The Year of Dressing Formally (2008)

Re:The Year of Dressing Formally (2008) by npsimons on Tuesday May 28, 2013 @06:11PM (#5783189)

As a style averse geek I hate myself for saying this, but it really depends. I've never been able to convince myself to go spend at the highest levels (bespoke from Saville row, for instance), but it's supposed to be more comfortable than casual clothing. When I have splurged a bit on nicer clothing, I have found that even a little more quality in clothing can make the difference between stiff and comfortable. It makes sense that better fit and higher quality would be more comfortable. There was a fairly good discussion about this on HN a while back: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4476397

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Year of Dressing Formally (2008) by sliverstorm on Tuesday May 28, 2013 @06:15PM (#5783216)

Oh, I don't mean "formal wear can never be comfortable". I was thinking more of, for example, how I would melt in 100-degree weather in an old-fashioned wool suit. Also, I'm really more concerned with utility/durability than comfort- I mentioned comfort only in passing. My lifestyle tends to be a little rough on clothes.

You're certainly right though, quality material and a cut that fits you well is fantastic. I have a few nice polos that I got tailored as an experiment, and they are now some of my favorite shirts. I would have more tailored, but it's $20 a pop and that's only if the shirt already fits me fairly well- which most shirts don't.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Year of Dressing Formally (2008) by npsimons on Tuesday May 28, 2013 @06:23PM (#5783267)

I'll give you the climate argument :) But I would think that higher quality materials and construction would also result in longer lasting products. As I don't wear my formal stuff very often, I couldn't personally say. But the flip side of custom fit is that if your body changes, it's no longer going to fit. On the gripping hand, custom fit is fairly well known for being something that can be tailored to fit, repeatedly. As for utility, I've got some suit jackets that have more pockets than my rugged wilderness parkas; then again, I wouldn't wear either kind of jacket bouldering or biking either ;)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Year of Dressing Formally (2008) by sliverstorm on Tuesday May 28, 2013 @06:30PM (#5783294)

I would think that higher quality materials and construction would also result in longer lasting products.

It's a question of construction decisions, not quality. For example, what fabric does it use? My denim jeans hold up to falls, rock, and dirt much better than light cotton slacks. What is the stitching pattern? Are there reinforcements? That sort of thing.

if your body changes, it's no longer going to fit.

Yup, I've been running into that problem. Thankfully the "problem" is that my biceps are stretching my sleeves, so I can feel good about said "problem".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Year of Dressing Formally (2008) by overgryphon on Tuesday May 28, 2013 @06:20PM (#5783250)

An old-fashioned wool suit would never be appropriate in 100-degree weather. Formal-wear doesn't necessarily mean wool (which also doesn't mean heavy. Wool can be very light and summery). The point is less to dress more formally and more to dress more appropriately for the occasion.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Year of Dressing Formally (2008) by solarmist on Tuesday May 28, 2013 @06:59PM (#5783425)

In 100 degree weather you should be wearing a linen or seersucker suit not a wool one. It makes a huge difference.

Being rough on clothes is another matter altogether though.

[ Parent | on HN ]