Pix-Elated

51 Comments

• Peri replied 8 years ago

  Sorry Suz, I don't even think I can answer your questions! I have no idea what makes them not "typical". Maybe they are exactly like what your mom would wear! I was happy simply because they are the closest I've ever come to skinny anything without triggering nerve pain. For me only (being a problem case), heavier structured ponte would negate that. Also, heavier would limit my use due to warmer climate. 

  It's quite likely they do serve the exact same purpose as a very soft legging. I haven't tried enough leggings to know. My issue with leggings is that they tend to look exactly like tights...they make it look to me like someone forgot their pants, or skirt. I don't think these look that way...I think they look like pants. But again, it is quite likely that I could have gone a size down and didn't for comfort. And Carter also said she sized up to get a more trouser-like look. If they were tighter, they might look just like leggings. I know mine are loose-ish in the calves because when it cools off enough to wear them...late October...I'm going to be posting a lot on how to get them to stay down in boots. I seriously want to wear them tucked into boots, because I've always been denied that look and I want it!! Even though as usual I'm getting it past trend. I am even willing to hem and tailor the calves tighter to be able to wear them like normal people wear their skinnies. 

  So, sorry...it seems the things I like about them are the things you are questioning! Maybe Carter can help from a pure looks perspective. 

• replied 8 years ago

  I bought these same ones (at least very close to it if not identical ) in navy a few weeks ago.  I haven't worn them yet - too hot here- but have to admit I'm a little annoyed with myself for buying them from a boutique that doesn't do returns.  My concern is only that the navy isn't dark enough, nothing to do with fabrication, or styling or anything like that. But they are mine now, so that's that. 

  I have to admit I'm not crazy about them worn under the Vince dress - only because they are pants in my mind,and not leggings or tights. The Vince dress is a little more refined or delicate in mood in my mind's eye (I have the dress too) - no, those aren't the right words. I just don't see them with pants.  

    Anyways - I think I know what you mean though about what it is about EF pants that is any different from our mother's stretch pants.  I think we have to style these with intent - more interest and volume on top (I bought an EF poncho in navy and taupe to wear with mine) , maybe some leather and a long white shirt,  your drapy wine cashmere cardi, boots, etc .  I hope they wear well, and I really think they will be a great solution to this boredom we all get with our winter wardrobe come January and February.  Are you happy with this shade of grey?

• JAileen replied 8 years ago

  I bought those exact pants during NAS and ended up returning them. I do like EF and have a few tops and a jacket. EF quality is very nice. They didn't work simply because the cut was wrong for me. I ended up buying some dark grey knit pants from Lands End that were wider in the leg and therefore looked better on me.

• replied 8 years ago

  I'm coming back to this to say two more things:  I know I didn't really say anything terribly helpful about the pants, and I might just be musing aloud my own thoughts.  But then #2 : (and this just struck me)  the footwear will make or break it.  Flat shoes with this kind of pant- and we have become our 80year old mothers.  I think we have to treat these pants like comfortable, great-for-travel basics, and funk them up with the right footwear and sweater/jacket.

• Gail replied 8 years ago

  The pants look like they fit nicely but I think that I would prefer them with a longer tunic like top. I feel as though the balance is off somehow, just my opinion. I think they look very comfy. I concur with lisp about them with the Vince dress. I think the dress is more refined and requires an opaque tight , legging or at least some type of of hose .

• Angie replied 8 years ago

  Suz, may I suggest a tighter Ponte knit pant. Sleeker and more polished. 

  And I'm THRILLED you had an incredible NAS. Great timing, and much love to you. 

• Joyce B replied 8 years ago

  The pants look very nice on you but I think they are a little bit like tights that fit looser on the ankles.
  It depends on how you ultimately feel about them but I think they can be useful as long as they stay put and do not slip down.
  Maybe if you try one size larger just to compare the fit on the legs? Of course you would need to alter the waist and also go through the schlepp of returning so maybe that would not be so good.

