Deadflow3r said:

Fauxie said:

Them triangular sparkly shits on the toe look so tacky though, just all wonky like they're glued on with prit-stick by an industrial accident victim missing some key phalanges.

This is also why your wife takes you with her shopping. You make her feel better if she can't get it......."oh, you didn't want that ugly shit anyway".

Exactly.

It's difficult living here to think the same way about it, though. Somewhere like MBK is so full of every style under the sun for under $20 it's hard to maintain the precarious conviction that expensive shoes are somehow better. There are lots of ppl into their labels of course, but even the 'hi-so' Thai folks can't resist a bargain pair of heels for 199 baht on the street, in a market, or in the low-end shopping centres. It's all ultimately the same bar the price tag, i.e. shoes that look like this or that, that you like or don't, so you just start to embrace the reality of it, I think. What shoes couldn't a Thai girl effectively have? None, really. It just shifts the goal posts and chips away at our pretenses. Same with jeans. While not for the ppl with means who will only shop in high-end places I think for most it starts to feel pointless spending a lot on any clothes that aren't very individual and uncommon-looking or made with expensive materials. I know so many well-off but frugal Thai women (not the guys so much) who think this way. I think it's a good thing, though I'm not saying the opposite is bad.

.

[Edited 9/17/11 19:15pm]

PurpleJedi said:

JustErin said:

Really?

H&M has great styles, but it's not usually the best quality. I'm all about fabric and sometimes they have pieces that are made from decent materials....but even those better quality pieces are very inexpensive.

Well, consider this;

A polo shirt at H&M for $9.95 seems like a great deal...until you touch it and realize it's about as soft as #3 grade sandpaper.

You find a nice, soft cotton one on another rack...but that one's $24.99 - the same price as GAP.

You find a boy's pair of jeans for $9.95 and say, "great deal"...until your son tries it on and it looks like something from the Goodwill section at Wal-Mart.

The ones that fit him nice and look fashionable are $29.99 - same price as a pair of Levi's.

I did buy myself a pair of jeans there for $20 that do fit me nice and are comfortable as hell.

But for the most part, I can get better deals at Macy's when you wait for a sale.

i agree with you about H&M, i like some of their stuff for my husband and son, but i also usually go to Macy's when they have a sale. just bought my husband some great Ralph Lauren clothes there for cheaper than walmart prices because i hit their sales rack.

kimrachell said:

PurpleJedi said:

Well, consider this;

A polo shirt at H&M for $9.95 seems like a great deal...until you touch it and realize it's about as soft as #3 grade sandpaper.

You find a nice, soft cotton one on another rack...but that one's $24.99 - the same price as GAP.

You find a boy's pair of jeans for $9.95 and say, "great deal"...until your son tries it on and it looks like something from the Goodwill section at Wal-Mart.

The ones that fit him nice and look fashionable are $29.99 - same price as a pair of Levi's.

I did buy myself a pair of jeans there for $20 that do fit me nice and are comfortable as hell.

But for the most part, I can get better deals at Macy's when you wait for a sale.

i agree with you about H&M, i like some of their stuff for my husband and son, but i also usually go to Macy's when they have a sale. just bought my husband some great Ralph Lauren clothes there for cheaper than walmart prices because i hit their sales rack.

The sad thing about poor quality is when you fall in love with the color and cut and then after the first wash that great fit or color is just gone . It is the same you feel when someone doesn't come through with a promise.

Deadflow3r said:

The sad thing about poor quality is when you fall in love with the color and cut and then after the first wash that great fit or color is just gone . It is the same you feel when someone doesn't come through with a promise.

It's also extremely important to know how to care for a garment. Sometimes, it isn't the construction that's the problem.

Genesia said:

Deadflow3r said:

The sad thing about poor quality is when you fall in love with the color and cut and then after the first wash that great fit or color is just gone . It is the same you feel when someone doesn't come through with a promise.

It's also extremely important to know how to care for a garment. Sometimes, it isn't the construction that's the problem.

This is so true when you are buying vintage. Some people think also that if you "pay good money" for something it should wear like denim and be that easy to take care of. They are not prepared for how delicate some items are.

I am really loving shopping or at least browsing on line. Anybody else getting hooked on the endless options of the internet?

Deadflow3r said:

Genesia said:

It's also extremely important to know how to care for a garment. Sometimes, it isn't the construction that's the problem.

This is so true when you are buying vintage. Some people think also that if you "pay good money" for something it should wear like denim and be that easy to take care of. They are not prepared for how delicate some items are.

Exactly.

