Clothing: Another L$200 Wasted!

Sure, if I wanna wear the uniform and look like everyone else. But I don't - I'm me. Have you ever seen the way I dress most of the time?



Nobody else does that. It's the Cody Look(TM). It's also a shirt (albeit an open-front button shirt) on the jacket layer, so I'm not unfamiliar with that technique.

Besides, again the problem isn't the shirt. I already -had- the shirt, and it already fit fine with my normal jeans - the ones in the above photo. ALL of my shirts fit fine with those jeans. It's the new jeans that don't fit with everything else I already have. And like I said before, jeans that are intentionally low-rise (and shirts designed to work with them) are fine and dandy and wonderful if people want to use them, but they should be advertised that way. And if you ask me, I don't see what's really so "low rise" about the jeans I'm showing in the OP, compared to other low-rise jeans I've seen actually labeled "low rise". I don't think anyone could honestly say that filling in the little inch-wide gap would make the jeans "too high", or otherwise change the look of the jeans in any meaningful way save that all my shirts would now work with them.

That's not the picture ~I~ have of you. =^-^=

Cooties alert!

Run like hell Cody!!!!!!

EDIT: Unless you have gotten to the age where it sort of feels good to be around some girls, in some strange way.

I seldom really have a problem with 'no copy', but mostly that is because I do not mix & match and I love to be able to give away outfits after I have worn them.

HOWEVER, the one time I really hate 'no copy' is when I get an outfit that has skirts in multiple lengths, but only one top and/or glitch pants and they are No Copy. That prevents individual outfit folders.

This is really the point of the OP and the major issue with clothing in SL.

We all have different styles and tastes. Designers can make clothes however they wish. Residents can buy and wear clothes in whatever manner they choose. You can have the opinion that all t-shirts should be a combination of top and underpants - or you can be of the opinion that you do not want to use many layers for one item. All those points are valid.

However, all designers should properly and thoroughly picture their items. If a pair of jeans does not go to the top of the pants layer, something in the photo should indicate this or it should be stated. If a top does not go to the bottom of the shirt layer, the picture should make this clear via the photo or words.

Communication and full disclosure & truth in advertising - wow, what concepts.

The picture is one best described as effete, rather than as a comment on your sexuality.

Pep (But if the cap fits, wear it)

ROFL

oh um... empty your mailbox, you are full

And these forums are driving me nuts, the constant page load errors.
If it were not for others having the same issue, I would blame it on my net connection, but I am not alone in this.

blech

erm... effete is one who is exhausted of vigor and energy, worn out...

not sure what that has to do with sexuality. (well I guess it could, in a sense LOL)

I think the word you were looking for was effeminate, not to imply that Jesse is in any way effeminate.

The OED says (confirming my meaning) that effete is affected, over-refined, and ineffectual.

Pep (I don't use words without knowing exactly what they mean, unlike many here; I would suggest you should not presume to correct me without certainty of your position)

Then you'll want the outfit shown on different avatar types - short, medium, tall, big boobs, big hips, skinny, large, etc. Then it needs to be shown against different skins. And how about how it looks at Midday versus Midnight?? Oh yeah, and for unisex jeans, always take another photo and put it on your package of both male and female looks in all of the above avatar variations.

All these comments from buyers about what they expect from a 50 cent pixel outfit are one of the reasons I stopped designing new clothes.

sorry I assumed, but by your previous posts your description was more effeminate than it was effete, so I was (and still am, regardless of what you say) certain of my position.

(not like you have never jumped on someone's post and try to tell them what it is they are saying or trying to say)

and my dear the same could be said about you and your presumptions... I highly doubt Jesse is effete (but you are just presuming he is right?)
and fyi it also says effete is to mean infertile, however I would never presume anyone is infertile (and again, I still do not see how effete relates to what you previously said about him.)


tell me something pep, why do you feel the need to always jump on anyone that doesn't seem to agree with you? (or says anything that doesn't fit in with your way of thinking, doesn't matter who it is, you always seem to jump) although your barbs are directed at some more than others, but I suppose now that I presumed to correct what I thought was a misuse of words, you will be ready to pounce on me now... fresh meat eh?

it is amazing what folks do expect for such a small amount of money (sure the numbers might look big in world, but sheesh, 50 cents is 50 cents no matter how you put it.)

Have you ever had someone complain about something that was free? I did...
I used to put out free sample items of my new releases, a non released color or in the case of shoes, non scripted (and freebies always non mod)

well I had complaints that they were not a color that they wanted, and no mod.. oh and even had someone complain about the demo box over a pair of demo shoes... (similar to how demo hair will have a box over the head)

I mean, come on, these things are free!! (or in some cases a demo)

@Cody - I see what you`re saying man. The look doesn`t look bad on you either.
And yes, those jeans definitely are not low rise.