• carter replied 8 years ago

  Ha! Lisa made me laugh...I must be the last person on earth capable of "funking them up" with shoes! I fully intend to wear them with flats daily;-)

  I think they look great on you. I think the one key difference here is our difference of purpose for these pants. You are looking for sophisticated ease for at-home wear. I am looking for sophisticated ease for daily life and travel. Leggings may certainly work equally well for you, but they would be extremely limiting for my purposes.

  I'll wear leggings at home with a big flannel shirt, but I'm not comfortable leaving the house in them unless I'm wearing a long tunic/short dress over them. With the EF pants (I didn't size up in EF. I think that was the Vince pants Peri was thinking of.), I can wear them with virtually any of my F/W sweaters, whether they cover key real estate or not.

  So why aren't they my Mother's knit pants (She wears JJill)? For me, the difference is the material, the structure and the fit. I think the material looks and feels more like a very fine (yet stretchy!) worsted wool than a knit. The seaming and the fit add structure and definition, where Mom's pants are all about structure-free cover-up.

  Keep us posted on what you decide!

• Gaylene replied 8 years ago

  Good question, Suz, since I had much the same reaction when I bought my first pair of EF knit pants. And note, I said FIRST pair-- i now own 3 pairs, one black, one ink blue, and one charcoal gray.

  My moment came when I realized the pants are a base layer, a second-string player, like her camis and base tops, whose function is to let the starring EF players shine. The proportions and shape of EF's knit pants work effortlessly with her top layering vests, sweaters and jackets. Other knit bottoms and leggings can work, but, to my eye, the final effect is all too often just slightly off in terms of line, shape, and/or proportions. When I look into the mirror, it is the difference between feeling the layers effortlessly coalesce into an attractive, elegant outfit--or feeling that I've just piled on a bunch of clothes from my closet that ought to give me a certain effect but somehow end up looking bunchy, overdone, or--at worst--totally lacking any sense of style.

  In EF's system, every item works proportionally, drapes well, and plays nicely with each other. The styles are simple, so it looks like it ought to be easy, but I've come to realize is actually quite hard to pull off unless one has a very good eye for how to work with layers.

• Peri replied 8 years ago

  Ha Carter, you know I won't be funking them up with shoes either!! And I'm laughing over "key real estate"!

  Oh dear Gaylene...now I absolutely have to buy more EF top pieces. I need to. It's a requirement. :)

• replied 8 years ago

  ok, ok, I'll take back my funking it up suggestion :)  I get it !

• replied 8 years ago

  I'm so glad you asked this question because I sometimes wonder about the difference between the knit pants I buy and those my Mother might have bought.  Carter's explanation helped a lot.  I have knit pants across multiple price points.  The more expensive Eileen Fisher ponte pants are very much better looking ... more sophisticated.  

• Firecracker (Sharan) replied 8 years ago

  Such an interesting discussion you've started, Suz. I am thinking they might be a little soft for the way you want to wear them. (My thoughts are along the lines of Angie's and Gaylene's here.) I like Angie's suggestion of a firmer ponte pant for you, because I think it would pair better with the more structured look that you typically wear. And when I say structured, I mean relatively so. I know you're not wearing fitted blazers and crisp button-downs to work from home. But the pullover you show in 1 is a more structured look than the drapey flowy styles that are characteristic of Eileen Fisher, as Gaylene describes. And even the Vince dress, the way you are showing it here, is reined in by the long cardi with a more classic structured look. FWIW, I think the Vince dress sans cardi would be more in keeping with the softer look and feel of these EF pants.
  I think something like these NYDJ ponte pants would fit the bill better for what you're after--although I would suggest looking for something similar with a side zip, to avoid the fly-front bulk as you are wanting.

