/cgl/ - Cosplay & EGL

>>8426822
I think you have to be super tiny and flat chested, and even then it's hit or miss.

>>8426822
I think they can look nice, the coord in pic related looks really good to me because the girl did her hair and makeup nicely, and is cute (the only thing I might add/change would be wrist accessories and shoe colour).

But I'd like to see more sack dresses, especially what they look like on larger body types. People seem less likely to coord them with a lot of acessories.

>>8426882
Some dresses like the wrapping ribbon OP are really hard to find worn pics of. I wonder if it's because no-one could really make them look good.

I feel like you need to wear a belt so it looks less like a sack of potatoes, but even still, I don't think anyone has done it yet.

>>8426905
There was one photo posted a few days ago, girl was wearing the cosmic op and she had used a gold chain around her waist. I cant find it atm but I'm sure some anon saved it.

only girls with no boobs and really defined waist/hips look good in these,especially the boobs. they need to just kind of fall down. some of the girls ITT look pregnant in them because their bodies are different types than banana(right?) or because the dress goes over the boobs and falls from them and then billows out instead of lying flat.

>>8426922
I agree. I think you can be pretty much rail thin and maybe have small breasts, but that's it. Tbh I want a sack dress, but my shoulders are so broad that I'm too afraid. I can compress my normal b cups comfortably with a high impact sports bra so I dont think that'll be an issue.

I do agree with the anon above referring to the gold chain. In the otome thread, they discuss belts for the shapeless jm dresses

>>8426922
Agreed. I have small boobs but square shoulders and a prominent rib cage. I just look preggers in sack dresses. I have to wear a belt with them.

>>8426908
i got you

>>8427140
not a big fan of this but i like the colour scheme, the red looks tied in nicely.
i think it's just the angle that's awkward

>>8427146 I like this girls coord better. I think maybe lemon tree is a bit big for this cut - she's not super rail thin. The pic isn't very flattering. I do like that print with red though.

>>8426822

Fresh from COF

>>8426922
Sorry for slightly off topic, but I think you mean pear shape b/c banana shape is characterized by very poorly defined waist/hips. Pear shape is little boob, little waist with hips that flare out a lot.

I hate these cuts of dresses. They look so infantile and crappy on lolitas no matter how they dress them up.

>>8427176
I know no1curr but I'm a petite pear and these dresses look TERRIBLE on me. But I think it's because I'm so short so they look super childish on me. Cosmic OP looked like a girl's nightie on me so I sold it as soon as I got it. So disappointing. I love it when people can pull these sack dresses off, though! It's so hard to make shapeless garments look cute.

>>8426822
Be cute and small.
>>8426905
That pretty much always looks terrible, the chain belt above looks better than the other ones I've seen though.

I have huge boobs. 98cm chest x 71cm waist.
I love this "shapeless" cuts, but I have to go heavy on the petti in order to not look pregnant.

I know this is not everyone's cup of tea, but I love it.

I want the Rose Letter OP but I have a 91cm bust and a 70cm waist. I might just get the JSK, since I really like the print.

>>8427140
Do you have anymore cosmic?

They're adorable but they won't look good on you unless you are stick thin and have absolutely no boobs whatsoever.

>>8427176
I think that anon meant "NOT really defined waist/hips". At least, that would be more consistent with everything else they were saying.

>>8426922
Do waist and hips really matter in these dresses? I thought you couldn't see them in the sack shape anyway?

>>8427300
not that anon, but they don't really matter
just don't have legs and arms which are too chunky, and even if your legs aren't the slimmest, a poofy petti to widen the hemline makes your legs look relatively alright

this one's not really lolita, but it is a pic of the jsk worn..

>>8427300

Not that anon, and I'm going to say I don't think they matter.

I think some of the other anons have a much better criteria -- shoulder width. At least two anons have mentioned having broad shoulders and not looking good in these sack dresses. Considering that the shape these things aim for are triangles/cones, I think it definitely helps to have narrower shoulders. Everything below the shoulders can be bound or padded, but the whole dress hangs off the shoulder width.

>>8427206

Any examples of your body type working with this anon? I am same measurements (a bit smaller boobs) and very curious

>>8427435
Sorry for the weird hotel room picture, it was all I had on my phone. Almost hoover loli because be a halfling dating a normal sized person.

The bigger the hemline the better, but sadly this is all this dress can handle and I like this look.