We see it all the time in the comments on our website. For some reason, people equate a heavier textile weight with "quality." Very often, something that is finer, lighter and softer is actually higher quality or more expensive.

I have garments that I've owned for years that have never been washed or cleaned. A wool blazer, for example, never really has to be cleaned. As long as you don't totally sweat it out or spill something on it, an occasional brushing or steaming, and a spritz with vodka, is all it needs.

Genesia said:

Deadflow3r said:

This is so true when you are buying vintage. Some people think also that if you "pay good money" for something it should wear like denim and be that easy to take care of. They are not prepared for how delicate some items are.

Exactly.

We see it all the time in the comments on our website. For some reason, people equate a heavier textile weight with "quality." Very often, something that is finer, lighter and softer is actually higher quality or more expensive.

I have garments that I've owned for years that have never been washed or cleaned. A wool blazer, for example, never really has to be cleaned. As long as you don't totally sweat it out or spill something on it, an occasional brushing or steaming, and a spritz with vodka, is all it needs.

Do people still wear sweat guards? Back in the 80's when I started looking at older clothes I wondered how the hell did these women not ruin their dresses because some styles were very fitted around the armpit. I read that man of those ladies had sweat guards. I never saw the damn things but they made perfect sense to me. You know the styles I am talking about, that 50's look where the sleeve is either cap or 3/4 length and a very fitted armhole. Do they even make such a thing?

Deadflow3r said:

Genesia said:

Exactly.

We see it all the time in the comments on our website. For some reason, people equate a heavier textile weight with "quality." Very often, something that is finer, lighter and softer is actually higher quality or more expensive.

I have garments that I've owned for years that have never been washed or cleaned. A wool blazer, for example, never really has to be cleaned. As long as you don't totally sweat it out or spill something on it, an occasional brushing or steaming, and a spritz with vodka, is all it needs.

Do people still wear sweat guards? Back in the 80's when I started looking at older clothes I wondered how the hell did these women not ruin their dresses because some styles were very fitted around the armpit. I read that man of those ladies had sweat guards. I never saw the damn things but they made perfect sense to me. You know the styles I am talking about, that 50's look where the sleeve is either cap or 3/4 length and a very fitted armhole. Do they even make such a thing?

Yup. They're called "dress shields" - and you can still buy them. You slung them under your arm and hooked them to your bra straps, usually.

They're still used a lot in theatrical costumes that aren't easily cleaned.

Genesia said:

Deadflow3r said:

Do people still wear sweat guards? Back in the 80's when I started looking at older clothes I wondered how the hell did these women not ruin their dresses because some styles were very fitted around the armpit. I read that man of those ladies had sweat guards. I never saw the damn things but they made perfect sense to me. You know the styles I am talking about, that 50's look where the sleeve is either cap or 3/4 length and a very fitted armhole. Do they even make such a thing?

Yup. They're called "dress shields" - and you can still buy them. You slung them under your arm and hooked them to your bra straps, usually.

They're still used a lot in theatrical costumes that aren't easily cleaned.

Thanks, I really should have checked it out waaay before now. I ruined the lining of a great sweater at least once. I have a thick middle, no matter how thin I got, so I never bought any of the 40's and 50's styles that were really fitted. By the time they fit my waist the rest of the dress or suit was huge. Twenties and sixties styles fit my Campbell Soup kid shape the best. I have been going on the internet looking at 20 styles for hair and make-up as well as clothes just to get a feel for the balance of the look. It is not as sexy of a look as the following decades that Dita Von Teese likes to emulate but I am built NOTHING like Dita.

Peter Som and Thakoon, Fall-Winter 2011

Stuart Weitzman Mcallen

so target is presenting the plaid in outer wear (that's a good knock off) and if you squint at the target boots you'll see a little of the military merge from the designer's p.o.v. - note: the designer boots are from 2010-2011 collection, however they have that durable rainy snowy weather appeal for me, even past 2011.

i so like saving my money. once in a while i buy one designer clothing item, then add my own affordible flair. i'd like to buy high fashion designs in clothing, but i'd rather give a portion of my extra monies in groceries to the local food banks.

anyway this is a neat thread.

[Edited 9/19/11 9:58am]

Deadflow3r said:

Genesia said:

Yup. They're called "dress shields" - and you can still buy them. You slung them under your arm and hooked them to your bra straps, usually.

They're still used a lot in theatrical costumes that aren't easily cleaned.