• Suz replied 8 years ago

  Thank you all for weighing in. This is both helpful, and not helpful. Ha! ;)

  Sharan, Angie: I think you are dead right --  I require something more structured or "firm" somehow -- although why, I can't say, and Gaylene might be right that this structure might compete with other EF layers if I had them. The problem is that it's hard to find the structure without a front fly and front fly is what I don't want if I am wearing a knit top. Like, not at all.

  I don't know how those of you who wear zip flies wear them with long knit tops over them -- maybe your tummies are concave? I admit my waist is not what it once was, but I'm not a true apple shape, and yet I find the bumpy fly look unappealing. I can wear a very oversize knit over a fly front, or I can wear a woven top over a front fly (or, for that matter, I can wear an oversize knit over a woven top, LOL) -- but if the knit is more form fitting or even just fluid, the bumps drive me batty. 

  Sterling, I agree these pants look better than my mother's really inexpensive Land's End pants. But even hers looked pretty good right out of the box; it was after extensive wear that they lost their shape. 

  Gaylene, I hear you. I do have one EF top that I'll show in another post (another NAS find) and I think it works with a different pair of leggings. But I might be wrong about that. I'll show it tomorrow if I can get some decent pics. 

  Carter, this is where I get super confused. These pants feel more "legging" like than some leggings (to me). They have no pocket or detailing on the back -- I'd as soon show my bottom in these as I would in my undies, to tell you the truth. How do they feel different than leggings to you? Or maybe we have been trying on different types of leggings? 

  Joyce, "tights that fit looser on the ankles." You nailed it!! ;) 

  Angie, you DID (no doubt wisely) suggest a sleeker ponte pant to me during NAS. ha! The trouble was, they were out of my size at the time...and those pants had a zip fly. I think you suggested the ones Sharan pointed out. I also read reviews of the Kuts quite avidly but again, my size was gone by the time I got wise to this need, and anyway, the fly was zip front. 

  Grrrr. 

  Gail -- now, here is a topic for another thread. What IS a tunic? To me, that oversize sweater is "short" tunic length, which I consider to be anything from covers-the-bum to mid-thigh or a bit below. But lately I have been wondering if I really understand what tunic length is. Hmmm. 

  JAIleen, maybe I should try another cut also.

  Lisa, I agree about the dress being too...something...for these pants or legging or tights with baggy ankles, or whatever the heck they are. But, recall,  per previous comments, I was supposed to try styling the dress with leggings, and to me, these things are kind of like leggings.

  I have a feeling I'm a bit obtuse on this whole legging/ pant issue!! I certainly can't tell anyone not to wear leggings as pants since I can't even tell the difference. ;)  The girls in my college city are safe from my judgement.  ;)

  Anyway, I agree -- these grey things are not quite the right pant/ legging for the Vince dress, if I'm to wear the dress with pants/ leggings. And I also think the right footwear is key, so I was trying my new boots and old (but still to my mind, very cool) booties. ;) 

  Peri, thank you so much. I am SO glad these worked for you!! I think they look like real pants on you and Carter but my legs are too thick maybe so on me they look more like tights with loose ankles!! 

• Gaylene replied 8 years ago

  Suz, I was wondering if you might want to consider a side-zip, stretch pant like these BR Sloans. My Sloans are a very structured pant with a banded waist but a side zip which gives a very smooth line under tops and sweaters. The Collect feature doesn't work on my IPad, but here's a link
  http://bananarepublic.gapcanad.....=555775003

  The only downside is that the pants need to be drycleaned, but that hasn't been much of an issue for me. If I get a bit of knee bagging after multiple wears, a quick steaming sorts that out quite nicely.

• Vix replied 8 years ago

  Hi Suz --

  I'd actually like to see the Vince dress worn over the #1 combo. Right now the pants look bunched up over the more rugged boots.

  TBH, I know EF pants have a strong fan following and yes, the fabric feels lovely but...from 2 feet away, they read like other knit pants, which read like trendy yoga/exercise pants. 