>>8427206
Seconding heavy on the petti with bigger boobs. I do the same thing. Super fluffy CP A-line petti works for me.

>>8427435

Pardon my self posting and really not great coord, but I wanted to show an example of heavy petti + big boobs in sack dress. It comes out really well and I personally wear a 32F. Also, I tend to bind for lolita and it's nice not to have to with the sack dress.

>>8429359
this looks terrible

>>8429359
Holding your hands like that really makes it look much worse. It's not soo bad but it really does suit stick girls more.

I love sack dresses. I think they're great for casual wear -- fun to dress up or down. i'll dump what i have.

>>8430342

>>8430349

>>8430349
Another of Mila's coords for Cosmic. I like it.

>>8430355
That is not a sack dress.

>>8430394
maybe not like ap's sack dresses, but i own it and it's pretty sack-y in that there's no waist ties to bring in the waist, and it sort of hangs there.

anyway, more sack dresses.

>>8430387
Those teef tho

>>8429359
that shape looks really off

>>8426822
How do you wear them without looking like you're pregnant and it's the 80s is my real question

They don't look good on girls that don't have thin bodies with no tits.

They make you look pregnant if you arent slender enough.

>>8430342
this is amazing

>>8427499
Sorry, I don't think this dress flatters you. Then again, I don't really like sack dresses at all.

>>8426903
Oh, I like this one! Does she have a tumblr or anything?

>>8429359
I think this doesn't look too good, anon. I actually think no petti would benefit you greatly here. I thought you were much larger than you were until I saw your arms and legs. If it was more flat on you with no big petti, I think you'd look much thinner.

>>8430585
No hard feelings, anon.
I don't even post this kind of coord anywhere anymore because people don't like this cuts and all I get for con crit is: wear a belt.

On another topic, Cosmic was super popular... Is that because the print overpowered the cut? Because they were short and "shapeless".

>>8430639
Personally, I would love to own Cosmic if not for the cuts. Love the print, but sack dresses would probably never look good on me with my huge boobs. I prefer cuts with some sort of definable waist. I suppose I could wear a belt of some sort with a dress like this, if I liked the print enough.

>>8430606
I'd be more than willing try with a smaller petti. The problem is with my larger chest, I do need some amount of poof so I don't look pregnant. If I was to go petti-less, I'd have to bind down. But I already tend to bind down for Lolita so it's not really a big deal in that case.

>>8430262
Yeah, that pose and stance was pretty damn bad. I honestly didn't know what to do with my hands.

>>8430736
My second thought was honestly something for the waist then. If you get a belt or something and maybe even yourself out into an hourglass shape, I think that could help too.

I know the sack dresses are hard to work with if you have a chest, but maybe you don't have to bind as hard as you think. It could look interesting if you tried it.

>>8427499
Your torso seems a bit square. Are you binding here? I think as it is it doesn't work for your body type like other anon said. I think if you wore a cardigan with it it could work well for you, though! It's a great coord, btw.

>>8430475
perf i know

>>8429359
I don't think this flatters your chest tbh, anon. This makes you look much bigger than you probably are.

>>8430761
Thanks, anon. For the compliment and I the tips. I'm planning on using this jsk again soon and I'll try switching the blouse and going with a cardigan.

Yes, I'm binding. My chest is 98 cm binded. With a regular bra is 106 cm. I am really top heavy... I'm considering getting a reduction, btw.

this girl wears sacks a lot- I think the cardigan helps break it up a bit.

does anyone have a list of sack dresses? i want to buy all of them.

>>8430973

>>8430974

>>8430979

>>8430995

requesting to see like 1-2 pics of sack dresses worn by fatty-chans just to persuade me tf away from them
Like, everyone says you have to be tiny but i've never seen pics of a fat person wearing them except that wonky self-pic a girl posted.

>tfw money to spend
>no lolita friends to slap me out of stupid ideas

>>8430901
Where to find more?

>>8430995
this has got to be massively edited, those are some Clamp proportions right there.

The theme I'm getting here though in general is, be skinny or slim with long thin legs with narrowish shoulders and small boobs. They're cute but wouldn't suit me, I'm slim-ish but with broad shoulders and I don't think I could pull it off.

>>8430757
I'm not sure what would work for my waist with that specific dress but I can certainly take a look into it! And maybe I don't need to bind too much, to go without a petti or very light petti. I'd have to try it on with both my binder and then a sports bra just to see the difference between the two.