Thanks, I really should have checked it out waaay before now. I ruined the lining of a great sweater at least once. I have a thick middle, no matter how thin I got, so I never bought any of the 40's and 50's styles that were really fitted. By the time they fit my waist the rest of the dress or suit was huge. Twenties and sixties styles fit my Campbell Soup kid shape the best. I have been going on the internet looking at 20 styles for hair and make-up as well as clothes just to get a feel for the balance of the look. It is not as sexy of a look as the following decades that Dita Von Teese likes to emulate but I am built NOTHING like Dita.

You have to go with what works for you. For what it's worth, a lot of curvier women who wanted to emulate that straighter 20s and 60s shape actually had to flatten their bosoms - I mean, like, literally strap themselves down - to do it.

I've always sort of liked that flapperish style - but I'm way too curvy for it.

Genesia said:

Deadflow3r said:

Thanks, I really should have checked it out waaay before now. I ruined the lining of a great sweater at least once. I have a thick middle, no matter how thin I got, so I never bought any of the 40's and 50's styles that were really fitted. By the time they fit my waist the rest of the dress or suit was huge. Twenties and sixties styles fit my Campbell Soup kid shape the best. I have been going on the internet looking at 20 styles for hair and make-up as well as clothes just to get a feel for the balance of the look. It is not as sexy of a look as the following decades that Dita Von Teese likes to emulate but I am built NOTHING like Dita.

You have to go with what works for you. For what it's worth, a lot of curvier women who wanted to emulate that straighter 20s and 60s shape actually had to flatten their bosoms - I mean, like, literally strap themselves down - to do it.

I've always sort of liked that flapperish style - but I'm way too curvy for it.

It is exactly like hair, you want what you don't have. I ALWAYS wanted to look like Rita Hayworth but that is not my body type or even face structure. The looks of Louise Brooks or Clara Bow are much more suited to my full cheeks and large eyes along with my junior-fit body.

free2bfreeda said:

Affordable fall fashion finds at Target Sept 14, 2011 AM by Jessica Padykula http://www.sheknows.com/b...-at-target

Fall 2011’s Most Wearable Trends

http://www.glamour.com/fa...ds#slide=1

Peter Som and Thakoon, Fall-Winter 2011

Stuart Weitzman Mcallen

so target is presenting the plaid in outer wear (that's a good knock off) and if you squint at the target boots you'll see a little of the military merge from the designer's p.o.v.

i so like saving my money. once in a while i buy one designer clothing item, then add my own affordible flair. i'd like to buy high fashion designs in clothing, but i'd rather give a portion of my extra monies in groceries to the local food banks.

anyway this is a neat thread.

Thanks for posting a pic and thanks for the compliment. I like the bag(4) and the plaid jacket the best. They both can give casual that pulled together look I need.

Deadflow3r said:

Genesia said:

You have to go with what works for you. For what it's worth, a lot of curvier women who wanted to emulate that straighter 20s and 60s shape actually had to flatten their bosoms - I mean, like, literally strap themselves down - to do it.

I've always sort of liked that flapperish style - but I'm way too curvy for it.

It is exactly like hair, you want what you don't have. I ALWAYS wanted to look like Rita Hayworth but that is not my body type or even face structure. The looks of Louise Brooks or Clara Bow are much more suited to my full cheeks and large eyes along with my junior-fit body.

I have a Clara Bow face and a Mae West figure. Deal with that mess.

Genesia said:

Deadflow3r said:

This is so true when you are buying vintage. Some people think also that if you "pay good money" for something it should wear like denim and be that easy to take care of. They are not prepared for how delicate some items are.

Exactly.

We see it all the time in the comments on our website. For some reason, people equate a heavier textile weight with "quality." Very often, something that is finer, lighter and softer is actually higher quality or more expensive.

I have garments that I've owned for years that have never been washed or cleaned. A wool blazer, for example, never really has to be cleaned. As long as you don't totally sweat it out or spill something on it, an occasional brushing or steaming, and a spritz with vodka, is all it needs.

I have thought that is odd, that the best clothing is "Dry Clean Only," or like you say, no cleaning at all. I mean, I understand what you're saying, that the fabric is delicate, but it seems odd that the best dressed people are wearing the dirtiest clothes

I guess certain clothes are not every day clothes, so if they are only worn once a year or so they won't get too dirty...but then if you are a smelly boy that may be less the case.

NDRU said:

Genesia said:

Exactly.

We see it all the time in the comments on our website. For some reason, people equate a heavier textile weight with "quality." Very often, something that is finer, lighter and softer is actually higher quality or more expensive.

I have garments that I've owned for years that have never been washed or cleaned. A wool blazer, for example, never really has to be cleaned. As long as you don't totally sweat it out or spill something on it, an occasional brushing or steaming, and a spritz with vodka, is all it needs.