  [Seinfeld] Not that there's anything wrong with that! [end Seinfeld] 

  I'm a big fan of knits, so I'm not knocking outfits with knit pants at all. Thought Peri and Carter looked great in theirs. 

  But I'd make the decision based on feel and (if it matters) the specific pair (brand's) rep for holding its shape, colorfastness if washable, etc.

  As far as top length to pair with knit pants I do feel that's a comfort level/body type thing just like with leggings and yes, skinny jeans or pants like the Sloans (which I own in front zip). I have my personal preferences but others can and will do their thing.

• replied 8 years ago

  The front fly /bumpy /lumpy issue is really problematic for me too.  That's precisely why I don't do a t-shirt and jeans combo - untucked or not. The bulk of the zipper and fly only make me look pregnant or really apple-ish, and , I'm neither.  I thought it was only me, and my less than perfect lower ab region.  I have some ponte legging/pants things that do have a fly front and waistband/button combo, and you're right, they aren't great unless I wear something really heavy and oversized with it. Anyways - the difference between leggings/tights/skinny pontes is all just semantics anyways. Call them whatever you want .  :)  Now I'm freaking about my non-returnable navy ones hoping that they look as ok as I remembered them a few weeks ago.  I did try them on of course (at that price I had to), but I haven't looked at them since.  Yikes.

• Suz replied 8 years ago

  Lisa, I'm sure you look amazing in yours. Remember, you are the woman who can rock the butt vest that totally defeated me!! There is something about my particular proportions that seems to make anything legging like a bit tricky. Although I wear super skinny jeans without batting an eyelash. As long as I can semi-tuck to avoid the bumpy front, ha! 

  Vix, do you mean try the booties in 1 with the Vince dress and the ER pants/ leggings? I could do that. The pants are a bit loose at the ankles and problematic in that they neither lie completely flat pulled outside of boots/ booties, nor tucked in, as Peri mentioned. 

  I think I need to try these things on again and try some more styling options, but I am leaning towards returning. 

  Gaylene, that is a brilliant suggestion, thank you! I have a pair of terrific Theory pants that are quite similar, actually, but they are a woven fabric with only a touch of stretch that doesn't feel great for at home wear and I confess I "save" these particular pants for "special" occasions because I really love them. An extra pair of similar pants would be a great idea and the Sloans could be just the ticket. They probably have a bit more stretch than the Theories, too. 

• Mona replied 8 years ago

  You have had some great suggestions here from the wise minds. I just wanted to say that as I was reading through responses, I was thinking, she should try Sloans. I have three pairs in regular circulation and thinking about buying a fourth one. They are structured yet extremely comfortable on me. And then I saw Gaylene's suggestion. She is right about Sloans.
  p.s. I put mine in the wash and they still look good as new. 

• Sveta replied 8 years ago

  Suz, I am not much help here as  am struggling with the same problem myself. Even my ponte pants from 3 seasons back feel too "legging like" to me to wear them in any other way. And I have zero experience with EF :-(
  I only know that I don't like the look of Vince dress over these pants. :-)
  Now the Sloan root...I tried several styles in BR and they are too tight over my calves. It was a frustration because they fitted well on top. 
  Gaylene, if I remember correctly you have "athletic" calves like mine - how is the calf-sucking problems with these Sloans? Maybe they are not all created equal and I should keep trying all models? Or maybe my calves are too big compared to my hips so in the right size they are too snug?
  On another topic - Suz, I cannot wait to read about the "game-changers" because I desperately need them but recently my mind is not in the fashion at all. I may be following in your footsteps... :-)

• CocoLion replied 8 years ago

  To me they read as leggings with a wider leg opening.  I do like them as shown in pictures 1 and 2.  #3 is ALGO for your style with the strap booties, scarf, cardigan etc.  I would try #3 with just the pants, the Vince dress and some heels like your Okalas for a sleeker look.  

  I do think they work on you but I must say that I have not one pair of leggings.  I got one pair years ago and got rid of them.  I was a huge leggings wearer in the 80s and up until 1991, I think I just got them out of my system.  I can't seem to make them work for me any more but never say never.

