Showing all 38 replies.
>>
>>
>>18713125
In no particular order
>the guy looks thin and frail
>almost everything he wears in the video is loose and shapeless
>can't tell much about the fabrics but they don't seem to be of particular quality, probably Zara or some other fast fashion brand, which equals no drape
>shoes are too big and chunky
>tl;dr
horrendous silhouette
>>
File: cf7e83ba4a6da23ffc8d556c57a22d04.jpg (110.4 KB)
>>18713125
Because color isn't the only factor. The fit, the thickness and quality of material, and most of all, the guy wearing the clothes, matter just as much.
Those pants look like shit because they have no structure to them and are unironed. They look like flimsy, bullshit plastic pants from a Chinese bargain bin. And stacking slacks is retarded and low class. Either get them hemmed or cuff them.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>18713125
The fits are all trash, but strictly color-wise the white, black, and camel shirts are fine. The blue, green, and pink don't follow color theory and look atrocious. You can make them work with a jacket or something. Not the way he's wearing them, though.
>>
>>
>>18713463
If “muh color theory” says light blue, light green and light pink don’t go with brown, then muh color theory is retarded. Imagine needing le fucking “theory” to match fucking colors. My sides, retarded amerifat subhumans.
With that being said, yes, of course all his fits are trash.
>subhuman tiktok content “creator” (more like regurgitator)
Could it be different from trash?
Fucking retards everywhere.
>>
>>18713465
>If he was slightly more muscular
Or, he could just wear clothes that fit him, not trash bags. He is muscular enough. You don't need to be a roidcel to look muscular. He looks like a scrawny retarded because he's wearing baggy clothes. That's the entire reason why fatfucks wear baggy clothes, because they break your body's outline and make you look skinny.
>>
>>18713465
>>18713475
>100% polyester
>tiktok
>and they discuss it seriously
>>
>>
>>
File: Screenshot 2026-06-02 21.55.24.png (701.6 KB)
>>18713125
Looks like a goofier micheal
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>18713475
>He is muscular enough. You don't need to be a roidcel to look muscular.
He is not. And even if the clothes don't fit, even if you're skinny like that, being muscular gives you a shoulder/trap/back area that makes stuff that's loose still look good.
>>
File: Untitled.jpg (37.2 KB)
>>18713125
It's not just about "green" or "blue". Imagine comparing olive to sage. That green shirt he puts on there does not work IMO. It would work if it were olive though. Color is a lot more complicated than primary colors. You have variances in hue, saturation and brightness.
Color is also only 1 part of the puzzle. You still have other ways pieces of clothes can not work together like fit, formality, fabric, etc.
For specifically this video I find the t-shirts look a little cheap. The blue shirt is very light for those pants, I think a lighter brown would work much better. Same with pink shirt. I think other color pants (white, khaki, light grey) would work much better with that pink shirt. Not a fan of that black one either as the contrast is extremely low brightness wise, but saturation wise is quite large. It both looks simultaneously almost the same color while also being very different. I would prefer to pair the black with a taupe over a brown.
>>
>>18714163
Why is it that bright colors usually=bad, whereas something muted or pastel tends to be good? The only group I've seen that pull off bright colors are blacks and that's because they have a dark base to work with.
>>
>>18714216
It's not that they always look bad, but they can wash our the contrast on everything else because they contrast hardcore with literally everything else. This can be problematic if you have little contrast in your features e.g. light skin + light hair.
In general highly saturated colors (think #FF0000 red) tend to look quite juvenile, like a child painting with only primary color crayons vs an artist who uses a range of less saturated colors after mixing the paint to get the correct and more accurate color. They call a lot attention to that particular garment. This can be a look, particularly with streetwear when that's the whole point, but overdoing it can feel overwhelming. They are also not as seen in nature so they can look quite jarring.
On the other hand a pastel color like pink doesn't demand you focus your entire focus on just that garment and instead look at the outfit as a whole.
In general color is a tool and there's usually no objectively always bad colors or always good colors, and a lot of it depends on the interplay between colors. Increased contrast from a color to another, and in general highly saturated colors draw the attention, often excessively. More muted colors (think navy vs blue for a dark less-saturated blue, or pastel blue vs blue for a lighter less-saturated blue) *often* (but not always) harmonize better with other colors in the outfit. This isn't always the case like in those dark pants as I find there's still too much of a jarring contrast with how dark those brown pants are.
>The only group I've seen that pull off bright colors are blacks and that's because they have a dark base to work with.
your skin is basically another color in your outfit. if you're pale then saturated colors can make your skin seem comparatively unsaturated. e.g. a bright red can pull the life out of your face (making it seem more white vs slightly pink). This can be to your advantage if you want to remove an undertone too though.
>>
>>
File: Brown-Pants-Outfit-@jessie_bush.jpg (96.4 KB)
>This can be to your advantage if you want to remove an undertone too though.
This can be in your skin, or even another color in your outfit btw. I have a cigar brown shirt which is quite saturated and I have slightly yellowish beige pants. On their own I find the pants to be too yellow and that a light khaki/beige works better in most cases, and likewise the cigar seems too yellow, but when paired the pants bring down the yellowness of the cigar shirt, and the shirt does the same for the pants. It's about an interplay between colors. Whether that's between pieces of clothes, or between them and your skin, between the environment you're in, etc.
pic is kinda what I meant by a lighter brown, although not a guy. I would still prefer a light khaki over it though most times. This might be just personal preference with brown though (it just looks "wrong" in the OP), as dark brown and white/cream/light beige tops looks great most times, but maybe it's because there's more harmony as they're in the same tone.
I think if I had to generalize it, you can contrast in 1-2 of hue/saturation/brightness fine, but doing all 3 is too much most of the time.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>18713125
i can tell it all came from zara because of the cheap fabrics and terrible cuts and drape. that stuff might fool the proles but its not going to pass off to anyone keen on fashion. its not going to get you any respect from men but you might be able to trick a woman into thinking that stuff is nice because they generally don't know much about fashion. i can't tell you how many women i know that think zara is designer lmao.
>>
>>18714163
texture too. the fabrics the guy in op are wearing are completely textureless and reek of cheap. even just the way they reflect light exudes cheapness. it looks like it would feel gross if i touched that fabric.
whereas in your example even from the low resolution photo i can see the texture on those pants and that shirt. looks matte, soft, fuzzy, welcoming.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>