@Rhoarth - Fixed


I`m going to have to almost-thoroughly agree with you here. If a shirt comes in a jacket layer, shirt, underpants, etc..one can safely assume that the shirt/undershirt version *does* reach the bottom of the template. And then even if the pants do not reach the top of the template, by simply wearing the underpants layer of the shirt, the gap problem is fixed.

It would really boggle me why a mens shirt would not be brought down to the bottom of the template, so if a shirt isn`t the shirt should be labelled high rise or something..As that`s what is essentially is.

I just thing there has been a huge shift in SL fashion and it`s just going to be harder and harder to find pants that are brought up to the top of the template, by doing that you get a "choppy" look, for utmost quality you have to stop it before it hits the top and complete a realistic "seam" up there.



Because of everyone`s different styles, even with photos, you can not always tell where things end because it`s impossible to always make out exactly where the top and bottom mesh meet. The *only* 2 ways I can think of accurately displaying this would be:

1. Give out demos of all clothing
2. Draw the outline of an avatar, make a huge red gash across it seperating the top and bottom mesh. Draw various other lines all over it showing "My brown shirt ends here" "my black shorts come up to here"..Not really logical especially for people who have a large variety of product.

I think in this day and age people should expect the pants are not going to go up that high, and should expect the shirts to not only go to the end of the template`s bottom, but beyond that, and then given on all possible clothing layers.

Safest thing for him to do would probably just be to shop at the same store, maybe that creator does all of their pants that high.



First off, I would like to compliment you on your cap.

Now to the point: I don`t know why you emerge out of your worm hole everytime you`ve noticed I`ve submitted a forum comment for the purpose of calling me gay. And yes, that is what you are doing or you would not have made sure to make a note that you were not homophobic.

I`m sorry, but I wasn`t born a homosexual male and I don`t plan on ever giving it a try. You will need some new man-meat to follow around if you are serious about getting anywhere with you`re endeavours.

I don`t know what is more irritating, you sitting at your computer, browsing the forums, finding my post, picking up your little fingers to type a message, and hitting respond... or your obsession with parenthesis. I think I`m going to have to say the latter.

To top it off- You tried to be eloquent in your speach and messed up by way of using the word "effete" rather than "effeminate." Rhaorth caught you and then you feel the need to go on about how she misconstrued what you were trying to say.

I`m a really laid back person and am not into petty arguments and forum fighting, which is all I can see coming out of conversing with an individual such as yourself.

I choose to not devote any more of my time to you.

Yikes! *tosses away the parenthesis and uses asterisks instead LOL*

I know what you mean though (I do use them from time to time, but not obsessively)

How about "no". We don't need to go down this slippery slope you've provided. Solving my complaint requires absolutely nothing more than putting a plain black t-shirt (on the shirt layer) on your photo model, instead of showing him bare-chested. It provides all the missing information just that easily. It also costs absolutely no money and maybe 15 seconds of time. It's not as if the model having a nice chest factors into my decision to buy a pair of jeans.

OR if they do not want to do the plain black shirt, just simply put "low riders, or low waist"

(which reminds me, I should do that on some of mine, when I redo the ads)

I am glad these forums are here, I learn something new everyday!

I just wanted to comment on this, since several people have tried equating in-world goods and services with real-world value, and not just in this thread.

Sure, the item in question may have a cost that is equivalent to 50 cents in real-world dollars, but the economies simply do not scale that way - unless anyone here can tell me where I can find a nice beachside house in the real world I can rent for five dollars a month.

obviously the economics do not scale that way, if they did, artists would be charging a hell of a lot more for their work (be it textures, clothing, sculpties, etc)

but the bottom line is, it is still only 50 cents that the person is complaining about.

(and my point was more about the complainer that complain about something free, and that does translate from any medium to another, free, is... free)

Some girls maybe. But NOT that one!

Get shirts with an untucked jacket layer, and a tucked underwear layer, that way you can have a natural waistline with tucked or untucked shirts and you don't have your waistline at the same unnatural place that everyone else does.

And, clothing creators, including a jacket and an underwear layer with the shirt doesn't mean you lose half the sales. Or make them copy-no-transfer.

Of course this goes together with the whole issue of the shortage of good guys clothes in SL.

You should make pants on the pants layer and the underwear layer. And it's no more work to make the shirt layer and underwear layer for the shirt once you have the jacket layer.

One shirt maker ticked me off, they did an untucked jacket layer... but you have to wear the shirt layer as well, because they left the upper part of the jacket layer blank, so it takes up two upper layers.

/me crouches, hypnotized, socks forgotten.

It took me quite a while to get a good police uniform for my police dog avatar!

No mod clothing is evil.

that would be ok if the entire outfit was trans. but they arent.
latest ivalde perms are:
prim pieces no trans
skirts, shirts, and glitchpants no mod no copy. i cant even shorten a skirt to counter long glitchpants anymore
needless to say i am never shopping ivalde again, and i was their biggest fan.

The pants you were wearing was for L200? O_O
Wow it looks worse than a L0 freebie =x
A note to shoppers too, there are definitely "good" stores and "bad" stores on SL in terms of price and quality.