[tweeds]

going back to Yohji's words...he once said in response to a question, how would he respond if he saw someone who wore his clothes in a way that didn't look right, or perhaps the way it is intended to be worn, to which he said "Bravo."

excellent. really excellent.

of late, one of my favourite pasttimes has been to take a plain white or black shirt and put it on differently in front of the mirror. buttoning the sleeves to the collar, upside down...so far the results have been very disappointing but it is proving to be an interesting experiment in silhouette, and, i suppose, "fit".

[Double D]

Would be interesting to see what people's definition of fit is? As is baggy jeans and a t-shirt a good fit if it fits well onto the person? Are tight t-shirts and jeans a good fit on a fat person?

Nothing is a good fit on a fat person. This is of course my subjective opinion, which is the exact point of my post.

The fit of an item (equals in your eyes) your intended aesthetic of that item on yourself (which objectively, in other people's eyes equals) achieving that aesthetic whilst displaying that aesthetic is your intent.

Something along those lines. Naturally, it's easier to display intent in your aesthetic when you play by the hard and fast rules of tailoring. Take Daniel Craig as James Bond, take on immaculately cut Armani tuxedo and anyone with any experience of classic Western clothing can see that it 'fits well'.

When you start breaking those rules, displaying that intent is a lot more difficult. See the distinction between a Thom Browne catwalk model and a badly dressed office worker. If anyone would like to try to define how that intent is conveyed, you're a braver person than me.

[fade to black2]

to further support what i said earlier about Yohji's philosophy...I just got done watching Takeshi Kitano's film "Takeshis" (trippy, excellent movie btw...not usually a fan of avant garde cinema but the black humor in this makes it pitch perfect), and the movie clothing was done by Yohji...if you look at the way people wear suits in that movie, I think it sums up what I would personally try to strive for. E.g. sweaters too short, jacket sleeves too long, pants dangling midway as if the proportions were off, etc. and whether it's a convenience store clerk or big shot celebrity, the style has a lot of character IMO.

[onemancult]

Nothing is a good fit on a fat person. This is of course my subjective opinion, which is the exact point of my post.

Should they stop wearing clothes and stick to draping themselves in large swathes of fabric? I think saying that nothing is a good fit on a fat person is ridiculous, but perhaps I'm just conditioned to think otherwise by plenty of overweight stylish folks

that I've seen. Is being slim the only rubric we're supposed to use as a jumping off point for discussing fit/fashion/style/etc?

-----

We all have our personal opinions of what fits us and what fits others around us,

what constitutes a good fit versus a bad fit, and what standards an item must satisfy

in order to be considered well- or ill-fitted. These ideas, primarily, stem from our personal evolution as people interested in the aesthetics of clothing, which is to say, I think that the cues we pick up on for what we like come more from our experiences with clothing than from seeing a particular type of fit on another individual.

As such, I find it funny that we can argue endlessly about what makes a good fit and what makes a bad fit, when all it really comes down to is that each of us has been conditioned to appreciate a certain look, and it takes that same process of slow change in order to begin to fully appreciate things that don't fit into our aggregated perspective on fashion.

As much as we can talk about what fits us well personally and why we want things

to fit a certain way, beyond the matter of factness of the body, well... who really cares

that one person's aesthetic taste leans towards a fuller cut than what we'd personally enjoy? Should we spend that much time trying to reconcile differences?

Clothing, in my opinion, should flatter the eye of the Other before flattering the body of the Wearer. Clothing is a visual cue before it is an armor- and choosing items that fit a certain way is still, at the heart of it all, an exercise in choosing something that will strike the Other in a certain way. It seems very disingenous to me to believe that we are simply after the perfect fit for our own enjoyment- we are after the perfect fit, whatever that may mean to us personally, because there is an image in our heads of

ourselves that we have an undying need to make real.

Otherwise, we'd all be draped in swathes of fabric and eating lard out of cans, right?

[Double D]

As I said, considering the extreme subjectivity of fashion, the only course of action is a) to achieve what you want aesthetically, and convey that your aesthetic is intentional and successfully achieved.

That's about all you can reasonably expect in the world of individual fashion. If you want to be accepted by all and sundry, play by the conventional and socially accepted rules, join the hordes and buy a few immaculately tailored suits.

[2000dB]

Isn't it virtually impossible to acheive a "perfect" fit with ready to wear fashion? Especially if you base the ideal fit on the runway pictures and such.

