MPB is proud to be the world's most popular men's sewing blog!



Apr 18, 2013

White Linen Pants + Sunglasses Update!



Readers, thank you so much for your many comments yesterday regarding my Warby Parker sunglass selections.

I'm not sure if you've ever seen these vintage 80's Commes des Garcons frames I own.  I found them years ago at the flea market for cheap and if nothing else, they always get a laugh from Michael.  But they are different.



To be honest, there's something about those Warby Parker frames...they're just so retro-trendy and tasteful they're almost boring, do you know what I mean?  And while $95 is cheaper than many frames out there, it's still a chunk of change.  I also agree with those of you who said that the frames are all a bit wide for my (relatively) narrow face -- though that's very much the look these days. 







Anyway, I still have four more days to make up my mind though I doubt it will take that long.

In other, arguably more exciting news, I'm making good progress with my white linen pants, which I hope to finish tomorrow.   So far there haven't been any major hiccups, though I had a minor panic attack when I realized you could see the white pocketing through the white linen.  I thought this linen that was sufficiently opaque; perhaps not.  I may need to buy white tights...

I redrafted the front slant pockets so that the inside edges meet the fly, which is how my H&M linen pants are made.  It gives the front added heft (like underlining) and holds the pockets more firmly in place.







The zipper -- a metal YKK I bought at Sil Thread -- went in very smoothly.  The metal zippers seem easier to install -- maybe it's the zipper tape, which feels more substantial and less cheap than the zipper tape on plastic zippers.





Just because I'm a glutton for punishment, I made two back double welt pockets on these pants (one is standard).  I may yet add a buttonhole to each.





I decided I'll be fitting these at the center back seam, where I left a wide seam allowance (normal at the bottom but gradually wider toward the top), rather than at the sides, as I normally do with jeans and other casual pants.  That means that the waistband will split at the back.  I've never had to let out my pants or take them in, but it's nice to have the option -- especially if these should shrink, though I don't plan to ever put them in the dryer unless I'm trying to tighten up the weave to make them less see-through, if that's even possible.

Readers, that's it.

In closing, would you be awfully disappointed if I didn't choose one of the pairs of sunglasses I showed you yesterday?  I have this fear of looking like your typical Sartorialist hipster.  Do you see me that way?  I do sort of like Winston and Jasper, however.

Maybe the best part is receiving the frames in the mail, trying them on, and blogging about them.  Then it's like, whatever, sunglasses...

.

Have a great day, everybody!

27 comments:

  1. Nope. I honestly think they're all too wide and too big for you and overwhelm your face. And for the pants... white boxers. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Peter - I think 'white pockets showing through the outsides' on white pants is an issue, no matter how opaque the pants are. I've read of people basically sewing the pockets closed and cutting the pockets themselves OUT. I've also heard suggestions of making the pockets out of skin-colored (well, whatever one's skin color IS)fabric as a solution. I have to admit though that I've avoided making/wearing white pants for just that reason.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I've always read to use flesh-toned (meaning, the color of YOUR flesh) pocketing when making white pants, for that very reason. I would also add that one also should wear flesh-toned underwear, when wearing said pants. Same with women's white shirts - white bras clearly show through, whereas flesh-toned or grey (depending on skin tone) do not. This was a huge revelation for me. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Think about the fabric you could buy for $95, and decide if you like the glasses as much as you would that fabric.

    You do know, that if you buy one of those frames, then the fates will drop a thrift find in your path that you like even better...

    ReplyDelete
  5. Re sunglasses: Always wear what YOU like best. Simple. I underline white garments regardless of fabric weight. Being a woman, I have the option of making pants without pockets and have never put pockets in white pants. I agree with Kris C. about the undies. Menswear has so many rules that I can certainly understand why you have fun sewing for Cathy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I guess my next project is white boxer shorts. ;)

      Delete
  6. Sunglasses, imho, are like shoes - buy the best you can afford! It's your eyes, and your feet - VERY important body parts!

    And by best sunglasses, I mean lens quality over vanity. That said, you DO want to feel like you look good (same with shoes, right?). I was trying to be polite, but hang it all...I don't like ANY of those sunglasses on you! Except for the Commes des Garcons, but you may not want to make quite that much of a statement every time you step out in the sun ;-D

    ReplyDelete
  7. I have the Jasper in the same Marine Algae color (or whatever), and I really like them. Previously I've always lost or broken my sunglasses before July is over. But when you pay $95 for a good pair, you take care of them.
    People always give me compliments when I wear them, which is a nice boost in my day too.

    ReplyDelete
  8. No. That would be flesh tone boxer shorts.

    ReplyDelete
  9. No on the sunglasses. Yes on the skin-tone pockets (or underwear).

    ReplyDelete
  10. Agree -- none of those sunglasses were keepers. The Comme de Garcon ones are a kick. Your buttery shirt and white linen pants are the best harbingers of spring/summer. Looking forward to the photo shoot.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I'd keep looking for sunglasses......the flea market ones are by far the cutest anyway, others don't do nearly as much for you.

    Like so many others I wear me-skin color undies under white pants......

    Ceci

    ReplyDelete
  12. Men don't wear flesh-colored underwear. I wonder why...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I mean no offense, but wouldn't we look like Ken dolls?

      Delete
  13. Those Commes Des Garcons sunglasses are a great find. Very steam punk considering they are from the 80s. You could easily sell those. I bet Urbandon could pull them off.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I have linen trousers and they have a full lining. No pockets or underwear seen.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Replies
    1. Don't they then lose a lot of the light airiness of the linen?

      Delete
  16. I say pass on the sunglasses. I couldn't get excited about any of them. As you say, you've had all the fun of looking and blogging, and if you send them back, none of the expense of buying.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Such a relief that some of the commentators have the same feeling like me: I didn't like any of the sunglasses, I felt they were too wide for your narrow face.
    And yes on the flesh-toned pocket lining. It is very hard to find opaque linen, I have been looking for years...

    ReplyDelete
  18. go for the white linen trousers...with bright flowered boxer shorts!
    Flesh tone boxers sound yucky...
    I personally would underline the trousers with another layer of linen...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Those would be some very heavy pants!

      Delete
    2. OK...then just make them of two layers of white tulle!
      (grin)

      Delete
  19. I think you'd look better with brown frames and dark brown lenses, rather than the black. My DH used to wear black sunglasses, but since he's gone completely grey (with a white beard) he looks much better in brown.

    ReplyDelete
  20. The Commes sunglasses are very steampunk!

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts with Thumbnails