Another view of body type... - YouLookFab Forum

Category

Body Type

Welcome! Read about what to wear and how to wear it on the YLF Blog. Join the YLF Forum to ask specific questions or just chat about fashion and personal style. Or check out the curated list of things we love in YLF Finds.

Outfits Ensembles Trends Advice

Another view of body type...

TraceyLiz65

(website)

Veteran

http://40plusstyle.com/how-to-.....ody-shape/
Looking at your vertical proportions..

Body Type

17 replies

Latest reply was from gesturepoke

Jules

Veteran

Definitely interesting. I am short-waisted but didn't realize this until I was 30, and it's still a minor flattery consideration for me, if at all - but it did help me understand why some dresses were hard to fit.
I don't agree with her example shot analysis though. I think she looks fine in both photos. My eye has adjusted away from thinking that only long pants and heels can have flattering proportions.

MsMary

Veteran

I agree, Jules. I actually prefer the outfit she says is not flattering!

And I am so over the "how to dress over 40" thing. My rules for dressing over 40?

1. Be over 40
2. Get dressed

Coming back to say it's a good site with a lot of good info once you get past the "over 40" thing...

Anonymous

Thanks Tracey! I've seen this before, and I've read about the concept in other places. Some site the crotch point as the halfway mark, and others use the nebulous "break of leg". Depending on which way I measure, I'm either short legged or balanced. I use some of the tricks for lengthening my leg line, but I can't wear heels on a daily basis so that's out. This is good information to have.

Anonymous

Thanks Tracey for this info! I do find personally that vertical proportions do play a part in terms of fit and style. I'm a bit taller than average at 5'7 although not tall enough to fit into tall. I'm fairly proportional, perhaps a bit long-waisted. But given those two factors, as well as being a rectangle, I do find it helps me to break up the vertical line somewhere more in the waist area or a bit lower.

Alana in Canada

(website)

Veteran

You know what occurred to me, looking at her photos--the conventionally flattering look while not frumpy, is not fashion forward. I don't know if that's because what she has on is not FF, or if because the proportions themselves are not what is current at the moment. The first outfit does look more current--but is that due to its slouchiness--or the proportions it creates?
Anyone care to weigh in?

Jules

Veteran

Agreed Alana - I was looking for a date on the post, to get some context!

I do think it's important to understand "the rules" of conventional figure flattery and proportion. Then we get to break them intelligently! I mean I always had trouble with bootcuts, which should be the most flattering cut on my pearish shape, because I don't wear heels. If I had understood that at the time I could have figured out ways around it instead of just being confused.

Aziraphale

Veteran

Thanks for the link, Tracey! The information was all very accurate for my vertical body type, actually. I've seen something like this before and went so far as to measure my body segments at the bust peak, leg break etc. I have a "balanced body type", which this writer says is typical for petite women. Her suggestions in terms of what things are flattering are spot-on for me, and I often use those strategies.

However, as others have mentioned, it is no longer necessarily desirable to wear the most flattering option 100% of the time. We've all been introduced to the idea of "just flattering enough", and this concept gives us more flexibility in terms of our sartorial choices. It's also more fun -- feeling like you're "breaking the rules" a bit!

As for the two outfit photos at the bottom, I'm going to disagree with Jules. She does look more well-proportioned in the second photo. Her legs look very short and her torso very long in that skirt outfit in the photo on the left. But she still looks cute, I think. My point is we don't have to look perfectly well-proportioned all the time. I bet we wouldn't even notice the non-ideal proportions of the first outfit if we saw her moving around.

CocoLion

(website)

Veteran

Thanks for the link Tracey! I've been checking in on Sylvie's blog over the years and I love where she's taken it.

I suspected I was the long leg, short torso type but I pulled out a tape measure anyway.

Foot to mid-knee cap: 18"
Knee to hip bone: 20" (if I measure to leg break it is 18.5")
Hip bone to mid-bust: 10" (freak?)
Mid-bust to top of head: 17"
Top half total 27 to 28.5" depending on how you measure
Bottom half total 36.5" to 38" depending on how you measure

I am not tall like she suggests this body type often is, I'm around 5'4" (and I know my numbers don't quite match up to that height). I once stood next to a man of around 6 foot (Starbucks, natch) with an exceptionally long torso and our hips were at the same point. So maybe I'm not really short I just have a really short torso. LOL. I had never heard of the arm bend test but mine bends 2-3" below my very high positioned waist.

