[Winhes2]

by which I mean, don't have the background field of your suit, shirt, tie, square match the dominant coloring of your face. Perhaps the face could appear in small parts of the pattern in the tie or square. Matching the face in the jacket, shirt and tie, would resemble a silhouette. Even having it in the shirt or tie would defeat the purpose of drawing the viewer's eye to the face.

Is there a consensus here that the main prescription of not wearing one's face is a useful one?

If not, please post photos as examples of well-dressed mean wearing their face in the main fields of jacket, shirt, tie or square.

 

[Troones]

I have to agree. I really like tan suits and would love to wear one. But with my complexion they just wash me out. They look great on some people, but not on me.

 

[Flanderian]

by which I mean, don't have the background field of your suit, shirt, tie, square match the dominant coloring of your face. Perhaps the face could appear in small parts of the pattern in the tie or square. Matching the face in the jacket, shirt and tie, would resemble a silhouette. Even having it in the shirt or tie would defeat the purpose of drawing the viewer's eye to the face.

Is there a consensus here that the main prescription of not wearing one's face is a useful one?

If not, please provide evidence by posting photos of well-dressed mean wearing their face in the main fields of jacket, shirt, tie or square.

I think I understand the principle you're driving at, but you must forgive me, upon reading it quickly in my debilitated state, the first image that came to mind was a tie with little pictures of my mug all over it!

I suspect your principle was inferred from an observed effect, but I might rather propound it as; the coloring of your clothing should harmonize with your own coloring.

For the sake of simplicity, let's divide human coloring into three broad racial categories which we might typify as; Asian, African and Caucasian. We'll ignore the fact that there's actually a myriad of variety in coloring among each group, and instead focus on whatever stereotype we might have of each. And the point is that even in that single stereotype, a specific individual's coloring is very, very complex. For this reason, trying to exactly match, or avoid matching, a specific color, or colors, is largely impossible. Whereas picking a color, or colors, that are harmonious with them is comparatively easy.

In addition to each complex assemblage of skin tones, we also need to consider hair color. I lived half my life with very dark brown/black hair, and half with light grey hair, and when my hair turned grey, it made a major difference in which colors are harmonious.

The final reason I can't concur with this principle is that among men with brown skin, the right earth tones can be some of the most flattering shades they can choose.

Of course I should add that trying to harmonize colors by racial groups is also futile, and you need to attend to the specific coloring of the individual. You can consider the skin color of a sub-Saharan African, a gentleman of a particular Indian ethnicity or Australian Aboriginal, who may actually share similar skin colors, but as individuals their skin color will differ not just among the three groups, but among the individuals within the same group. Just as you can't necessarily equate the color of an Icelander with that of a Sicilian, though both Caucasian.

 

[Andy]

Winhes2:

For more research: How To Look Your Best, , and

 

[Peak and Pine]

Weeds are sprouting from my laptop.

A first, the first thread that tries real hard to make dressing well a chore.

 

[Dhaller]

Do people actually do that? Go for a clothing/face match?

I just never thought about such a thing!

(I'm sort of olive-complected, and admittedly never particularly thought I looked good in greens. Unconscious compliance, I suppose.)

DH

 

[Tim Correll]

I agree with Winhes2. Basically, he’s saying that dark skinned Asian and Hispanic people and light skinned Black people look bad in light brown against bare skin due to their skin being light brown.

He’s also basically saying that dark skinned White people and light skinned Asian and Hispanic people look bad in beige against bare skin due to their skin being beige. Winhes2 is also basically saying that dark skinned Black people look bad in dark brown against bare skin due to their skin being dark brown.

Finally, he’s basically saying that light skinned white people look bad in cream against bare skin due to their skin being cream.

Against bare skin, clothing and shoes that are the same color as the skin is a washed out look. Winhes2 is 100% right about that.

 

[Matt S]

I agree with Winhes2. Basically, he's saying that dark skinned Asian and Hispanic people and light skinned Black people look bad in light brown against bare skin due to their skin being light brown.

He's also basically saying that dark skinned White people and light skinned Asian and Hispanic people look bad in beige against bare skin due to their skin being beige. Winhes2 is also basically saying that dark skinned Black people look bad in dark brown against bare skin due to their skin being dark brown.

