Many thanks to the fashionable Joy for sending us her uniform to use for this week’s fashion lab. (Her pictures turned out so great, even taking them by herself with the timer! Sorry, but I can’t seem to adjust the size without losing resolution.)
Trying to empathize with the circumstances of others is somewhat of a hobby of mine. Since I hang around with alot of mothers of little ones, lately my thoughts have centered around silhouette issues and specifically how to work with the uniques challenges of being at least 2 sizes bigger on top than on bottom. Like how to manage to be modest without being frumpy. And the flip side, how to be stylish without being sleazy. Does that about cover it?
A couple of principles I notice:
- She is using fitted styles and clothes that fit.
- In the first shot, the layered t-shirt necklines break up the upper area.
- There’s virtually no difference in silhouette between the skinny jeans (black) and boot-cut (with the fading).
- The fading on the jeans does add curve.
Isn’t that last dress just fun?
This is as good a time as any to refresh on the concept of balancing the face with the neckline. The lady who wishes people to look at her face should wear her neckline no lower than the length from hairline to chin. If everyone lived by this rule, the “cleavage wars” would surely die out for lack of fuel.
So if you want to wear a lower neckline, don’t wear bangs. Right?
Update: After reading everyone’s comments and questions, and re-reading what I posted here, it is obvious I neglected to explain one important thing. When measuring for this face-length neckline, the starting point is your chin. In other words, from your chin to the lowest point of the neckline should not exceed the length from hairline to chin. So sorry! Does that seem better?
Here’s a link to my post where I explain this better, with a link to an actual illustration of how it’s done.
My one sister struggles with this. She is rather large on top, and atheletic and shapely-but she combats it by wearing shapeless things which just make her look matronly or shapeless! ARGH! I need to get her reading your blog (which if you ever see “sportyRN” reading I have succeeded in doing!)
Hairline to chin… hee hee. That gives me the liberty to wear as deep a neckline as modesty would permit – and maybe even then some! Short people rule! 😆
Joy looks wonderful – shapely and proportioned – and I could not possibly have guessed that there was any size difference between the top and the bottom!
I never really thought about the official balance of neckline with chin & hairline, even after reading it here. I noticed a while back in candid photos that I looked like a linebacker when I wear higher necklines (not including turtlenecks), and that I dropped 5-10 visual pounds in photos with scoop & deeper v’s.
Rebecca, thank you so much. It’s reassuring to read the things I’m trying to do are working to a certain extent. You’re right about the “skinny” jeans silhouette. They are far baggier than my boot cuts. If I want to wear my loose linen blouses without looking frumpy, it’s time to spend the $20 for a smaller size at Old Navy.
Ladies, get out your cameras. The perspective on my clothing is very different when I see these photos. I’m going to start weeding out my closet & drawers based on the wardrobe photo album I’m building.
My two oldest daughters both have this problem. One is very tall…6′ and the other about 5’8″. It is very difficult for them to not look frumpy, especially the shorter one, or matronly. The younger one is especially into fashion. They both wear cargo jackets, darker colors on the top or prints, usually smaller prints. They both do a great job of dressing and still remain young-looking and ‘in style’. I loved the pictures here!
Oh how fun! Thanks, Joy, for being so willing to model for us! I agree with Vildy in that I would never have guessed there was such a size difference between the top and bottom. Joy mentioned this about the high necklines, but…I read somewhere that those of us with bigger busts should wear scoops or v’s versus high necklines. The higher necklines make us look droopy, and I have to agree. Problem is trying to find the shirts that are scooped enough but not scooped too much.
I tried the hairline to chin measurement. And either I have a long face (which I kind of do) or something went wrong, because I wouldn’t think that lowest point would be modest at all. What am I doing wrong?
Jenna, I feel rather the same – not as modest as I would like. I don’t think you’re doing anything wrong but perhaps it’s more to do with how high the bosom is on the chest? And I can also imagine 2 very different effects depending on whether someone’s bosom is more front and center or more widely set. Front and center could possibly show too much cleavage and widely set, showing more chest wall plunge, could also suggest nakedness.
About the large bosom and the high necklines vs. the scoops. I don’t have an objectively large bosom but big enough for my stature. I do look less beefy in scoop or v neck but I also read a comment once by another short woman who was profiled in a magazine and said she had to watch how open or scooped the necklines were or else her whole upper torso “disappeared.” I like those scoop or wide vee necks or even deep vee necks but I do feel like I am all neckline. I think that’s because I have more of a side-to-side bosom.
Perhaps I was a bit hasty in that last statement, because you are right, Jenna; since I wrote that I have noticed that there are circumstances where full head length is too deep to avoid showing cleavage.
There is another way to measure for a balanced neckline: find the widest part of your face; draw an imaginary line across, from wide point to wide point; measure from the center of that line to chin. The starting point for this neckline depth is the base of the neck. Most often this will provide for a shorter balance point.
And now I see what I explained wrong about the first measurement. Update!
Interesting. I struggle with the bigger on top issue too.
Pingback: The Space Between My Peers » Just Linking: November 30, 2007