Today’s Outfits
This is what I wore to church today. Despite it being a very nice, well-coordinated outfit, made up of some of my favorite pieces, I still had a momentary twinge when faced with other people in their new coats, etc. Believe me, I’m over it now.
BTW, this shirt and sweater combo is the same one I wore
Christmas Eve, with jeans and my birthday belt.
But will I wear it again tonight? Attending a game night, with the same group we were with for the Thanksgiving Leftovers Party, the big question mark is temperature. How many layers will I need? At the previous event, the wife of the pastor in charge runs just a little colder than I do. Perfect. But I don’t think they will be there tonight.
My first choice is actually the outfit pictured back here. And since my hero just informed me that he knows how to work the heat in the fellowship hall, I guess I will wear what I want.
Update: What I want will be the sweater I wore this morning, topped by the jacket pictured here, which my hero just bought for me. We only paid $35 American, though. Washable suede, the XS fits (!), and it’s my signature color. Yay!
Related Posts:
Fashion Lab: Better Late Than Never
I really should get some modeling lessons or something, rather than continually subjecting you wonderful people to these hack photos.
Typically I choose not to focus on the type of advice that picks some “less-than” body part (”I hate my thighs!”) and uses “fool-the-eye” techniques to compensate. It’s all too confusing. In most cases, learning and employing the basics (line, shape, proportion, scale, and, of course, personal idiom and color) will create a much more integrated, simple, and aesthetically pleasing look.
But an outfit I threw together recently caused me to think about a principle I had previously run across:
To camouflage or draw attention away, surround the feature with something larger or more eye-catching. In these pictures, the “feature” is my thighs and the “something larger or more eye-catching” is the line of the t-shirt hem(s) and the belt buckle.
In which of these pictures do I look most normal to you?
And another question: How would this principle be used if the “feature” being camouflaged was a slight tummy bulge?
On one thing I’m sure we can all agree: Use tunic-length tops with caution! (They never worked for me in the ’80s either.)
Related Posts:
Reader Question: Trench Coat Length for an Hourglass Figure
Or should I have titled this “I love fashion research?” And it’s not just an excuse to avoid doing any work. At least I don’t think it is.
Vildy asks:
Can I ask a question about balance in design here? I have a silky dark navy raincoat with white pin dots. I like the contradiction between the feminine fabric and the full-out trench detailing. It isn’t my best look - the fullness, the belted trench, the epaulets and belted sleeves, the full cape back bodice, the half cape front bodice, the semi-dolman sleeves - but I like it.
Here’s what I’m wrestling with. It was an 80’s style with the rounded extended shoulder pads. I replaced these with smaller and somewhat crisper. The former length balanced all this “design.” But it was ankle-length on me - I’m 5 feet with that all around hourglass.
My first thought was that I had to be careful how much I shortened it because of needing to balance the top fullness. So I have it around mid-calf, perhaps a bit higher. Looking at runway pictures I see many similar full cut trenches that are knee length and even above the knee. It gives a very wide poofy effect even on the slender models.
What do you think?
My off-cuff-answer was “not above the knee”, but here’s what I found after a bit more research.
- Generally these looks measure two “units” above the belt and three below. That is in accordance with the basic laws of proportion governing the universe.
- But I think some of them are belted above the natural waist. Okay for a skinny model, not actually workable for a genuine Type X figure.
- And then there is the matter of the sleeves. Nearly all of them were 3/4 length or at least pushed up. I suppose that is merely parenthetical to the actual point here.
- But shape is the elusive element. If you belted the coat at the first natural-looking spot below the bust and then hemmed the coat to a length (from the belt) 1 and 1/2 times the length from shoulder to belt, would the “skirt” of the coat poof or drape? Would the overall silhouette be an hourglass, a figure eight, or a mish-mash? And would the length be above the knee or below?
If it worked, it could be fresh, pretty, and springy.
Picture “borrowed” from Elle.com. Subscribe here
Related Posts:
US Vogue Cover: January 2007 Picturing Angelina Jolie
In the spirit of my previous Vogue cover art reviews, I will be calling out just a few of the artistic principles employed here:
- Color choice: With a persona as glamorous as this, what other choice is there but red? Note that the red here is the “little to the dark, without going burgundy” I mentioned in my recent post Steps to Successfully Wearing Red & Black, a wonderful red for those with deeper coloring.
- Visual weight: Clearly the dress is of a light-weight fabric. I am confident that if it were not so, we would see more of the actress’s hair. Adjusting the volume of one’s hair is the primary way of adapting to fabric weight.
