1. I would love to see the second outfit in the first slide without cropping at the waist and a break at the ankle. The sleek, sharp, tailored look is very powerful. I like the blazer in the first outfit too, but I wonder if the accompanying items might benefit from firmness, or more elongation? Something about the length of the shorts seems to look unbalanced?

  2. I’ve always thought SC. I like her in the same styling and I think she is similar energy wise to Naomi Watts and Kristen Dunst. Pretty, refined, graceful, expensive.

  3. Totally agree. I see a Romantic undercurrent here, and something harmonious is brought out when she leans that way. More yang styling looks off to me.

  4. i wonder if she could be TR... She has trim curves, seems quite petite, and I'm not sure if she really strikes me as being gamine, maybe more femme fatale? Maybe like

  5. Haha really? What are your thoughts

  6. If they’re going to be allowed, you might as well give the people what they want. And as much as focusing on bodies can be unhealthy, in the end, it is a typing system where, as David says, your physical self is finite. There is going to be focus on the body because it’s built into the system. Accepting your physical self is as much a part of it as the clothes.

  7. Do the people really want to pose unclothed and have people typing them? Or is that just because they see others do it and it's feeding into further misunderstandings?

  8. I’m speaking specifically about typing here—if people are new, which the typing post people generally are, I don’t think that they would have the tools to attempt what you’re talking about here. If they’re posting their favorite outfits, people would be reacting to that, so I don’t see it as better than just something that shows the body, but isn’t necessarily an outfit. (That’s what is most helpful to us in SK when people are working on their sketch, although of course the process is very different and not typing per se.) I just don’t see it being helpful to make outfits a requirement for a typing post. If people want to post outfits, fine. If people want to post something in something like leggings and a top that isn’t an outfit, fine. If people want to post nearly nude pictures, I hope that mods would take care of it. People who are already in a place where they can talk about the finished effect are generally not the people who are going to have a desire to post a typing post for themselves. I’m opposed to typing posts generally, but I know that people clamor for them.

  9. Fair enough, i can see that angle! Although.... do people have the tools for anything at all in any direction really?

  10. I think with any "type" of garment or sleeve or shoulder or whatever, I believe it really needs to be considered in context with other qualities.

  11. I specifically asked about batwing dresses that have form fitting skirts to the knee

  12. In that case, I would still need to consider a lot of different qualities in the lines of the garment, this isn't just one government-issued dress standard uniform, there can still be a lot of variation in design, sleeve proportion, fabric, and can be styled differently.

  13. I thought that too till I saw the picture with the white pants and green jacket. Robin williams would have eaten that outfit up, but it looks odd on Andrew Garfield. I think he needs vertical and more monochrome

  14. I agree about the white pants and green jacket on Andrew, but I'm not sure if I see how Robin Williams is an FG... is he verified? From my perspective I see

  15. I've seen him typed as a SG, unverified. He's got petite and he was definitely more "lush" in that his muscle defined his shape more than his bone, but he had enough yang that I could see gamine for him. He definitely looks more petite than some verified romantics I've seen, and less blunt than some of the SNs though the list I read from may have been speculative. I definitely see the similarities to Michael Landon, but Michael's shoulders are so prominent, whereas Robin has more of a moderate shoulder line.

  16. Interesting, yes, if he indeed would be best accommodating petite, then that would definitely put him in the gamine family. Although, i don't know if i can really see him as SG, shoulders or no shoulders, SG makes me think of light/softer qualities in men, your Michael J Fox or Fred Astaire. Robin strikes me as a bit more 'broadly angular' and yang... I think there is something more interesting with angular and geometric styling maybe for Robin?

  17. i really feel that before anyone gets too far, they should, just for the sake of research, (as I mentioned in the last post) check out

  18. Pure Dramatics might have a chance at bringing a sense of attitude, irony and unquestionable cool to this dress. Like, on Cate Blanchett I’d probably be like 👁 👄 👁 such chic. Anyone else… probably just look dated?

