Yes or No?

[CAD]

thanks bukka,Arkady,DudleyGray,Nickefuge,justin_bridou for your advices.
when i'm saying "travel" that is more like one week urbain trip, not a wild nature trip..

i really want to buy a decent(strong too) bagpack.. any advice?

[unwashed]

thanks bukka,Arkady,DudleyGray,Nickefuge,justin_bridou for your advices.
when i'm saying "travel" that is more like one week urbain trip, not a wild nature trip..

i really want to buy a decent(strong too) bagpack.. any advice?

I use a cote&ciel bagpack. Fits nice, has padding, looks cool, laptop compartment. But likely too small for a whole week urban tripping.

Might better use a duffle with a sling. I used a duffle from North Face for a month backpacking which can transform into a bagpack as well. I also use this for family weekends.

[Arkady]

I use a cote&ciel bagpack. Fits nice, has padding, looks cool, laptop compartment. But likely too small for a whole week urban tripping.

Might better use a duffle with a sling. I used a duffle from North Face for a month backpacking which can transform into a bagpack as well. I also use this for family weekends.

Yeah I have this and it's spectacular, gets a lot of use: Patagonia Black Hole Bag

[lowrey]

damn man, the green one that pops up first looks absolutely dreadful. Even on the black one the branding is pretty bad, there are a lot better looking simple duffel bags but if you are looking for something purely utilitarian and aesthetics don't matter at all, there are of course tons of options.

Regarding backpacks, I rotate between a Cote et Ciel backpack and one from C6, both are big and fit a laptop, camera, toiletry bag and a set of clothing (pants, sweater etc) easily. Master-piece makes nice backpacks too, as does Dsptch (they also have gym and duffel bags). These are all very practical but still look nice and clean (and black...) imo.

[brettwagg]

damn man, the green one that pops up first looks absolutely dreadful. Even on the black one the branding is pretty bad, there are a lot better looking simple duffel bags but if you are looking for something purely utilitarian and aesthetics don't matter at all, there are of course tons of options.

Oh yeah that's pretty awful. I don't know for vacations I tend to just use military issue canvas duffel bags. Cheap, sturdy and inoffensive,

[Shucks]

military issue canvas duffel bags.

this.

[Arkady]

damn man,

Mine's black on black, fortunately.

[justin_bridou]

maybe he thinks you're a troll because of your name . Which would make sense

come on ... does "RickandJuliusandCarolandSaberi" make more sense ? or "Jesus violet' ?

Nice try but, as you know, don't feed the troll

no, I won't let it go, it's offensive, so please, let me know what are your problems with me or back-off. I'm making a personal affair of this. It's too easy to discredit people like this.
So buka, please elaborate here, as you don't want to do this in private

(if it is unrelated to the thread, please remember I've asked buka to go on in private but that he preferred to make a second attack publicly here ...I'm all the more willing to end this on pm, in a gentle way if this dude can be reasonable)

[justin_bridou]

As I said, "overpriced" is not an argument.

it's not because it is not an argument following your way of thinking that it is not an argument at all... and coming back to the special case of the 11 backpack, avoiding paying 250 additional euros for the 11 logo does make sense for a lot of people ... who don't like to think that the joke is on them...

I agree to pay the added "designer" value when it makes sense (the ZB bag is a perfect exemple, because there is creativity and a lot of artisanal work) but in the 11 case, you just pay for the branding.

[DudleyGray]

Haha, this is kind of a lot of hooplah over a bag. I mean it's really not that big of a deal, some people don't want any branding, some don't mind it as long as it's tasteful, some are willing to pay more for the difference, whatever, you know? It's just a bag.

Edit: the question of branding is interesting though. Traditionally, it's been a status symbol of money and taste and consumerism/marketing and that's why people hate it, and maybe it's no different here, but I view it more like a band tee. A way to signal to others who are similar what I'm about, what resonates with me culturally. Fashion is a social activity to me, and I view a bag as part of fashion, whereas others might think of it only as utility. But I will absolutely pay 200 euros more for me to feel like my "self" is being consistently and accurately represented to myself and others. A car or laptop or big tv, no I don't care at all, I don't feel any attachment, but I've definitely paid larger sums for smaller differences when it comes to fashion.