I have thought that is odd, that the best clothing is "Dry Clean Only," or like you say, no cleaning at all. I mean, I understand what you're saying, that the fabric is delicate, but it seems odd that the best dressed people are wearing the dirtiest clothes

I guess certain clothes are not every day clothes, so if they are only worn once a year or so they won't get too dirty...but then if you are a smelly boy that may be less the case.

Oh, dear - I seem to have given an incorrect impression.

The reason a wool blazer may not ever need to be cleaned is because a) it is never actually worn against the skin (there is always another layer between you and that garment) and b) wool (because of its lanolin content) is naturally hygienic. That means it will actually shed soil.

The part of a wool blazer that is most likely to get funky is the lining - and that's because it is most likely made of something like polyester. (Bemberg rayon is a little better.)

A lot of garments that are marked "Dry clean only" are marked that way not because the garment fabric is terribly delicate - but because other elements used in the construction (interfacings, shoulder pads, etc.) don't take very well to being doused in liquid (like wash water). It's more about preserving the garment's original shape and condition.

And frankly, a lot of manufacturers say "Dry clean only" purely to indemnify themselves against laundry illiterates. A lot of folks just don't know how to care for clothing.

Genesia said:

NDRU said:

I have thought that is odd, that the best clothing is "Dry Clean Only," or like you say, no cleaning at all. I mean, I understand what you're saying, that the fabric is delicate, but it seems odd that the best dressed people are wearing the dirtiest clothes

I guess certain clothes are not every day clothes, so if they are only worn once a year or so they won't get too dirty...but then if you are a smelly boy that may be less the case.

Oh, dear - I seem to have given an incorrect impression.

The reason a wool blazer may not ever need to be cleaned is because a) it is never actually worn against the skin (there is always another layer between you and that garment) and b) wool (because of its lanolin content) is naturally hygienic. That means it will actually shed soil.

The part of a wool blazer that is most likely to get funky is the lining - and that's because it is most likely made of something like polyester. (Bemberg rayon is a little better.)

A lot of garments that are marked "Dry clean only" are marked that way not because the garment fabric is terribly delicate - but because other elements used in the construction (interfacings, shoulder pads, etc.) don't take very well to being doused in liquid (like wash water). It's more about preserving the garment's original shape and condition.

And frankly, a lot of manufacturers say "Dry clean only" purely to indemnify themselves against laundry illiterates. A lot of folks just don't know how to care for clothing.

what about a wool suit (ie slacks that do touch your skin)?

[Edited 9/19/11 11:24am]

NDRU said:

Genesia said:

Oh, dear - I seem to have given an incorrect impression.

The reason a wool blazer may not ever need to be cleaned is because a) it is never actually worn against the skin (there is always another layer between you and that garment) and b) wool (because of its lanolin content) is naturally hygienic. That means it will actually shed soil.

The part of a wool blazer that is most likely to get funky is the lining - and that's because it is most likely made of something like polyester. (Bemberg rayon is a little better.)

A lot of garments that are marked "Dry clean only" are marked that way not because the garment fabric is terribly delicate - but because other elements used in the construction (interfacings, shoulder pads, etc.) don't take very well to being doused in liquid (like wash water). It's more about preserving the garment's original shape and condition.

And frankly, a lot of manufacturers say "Dry clean only" purely to indemnify themselves against laundry illiterates. A lot of folks just don't know how to care for clothing.

what about a wool suit (ie slacks that do touch your skin)?

Do you wear underwear? How bad do you sweat?

If "yes" and "not bad," turn the pants inside out and brush them with a clothing brush occasionally, and then spritz them with vodka. The question of how often to actually have them cleaned depends on the above - and how often you wear them.

I have several pairs of wool trousers that have never been cleaned. But I wear them a few times a season, always wear underwear, and don't sweat them out.

Genesia said:

NDRU said:

what about a wool suit (ie slacks that do touch your skin)?

Do you wear underwear? How bad do you sweat?

If "yes" and "not bad," turn the pants inside out and brush them with a clothing brush occasionally, and then spritz them with vodka. The question of how often to actually have them cleaned depends on the above - and how often you wear them.

I have several pairs of wool trousers that have never been cleaned. But I wear them a few times a season, always wear underwear, and don't sweat them out.

Also most suiting is "freshened" up with a steamer... a steamer gets hot enough to kill bacteria and odors. Genesia is right, too much drycleaning will destroy the suit especially if its a finer high twist wool.