  I have tended to prefer fitted bottoms that are skinny jeans to leggings.  Even a legging type jean can really throw me.  I think I just feel too revealing in a legging.  Odd, because I have no problem with shorts.

• Suz replied 8 years ago

  Sveta, thank you for the sympathy. I, too, wonder if all Sloans are created alike, or all legs, for that matter. I happen to know that Mona has lovely slim delicate calves (or at least I have observed that her ankles are delicate and refined) and I think Gaylene is an IT so she probably has slim calves and ankles, too. Harrumph. 

  I tried the Sloans on a few years ago and passed them on to Ms. Mary. I passed them on because I knew I wouldn't wear burnt orange pants. But the fit may have been a subconscious factor. Technically they did fit over my calves, but they didn't glide as smoothly as I might have wished. Still, I might be willing to put up with that for a nice sleek look and yet some stretch. 

• Suz replied 8 years ago

  Denise, that is so interesting about your experience. Hmmm. So I'm not the only one who finds leggings difficult. 

  I concluded last winter that I was simply not a legging girl, but here I am stepping up to try the darn things again. I don't know what it is about me and leggings. Maybe I look too often at Deborah's WIWs, LOL. How come she and Lisa (and others) look so fantastic in theirs???  ;)   

  I am getting sick of JEANS. I'm also getting tired of the old jeans and semi-tucked top fallback and want to experiment with some longer tops. Hmmm. 

  Now, as to the suggestion of Okalas with the pants, thank you, but no. 1000 times no. Why? Because if I can wear those shoes, there is no way I am covering up my legs. Seasonal confusion for my climate. Those shoes are summer time shoes for me (no back to them) and the pants feel like a F/W item. 

  But you're right that the boots might have too much going on with them. Good point. 

• Gaylene replied 8 years ago

  Ha, nothing slim or delicate about my 15.5" calves--i think I could write a book about calf-sucking pants. But, regarding the Sloans:

  The Sloans differ widely. BR keeps bringing out variations and labelling them "slim", "straight", "ankle", or whatever. Either the labels don't make much sense or, more likely, the sizing control is non-existent, otherwise how could a "slim" fit nicely on my calf, while a "straight" was calf sucking? I've even experienced variations in a pile of the same size or between
  colours!

  I've also found that the calf eases up quite a bit after a hour or so of wearing--or with a bit of judicious tugging at the calf before putting the pants on--because the fabric is thick, but stretchy. Bonus--the pant fits very nicely into a taller boot.

• Suz replied 8 years ago

  Gaylene, you have persuaded me to give these a try. I have a coupon so it is worth a shot. Thank you!

• Sveta replied 8 years ago

  Gaylene, you give me hope! I need to continue try on Sloans.
  The problem is that after trying on 3-4 pairs and being suffocated in the calf  I get discouraged...but I need to persist!

• Diana replied 8 years ago

  First off, they look great. However, I know what you mean about them feeling too soft. I have the same problem with most knit pants. To me they feel ... squishy. Yes, I do wear super soft leggings but only with dresses or skirts, not as pants, as a tights alternative.

  I have much better luck with jeggings. They're just denimy enough to have a little structure and if you get deep black they look plenty dressy.

  I love the CoH slick avedons but they have a zip fly. I just got these Paige ones in charcoal - those are sold out but here is black:
  http://www.amazon.com/Paige-De.....B00DR8WU9G

  These have a big elastic band for the waist so it's smooth.

  You'll notice that both are a cotton/rayon/cupro/stretch fabric, which I adore. It's stretchy but still just a tiny bit firm, but still has a soft hand. And it doesn't do that crawly, itchy thing a lot of high poly denims do.

• Caro in Oz replied 8 years ago

  I agree with Denise. I wish there was a ponti-type pant for me as they are so practical & comfortable but I never feel right when I wear them. My harems do the same job (for me) & feel so much better on my body. 