- Taut vs drapy: Generally speaking, taut fabrics are congruent with the hardness of visible bone structure, drapy with soft roundedness. Pictured is an example of a slender person of soft roundness. Agreed?
Read more on this issue at the Runway Scoop. Unlike Maria Palma, who identifies with Angelina Jolie, I feel no connection to her at all. She’s just an extraordinarily pretty face.
BTW, you could buy me a subscription to Vogue
Related Posts:
Resolved: Posting Outfits Prior to Event
Two considerations compel me to try harder in this next year to plan and post my outfits prior to an event:
- KNOWING what I am going to wear. No small matter.
- Just in case one of my real-life friends is curious. Probably a small matter.
But it did happen. Christmas Eve, to be precise. The hostess of the party we went to had checked the blog that day to see what I would be wearing. Her diabolical plan: to wear the same thing!
The eerie thing about it is that, although I didn’t post what I planned to wear, or even have a plan earlier in the day, we were not dressed that different. Chunky shoes, bootcut jeans, v-neck sweater over collared shirt. My daughter even pointed out that our sweaters matched our hair: hers - dark brown, mine - heather gray.
Evidently she’s been paying attention.
Related Posts:
Coming Soon
As my husband took today off from work, I will not return to normal blogging until tomorrow.
Just a few hints as to what’s on my mind:
- Things I’d like to improve in my personal wardrobe planning process in 2007. Like low-pressure New Year’s Resolutions.
- A Vogue cover artistic analysis. Yes, the US January edition featuring Angelina Jolie.
- This week for Friday Fashion Lab I will be dressing up in jeans with different lengths of tops layered over and thinking about line placement as it relates to body particulars. Anybody care to play?
From last year’s post-Christmas post, Style It Yourself:
Ever wonder about statistics for being sick on Christmas and/or the day after compared to any other day of the year?
Related Posts:
What Did You Get for Christmas?
Did you get any cool clothes? (I don’t think anybody dares to get me any. There was a nice pair of hiking socks in my stocking, though, and plenty of $$$. I’m happy.:)
Related Posts:
Christmas Ponderings
Ever since we declared an end to the insane shopping schedule we were keeping, I’ve been able to focus on what about the Christmas season gives it meaning. Giving and receiving gifts? Spending time with family? Special foods or pretty lights? All these things, and the rest of the trappings, fail. I mean, what if you don’t get what you want? Or can’t afford to buy gifts? Or your relatives don’t like you?
I don’t want any of those things to be able to make or break my Christmas. They aren’t what it’s about anyway.
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
He was in the beginning with God.
All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.
In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men.
The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.
There came a man sent from God, whose name was John.
He came as a witness, to testify about the Light, so that all might believe through him.
He was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light.
There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man.
He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him.
He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him.
But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name,
who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.
And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.
The Word became flesh. God became a human baby. That makes my Christmas.
Merry Christmas!
Related Posts:
And This Is News?
My husband found this on World Net Daily and it was the source of enough sarcasm around here that I thought I’d share:
Macy’s pulls Sean John dog fur jackets:
Macy’s has pulled from its shelves and its Web site two styles of Sean John hooded jackets, originally advertised as featuring faux fur, after an investigation by the nation’s largest animal protection organization concluded that the garments were actually made from a certain species of dog called “raccoon dog.”
and
Macy’s removal of the coats comes on the heels of other tests conducted by the Humane Society of the United States on a range of fur-trimmed jackets from retailers such as Burlington Coat Factory, Bloomingdale’s, J.C. Penney and Saks Fifth Avenue as well as from designers and clothing lines such as Baby Phat, Andrew Marc, MaxMara and Calvin Klein. Those tests revealed that most of the jackets labeled as “raccoon” or coyote” from China in fact contained fur from raccoon dogs.
Who wants to wear a coyote-trimmed coat, anyway?
Related Posts:
Cheater Fashion Lab: Pant-leg Silhouettes
I call this cheating because … well, I am. I was just too lazy to get dressed for pictures, so these are from Zafu fit finder.
Allegedly, wearing tapered pants makes short legs look longer. Of course, most fashionistas have been wearing flares (albeit labelled “boot-cut”). Balancing the hips with volume at the hem was the prevailing concept.
Somehow, Zafu’s model resembles me enough in figure that I dare to ask: What shape jeans do you recommend for me? Rarely do I wear heels, so I can use all the leg-lengthening I can get.
Since this Friday Fashion Lab turned out sort of a “hack” affair, perhaps we will re-visit this topic in the future. In the meantime, I recommend to you the Zafu blog.
