/fa/ - Fashion

Oxford is meant to be thick. Linen isn't.
Oxford = cold weather
Linen = Hot
Easy to understand. Any gitman bros are good , anne , saint laurent etc

>>6770080
>is perfect on me
So buy it.

just bought one from size 8 needle, I am very happy with the fit.. dont know if it is an internetional availiable brand though

brooks brothers

>>6770088
Oxford is the sort of look I'm going for... Now I don't mind if it's a little thick but for layering Thom Browne was adding like, 4 inches of bulk...

I want something along the line of the PRL material, thickness etc but a higher quality.

>>6770134
Good call but they don't have any good ones, extra slim fit is the only wearable fit IMO and my options for that are some disgusting grosgrain trim Red Fleece (seriously those colors they use for the trim are vile), and the plain white looks too formal...

https://www.everlane.com/n/0sf5da

Everlane is the answer to your question. Great fit. Awesome fabric.

>>6770491
>ref code
gtfo

https://www.everlane.com

>>6770495
Are you that autistic that you can't copy/paste without the code? Let alone that angry that you have to post about it?

>>6770080
if the RL one fits you perfectly then buy it. i have a couple RL oxfords and their great shirts

>>6770617
they're*

>>6770491

>>6770617
Thank you anon, I may try an A.P.C. then if they're no good I'll go for the RL.

>>6770088

there's a huge variance in thickness when it comes to oxford shirts man. gitman are extremely thick compared to uniqlo, but it's not always more expensive=thicker.

OP asked a valid question, and wearing linen is much more difficult anyway

maybe try Gustin. they use really high quality fabrics and a variety of them. if you e-mail them I'm sure they would help you out finding something light.

actually just looked and this is a "light" fabric: https://www.weargustin.com/store/166

of course you have to wait a bit if you buy from there

>>6770495
just sage and report
Also, Everlane isn't really worth the money OP.

>>6770717
>$55
>implying that is expensive
pls go, poorfag.

>>6771305
>implying that is expensive
He didn't imply that.
Reading comprehension, faggot.

Try Club Monaco

>>6771347
>worth
>the money
Perhaps it's you that needs to learn how to comprehend English? The phrase implies that "the money" is a tangible amount of money. $55 is not a tangible amount of money unless you are a poorfag.

Stay jelly, faggot.

APC vs Naked and famous vs Norse Projects vs Acne?

What to cop?

>>6773416
My N&F oxford comes in tomorrow, otherwise I'd tell you how it is.

>>6773628
Sweet, post fit in WAYWT or Fuccboi thread if you can

>>6770663
>gitman are extremely thick compared to uniqlo
this isn't true in my experience
thom browne is v. thick tho
OP try our legacy

>>6771489
>tangible
i dont think that word means what you think it means twat

>>6770134
>brooks brothers
shit fits ahoy
unless you're a pudgy boomer who wears a visible crewneck under his shirts, don't shop there
they're "extra slim fit" shirt is a fucking joke.

>>6771489
Are you kidding me? He said it isn't worth the money. That means no matter what the price is numerically, the shirt isn't worth that amount. It has nothing to do with being poor or rich.

>>6771489
what a shitposting asshat

>>6776425
second, my gitman bro vintage white button up is quite thin

>>6776446
not everything has to be skintight

>>6770080

do people still wear oxford shirts or shirts in general without a jumper on top?

kinda makes me feel physically projectile vomit

>>6776450
If you're going to bother shopping at a place as boring and conservative as Brooks Brothers, you probably want a "proper" fit. You won't get it unless you are slightly overweight.

>>6776464
but a slim fit isn't necessarily a 'proper' fit
baggy oxfords are the GOAT spring top

>>6776479

wearing oxford shirts is lame

>>6776479
no thank u