I think what is even more important is the general silhouette created by the clothes, even if each piece doesn't fit properly.

I sure have clothes that don't fit me perfectly and it's often designed in that way (which would make the fit arguably ideal in those case), but I can still pair them with certain other clothes and there's a few posters here than can definetly illustrate this point better than I can.

[Ichigo100%]

There are in fact many defenitions as to what the word "fit" sums up to be.

Fit: To be the proper size and shape for: Fat or slim, you can easily pull off a good fit by dressing appropriately. Its the minute you put on something that isnt equivalent to your own size that comits you as having a bad fit.

To be appropriate to; suit : For example, a business meeting. You dont want to walk into a meeting with an unproportioned suit with a pair of sneakers. Bad esthetic right there, that tells all the other people around you that you dont have any care for your own personal appearance or character. Now some of you may argue against that, but at the same time, depeding on the environment your in, fit plays a very important role depending on which direction you take in life.

To make suitable; adapt: As said above, it all depends on the environment you're in. Somebody said that we dress for other people first then dress for ourselves after.. I beleive that to a certain extent. As much as we dress to impress the opposite sex(or whatever your sexual preference may be), we do at the end of the day, dress to please ourselves because its what gives us that feeling of confidence in what we wear. If we dont feel good in what we wear ourselves, how is somebody else going to feel good about what you wear? Its confidence and good character that really makes a great fit/esthetic IMO.

To be suited; belong: Another type of Fit.. A lot of the sufu members on here are are catered to the usual sufu fits and common critiques. But others who aren't used to the environment have to sort of try to fit in. Now in my opinion i would find that kind of childish, but this is what society has come to. If you dont cater to a groups lifestyle, you're considered different. I beleive that nobody shouldn't have to be forced to belong to anything. It should be about acceptance and how well that persons esthetic is in general. As Fade said, physical plays a part but mentality plays an important role also.

The most important thing to remember is that people have different preferences, so you can't really judge and say someones fit is bad or good, because we all cater to different lifestyles/influences. The people we hang around also play an important role..Like for example we have different trends, The punk rocker trend, or the high end couture trend. Its like judging apples and oranges, although both are equally healthy in nutrients, both have a completely different taste and look. In my opinion i beleive that basic/simple esthetic is what makes a good look. It shouldnt be about the name brands, but how well we blend things together to create our own personal tastes.

Like F2b said, its different strokes for different folks.

Do as you see fit

Imperfection is perfection.

[alterion]

As I said, considering the extreme subjectivity of fashion, the only course of action is a) to achieve what you want aesthetically, and convey that your aesthetic is intentional and successfully achieved.

That's about all you can reasonably expect in the world of individual fashion. If you want to be accepted by all and sundry, play by the conventional and socially accepted rules, join the hordes and buy a few immaculately tailored suits.

True- but there is nothing wrong with a traditional look if done corectly. Indeed the conventional rules are easy to play within simply beacuse the vast majority of people have such vauge notions of style and such entrenched viewpoints on "fashion". I know of very few people who have true notions what a saville row shillouette should look like and one look at the satorialist or a similar blog shows that you don't have to break fashion ruels to achive a brilliant fit and style.

[sidneylo]

Great contributions guys, I'm looking forward to seeing where this goes.

I guess personal taste plays a large factor and that streetwear vs. the "sufu look" should always be looked at separately. The point I am trying to raise is that certain cheap clothing can be made just as fashionable as hi-fashion lines when the fit is the priority. To me fit and style is much more important than fashion.

I agree with this point--in discussing fit, we've stumbled upon other larger topics of style/fashion/branding that play into how we perceive 'fit'. Thus, should we take a moment to recognize the idea of 'personal taste' being (inevitably) derived from other styles, cultures, and trends--locally and globally?

My point is: perhaps personal taste can discern or allow for 'fit' to have a different definition, but personal taste has to come from somewhere... there must be some form of standard we follow, even if it's an 'off fit', surely it must have been inspired by another trend/style/culture/etc.

Sufu look or not, we're all drawing from something, so I think it's quite understandable that we've come to a general collective consensus on what is considered a good fit or a bad fit (with an obvious amount of deviation.)

[Double D]

I never said you have to break "fashion" rules, but this is the fashion versus style debate all over again. Saville Row tailoring is a great example of what some may call "style", but it's never going to be contemporary fashion.