  Gaylene - not sure if it's true in your part of the world but "slim fit" in Australia refers to the hip & thigh area rather than the bottom part of the pant/jean. They are usually great for the top & middle heavy types like me :) :)

• replied 8 years ago

  I think the Vince dress looks good with these pants. I like the color of them. Might also look good with basic black leggings (?)

  I think your grey pants would look good tucked into a boot with a really massively oversized sweater *that cuts across the hamstring*. I'm thinking the sweater you're wearing is too short for these pants (which read as leggings to me).

  Also, it would be interesting to see the dress with a straight leg (or tapered) pleated pant.

  My legs look exactly like yours from the side (I.e: Muscular) and I've noticed that clingy things like leggings and skinny jeans that have too much elastic/spandex make me feel a bit exposed.

• Jaime replied 8 years ago

  This is a very interesting discussion. My first reaction, pre-comments reading, was that you should return them for something perfect given the price point and the less than ideal fit. But I absolutely agree in principle to Gaylene's point that there can be a subtle but crucial difference between two apparently similar essentials that make the extra cost of the better option well worth it. But you, Suz, don't have a closet of EF. (By the way, I have been wearing longer tunics/short dresses with short leggings and skinny long shorts all summer as a change of pace that I am really enjoying.)

• Firecracker (Sharan) replied 8 years ago

  Here are a couple of side-zip pants, one by J Crew Factory and one by Vince Camuto. I think it's worth holding out for a pair that works in all the ways you want them to.
  On the fly-front bulk issue, I have one or two close-fitting short dresses or tunics that I won't wear with pants for that reason.

• Beth Ann replied 8 years ago

  Sounds like a style shift is in the air --- I'm having much of the same feelings.  As for leggings, I am looking instead for a lightweight skinny trouser --- perhaps with a Hollywood waist or a side zip.

  Needless to say, I haven't found them yet!  I love the way you've styled them here, but I wouldn't keep the EF pants if they are too big in the waist.  Leggings that slide are so annoying!

• catgirl replied 8 years ago

  I totally understand where you are coming from, Suz. I feel completely frumpy in this kind of stretchy pant, which skims but doesn't hug and tapers then gets a little wider at the ankle. I don't SEE frump on you but I feel it MYSELF. I have this problem with EF generally although I love her clothes on others here. The pants feel like gear to me and not like I'm really dressed. I think this will bother you over time.

• catgirl replied 8 years ago

  And can I again recommend the Spanx faux leather leggings? Or did you find something that fit this hole?

• Deborah replied 8 years ago

  Suz, they look good but if you don't feel good in them, send them back. I am probably repeating others comments, but as you know leggings are a winter staple for me.  I have a couple of pairs and the are all a firm ponte.  They are substantial and while there is no question they are leggings, I almost consider them pants... I always wear something long over them (I don't wear legging like pants if you know what I mean).  The are firm and thick so they provide good coverage.  Some ponte leggings are so thin and tight they just look like you are wearing thick tights.  Mine are actually from Target and so far they are the best I have found.  Metalicus do excellent ponte too but I haven't ventured there yet.  I can't recommend an alternative but I hear you and think these need to go back.

• Suz replied 8 years ago

  Okay. Thank you for all your comments and suggestions! 

  I am going to send these babies back. At the price point, even the sale price point, I can probably find two better options. And if I acquire a closet of EF layers, I can buy these again next year. 

  ONWARDS!! 

  But I do hope I find a charcoal ponte or side zip eventually. Black is great....but....

  Some specific comments: 

  Deborah, that is really interesting about the composition of your fab leggings, and helpful to me to hear. I think I might have found something that will work on me, but more soon. 

  Una, I had no idea you felt the same about soft leggings! Yet you wear leggings so well! Now maybe I know why -- yours are more substantial. 

  Beth Ann, great idea to try a side zip -- and it is so cool that you and Shevia and I might be on the same wavelength re silhouettes! 

