OCI/callbacks/etc Men's Clothing Mega-thread

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby romothesavior » Wed Aug 11, 2010 3:28 pm

blowhard wrote:Image

What do you think about these but in a burgundy (lighter) for a dark navy suit? The sales guy at Macys said they sell a lot of these in burgundy for that reason. I think I'm going to buy these in black but I need to go over $100 so I can get 25% off tomorrow.

That is the exact same pair Bronte posted two pages ago. We all said they look pretty good. Burgundy is fine, but it may be too light for an interview. I'd stick with black or the darker cordovan shade.

03121202698008
Posts: 3002
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 2:07 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby 03121202698008 » Wed Aug 11, 2010 3:30 pm

romothesavior wrote:
blowhard wrote:Image

What do you think about these but in a burgundy (lighter) for a dark navy suit? The sales guy at Macys said they sell a lot of these in burgundy for that reason. I think I'm going to buy these in black but I need to go over $100 so I can get 25% off tomorrow.

That is the exact same pair Bronte posted two pages ago. We all said they look pretty good. Burgundy is fine, but it may be too light for an interview. I'd stick with black or the darker cordovan shade.


Yeah, I know. I was asking about the burgundy though... I'd probably wear the black shows for interviews but someone mentioned wearing cordovan for everyday wear earlier...

03121202698008
Posts: 3002
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 2:07 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby 03121202698008 » Thu Aug 12, 2010 11:04 am

Before I go back to the store...burgundy shoes (lighter reddish color) with a dark navy suit? Yes or no?

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby romothesavior » Thu Aug 12, 2010 11:09 am

blowhard wrote:Before I go back to the store...burgundy shoes (lighter reddish color) with a dark navy suit? Yes or no?


I'd say yes, but too light for an interview. I have a pair of shoes exactly like the ones in the picture in a light reddish burgundy color and wear them with navy often.

User avatar
Duralex
Posts: 447
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 9:25 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby Duralex » Thu Aug 12, 2010 11:12 am

The most conservative answer is no--the shade of burgundy/cordovan/oxblood needs to be as dark or darker than the suit. I tend to think there's a little leeway here, but if you want to play it safe get 'em darker.

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby romothesavior » Thu Aug 12, 2010 11:20 am

Duralex wrote:The most conservative answer is no--the shade of burgundy/cordovan/oxblood needs to be as dark or darker than the suit. I tend to think there's a little leeway here, but if you want to play it safe get 'em darker.


Nothing wrong with it for wearing around the office.

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby romothesavior » Thu Aug 12, 2010 11:21 am

Also, does anyone here have an opinion on button-down collars on dress shirts?

User avatar
Duralex
Posts: 447
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 9:25 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby Duralex » Thu Aug 12, 2010 11:31 am

Agree that they're fine for the office--I had the impression he wanted dual-purpose. I like the way burgundy looks--and it wears well. Develops 'character' where black just starts to look shabby.

Button down debate can be like a holy war. I tend to think it depends on the shape of your face/neck. If it's flattering for you it might be worth it to look for suits that go well with them. I can't say exactly what that means, but I know it when I see it. Some jackets look right with them, some really don't.

That probably isn't too helpful.

Flusser doesn't have much to say about it except that they can look "casually stylish" but are "too often favored by exactly the kind of men who should avoid them--the double-chinned set. Softer-chinned men need slightly higher and firmer collars to compensate for the lack of a strong line under their face."
(Style and the Man, p.26)
Last edited by Duralex on Thu Aug 12, 2010 11:36 am, edited 1 time in total.

03121202698008
Posts: 3002
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 2:07 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby 03121202698008 » Thu Aug 12, 2010 11:33 am

Duralex wrote:Agree that they're fine for the office--I had the impression he wanted dual-purpose. I like the way burgundy looks--and it wears well. Develops 'character' where black just starts to look shabby.

Button down debate can be like a holy war. I tend to think it depends on the shape of your face/neck. If it's flattering for you it might be worth it to look for suits that go well with them. I can't say exactly what that means, but I know it when I see it. Some jackets look right with them, some really don't.

That probably isn't too helpful.


I'm getting the same shoes in black/burgundy. I'd wear black for the interviews. I have to break $100 to get 25% off and that is the best deal I can find on a decent leather-soled shoe.

User avatar
Waterman47
Posts: 176
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:44 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby Waterman47 » Thu Aug 12, 2010 11:34 am

romothesavior wrote:Also, does anyone here have an opinion on button-down collars on dress shirts?


I laughed.

User avatar
Duralex
Posts: 447
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 9:25 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby Duralex » Thu Aug 12, 2010 11:37 am

Yeah...I wasn't sure.