If you DON'T play with style, proportion and contradiction of accepted rules as a designer/stylist, how exactly are you going to stand out?

As my point basically said, proportion is all horses for courses. If you're going for an immaculately tailored traditional look, it had better be immaculate. Conversely, if you're going for an unconventional set of proportions, it had better be well conceived and completely intentional. Thom Browne doesn't fit things 'wrong' by accident.

[goldengloves]

As such, I find it funny that we can argue endlessly about what makes a good fit and what makes a bad fit, when all it really comes down to is that each of us has been conditioned to appreciate a certain look, and it takes that same process of slow change in order to begin to fully appreciate things that don't fit into our aggregated perspective on fashion.

I totally agree with everything OMC said, but quoted this just because I wanted to use an example I saw earlier in the week.

I was browsing though the Worst WAYWT thread and came across Still's picture. I thought to myself, "what the hell?" Still was wearing an oversized shirt in tie die with some pants, etc. Now, the Ann D. shirt is supposed to fit oversized, it's her look for that particular shirt. To some, this would be a 'bad' fit, as was one of the reasons it was in that thread, but to others like myself he wore it the way the designer intended and it worked beautifully! Something similar has happened to ddohnggo before; His outfits are usually fantastic in my eyes, very comfortable and cool and looks effortless but to others it just looks like he threw on a CCP sweatsuit.

So I started thinking, maybe everyone should be put into the Worst WAYWT thread, I mean, it's possible because of our different views on fashion. I think, despite how nice this forum is, it is very closed minded, just like every forum. All these forums are catered towards certain thing and although this particular one may be fashion, it is really 'fashion condensed into segments' with some segments overpowering the others.

But to end this rant, these are the reasons I like fashion so much; The differences in all of us, the viewpoints on life, political, etc. etc. I just think people need to open thier eyes to new things and maybe they'll realize there isn't just one form of "fit."

[Miles]

My point is: perhaps personal taste can discern or allow for 'fit' to have a different definition, but personal taste has to come from somewhere... there must be some form of standard we follow, even if it's an 'off fit', surely it must have been inspired by another trend/style/culture/etc.

Glad the discussion with FTB has found a suitable home.

I think everyone thus far has agreed that there are infinite defitions of "fit", nearly all of which have their own appeal to a particular group. Ultimately, though, everyone on this board conscienciously strives for a certain look (or many of them).

The key here, to me at least, is that the look or "fit" presumes an effort was made by the wearer, regardless of how imperfect or unorthodox it is. My point is that for all of us, FTB included, an effort is clearly present.

Carry on...

[Tiranis]

Glad the discussion with FTB has found a suitable home.

I think everyone thus far has agreed that there are infinite defitions of "fit", nearly all of which have their own appeal to a particular group. Ultimately, though, everyone on this board conscienciously strives for a certain look (or many of them).

The key here, to me at least, is that the look or "fit" presumes an effort was made by the wearer, regardless of how imperfect or unorthodox it is. My point is that for all of us, FTB included, an effort is clearly present.

Carry on...

I agree with this. What I don't understand is people talking about SuFu believing in only one fit. I absolutely disagree with that. There's a huge diversity of posters on here and many posters appreciate a huge range of styles (from chub rock to still to kixslf to carl to chard to milspex).

To me a bad fit would be, as mentioned in my previous post, going against your own body. No matter what, you just can't pretend like that variable doesn't exist. Or just not paying any attention to the fit... not putting any effort into it, as Miles said. A perfect example would be "My Name"—his streetwear looks like crap because he buys the pieces without any attention to how they look on him.

[Ichigo100%]

^^ yea tiranis, i agree with that last comment. People just buy clothes because they feel that they'll impress others moreso then their own personal esthetic. Its all impulse, and impulse purchases to me make you look extremely ugly because You dont take the time nor the effort to really put down any thought or concern about how it fits/suits you.It's almost like their insecure about themselves so they feel like its beneficial to buy a shirt because it says "nike" or "adidas" on the front. Buying brands isnt the problem, its buying it because you're almost forced to because all your friends do it. That ruins the whole point of dressing to please yourself. Nobody really sits down and thinks to themselves anymore, society has become the voice and i find that really dissapointing. people need to be more aware of their own surroundings and rectify their own sense of well being.

