Want to buy or sell something? Check the classifieds
  • The Fedora Lounge is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

Show off the sports coats.

mike

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,000
Location
HOME - NYC
what do you think of my new db jacket?

DSCN1523.jpg


DSCN1528.jpg


DSCN1524.jpg


DSCN1527.jpg
 

mike

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,000
Location
HOME - NYC
Baron Kurtz said:
Nice jacket. Fits you well. And a nice combo with the solid trousers.

Glad to see a jacket that's not too long! (not particularly you; just generally people wear 'em too long.)

bk

thanks! any other suggestions on what sort of pants to pair it with as it's orphaned otherwise? by the way, the pants aren't as long as some of those pictures show them to be, I wasn't wearing suspenders, just quickly put em on to show here.
 

mike

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,000
Location
HOME - NYC
Baron Kurtz said:
Striped jackets are difficult. They have a terrible tendency to look like orphaned jackets, independent of what you do with them.

bk

do you think maybe some charcoal or even black pants might take the eye away from the difference of material between jacket/pants...? I have some high waisted probably 50's pants that aren't pegged that I thought might be able to mix well... :eusa_doh:
 

luvthatlulu

Suspended
Messages
433
Location
Knoxville, TN
Mike...

That looks like a very nice jacket but, judging only from the first two photos, it appears to me to be about 2-3" too short in length (hands in pockets pictures--all bets are off). Ideally, the coat bottom should lie in the curve of your fingers at rest (give or take a little for personal taste), but definitely should not be so short that almost the entire pant fly is exposed to public scrutiny! DB jackets were worn shorter decades ago...but never that short, I'm afraid.

Now, I know you mentioned that the pants were not hanging properly in the photo. Try them again with the suspenders you mentioned and, if the same problem still exists, I'd recommend recycling that jacket thru eBay.

Sorry...you asked...and I was reluctant to say so, but felt someone had to say it. ;)
 

mike

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,000
Location
HOME - NYC
luvthatlulu said:
That looks like a very nice jacket but, judging only from the first two photos, it appears to me to be about 2-3" too short in length (hands in pockets pictures--all bets are off). Ideally, the coat bottom should lie in the curve of your fingers at rest (give or take a little for personal taste), but definitely should not be so short that almost the entire pant fly is exposed to public scrutiny! DB jackets were worn shorter decades ago...but never that short, I'm afraid.

Now, I know you mentioned that the pants were not hanging properly in the photo. Try them again with the suspenders you mentioned and, if the same problem still exists, I'd recommend recycling that jacket thru eBay.

Sorry...you asked...and I was reluctant to say so, but felt someone had to say it. ;)

lol no problem! I certainly appreciate honest opinions! but with these new pictures.. is this still too short..?
DSCN1536.jpg

DSCN1541.jpg

DSCN1537.jpg

DSCN1539.jpg
 

luvthatlulu

Suspended
Messages
433
Location
Knoxville, TN
It's better, but I'm still afraid so, Mike.

Let me draw your attention to the second photo. Notice anything odd?

1. The crotch of your trousers is still exposed.

2. Compare the waist of the jacket to your natural waist--a little too high.

3. Now, let your eyes follow the line of your trouser leg up to the bottom of the jacket. Then, start at the shoulder of the jacket and let your eyes follow the line of the jacket down to the bottom. See a difference? Long legs on a chorus girl are great, but not on a man in a jacket and trouser. A 1 3/4 - 2" cuff would break up that difference and help some.

It's the problem in 1. above that concerns me the most. The jacket is just a hair too short in my opinion...and that's all it is, my opinion.

Still, it's a nice looking jacket and the high-waisted trousers are great, too, by the way.
 

Tomasso

Incurably Addicted
Messages
13,719
Location
USA
Sorry Mike, but I'm afraid that I'll have to concur with just about all that Lululover said.[huh]

The exception being this:
luvthatlulu said:
Ideally, the coat bottom should lie in the curve of your fingers at rest (give or take a little for personal taste
This often repeated measuring technique, while occasionally accurate, is not applicable across the board. Jacket length should be fitted to one's body regardless of their arm length as men of the exact same height can have arm length variances of several inches. (Note: Once one has determined their proper jacket length, they can then use the point where the jacket hits their hand as future reference).

