Angie, thank you so much for your thoughts when you have time!! I hate to disturb your weekend, and will not be taking these to the seamstress until Tuesday morning because we have a holiday here tomorrow.
That said, I am very nervous about these pants and where/ how to hem. I feel quite clueless about proportions.
Also, please excuse all the folds and bunches. They are the very devil to pin. They are on the loose/ baggy side up top (except the waist) but are quite tapered towards the bottom and pinning messes with the way they hang -- you just can't really tell how they will look! (There's a lining, too, and that complicates things further).
The shorter length is about 5.5 inches higher. The longer length is maybe 1.5 or 2 inches (not sure) but at any rate is a couple of inches above my ankle, which is where they seem to be showing them these days and where several people suggested I try pinning.
There were also a number of suggestions that I have these pants further tapered. That would mean tapering at the top, because there is no way to make them narrower (and still fit me) in the calf area.
The thing is, they do not have any stretch, and I'm not sure how they would look or feel if they were a whole lot narrower. However, I'm willing to consider that if it seems like the best idea. I don't want to go looking 15 years out of date. For myself, I quite like the look and feel of baggy pants. But maybe these look just too dated?
Also, these are the RW&Co. shoes I bought yesterday. Will they pass muster?
Thank you all for your thoughts and help on this.
That said, I am very nervous about these pants and where/ how to hem. I feel quite clueless about proportions.
Also, please excuse all the folds and bunches. They are the very devil to pin. They are on the loose/ baggy side up top (except the waist) but are quite tapered towards the bottom and pinning messes with the way they hang -- you just can't really tell how they will look! (There's a lining, too, and that complicates things further).
The shorter length is about 5.5 inches higher. The longer length is maybe 1.5 or 2 inches (not sure) but at any rate is a couple of inches above my ankle, which is where they seem to be showing them these days and where several people suggested I try pinning.
There were also a number of suggestions that I have these pants further tapered. That would mean tapering at the top, because there is no way to make them narrower (and still fit me) in the calf area.
The thing is, they do not have any stretch, and I'm not sure how they would look or feel if they were a whole lot narrower. However, I'm willing to consider that if it seems like the best idea. I don't want to go looking 15 years out of date. For myself, I quite like the look and feel of baggy pants. But maybe these look just too dated?
Also, these are the RW&Co. shoes I bought yesterday. Will they pass muster?
Thank you all for your thoughts and help on this.
This post has 3 photos. Photos uploaded by this member are only visible to other logged in members.
If you aren't a member, but would like to participate, please consider signing up. It only takes a minute and we'd love to have you.