OK I've always been a bit obsessed about these things but I had an aha moment after doing this. No wonder everyone hated the Mom jeans on me. They completely emphasize my short torso and my long thigh area in particular.

However -- I think there is something liberating AND fashion-forward about going with your body type, almost exaggerating it. I agree her "don't" picture looks edgier to me, in a good way. Sometimes it's just a way of celebrating the way you're built. For example, in her "don't" picture -- I see a beautifully long slim torso. I understand that this is an intentionally short-legged outfit and it doesn't bother me. I am choosing to look at the good things this look shows me, rather than where it's deficient. Does that make any sense?

I think it's fun to play with proportions and turn rules of figure flattery upside down.

Jules

Veteran

I think we are on the same page actually, Aziraphale. Her legs look longer in the pants, no doubt. I just don't think it looks "better", which is purely a matter of taste.
These days I'm generally not "fooled" by conventional flattery, I see the clothes and the flattery, I don't think that person is naturally better proportioned.

TraceyLiz65

(website)

Veteran

I've been out all day with my best friend, then went shopping with DH and got him some more items for the Ireland trip...
Some great points here. I didn't have time to peruse her article thoroughly before posting it here. I am going to try to find time when not so tired to look at it more closely and do my measurements... I will say that her style preferences are far from my own.

Firecracker (Sharan)

Veteran

I did a quick measurement in front of the mirror and found I'm a balanced body type. 18" from top of head to bust point, 15" from bust point to hip, 15" from hip to knee, 18" from knee to floor. My elbow seems right at my waist.
So I thought I was short-waisted, but I'm not? But no wonder I have a hard time wearing skirts--the guidelines are for me to wear skirts and tops in the same color! If I were going to do that, I'd wear a dress! ha haha! Well, anyway, interesting stuff to ponder. . ..

Janet

(website)

Veteran

Interesting proportion exercise. I think I did a quick assessment of this once, and my proportions are pretty similar to Denise's, although I'm a few inches taller and not as slim, and I think the curviness of my body tends to exaggerate my shortness-of-torso. So Mom jeans look really, really bad on me! But my husband, who is nearly a foot taller than I am and long all over, is especially long in the torso but only needs 35" inseam jeans (if they were actually cut to the length on the tag, but that's a gripe for another day). That's as long as I need jeans to be to wear with heels!

I do strive for balance though. I just don't feel fab at all when something accentuates my shortwaistedness because it tends to make me look wide and squat in the body. Long legs might be good for some things, but they do not compensate for everything when it comes to creating flattering proportions.

Sylvia

(website)

Thanks Tracey for sharing the link and all your comments ladies.
This is quite an old article on my site so I agree with you that the first outfit is not so fashion forward as the image is old. However, I still believe it explains the concept.
I also don't believe that we should dress to flatter our bodies all the time. I actually wrote about that recently http://40plusstyle.com/do-your.....-the-time/.
However, I do believe it's good to understand your body type and know which clothes do flatter or would enhance your body. Then by all means break the 'rules' of figure flattery as much as you please and wear what makes you happy.
I also agree that dressing over 40 is not all that different but I felt it is a great to have a site where the focus is on 40+ women and where they are celebrated. Some 40+ women do like to have guidance on how to dress or how to get out of a style rut, so that's why I have those kind of articles as well.
I try to create a variety of articles though to inspire, give you ideas, look good and ultimately achieve that most important thing which is that you feel good about yourself.

Mnemo

Thanks for the link! I'm very new to learning about my body type and it's nice to have this additional perspective.

Nickie

I'm balanced

Marilyn

Veteran

Hmmm.....Well, surprisingly, I'm balanced. I suppose it's my own critical eye that always feels like my petite little body is out of whack. The things she lists for balanced bodies feel true to me.

MsMary......I LOVE your rules for dressing over 40! LOL. I'm going to make that my rules for dressing over 50. I feel like I'm second guessing my choices way to often and it needs to stop.

gesturepoke

I like getting a fresh perspective on body types. I don't have a decent full-body photo to use for it right now, but from what I can tell, I seem to be balanced.