  Sharan, thank you! Items collected and I'll investigate further today! 

  Shevia, high five!! (And THANK YOU, but more on this in a post today or tomorrow!) 

  Diana, I LOVE CoH jeans so you might be onto something with your suggestion. I'm going to look into those. 

  Smittie, yes, having muscular legs is a plus and a minus. It does make the wearing of leggings more challenging, although it doesn't seem to prevent me from wearing snug jeans and I don't feel self-conscious in those at all. I do agree that the sweater might be too short -- yet it feels fine with skinnies. Weird. 

  Caro, that is really interesting about the harems. I don't think they'd work for me due to the need to tuck into boots -- somehow the look isn't quite right, in my mind, plus the fullness on the bottom will make it harder for me to layer over on top, I suspect. But I hear what you are saying and feel supported in my confusion over how to make leggings work!

• jackiec replied 8 years ago

  Ah Suz I see you've come to your conclusion. I appreciate your analysis, since you articulate so well how I feel as well. Granted, I gave those navy leggings a good go last year, but it was work. I find myself defaulting to structure on the bottom and wear a very similar formula to you. I have a very old pair of black jeggings with zip and fly that seem to be my "go-to" for certain looks. They have back pockets and feel most certainly like a pant. I have my eyes open for something similar in charcoal. I really wish I could have tried the Kuts that were recommended here during NAS, but I neither saw them in store when I was briefly in the Newport Beach store, nor was I willing to gamble on ordering the wrong size online. I'll be following along as you search. We wear similar colours and I am hoping to find something not black that will fit the bill. Onwards, indeed ;)

• catgirl replied 8 years ago

  I just saw these in Garnet Hill.

  http://www.garnethill.com/pont.....value=main

  Thinking about this dilemma more, I think I tend to look for "faux structure" in these kinds of pants. So not too thin or loose. I especially hate when pants fit like leggings on the thighs but pants from the knees down - too me that is the frumpiest feeling on earth. Remember, I'm on team calf-sucking for a reason!

• unfrumped replied 8 years ago

  I don't have specific brand advice, but the right kind if side-zip is a HEWI because it can't be beat for wearing untucked knit tops.
  Also whatever construction allows flat elastic waist without actual gathers- the gathers are so the Mom look. Plus " that look" to me is that the wearer did not get the right fit, length, taper for body type.
  And I agree with a thicker fabrics. I tried some EF pants last year in a fine will knit and I liked them but it was just too thin.
  So actually I think what makes it not- Mom is not just " trend" or even modern but being very picky about all aspects of fit and proportion, and then combining the right modern top and shoes( flats or low heel for sure, but not the JJill low straight hemmed top , ballet flat combo. ) That's why leave no retail stone... Works because there are so many variations and yet it comes down to, not the hanger look but the body fit. This type of pant IS a substrate to a great degree.

• Sheila replied 8 years ago

  I must say I LOVE the way you styled the Vince dress with the scarf... LOVE LOVE LOVE the scarf ! 

  On the pants... no. I think that they are just not here or there. The ankle is off for a tight and the knees look a bit baggy. EF can be pricey and I think you can do more for the money elsewhere.

  I am following this with great interest as my workplace is changing their dress policy to NO DRESSES. Yes that is sadly true. And for someone who has a closet of sheaths I have to step up. I am worried... really worried about how to still be myself and wear trousers on a daily basis. And what trousers ? EEk. I can't see tights every day and I don't have any jeans- don't like them.

  Agree completely on the stretch pants idea. I remember my mother and her friends wearing colored stretch polyester pants and thinking... please Please Please let that not be me !!!.... and of course... now ... somedays it is !  Is it really any different ?  Are my children looking at me and thinking the same ?

• Suz replied 8 years ago

  Sheila, you are kidding me. NO DRESSES AT WORK???? 

  This deserves a thread of its own. Please start one so we can brainstorm and help you with this ridiculous requirement. 