Finally, he's basically saying that light skinned white people look bad in cream against bare skin due to their skin being cream.

Against bare skin, clothing and shoes that are the same color as the skin is a washed out look. Winhes2 is 100% right about that.

No, that is not right. People can look great in clothes that match their skin tone so long as that is not the only colour they are wearing. A small bit of contrast added to the outfit is all that is needed for some people. In most cases the problem is caused by wearing the wrong undertones.

 

[Matt S]

I have to agree. I really like tan suits and would love to wear one. But with my complexion they just wash me out. They look great on some people, but not on me.

You can wear tan suits, but it needs to be the right shade of tan. Some men look better in a golden tan while others look better in a rosy tan. I have a cool complexion and need a rosy tan. Golden tans wash me out. Undertones are most important.

 

[Flanderian]

No, that is not right. People can look great in clothes that match their skin tone so long as that is not the only colour they are wearing. A small bit of contrast added to the outfit is all that is needed for some people. In most cases the problem is caused by wearing the wrong undertones.

You can wear tan suits, but it needs to be the right shade of tan. Some men look better in a golden tan while others look better in a rosy tan. I have a cool complexion and need a rosy tan. Golden tans wash me out. Undertones are most important.

 

[Winhes2]

Andy, thank you for those resources.

Flanderian, regarding harmonization, I wasn't thinking of the many things that could make a man look good. I was wondering whether the prescription might correctly state one thing that does not.

The prescription didn't arise after thinking about the skin colors or races that have been mentioned. It arose from two things:

a. Years ago in this forum Alexander Kabbas suggested I shop in the company of a talented oil artist. The thinking was the artist, being able to combine colors well, would have a good eye for skin undertones etc. So, sometimes I take my very talented step-uncle shopping with me. On one occasion I mentioned liking a red shirt. He told me to look in the mirror. There he pointed out that my ruddy complexion has much red in it and that the shirt would be adding more of the same and that I shouldn't wear it. That was part one of the prescription's inspiration.

b. The second part occurred when I was fooling around on https://coolors.co where one may upload a selfie, use a color picker to select five colors from the selfie, and the software will give harmonizing palettes based on those colors. When it did, it included reds similar to those in my face and I was reminded of my step-uncle's instruction. So, I was wondering how to use such software tools but have them show only colors other than those too closely matching the face. But first, I thought I would post a question to see whether members agreed with a prescription based on my step-uncle's thinking.

Flanderian, regarding, "Of course I should add that trying to harmonize colors by racial groups is also futile, and you need to attend to the specific coloring of the individual." Agreed. I wasn't suggesting the former at all and I was suggesting the latter entirely. These online color tools don't know which race or which mix of races the user is. They simply suggest colors harmonizing well with the colors one picks from the selfie. So, they do their thing equally well with every unique skin coloring.

Flanderian, I had assumed it would be fine to use the color picker tool to identify hair color and eye color and match them. I've seen people with dark hair wear colors that match and I've seen people match their eye color in their clothing, both with good results. So, I wasn't proposing a rule to not wear one's hair or eyes.

Matt, regarding "People can look great in clothes that match their skin tone so long as that is not the only colour they are wearing. A small bit of contrast added to the outfit is all that is needed for some people." Matt, since you typed it, I've no doubt that you are correct. How about some example photos to show what you mean so we can put a nice visual mnemonic to what you are saying.

Matt, regarding, "You can wear tan suits, but it needs to be the right shade of tan. Some men look better in a golden tan while others look better in a rosy tan. I have a cool complexion and need a rosy tan. Golden tans wash me out. Undertones are most important." Matt, that is cutting things really finely. Unless someone takes along someone as talented as my step-uncle or you, they are probably unable to notice the distinctions you are mentioning. My proposed prescription to not wear one's face rules out all of these close calls and leaves the user safely choosing from colors that cannot go wrong. I guess my proposed prescription is for those, like myself, and perhaps the majority, who have untalented eyes. (Some may recall my abramost.com idea as another attempt to really simplify things so those of us without talent can avoid mistakes).

Flanderian, regarding your initial impression, the shirts of this guy and his dog come to mind, I'm not sure why. I'll claim their colorings are similar enough to make it relevant, but it could just be someone wearing a face, or, I just think it is funny.

