https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom Style Advice for Fashion Lovers en-US Tue, 21 Apr 2026 17:08:40 +0000 http://bbpress.org/?v=1.0.2 q https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/search.php https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom/page/2#post-2059357 Mon, 09 Sep 2019 22:58:43 +0000 Helena 2059357@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>The Cat, I've found tons of variations on the theme in the last few days ... Definitely not original on my part, but fun nonetheless.</p> <p>Susie, if you love having lots of variety in combinations etc, then as Angie would say, milk it and rock on! The diversity of approaches to wardrobe is part of what makes this community interesting! </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059352 Mon, 09 Sep 2019 22:19:37 +0000 The Cat 2059352@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Thank you for this reminder, torontogirl. This concept is not new-- I think I first read about it in an "Awake!" article in the '80s, and later I have seen similar maths in thrifted books from the '50s. Anyway, I appreciate your positive and appreciative spirit. I agree with much of what you have written here and find myself in your camp.</p> <p>Unlike many others, I don't have special tops for skirts and others for pants, etc. In theory, I can wear all my tops with all my bottoms, all my toppers and all my shoes. However, in a few cases, I don't, i.e. because I don't like the look of any pattern worn with any other pattern. But I love to play around with my clothes, do it every day, and have seldom worn the exact same outfit twice.</p> <p>I wouldn't call myself a uniform dresser and would also not label my style as minimal. My style is casual elegant with some playfulness. I crave variety in colours and love variety in categories (e.g. skirts/dresses/pants/jeans; blouses/shirts/pullovers/tees; blazers/cardigans/coatigans/bomber jackets), but not necessarily in lines. I know which lines suit my body best and stick to them--this might be a key to make your math work successfully.</p> <p>I believe this math could work (more or less) for several other styles, too. Generally, in my experience, many people have way more options in their closets than they are aware of.</p> <p>By the way, being able to mix most tops with most bottoms and most toppers helps making packing easier. And having a travel wardrobe with a big mix-and-match potential is a real bonus. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059348 Mon, 09 Sep 2019 22:05:49 +0000 Susie 2059348@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>When I look at examples of mix and match wardrobes, I can't help but think that I would quickly get tired of each piece. I could wear top&nbsp; A with pants 1, 2 and 3 and that would be 3 different outfits. But I would be sick of wearing that same top!&nbsp;</p> <p>The other factor for me is that I generally have a preferred way to wear something. So if I like top A best with pants 2, I'd rather wear that combination each time instead of mixing it up just for the sake of having a different option.&nbsp;</p> <p>I think I am just trying to justify having more clothes than I actually need! </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059231 Mon, 09 Sep 2019 13:20:13 +0000 Helena 2059231@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>That could totally be the case Sarah - I can do the slot machine approach because I have a somewhat minimal/simple style, very little variation in terms of level of dress required, a consistent silhouette AND a neutral-heavy wardrobe.</p> <p>Come to think of it, it's almost like a self-balancing system:</p> <p>- people with uniform/minimal/low variation dressing can use the slot machine approach --&gt; outfit variety</p> <p>- people with more diversity among colours, silhouettes, etc. are less able to use the slot machine approach BECAUSE of their pre-existing outfit variety</p> <p>Both approaches lead to a similar theoretical/psychological/emotional result (although they look entirely different in practice) ... </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059226 Mon, 09 Sep 2019 13:04:12 +0000 SarahD8 2059226@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Great exercise, <b>torontogirl</b>! And what an interesting discussion. I am with <b>LaPed</b> and some others upthread in that I have quite a few combinations in my wardrobe that work in theory but that I wouldn't want to wear in practice. The idea that this is about being a "uniform dresser" is interesting. In many ways I am a uniform dresser, especially in cold seasons -- I am almost always wearing some version of long-over-lean. But even within that uniform silhouette, there are some combinations that I wouldn't want to wear. I wonder if this "slot machine" approach works best for people with a rather minimalist style?&nbsp;</p> <p>Regardless, I totally agree with you about the power of adding one carefully chosen piece and getting many more outfits! My big insight recently is that the piece that unlocks the most outfits is not necessarily the most "basic" one. (Again, that might be specific to my more maximalist style.)&nbsp; </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059222 Mon, 09 Sep 2019 12:51:01 +0000 notsaf 2059222@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Wonderful! I’m entirely with you as a uniform dresser. The numbers are phenomenal! </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059202 Mon, 09 Sep 2019 12:06:02 +0000 RobinF 2059202@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Very fun exercise! I'm with LaPed in that I have a lot of "rules" about what tops and bottoms go together so I definitely don't have that many variations, but totally agree with you that adding even just one new item can feel like a big wardrobe refresh. