Your recent purchases

[Faust]

I dunno man , knock-off is too harsh , Why cant we settle for inspired

& Faust is right ... the price is a big factor in adopting something that aesthetically pleases specially as a derivative of something that may be well out of reach

My point was that in the overly crowded & overlapping marketplace of artisanal clothing where lots of new designers are freely ripping off their heros or the celebrated designers as such , its nice that one of them openly says hey iam really inspired by XYZ & this is my version of that . Hopefully they can start from there and eventually grow to a aesthetic purely their own

I understand. I do think it's only natural that the stratospheric prices bring about such situations.

[Squat]

I think stratospheric craftsmanship, execution and fabrics, resulting in an according overall quality can justify prices.

[Venus in Furs]

maybe this should be in the random fashion thoughts thread, but i think people need to stop using 'quality' as a justification for highly inflated pricing. for many of the designers discussed here, the 'quality' is good at best, but for the most part it's pretty ordinary and in some cases outright rubbish. given a company like red wing [first that came into my head but there's plenty of examples] can make a pair of high grade boots, in the US, that will last a lifetime, for around $300, it's fucking disgusting the shit many designers are putting out with a price tag more than 4-5 times that. call it whatever you will— vision, scarcity, construction, production methods— most of the time you're paying for a label.

[wurm]

^^ i mostly agree with what you're getting at, but you're really over exaggerating the claim about designers discussed here having average or mediocre quality. in most cases it could be better (and should be for the price), but these brands still produce well above-average quality garments in my opinion. ordinary, at least to me, is somewhere amongst h&m, j. crew, old navy, et al. (rubbish is walmart's defects). even if things were different in the past, a $300 pair of boots is a far cry from today's norm - red wing or other.

[AKA*NYC]

maybe this should be in the random fashion thoughts thread, but i think people need to stop using 'quality' as a justification for highly inflated pricing.

"quality" strikes me as a very vague and superficial term much like "authenticity". what i think most of the individuals on this forum find important and gravitate toward is "concept". presumably the prices are based on the amount of research and development and in some cases hand work that it takes to realize a certain item. while a pair of red wings will likely outlast a ccp dripped trainer - which is all but deliberately designed to degrade at an accelerated rate - it is obvious why many would choose the latter even at a significantly higher price point.

[Dane]

I like to think of it in similar terms to patents. Person A invented/created something unique. Person B blatantly copied person A and made no contribution to the world. Person C took Person A's ideas, twisted them and made them new, unique, yet still clearly inspired. Person A and C would (speaking generally here) get a patent. Person B would not, because they brought nothing new to the table.

Designers like Rick are clearly inspired by others' ideas from the past, but he (usually) manages to make them feel new again, and is successful because of it. Someone like Philippe Starck blatantly takes ideas from others and makes them in new materials, and is again, successful because of it. There's a fine line between inspiration and copy, but if the inspired designer doesn't add anything new to the picture, through ideas, quality, or something else, they will, in time, fail.

[RCJEN]

Just recieved my guidi
Unfortunately the red 907T not I expected
so dark like blood red. Not the one I saw from 2013ss preview photos.

[morsto]

they look pretty fucking cool. let em grow on you son

[RCJEN]

yeah even though it's not my expected color,but it's still going to be my daily shoes ~

[diorowen]

"quality" strikes me as a very vague and superficial term much like "authenticity". what i think most of the individuals on this forum find important and gravitate toward is "concept". presumably the prices are based on the amount of research and development and in some cases hand work that it takes to realize a certain item. while a pair of red wings will likely outlast a ccp dripped trainer - which is all but deliberately designed to degrade at an accelerated rate - it is obvious why many would choose the latter even at a significantly higher price point.

so is quality = durability then?
IMHO I always think quality is not limited to only durability, but the concept itself, the amount of research, development, etc etc etc is counted as quality as well.

[AKA*NYC]

so is quality = durability then?
IMHO I always think quality is not limited to only durability, but the concept itself, the amount of research, development, etc etc etc is counted as quality as well.

to me the term "quality" is too vague and abstract to refer to the clothing we discuss here. if your definition of the word is all-encompassing then it can of course suffice. i am saying that quality is NOT durability and also suggesting that "concept" is more significant than durability.

[fncyths]

given a company like red wing [first that came into my head but there's plenty of examples] can make a pair of high grade boots, in the US, that will last a lifetime, for around $300, it's fucking disgusting the shit many designers are putting out with a price tag more than 4-5 times that. call it whatever you will— vision, scarcity, construction, production methods— most of the time you're paying for a label.

This resonates with me as well. Red Wing, Frye, Docs, Church's, Chucks, Ferragamo etc. all amazing shoes. No hefty price point. There's no fucking way I could ever justify spending more than $1k on a pair of shoes. Hell, my hand made Burberry Prorsum brogues weren't even near that.

I definitely appreciate the quality of Guidi leather. And their boots for sure have perked my attention, but curious to know if their leathers hold up well when weighed against previous mentioned brands...

[zamb]

to me the term "quality" is too vague and abstract to refer to the clothing we discuss here. if your definition of the word is all-encompassing then it can of course suffice. i am saying that quality is NOT durability and also suggesting that "concept" is more significant than durability.

In all fairness, I think quality can and should be defined within the context of clothing in general, and the brands specifically discussed within the parameters of the SZ universe.

I certainly dont expect a CCP or Guidi boots to last as long as a Redwing or Timberland boots, however if I buy CCP or Carpe, I am buying largely because of the aesthetic appeal and not for the quality I would expect from a work boot. That being said, if I pay $1K+ for a pair of boots i would expect that i can wear it on a daily basis and with reasonable care should last me at the very least 1-2 years.

I think there are certain specific things that comes to mind when we speak of quality, that can and should be separated from Aesthetics.

1. .1 Did the designer/ manufacturer achieve the best possible fit if the garment consistent with the intended look he/ she was trying to achieve
2. Did the designer use the best possible materials in the execution of the garment.
3. Is the construction of the garment such that it is the most durable it could be without compromising the aesthetic look of the item
4. Is the item at all anatomically consistent with the human body so that it is comfortable to the wearer without a compromise of the designers vision

I could give more, but I guess the basic premise is, there can, and should be fairly objective standards of determining the quality of a garment within the context/ market which the designer is working.

[fncyths]

That being said, if I pay $1K+ for a pair of boots i would expect that i can wear it on a daily basis and with reasonable care should last me at the very least 1-2 years.

Zam, since you wear mainly this upper echelon of footwear, do those shoes last that long?

In this day and age how can this price point / quality be justified? Just curious. I'm trying to open up this can of worms because personally I've been toying with the possibility of saving more and potentially making the leap...

I know that if I spend $1k or so on a Harnden blazer that It'll last me through the apocalypse. Rick leather from previous seasons as well as other items could fall into place here. For me there is a price point when the feeling of paying for quality and durability is eclipsed by inflated name brand egotism...

[francojean23]

Zam... I think the problem with your elaboration is that it positions quality as something largely antithetical to the aesthetic.

Regarding the larger issue, I don't see much point in trying to connect or justify price by quality, aesthetic, material, label, etc. Price is artificial, driven by the market more than anything tangible.