 

[winghus]

 

[Winhes2]

Thankyou Winghus

Those may be examples of what Matt was describing, at least in the second photo. But in that photo he appears to be in shadow.

Here is an image where I took a color picker and picked three samples from his face and three samples from his suit in each image. Each row is from the same image. I was trying to use closeup on my screen, so there may be a couple of mistakes. For example the far right image in row numbered 4 is his skin from the fourth image, but I don't see that in the photo with my eye.

Row three is the one where he is in shadow with Dianna.

My proposed prescription to not wear one's face is shown in the image on the right. There I've taken three samples of his face from the first image and put part of his face over it. I'm suggesting that we not wear any of those three colors as the main fields of jacket, shirt, tie, square. Maybe I'll do another one of that shot except with blue between his face and those fields. That may be what Matt is saying.

.

The other image is his face on his suit. I think I would call them different except maybe in that shadowed one.

I'll post again in a few minutes with an image of his face on his face colorings with blue between them.

 

[Winhes2]

If the clothing colors are as different from the face as shown in three of the four examples (I'm not sure we can draw conclusions from the shadowed one) shared by Winghus, I see no problem wearing them and I don't think they would be caught by my proposed prescription to not wear one's face.

Below is his face against colors drawn from his face with another color present in different ways. These would be caught by my prescription not to wear one's face.

Maybe he could wear that third look on the far right. The ones in the middle and on the left would be difficult without an unusual hat and scarf : ) In all cases, I think applying the prescription to rule these out would leave him with better chances of wearing more complimentary ensembles.

Or maybe these would all look a lot better in the wild in actual clothes instead of in these goofy rectangles of color.

So, more examples from the wild, with the clothing even closer to the face, may be helpful.

 

[Winhes2]

Maybe this is a better example than the middle image above of what Matt meant by, "People can look great in clothes that match their skin tone so long as that is not the only colour they are wearing. A small bit of contrast added to the outfit is all that is needed for some people. In most cases the problem is caused by wearing the wrong undertones. "

But, I'm not certain that I've correctly understood what Matt meant. My guess is this or the one on the right above may be sort of what he meant. But, I could be completely wrong. Also, I'm sure example photos of clothes on men would convey his meaning far better than these amateur images of mine.

Maybe he meant clothes as close to the facial color as those in the images posted by Winhus. If so, I agree, those go fine with Charles' skin.

I meant colors actually drawn from the face as shown in my examples above. Colors that close to the skin color are what I thought might not be able to look good on a man and could be ruled out by the prescription.

.

 

[EponymousFunk]

by which I mean, don't have the background field of your suit, shirt, tie, square match the dominant coloring of your face. Perhaps the face could appear in small parts of the pattern in the tie or square. Matching the face in the jacket, shirt and tie, would resemble a silhouette. Even having it in the shirt or tie would defeat the purpose of drawing the viewer's eye to the face.

Is there a consensus here that the main prescription of not wearing one's face is a useful one?

If not, please post photos as examples of well-dressed mean wearing their face in the main fields of jacket, shirt, tie or square.

I will have to pull down my copy of Alan Flusser's "Dressing the Man". It has been ages since last reading it, but I do recall a section (perhaps a chapter?) on accounting for one's complexion and coloring in choosing what to wear and combine.

Regards,

 

[FLMike]

I ceased to wear my face about halfway through the second set of the Dead & Company show in Atlanta on Saturday night. I picked it up from the floor on my way out of the venue.

 

[smmrfld]

I ceased to wear my face about halfway through the second set of the Dead & Company show in Atlanta on Saturday night. I picked it up from the floor on my way out of the venue.

This post makes the most sense of any in this thread thus far.

 

[Big T]

I ceased to wear my face about halfway through the second set of the Dead & Company show in Atlanta on Saturday night. I picked it up from the floor on my way out of the venue.

This past June 30th marked 24 years to the last time I saw the Grateful Dead together. A very short six weeks later Jerry passed.

There have only ever been two bands, one was the Dead and the other asn't.

 

[Charles Dana]

"Don't wear your face." Hannibal Lecter would enthusiastically agree. If you ever need to escape from prison, chew off the face of a guard, then slip it over your own. Do a switcheroo with the clothes. You'll get yourself an ambulance ride to freedom every time.