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059198 Mon, 09 Sep 2019 11:47:07 +0000 Helena 2059198@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>So, definitely this was done from the perspective of a uniform dresser which I am, but just for fun, I redid the math but assumed that two of my top types would only go with two of my bottom tops based on sihouette. Yes, the number is much lower BUT it still worked out to 32 outfits, and that's per silhouette! So the principle is transferrable, even if the numbers are not. Again, this is not meant to say we should have less items, less silhouettes, or anything. It's more to suggest, if boredom hits, even adding one versatile piece might net 10s of new outfits </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059177 Mon, 09 Sep 2019 03:25:46 +0000 Gigi 2059177@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>This sounds like it was a fun exercise! You remind me of former forum member Mo who used to do lots of mathematical calculations. Her posts were always fun to read.</p> <p>I'm with&nbsp;<b>La Ped&nbsp;</b>in that I have a lot of requirements for proportions and color combinations that make things not as simple for me. But then again, I am not a uniform dresser. I think that this type of exercise would work really well for uniform dressers.&nbsp; </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059163 Mon, 09 Sep 2019 01:20:57 +0000 Jaime 2059163@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>My question with LaPed and others is how do different silhouettes (longer top vs shorter top, higher waist vs. lower waist) work interchangeably. In other words a shorter top and a lower waist don't really work. But I am all for mixing things up in principle! </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059161 Mon, 09 Sep 2019 01:06:36 +0000 Sal 2059161@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>I have noticed that some of the capsule bloggers and youtubers talk about this concept and do some interesting mixes eg wearing a dress as a top under a skirt etc... which gives them X options with a limited wardrobe. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059157 Mon, 09 Sep 2019 00:13:31 +0000 Helena 2059157@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Style fan, mine is very much like that but I think it would be impossible to get it 100% unless you really had no variation. Was it you who mentioned style bee? I've been reading it obsessively!! </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059153 Sun, 08 Sep 2019 23:56:34 +0000 Style Fan 2059153@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Interesting exercise.&nbsp; I am aiming for a wardrobe where every top goes with every bottom.&nbsp; But I have tops that don't go with certain bottoms.&nbsp; And toppers that only work with certain bottoms.&nbsp; I am headed in that direction. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059131 Sun, 08 Sep 2019 21:46:55 +0000 Kate 2059131@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>What an interesting exercise &amp; analysis. I’m pretty much of a uniform dresser myself, and I really admire the simplicity, utility and ease of TG’s wardrobe. I covet it, in fact. .Except in reality my closet size and the conditions I place on what I wear is pretty much what Janet wrote. Yikes! I need to make some changes....in my thinking and in my wardrobe. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059118 Sun, 08 Sep 2019 20:46:32 +0000 Sal 2059118@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Interesting numbers! </p> <p>I often get in a rut - wear my navy sweater with the same jeans. Tweaks of belts and bags can make a difference. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059109 Sun, 08 Sep 2019 19:59:50 +0000 JAileen 2059109@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Fun exercise! Yes, in theory we could have this many combinations, but my reality is similar to Janet’s. Some tops only work with certain bottoms, and certainly some pants only work with a certain heel height, eliminating lots of shoes. </p> <p>For LaP: I used to have a skirt and vest where the skirt was olive, and the vest was stripes of olive and shades of red and burgundy. I really loved wearing it. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059108 Sun, 08 Sep 2019 19:59:32 +0000 Helena 2059108@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Thanks for all the interesting insights!</p> <p>I totally get that this is not a one-size-fits-all approach ... for example, if you have a variety of silhouettes that you wear, then that's almost a sub-collection that you'd have to do run the exercise for (although, I guess by that logic, if you have multiple sub-collections, you'd still have a good bit of variety!) In my case, I have a pretty tight uniform, so virtually everything mixes and matches, but that's obviously not going to be true for everyone, nor would everyone WANT it to be! :)</p> <p>BTW, I am trying to argue for less vs. more pieces to work with - only just amazed at how exponentially a versatile piece can increase options - although of course there are all sorts of reasons why expecting too much versatility from everything can be limiting.</p> <p>I just did the same exercise for my 'deep winter' clothing, and I can see why I get so sick of my clothes, as the effect works in both directions - the option categories I have for this season are less for day to day, and thus I have exponentially <b><i>less</i></b><i> </i>variety. But now I can see that adding one other "category" will make a lot of difference, so that's valuable and good food for thought when I shop. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059107 Sun, 08 Sep 2019 19:45:44 +0000 Carla 2059107@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Works for me! This summer while challenging myself to wear my button downs, I did a run with white jeans, and then with my black 'OTF' bottoms. Then I did the same thing with my 3 lace tank tops. Changed up footwear and bag. When it's cool enough for a topper, you get a whole other set of variables! </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059085 Sun, 08 Sep 2019 18:59:51 +0000 Janet 2059085@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>What LaP says here is exactly why this tactic doesn't work for me, at least not at this stage in my style life. I have a number of tops and bottoms that -- in theory -- could be worn together. But considering the factors she mentions (length of top and rise of bottom are a definite consideration), plus my own aversion to much pattern mixing or seasonal confusion, and a pickiness about what really *goes* with what... this just doesn't do it for me. Plus I live in a climate with too much seasonal variation to have a singular wardrobe that works year-round. But also, like Christy, I crave variety and have a larger closet than many here. I have had times in the past when I wore pretty much the same silhouette every day, and I enjoy not having that restriction at this point in my life. However, I can see how there might come a day when I want to pare back in a serious way, and this could serve me well at that time. Interesting exercise, for sure!&nbsp; </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059084 Sun, 08 Sep 2019 18:57:54 +0000 rachylou 2059084@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>I remember Angie saying some people store complete outfits together. That always interested me. I’m definitely a Garamimals sort. Pick a top from the tops section, pick pants from the pants section. But I notice, I never wear blouses and jeans together. These closet sections do not go together in my mind automatically. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059081 Sun, 08 Sep 2019 18:43:32 +0000 LaPed 2059081@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>I've done this before too. In the abstract, the possibilities are almost endless. But in practice, I have a lot of little internal rules that reduce my options, even within a pretty tight colour palette. I won't wear navy tops with mid or dark blue denim, or black tops with black bottoms, or red/burgundy with olive, or horizontal stripes with corduroy, etc etc. And then you get into fit issues: certain tops being just a bit too cropped to look good with older, lower-rise bottoms; or too long to wear with wide-legs and midi skirts. Oh, and pants inseam as it relates to shoe vamp -- I have very particular combos for very particular seasons!&nbsp; </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059077 Sun, 08 Sep 2019 18:37:06 +0000 christy 2059077@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Such a great analysis! I sometimes look at the tightly edited wardrobes of forum members and think that I should strive to be more streamlined, but I crave variety and favor a large closet. I just finished a closet edit (with Angie! ) and feel good about where I am right now. But I still ponder a smaller wardrobe from time to time. Especially when I see an analysis like this that works through the number of outfits you could actually achieve with a smaller closet. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059074 Sun, 08 Sep 2019 18:12:19 +0000 nemosmom 2059074@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Love this! I've seen a post somewhere that talks about numbers... I'll see if I can find it. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059073 Sun, 08 Sep 2019 18:08:51 +0000 Deb 2059073@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>This idea is the foundation of the Wonder Wardrobe system.....you can find the founder Daria Andronescu’s videos on YouTube. Her content is wonderful! </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059067 Sun, 08 Sep 2019 17:46:44 +0000 Cardiff girl 2059067@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Wow,this probably means I could wear a different outfit every day until l die.Thank you for that thought! </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059063 Sun, 08 Sep 2019 17:24:34 +0000 deb 2059063@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>I get you with the boredom feelings. Since retirement I seem to wear the same uniform so this fall I decided to change thins up. I never thought about doing what you did so now I feel the need to re-evaluate my process. Thanks for sharing.&nbsp; </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059061 Sun, 08 Sep 2019 16:56:26 +0000 Helena 2059061@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>I thought about that Rachy ... In my case, yes I do, because my range of dress is quite limited (casual, elevated casual, dressier casual) but this is not true for everyone. So the math can't be transferred exactly, but the general idea can, I think ... Except for those people who purchase really specific, complete outfits, in which case I'm guessing boredom is not as big an issue?<br /> ETA - I guess it's more relevant to uniform dressers like myself? That's what started the exercise; thinking about variations on my uniform .... </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059056 Sun, 08 Sep 2019 16:21:49 +0000 rachylou 2059056@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>See now I always wonder about this. In theory, I can wear any of my tops with any of my pants, but in practice... will I? </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059050 Sun, 08 Sep 2019 15:42:59 +0000 Helena 2059050@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Yikes, enjoy the last of summer and testing out some new combos ... I might for fun try to do a 'no repeat' challenge for the rest of September, just to remind myself how much I have and how small changes can make all the difference. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/math-wardrobe-boredom#post-2059049 Sun, 08 Sep 2019 15:40:18 +0000 Preppy Pear 2059049@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Nice way to refresh your mindset on your options! I really need to undertake a similar exercise to reconnect with my cooler weather wardrobe, incorporate my new NAS pieces, and decide what I still want to purchase. I think looking at the combinations will help me be able to put together outfits quickly and keep things interesting. I currently have more pieces than you do, but still find myself reaching for the same combinations when I’m in a hurry.<br /> The high temp is 99 here today, though, so I still have some time. </p>