  I have ordered the GAP side zip Sloans to try and also a navy pair with a front zip. Stay tuned.....

• Sheila replied 8 years ago

  What has happened is that a couple of our male co-op students wore shorts to work. This inspired a management meeting where it was decided that a dress requirement needed to be set. The argument came up that if shorts were unacceptable then any leg bearing ( I do wear hose ) would not be allowed. I have to tell you that I do not wear mini skirts, I am significantly less distracting than another lady with a recent breast job that is in full display daily... however it is happening- I have no say in this.

  I work in an office/ lab but I am often called to the factory floor. I sometimes wear a white lab coat around certain areas.

  I just find dresses easy.. I do have to put an outfit together or think about anything. Put on a bra and hose, Zip up a dress, throw on necklace or earrings and makeup- DONE. No thought process required. I am stumped with the silhouettes of trousers.. I am short waisted... dresses without waist belt make me look balance- normal.

  So that is why I find this thread so interesting now... front zips vs side zips?  straight leg vs boot cut or flares ? ponte vs jersey ?

• Suz replied 8 years ago

  Check out Angie's blog post today, too -- it might be helpful on the issue of short-waistedness. It sounds like a draconian and plainly stupid dress code -- casual shorts are not a dressy dress!! Wowza. Again, do start a thread and we will chip ideas in to help out!

• catgirl replied 8 years ago

  Sheila, that is a perfect example of mindless application of a rule.  Are guys in your office really saying that wearing shorts is the equivalent of a dress or skirt?  I can see some guidelines on decent lengths, but what the heck?!

• Sheila replied 8 years ago

  No.. the offices are part of a factory and the issue has become not really one of modesty but somehow safety and exposed skin. It is not quite the same as a banking or tech environment.

  I think the shorts are blatant hairy legs in a factory environment. It is also somehow too casual in a off way. This issue is more calls to support the floor- they would probably be OK if they were "office only" but really no one is "office only".

• cheryle (Dianthus) replied 8 years ago

  Suz, I think you made the right decision.  The fabric composition doesn't appear to be any different than most knit pants and if you don't love them, they aren't worth keeping.  

  I know a few of the canadians here boycott Nygard because of his ethics and business practices, but I was at the store on the weekend and tried on a few of their "slims".  This pair is a textured fabric on the front that is matte and a very fine faux snakeskin.  The high waistband is comfortable and doesn't show through.

  http://www.nygard.com/en-ca/pr.....R166_001...'

  I also tried this pair of jeggings which could work for your at home work clothes.  I really liked them on and found them more flattering with the sheen which is counter intuitive.

  http://www.nygard.com/en-ca/pr.....166_001_...

• replied 8 years ago

  Una said something really interesting earlier here about how fitted -to-the-thigh but loose from the knee down being the frumpiest thing on earth. I agree!  And this is why I have never understood the appeal of a straight cut jean. Anyways, that's neither here nor there.  But it's reminding me what is wrong with these EF pants - and the ones I have in my closet that I'm now trying to ignore .  I also read something on a fashion blog the other by someone whose opinion I find viable about certain  EF designs. I'm PM'ing you.

• Suz replied 8 years ago

  Will be listening avidly, Lisa!! 

• replied 8 years ago

  sorry - got sidetracked w work :)  here it comes !

• catgirl replied 8 years ago

  Lisa, a small correction - I said it is the frumpiest feeling on earth to me!  I know that's not true of others here, either in how they look or feel... Just wanted to clarify because I think it has a lot to do with my body type and related issues.

  Care to share the link here?  I'm the cat dying of curiosity!

• replied 8 years ago

  Una - I agree with you - just had never had the words for it . It was like getting hit over the head with a 2x 4 when you made that comment . The EF comment I'm referring to - I'm not getting into it here on the forum because the brand has so many lovers here. I have 5 pieces myself - likely my last though, as I'm totally over/off it.