I steam most of my clothes.. some clothes you just can not iron and some you need to iron.

paintedlady said:

Genesia said:

Do you wear underwear? How bad do you sweat?

If "yes" and "not bad," turn the pants inside out and brush them with a clothing brush occasionally, and then spritz them with vodka. The question of how often to actually have them cleaned depends on the above - and how often you wear them.

I have several pairs of wool trousers that have never been cleaned. But I wear them a few times a season, always wear underwear, and don't sweat them out.

Also most suiting is "freshened" up with a steamer... a steamer gets hot enough to kill bacteria and odors. Genesia is right, too much drycleaning will destroy the suit especially if its a finer high twist wool.

I steam most of my clothes.. some clothes you just can not iron and some you need to iron.

How much did you invest in a steamer? I think men who wear suits frequently should own one.

paintedlady said:

Genesia said:

Do you wear underwear? How bad do you sweat?

If "yes" and "not bad," turn the pants inside out and brush them with a clothing brush occasionally, and then spritz them with vodka. The question of how often to actually have them cleaned depends on the above - and how often you wear them.

I have several pairs of wool trousers that have never been cleaned. But I wear them a few times a season, always wear underwear, and don't sweat them out.

Also most suiting is "freshened" up with a steamer... a steamer gets hot enough to kill bacteria and odors. Genesia is right, too much drycleaning will destroy the suit especially if its a finer high twist wool.

I steam most of my clothes.. some clothes you just can not iron and some you need to iron.

Excellent point!

When I hear about people dry cleaning cashmere sweaters, for example, it makes me They have no idea what dry cleaning does to delicate fibers. Handwashing or steaming is much better.

The one thing you have to be careful of on wool trousers is not to steam out the crease. Steam down either side.

Genesia said:

paintedlady said:

Also most suiting is "freshened" up with a steamer... a steamer gets hot enough to kill bacteria and odors. Genesia is right, too much drycleaning will destroy the suit especially if its a finer high twist wool.

I steam most of my clothes.. some clothes you just can not iron and some you need to iron.

Excellent point!

When I hear about people dry cleaning cashmere sweaters, for example, it makes me They have no idea what dry cleaning does to delicate fibers. Handwashing or steaming is much better.

The one thing you have to be careful of on wool trousers is not to steam out the crease. Steam down either side.

You are giving excellent advice her Genesia and paintedlady!!! I am really glad I started this thread now! Explain that vodka spritzing thing please....do you have a little spray bottle of cheap vodka? What fabrics do you use it on?

Genesia said:

NDRU said:

what about a wool suit (ie slacks that do touch your skin)?

Do you wear underwear? How bad do you sweat?

If "yes" and "not bad," turn the pants inside out and brush them with a clothing brush occasionally, and then spritz them with vodka. The question of how often to actually have them cleaned depends on the above - and how often you wear them.

I have several pairs of wool trousers that have never been cleaned. But I wear them a few times a season, always wear underwear, and don't sweat them out.

yes that makes sense, my knees touch the wool, but they are not exactly pouring sweat

When you first mentioned a vodka spritz I thought you were joking about spilling your drinks

Deadflow3r said:

Genesia said:

Excellent point!

When I hear about people dry cleaning cashmere sweaters, for example, it makes me They have no idea what dry cleaning does to delicate fibers. Handwashing or steaming is much better.

The one thing you have to be careful of on wool trousers is not to steam out the crease. Steam down either side.

You are giving excellent advice her Genesia and paintedlady!!! I am really glad I started this thread now! Explain that vodka spritzing thing please....do you have a little spray bottle of cheap vodka? What fabrics do you use it on?

Exactly - spray bottle of cheap vodka. (Or vodka/water in a 1:1 ratio.) The beauty part is that you can use it on any fabric. (Though you might want to test something like silk on a hidden area first.) And unlike stuff like Febreze, it leaves absolutely no scent behind.

I learned about this from a wardrobe mistress on a play I did. They use it on costumes that they don't want to have cleaned repeatedly.

NDRU said:

Genesia said:

Do you wear underwear? How bad do you sweat?

If "yes" and "not bad," turn the pants inside out and brush them with a clothing brush occasionally, and then spritz them with vodka. The question of how often to actually have them cleaned depends on the above - and how often you wear them.

I have several pairs of wool trousers that have never been cleaned. But I wear them a few times a season, always wear underwear, and don't sweat them out.

yes that makes sense, my knees touch the wool, but they are not exactly pouring sweat

When you first mentioned a vodka spritz I thought you were joking about spilling your drinks

Not this time.