IMO, a jacket should at the very least cover your rear end (which will cover your crotch as well).

I would much prefer the technique of measuring a man from the collar seam of their jacket down to the floor and then dividing in 1/2. Still not perfect but loads better than the former.
 

luvthatlulu

Suspended
Messages
433
Location
Knoxville, TN
One more thing: The sleeves of the jacket are currently just a little too long. Isn't it always funny that the jacket can be short and the sleeves still be long?

Anyway, I wanted to tell you if you do decide to keep the jacket and want to shorten the sleeves (and you should), don't fall into the trap of going with the 1/2"-of-shirt-cuff-showing rule. Because the jacket already appears short, too much white shirt cuff will accentuate the problem (think "Alfalfa" in The Little Rascals). Opt for a very discreet amount (@1/4") of shirt cuff showing instead.

Minor fit problems can always be diminished with the proper application of camouflaging eye-trickery!
 

luvthatlulu

Suspended
Messages
433
Location
Knoxville, TN
Tomasso said:
Sorry Mike, but I'm afraid that I'll have to concur with just about all that Lululover said.[huh]

The exception being this:
This often repeated measuring technique, while occasionally accurate, is not applicable across the board. Jacket length should be fitted to one's body regardless of their arm length as men of the exact same height can have arm length variances of several inches. (Note: Once one has determined their proper jacket length, they can then use the point where the jacket hits their hand as future reference).

IMO, a jacket should at the very least cover your rear end (which will cover your crotch as well).

I would much prefer the technique of measuring a man from the collar seam of their jacket down to the floor and then dividing in 1/2. Still not perfect but loads better than the former.

Tomasso is absolutely correct...which is why I said "Ideally" rather than elaborate further. I'm glad he did.
 

Tomasso

Incurably Addicted
Messages
13,719
Location
USA
Being a bit off on jacket length isn't nearly as noticeable on a suit as with a sportjacket/odd trouser combo (especially when there's a wide color discrepancy between the two).
 

Mike in Seattle

My Mail is Forwarded Here
Messages
3,027
Location
Renton (Seattle), WA
luvthatlulu said:
That looks like a very nice jacket but, judging only from the first two photos, it appears to me to be about 2-3" too short in length (hands in pockets pictures--all bets are off). Ideally, the coat bottom should lie in the curve of your fingers at rest (give or take a little for personal taste), but definitely should not be so short that almost the entire pant fly is exposed to public scrutiny! DB jackets were worn shorter decades ago...but never that short, I'm afraid.

That's what I had always heard - bottom of the jacket to the curve of the fingers. And I guess there's some leeway on that based on wearer's build and how the jacket looks, but to my eye, it's a little short in the body. It looks a little less obvious in the second set of photos (leaning against the wall, unbuttoned) and of course, our looking at it in photos, we're focusing on certain things. If you're out and about wearing it, and in motion, the average person on the street probably isn't going to notice the same things that we are.
 

luvthatlulu

Suspended
Messages
433
Location
Knoxville, TN
Mike in Seattle said:
That's what I had always heard - bottom of the jacket to the curve of the fingers. And I guess there's some leeway on that based on wearer's build and how the jacket looks...

The "bottom of the jacket to the curve of the fingers" rule is only a good starting or reference point. As Tomasso correctly pointed out, that rule must be flexible enough to accommodate individuals with longer than normal or shorter than normal arm length. But the basic concept remains the same:

If the bottom of the jacket ends dramatically higher than the hand when at rest, the person wearing it appears to have--for lack of a better metaphor--"ape arms". If the jacket ends dramatically lower, it's "alligator arms".

A knowledgeable tailor will therefore bend this "rule" to minimize those effects without settling on a jacket so short the crotch or buttocks are exposed, or so long as to appear clownish, just for the sake of having the jacket resting in the curve of the fingers.
 

resortes805

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,019
Location
SoCal
Baron Kurtz said:
Did you sell it to someone in the UK?

bk

Yup! I had held onto in hopes that I could have it reproduced in my size. Alas, the bills were due so I put it up for auction.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
109,256
Messages
3,077,417
Members
54,183
Latest member
UrbanGraveDave
Top