Thanks anon for the suggestions!

>>8430979
Name of this dress?

>>8431003
Here, you can see the horror of my selfpost. Excuse the weird hoodie, it was chilly that day and I forgot to take it off for photos. Either way the dress still didn't look good on my fat ass and I really hated it even though it was my dream print, so I sold it. Don't worry, my taste and coording abilities have vastly improved and I don't wear shit that doesn't fit me anymore, I promise.

>>8431023
dropped pic like a moron

larger girls - learn your lesson from me, please.

>>8431023
Thank you, anon. it must be hard to take yourself down like that but I definitely see why 'tiny' is a criteria. Even in the ita threads, I never see sack dresses, so I've always been curious because I don't really own any flared sacks (the ones I own are normie clothes).

Thank you again, anon!

>quietly deletes items off wl

>>8431056
Eh, admitting ones flaws and mistakes make it a lot easier to learn from them, so it's no problem :) There are lots of other gorgeous dresses out there, anon, don't worry, your wardrobe will still be fantastic!

>>8431081
Thanks! Yeah I have a weight paranoia. I have two jsks that are at least 10cms too big for me. While I have a relatively small chest, my butt is the size of a planet so I would not be able to pull a sack off.

>contributin'

>>8431023
If it helps the pain, anon, I feel like it's happened to most of us with at least one dream item.

Once every few months I stare sadly at every JM piece that is just too LONG for my short ass.

>>8430979
Can someone give the name of this piece? I love what she did with it and gave it a nice waistline, too.

>>8431108
I like this girls coords but whenever I see her I just imagine her nipples. I'll never forget.

>>8431153
Wait, what?

>>8429359
You look like you have saggy boobs and pregnant. You really do need to compress your bust for this.

>>8431153

>>8431158
She posted her nudes on /soc/ or something and they surfaced here and for a while all everyone talked about were her oreolas

>>8430599
Isn't that lamp-chan/victorianme?

>>8431163
She had a porn blog that she cammed on. did she post nudes to /soc/ too?

>>8431177
/soc/ might not have been her then. all I remember was that some girl posted a webm of herself in lolita flashing her tits

>>8431184
All I remember regarding /soc/ and lolita is pic related. Deets on other stories?

>>8431184
I don't think that was her. The girl who posted on /soc/ was white

>>8431199
Yeah, probably not. She is areola girl though, right?

>>8431213
yeah. Oreo tits

>>8427140
That's nice, just gets a bit of definition to the waist. Most of the time if people cinch the waist in too much it looks really awkward but this is just the right amount to get some shape without ruining the form of the dress.

Looking at this thread, it's also kind of the poses the girls have in the photos that affect how these dresses look, not just body size. You have to have very arms-away-from-body poses to really show of the triangle silhouette properly.

>>8427404
This isn't sack/trapeze. It's an empire waist. There is shirring in the back to bring the high waistline in. Rather than the dresses in this thread which fall from the shoulders and over the bust. This dress looked nice on me whereas sack dresses looked like butt on me.

>>8431022
>>8431145
It's JM
>http://lolibrary.org/apparel/chess-print-gored-op

>>8429359
I feel like if the white bib part wasn't there on the dress that this would be way cuter. Bib type designs with bigger bust lines just look awkward by default.

>>8431223
I wanna see it.

I'm dumping some AP's Sugar Pansy because I like it.

Not really lolita on this one, but cute anyway.

This is the OP from the special set.

This I don't like. Maybe it's too long on her, I don't know.

>>8434994
I can't tell if it's the purple or just her makeup that's making her look so... bright orange.

>>8435015
IMO it'd look a lot better if she weren't holding it out way further than it's supposed to go. That's probably what's throwing everything off.

Why does everyone pulls this jsk's skirt for pictures, though?

I just bought 2 sack dresses and by looking at some of these posts, I have the dreaded feeling that they will be too short on me.

>>8435248
So that the design doesn't look scrunched. It's less of a problem with florals but a lot of prints have a lot going on at the border. Pulling it shows the full print AND keeps it from looking like garbage.

Like, on a dollar bill, George Washington looks fine. Scrunch up the bill in a few places and you can make him look like a janked up monster. Now apply that to kittens, rabbits, etc.

>>8435454
That comparison.

>>8427499
Yeah, this is not flattering at all. Sorry.