One of my favorite artists, K-OS said it plain and simple: "We live in an alien nation" Nobody stands up for themselves anymore we're all uptight..its like when everybody starts wearing a certain peice of clothing, everybody runs with the trend without looking at the bigger picture and saying "you know what, i could be a leader. I should be the one setting trends, not following them." If more people were to think like this, we would have a much more civilized and more visually appealing society IMO

Its just like buying a video game because simply everybody else liked it,so because they thought it was great it must obviously be a great game. Then you play it for yourself and ended up not liking it.You never had the thought of reading the review on your own to get your own view on it.

But as i said earlier.. Do as you see fit. Create a mold of oneself, not the image of someone else.

"Failure occurs to those who lack self confidence"- Me

I really like this thread, defenitely keep this bumped.

[tweeds]

i wonder if it is possible to discuss "fit" and design without bringing branding and what is loosely termed "fashion trends" into the equation... :confused:

i think we have to differentiate this discussion from your run of the mill "hype vs ???" thread...it seems to me that in those threads stock phrases like "dressing to please yourself" and "breaking out from the mould" are thrown about too carelessly.

"fit" as a concept incorporates silhouette, drape, fall, proportion...amongst many many others--all very structural ideas that could very well be explored using a palette without the taint of brands.

[Ichigo100%]

it seems to me that in those threads stock phrases like "dressing to please yourself" and "breaking out from the mould" are thrown about too carelessly.

I really love this a lot..people are bringing lots of ideas to the table and the debate is very intriguing to say the least. Honestly there is no right or wrong answer to this whole thing.

All of what you say is true though tweed, im not disagreeing, but if you look at fashion in general, many designers are trying to "break the mould" of the current trends and develop a new concept of design and creativity. Dressing to please yourself is also important, it shouldnt matter how someone else dresses, it really should matter about how comfortable you feel about the clothing you wear. Furthermore, Criticism is there to help give us a better perspective or better route on how to improve our own esthetic. I think people get things misconstruded and end up taking the wrong turn, thats where i beleive the carelessness comes in. They take what people say, and instead of trying to rectify themselves, they misuse the information given to them and end up becoming a follower instead of a leader. This is what seperates a great fashion designer from a shallow minded one. A great designer will try to "fit" or cater to a wider audience whereas a shallow minded individual will just focus on the certain aspects that surrounds them and not so much the world itself.

The whole drapery, silouhette and proportion plays a part also..but look at fashion shows, female fashion for example, the drapery that they wear doesnt nessecarily "fit" them in terms of body width, length, etc..They wear these overly obscure dresses that to be honest i find extremely ugly. The models are too skinny imo and so putting them in a much larger attire swallows them up..But thats what the designers are trying to focus on. Not so much "fit" to body, but moreso "fit" to the right audience. Some may find those dresses to be a good fit whereas others like myself find it to be a bit overwhelming. Brands play a major part because in our minds, society has manipulated us to beleive that if you wear name brands, you'll have better esthetic. I find that to be ignorant of course, but its true.

If i were to walk into a denim store, 2 jean brands were laying in front of me, one thats a no name and a pair of imperials.. Right away id jump for the name brand because its whats been implemented into my brain. We're all told name brands have better quality, a better fit, etc.. but who's to say that the other brand doesnt share the same trait?

Again, this all goes back to different strokes for different folks. While what i say could be a complete dissapointment to many of you, others may find this to be a valid statement. I find that everything that has been said so far in this thread is completey relevant. No body is wrong because we all have different views on fit, esthetic, fashion etc.. I beleive a true fit has to do with how comfortable YOU feel in the clothing, whether it be baggy, or skin tight, or just laid back. Whatever gives you that confidence to move forward in life, then continue with it. Its when you take the whole fit out of control(complete arrogance) that creates a serious problem, because now not only are you ruining your own esthetic, your putting a bad name on the clothing you wear and you become branded for it.

[martinj]

If "fit" is to be defined as having the whole set of clothes to be able to as a whole be appeasing to the eye and in addition as well being able to provide a positive look to a person's figure, then I believe fit is a requisite.

I think sometimes, that those that try to provide some sort of message through clothes as something fun, but to what length are you going to do so?

As for what is it good to have a nice clothes when bundled they loose their aesthetic appeal?

Maybe it all boils to the point that you have to ask yourself is why are you dressing up, is it to just keep warm, give a message, aesthetics?

I think that clothes are also a status symbol, like feathers in the hat, a good brand shows status to be able to buy such brands.