[ian+]

Edit: the question of branding is interesting though. Traditionally, it's been a status symbol of money and taste, and maybe it's no different here, but I view it more like a band tee. A way to signal to others who are similar what I'm about, what resonates with me culturally. Fashion is a social activity to me, and I view a bag as part of fashion, whereas others might think of it only as utility. But I will absolutely pay 200 euros more for me to feel like my "self" is being consistently and accurately represented to myself and others. A car or laptop or big tv, no I don't care at all, I don't feel any attachment, but I've definitely paid larger sums for smaller differences when it comes to fashion.

you shouldn't. Branding is a crime against aesthetics, the fashion world has and continues to suffer a lot due its extreme use. To me a band t-shirt gains value from the band logo in addition to a piece of clothing whose value (not financial) must have nothing to do with a logo whether it's a hidden one or not. That said, I don't think that you need a logo to recognize a garment from BBS, CCP, Rick etc.

[PurpleJesuss]

what's the difference between a recognizable aspect of a garment and branding though? Is the rick white drawstring branding? The bbs string attached to the garments? They make a piece of clothing instantly recognizable to anyone vaguely familiar with the names. Does branding need to be explicitly displayed through a print or pattern?

[DudleyGray]

ian+, I guess that's where we differ; I think excessive or poorly executed branding (ortlieb and many 11 tees) is unfortunate, but otherwise, it's not something I'll go out of my way to avoid. It's neutral or it's a visual accent that means something that nobody except fashion people know or care about. Or in the case of UC tees, it makes more sense aesthetically than a refined avant garde design sometimes. I've experimented with graphic/logo tees and "sophisticated" tees, and graphic tees make more sense for certain outfits, albeit less "SZ."

I also don't see much difference between being a shill for a designer label vs a record label. On the contrary, in my corner of the universe, the band tee is what actually has the psychological effects of branding. The guy wearing a METZ shirt gets to come off as cool and in the know, while a UC shirt is just nonsensical.

Functionally, I like the graphic print of UC tees to help define proportions of my outfits. Like with my most recent fit, I used my necklace in combination with the graphic to emphasize that the upper torso is longer than the lower torso. The actual graphic would be irrelevant to me, if not for the fact that I am indeed a maniac undercover in the literal sense. Does that make the tee ironic? I'm not sure.

[ian+]

ian+, I guess that's where we differ; I think excessive or poorly executed branding (ortlieb and many 11 tees) is unfortunate, but otherwise, it's not something I'll go out of my way to avoid. It's neutral or it's a visual accent that means something that nobody except fashion people know or care about. Or in the case of UC tees, it makes more sense aesthetically than a refined avant garde design sometimes. I've experimented with graphic/logo tees and "sophisticated" tees, and graphic tees make more sense for certain outfits, albeit less "SZ." I also don't see much difference between being a shill for a designer label vs a record label.

Functionally, I like the graphic print of UC tees to help define proportions of my outfits. Like with my most recent fit, I used my necklace in combination with the graphic to emphasize that the upper torso is longer than the lower torso. The actual graphic would be irrelevant to me, if not for the fact that I am indeed a maniac undercover in the literal sense. Does that make the tee ironic? I'm not sure.

First of all Undercover prints are great and I love them. I am not against graphic t-shirts, as a huge punk / hardcore / metal fan I started purchasing bands t-shirts from an early age. My problem is the logo show off, like taking a Zara quality t-shirt and print a gold "Gucci" logo on the front. A rather uninteresting garment gains value from the logo it carries. When it should have been the other way round. I don't know to what extent this happened in USA but in Europe there was a time when everyone was attracted merely to logos, it was madness. Nowadays fortunately not many people wear D&G or Moschino on their chest but there are still examples of certain stuff that piss me off like the classic Hermes belt with the H buckle.

[DudleyGray]

Hah, I edited my post a lot just hoping I wouldn't get quoted during that time, but here we are on a new page with my original post quoted. I guess I should preview post more carefully.

I agree with you, I absolutely am against that form of tasteless branding, and I admit there's a risk of that happening with the 11 logo. But also like the music scenes, the poseurs reveal themselves quickly.