User avatar
Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 385
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 6:32 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby Thomas Jefferson » Thu Aug 12, 2010 11:38 am

Waterman47 wrote:
romothesavior wrote:Also, does anyone here have an opinion on button-down collars on dress shirts?


I laughed.

User avatar
BunkMoreland
Posts: 289
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 3:16 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby BunkMoreland » Sat Aug 14, 2010 3:44 am

for what it's worth, I was feeling adventurous and popped in my pocket square for my cleary interview recently. If dude noticed he didn't say anything at all, and I got a callback. Don't fret too much over this stuff guys.

User avatar
Mr. Fancy
Posts: 595
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2008 7:22 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby Mr. Fancy » Sat Aug 14, 2010 5:05 am

BunkMoreland wrote:for what it's worth, I was feeling adventurous and popped in my pocket square for my cleary interview recently. If dude noticed he didn't say anything at all, and I got a callback. Don't fret too much over this stuff guys.


same. i actually recieved multiple complements on mine and got more call backs than not - so it couldnt have hurt too much :roll: . you def can dress in a way that interviewers notice while still being conservative.

User avatar
HenryKillinger
Posts: 248
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:56 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby HenryKillinger » Fri Aug 20, 2010 11:50 am

I think David Beckham's suit needs some attention here.

--ImageRemoved--
I commend him for the three piece, but everything else is facepalm.

User avatar
Clint Eastwood
Posts: 612
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 2:15 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby Clint Eastwood » Fri Aug 20, 2010 1:24 pm

HenryKillinger wrote:I think David Beckham's suit needs some attention here.

--ImageRemoved--
I commend him for the three piece, but everything else is facepalm.


Yikes.

User avatar
zettsscores40
Posts: 2118
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:49 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby zettsscores40 » Fri Aug 20, 2010 1:57 pm

HenryKillinger wrote:I think David Beckham's suit needs some attention here.

--ImageRemoved--
I commend him for the three piece, but everything else is facepalm.


Meh it's Hollywood and he's rich and famous. He can get away with it.

User avatar
HenryKillinger
Posts: 248
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:56 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby HenryKillinger » Fri Aug 20, 2010 1:59 pm

zettsscores40 wrote:
HenryKillinger wrote:I think David Beckham's suit needs some attention here.

--ImageRemoved--
I commend him for the three piece, but everything else is facepalm.


Meh it's Hollywood and he's rich and famous. He can get away with it.

But why does he want to get away with that?

Renzo
Posts: 4265
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:23 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby Renzo » Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:18 pm

HenryKillinger wrote:
zettsscores40 wrote:
HenryKillinger wrote:I think David Beckham's suit needs some attention here.

--ImageRemoved--
I commend him for the three piece, but everything else is facepalm.


Meh it's Hollywood and he's rich and famous. He can get away with it.

But why does he want to get away with that?

It looks like something a 1940's gang boss would have made for himself while in prison.

User avatar
zettsscores40
Posts: 2118
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:49 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby zettsscores40 » Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:19 pm

HenryKillinger wrote:
zettsscores40 wrote:
HenryKillinger wrote:I think David Beckham's suit needs some attention here.

--ImageRemoved--
I commend him for the three piece, but everything else is facepalm.


Meh it's Hollywood and he's rich and famous. He can get away with it.

But why does he want to get away with that?


Cause he can.

User avatar
HenryKillinger
Posts: 248
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:56 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby HenryKillinger » Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:19 pm

I'm having a hard time figuring his lapel out. Is that a double notch on the right (his left) lapel?

Renzo
Posts: 4265
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:23 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby Renzo » Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:21 pm

HenryKillinger wrote:I'm having a hard time figuring his lapel out. Is that a double notch on the right (his left) lapel?

I think it's just an ugly suit-induced optical illusion

User avatar
HenryKillinger
Posts: 248
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:56 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby HenryKillinger » Fri Aug 20, 2010 4:32 pm

Renzo wrote:
HenryKillinger wrote:I'm having a hard time figuring his lapel out. Is that a double notch on the right (his left) lapel?

I think it's just an ugly suit-induced optical illusion

It is indeed. I ctrl+zoomed in like crazy and its actually an exaggerated peak lapel. The button hole on his left lapel just looks like a shadow created by a notch. Damn these low resolution photos.

User avatar
zettsscores40
Posts: 2118
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:49 pm

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby zettsscores40 » Fri Aug 20, 2010 5:11 pm

How do you guys feel about tie bars on a regular basis?

User avatar
seespotrun
Posts: 2395
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:36 am

Re: Suits (Clothing, not law)

Postby seespotrun » Fri Aug 20, 2010 5:32 pm

zettsscores40 wrote:How do you guys feel about tie bars on a regular basis?

The same way I feel about pencil protectors.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.