  19. i love pet colour analysis so much ❤️😻!

  20. Hehe if we are talking Kibbe I agree with Baby, but I see

  21. Hmmm 🤔 thinking through this again, what are the odds maybe Sporty = FG? I don't know whether she's too tall, but it was an afterthought.

  22. well, in a general sense i don't see Sporty really being particularly flattered by concepts like boxy, hyper-fitted petite styles and a gamine chop, but I could see the possibility of her being a "gaminish" SN

  23. I personally find this system quite fun but all tall women having to accommodate vertical part is strange to me too because for example, I don't see any elongation in Bella Hadid. She is shorter than her listed height but definitely not as low as 5'7.

  24. For me the fact that Kim can handle long, heavy hair and some strong bold/nude makeup looks are big tells. R types can look at home with more fussy, detailed, floaty styling concepts, whereas I think Kim's beauty is in more minimal and less ornate looks. Personal opinion - I often think there is a dash of "modernity" to an SN that is distinct from an R, who might have a more "old fashioned" beauty.

  25. The issue with creating new subs is that you need some kind of drawcard to tempt people to go there. Just creating a sub itself won't tempt 1000s of people with an interest in the system to lurk there and comment unfortunately.

  26. I agree. I get why people dislike the fload of "type me" posts but mega threads rarely work the way it was intendend.

  27. its a real conundrum. I am an advocate for free and open discussion and debate around ideas, but there needs to be some kind of limit to the stream of endless typing posts, which will alienate the very people who might have some clue about helping them.

  28. No, you don't seem Classic family to me. There's too much of a general narrowness/elongation to your impression I think.

  29. Thank you for suggestion! I will try few outfits of pure D, as I remember main aspects are sharpness and vertical and slim siluet?:)

  30. yes, David Kibbe described the silhouette as straight & with elongated draping

  31. I'm not sure if I did ir right but here is my attempt imitating D lines:) first one long vertical, sharper narrower shoes, second the same but lines shortened, chunky shoes, could you tell me which one looks better?

  32. Hmm its a little tricky to tell since in the first outfit, there are elements that are throwing off the vertical/Dramatic - the short sleeves for instance, the gamininish hair, the top underneath.

  33. Hmm what do you think about Selena Quintanilla? People were not happy when I posted her a while ago suggesting she might be SD - apparently she was the most obvious SN to ever SN and the fact that I would suggest anything otherwise meant I was just “not willing to admit that a beautiful woman can be SN” (even though I had only ever seen TR and SD suggested for her in the past lmao).

  34. oof, Selena Q's gotta be the walking

  35. You weren't asking me, but it's probably why she was initially cast in Funny Girl on Broadway. I don't know much about Barbara Streisand, but I think that was her breakout role, so trying to make parallels here.

  36. That last dress really nails it for me haha

  37. New ones 100%. I think DCs need to go just a little "chunky" or "strong" to get the Dramatic flavour across beyond their blendedness. However, on an actual Dramatic or whatever, these could read as quite low key, but I think on a DC they are the chefs kiss amount of intensity, especially if the whole outfit works together!

  38. I can imagine that it KIND OF changes your season, but not really. That you fit better in other colors than usual, and do not fit as well in colors as you used to. But probably you will always fit absolute best in your real colors and real season when you go for that

  39. Good answer. You might be able to pull off slightly brighter, more contrasty, more muted etc tones if you change your hair, in fact, to look "balanced" you will probably need to make some adjustments (and even potentially wear different makeup), but I think of this as more of a kind of artificial palette that is based off of your "REAL SEASON" that has certain qualities adjusted to incorporate the overall look with different hair. I don't think it will shift you completely into a different palette altogether.

  40. I think SD. I feel her shape easily get lost and she needs narrow, curve-emphasising clothing to bring it out. Straight lines look a bit dumpy and blank on her. I think she "absorbs" a huge amount of glamorous detail and ornament without it looking too much.

  41. I'm not saying it looks good, but...

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Author: admin