https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/more-about-pants Style Advice for Fashion Lovers en-US Fri, 10 Apr 2026 12:58:56 +0000 http://bbpress.org/?v=1.0.2 q https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/search.php https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/more-about-pants#post-1142728 Sat, 18 Jan 2014 04:56:29 +0000 Janet 1142728@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>I shudder at pleated pants -- #4 doesn't look fluid enough to me to offset the bulk of all that fabric. If they don't flatter a model, I'm pretty certain they'd make my hips look...well, like something I'd rather not.</p> <p>Of the ones pictured, #3 would be most my style, especially in a darker color. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/more-about-pants#post-1142690 Sat, 18 Jan 2014 04:05:51 +0000 shiny 1142690@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>There's way too much going on in the crotch for #3.&nbsp;</p> <p>#4 actually bothers me less. I'd wear with an untucked, short, fitted&nbsp;top hitting at high hip. Styled right, these pants have potential, and I'm sticking to that. As an inverted triangle, I could possibly create a triangle shape for myself. Also they look comfy.&nbsp;</p> <p>That said, what I'd most likely buy first, are 1 and 2.&nbsp;&nbsp; </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/more-about-pants#post-1142672 Sat, 18 Jan 2014 03:54:13 +0000 Suz 1142672@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Yeah, I love those pleated pants, Gaylene. But maybe I reveal my age in saying that! :)&nbsp;</p> <p>Seriously, though, I think they are super elegant, and I've always thought so. Just as the other pants shown, they might need careful styling, but then...what doesn't need careful styling, when you think of it? It's just that in any era we get used to styling certain ubiquitous items and therefore have the "equipment" to do that; when a "new" silhouette appears, we need to do some work (or make some purchases) to make it work for our body type, lifestyle, etc.&nbsp;</p> <p>Actually, to my mind, the only thing wrong with the baggy, wide leg pants is that it is too darn muddy/slushy/icy/snowy for me to wear them for four months a year!&nbsp; </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/more-about-pants#post-1142671 Sat, 18 Jan 2014 03:52:04 +0000 Peri 1142671@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Also in the never say never camp. My choice in pants is determined by factors other than fashion. My poison eye is for #2, and maybe #1. But they are in style and others love them. I try to learn&nbsp;what I like and don't like on me,&nbsp;but no decisions for anyone else. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/more-about-pants#post-1142663 Sat, 18 Jan 2014 03:35:24 +0000 Gaylene 1142663@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Another person on the bench with Caro.</p> <p>IMO the first two pairs require a high heel to look good so that factor alone makes them problematic for anyone who can't tolerate a high, thin heel. The "ugly" pants aren't currently as trendy (especially the ones in the picture which are too short for my taste), but check out pictures of a young Kate Hepburn in full pleated pants with a high waist and a flowy shirt, along with some current inspirations; it's a different look than a cropped skinny but, to me, just as interesting. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/more-about-pants#post-1142655 Sat, 18 Jan 2014 03:29:02 +0000 Suz 1142655@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>What Caro said, and what K. Can said. We all have different figure flattery issues and priorities. And the last trousers seem like pretty classic wide legs to me, just hemmed too short for the model.&nbsp; </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/more-about-pants#post-1142573 Sat, 18 Jan 2014 02:03:22 +0000 Anonymous 1142573@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Also in the "never say never" camp. I think I'd be least likely to wear 2 as too stumpifying on a 5'3" frame. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/more-about-pants#post-1142564 Sat, 18 Jan 2014 01:58:00 +0000 K. Period. 1142564@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>With 4, I bet that if her hands were out of her pocket and they were just a smidge longer so that they had a break in them, you wouldn't even bat an eye. They look like a pretty classic pleated trouser, sized a little loose and hemmed a tiny bit short. &nbsp;In motion they would probably give an entirely different impression.&nbsp;&nbsp;They don't rock my world (right now), but I've had to revise my opinion enough times through enough fashion cycles that I'm permanently&nbsp;in the "never say never" camp. &nbsp;(Is there room over there with you, Caro? I'll bring the cookies.)&nbsp; </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/more-about-pants#post-1142537 Sat, 18 Jan 2014 01:41:46 +0000 cuffcat 1142537@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>I do like the first 3 pairs, but not liking the last one. It's something about those pleats. I think they wouldn't flatter too many women. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/more-about-pants#post-1142526 Sat, 18 Jan 2014 01:32:34 +0000 Caro in Oz 1142526@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Never say never is my motto.&nbsp;I think the two&nbsp;best things I've learned from YLF are:<br />1. however awful it may look on ME someone else will rock it. Looking at you MaryK &amp; your fab skirt :)<br />2. We all have "poison eye" for things that others love. I'm guessing you ave poison eye for those pants :)</p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/more-about-pants#post-1142505 Sat, 18 Jan 2014 01:12:08 +0000 always trying 1142505@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Your thoughts on these</p> <p>1 is my kind&nbsp; 2. maybe&nbsp; 3. called baby boot cut and 4 is from the new 2014 spring collection form a search for spring 2014 street wear.&nbsp; IMO, even the model doesn't look good in these.&nbsp; to me they are plain ugly no matter how one tried to style them!</p>