Length Balancing: Pant Outfits
Previously I explained employing the Golden Mean principle of pleasing proportion when wearing a dress. After clarifying a point or two today, I hope to show how the same principle works when wearing pants.
Two easy ways to make a pant outfit appear balanced:
In the first example, the 3 "Cuisennaire Rods" are measured from the top of the head to the waist; the 5 are from waist to sole. This is the same concept as a skirt and hose and shoes, all the same color, with a tucked in blouse. In the second, the head is not included in the calculation; the 3 units are from collar to shirt-tail and the 5 are measured from the bottom of the belt to the hem of the jeans. (I have short legs so I always incorporate my shoe color into the bottom portion of my outfit.)
Have I totally lost all of you wonderful people? Cast your vote here. Should I keep on explaining this topic, or just move on?
1) See yesterday's post for a way to test a monochromatic look. If the color works for you, feel free to wear a monochromatic look of any length.
2) A 3 to 5 ratio is close to the same thing as 60/40. It is okay to vary proportions a few inches from the ideal, it makes things more interesting.
Two easy ways to make a pant outfit appear balanced:
1) Wear a top which approximates the colors and contrast level in your head, with a different color trousers. Tuck the top in at the waist.
2) Pair low-rise jeans with a colored top, untucked, and a belt.
In the first example, the 3 "Cuisennaire Rods" are measured from the top of the head to the waist; the 5 are from waist to sole. This is the same concept as a skirt and hose and shoes, all the same color, with a tucked in blouse. In the second, the head is not included in the calculation; the 3 units are from collar to shirt-tail and the 5 are measured from the bottom of the belt to the hem of the jeans. (I have short legs so I always incorporate my shoe color into the bottom portion of my outfit.)
Have I totally lost all of you wonderful people? Cast your vote here. Should I keep on explaining this topic, or just move on?
posted by Rebecca | 11:53 AM
5 Comments:
No, please continue. I'm just starting to get it!
Didn't you mean 40/60? or have I completely missed the idea??
Actually, 40/60 is the same thing as 2 to 3. Not exactly 3 to 5, but close enough. 2 1/2 to 4 also works. But it doesn't really matter which is first, only how they relate to each other.
Uhh, just wanted to let you know you have a broken link in this post.
I wonder how long it's been that way. ???
A true friend will tell you when you have spinach in your teeth. :)
Post a Comment
<< Home