|
|
Post by platon on Jun 28, 2009 13:09:07 GMT -5
 Is it just me or the jacket on the right is longer? (i.e. the jacket on the left is completely off?) Love to hear your opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by Ragingblues on Jun 28, 2009 13:31:48 GMT -5
Well, the lighting scale are different in boths shots, and the jackets are also most likely different sizes... as well as being worn on two differently shaped guys. However, even with those differences somewhow equalled, I could still see that the back seam is lower, the panel is shorter, and the color is different on the jacket on the left.
As long as the jacket owner is happy, none of that matters though. Aside from that, ordering a jacket with the correct back seam placement, right back panel length, and better color when compared to a screen shot (along with other design advantages), is really easy to get for most people. Just order a G&B Expedition in your regular jacket size and you're done.
Ken
|
|
|
|
Post by COWBOY on Jun 28, 2009 14:23:50 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2009 14:58:46 GMT -5
Ditto on what Ken stated.  Cheers, John |
|
|
|
Post by platon on Jun 28, 2009 15:32:24 GMT -5
Actually the jacket on the left is TN 000, i.e. supposedly the 100% accurate reproduction of what Ford wore in the movie. That means size is 1/1.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ragingblues on Jun 28, 2009 15:44:33 GMT -5
Actually the jacket on the left is TN 000, i.e. supposedly the 100% accurate reproduction of what Ford wore in the movie. That means size is 1/1. So much for truth in advertising.  To me, regardless of who makes the jacket or how close it looks to screen version (based on the opinions), it only matters that the buyer is happy with the purchase. Ken |
|
|
|
Post by pagey on Jun 29, 2009 8:04:18 GMT -5
I think it'S terribly difficult to draw conclusions from such pics. Yes, the OOO jacket should be a 1 to 1 copy - but the guy wearing it isnt and I think that does make a difference. My jacket is also Ford's size - it doesn't look so far off on me - at least to my eyes. As Ken says - it's what YOU think of the jacket that matters! I personally like the TN cut with the short back.  |
|
|
|
Post by platon on Jun 29, 2009 8:27:47 GMT -5
The jacket in the photo is the 000 and the guy wearing it is shorter than Ford which means the jacket should appear longer on him. But as we see, this is not the case.
Also, your jacket appears more right (although still short) because it is longer than the 000 we see in that photo. Just look at the shape of the back panel.
|
|
|
|
Post by pagey on Jun 29, 2009 9:01:44 GMT -5
Yes but my back panel - and also Ford'S looks a little longer because some of the width is lost in pleats and the shoulders drooping down the arms. If Lay the jacket flat, the panel appears more square. When I wear it, the shoulders droop down and the panel doesn't seem as wide. Not sure I'm explaining that very well!
|
|
|
|
Post by platon on Jun 30, 2009 14:25:08 GMT -5
You are explaining it well. However the difference in length in the above photo is so great that cannot be attributed to drooping. There is drooping in both jackets seen. The jacket on the right is clearly longer. And not a little longer, a lot longer.
|
|
|
|
Post by platon on Jun 30, 2009 14:31:49 GMT -5
Look at this  It was a loooooooooong jacket |
|
|
|
Post by angrynj on Jun 30, 2009 16:41:42 GMT -5
Not that long. Maybe 2-3 inches below the beltline. Plus the first pic the guy is wearing and un-tucked shirt. How long is it? WHere is his beltline? How wide are his shoulders? So much to consider. Pageys jacket looks just about spot on in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by platon on Jul 15, 2009 10:01:59 GMT -5
Someone said that in the photos I posted the aspect ratio is off (and that's why the jacket appears long).
While I highly doubt, those screenshots are the best I can do, so I welcome anyone who can get the correct aspect ratio to post the same shots corrected.
Let's see...
|
|
|
|
Post by Ragingblues on Jul 15, 2009 10:53:20 GMT -5
Someone said that in the photos I posted the aspect ratio is off (and that's why the jacket appears long). While I highly doubt, those screenshots are the best I can do, so I welcome anyone who can get the correct aspect ratio to post the same shots corrected. Let's see... Nobody here said that. You need to re-read this thread... Ken |
|
|
|
Post by platon on Jul 16, 2009 10:03:14 GMT -5
It was said in a private message.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ragingblues on Jul 16, 2009 10:22:02 GMT -5
It was said in a private message. So reply to it in a private message. Ken |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2009 14:40:56 GMT -5
It was said in a private message. So reply to it in a private message. Ken EXACTLY. And Hey, Have a nice day.  Cheers, John |
|
|
|
Post by excalibur on Feb 17, 2010 21:13:16 GMT -5
Look at this It was a loooooooooong jacket You may be mistaking the wide belt for a looong jacket, eh? You can't really see the bottom of the jacket. |
|
|
|
Post by parttime on Feb 18, 2010 3:34:16 GMT -5
If I may (and this is just an outside observation) point out that this thread brings to light an issue of screen accuracy even more complex than the simple differences in these two jackets.
At some point you have to draw the line between screen accuracy and what fits an individual correctly. For instance sports coats or dress jackets are sold in short, regular and long lengths in all sizes. This is obviously because every one is not biult the same.
I would guess the 1981 Ford is the picture on the right to be a 46 to 48 long. As we all know Ford is right around 6 ft tall(give or take an inch or two) and in '81 much leaner than he is now. The guy on the left appears to be a little shorter but no less broad accross the shoulders. Probably a 46 to 48 regular or possibly even a short.
If you'll noticed in all four movies the bottom line of Indy's jacket stops just below the top of his back pockets. That being said, if the bottom line of the jacket on the left stops just below the top of the back pockets which we cannot see, than it is proportionatly correct.
Keep in mind Indy's intire wardrobe was taylor made with practicaly no exspense spared to fit his whole caractor. If the wardrobe designer from Raiders were to taylor make a jacket for the guy on the left theres no doubt it would be designed proportionatly correct as well and it would appear shorter in length and wider in width.
So the bottom line is "WHERE IS THE BOTTOM LINE"?
|
|
