/fa/ - Fashion

need a similiar shoe

w2c cheap alternative to pic related

>>7616996

Imagine the shoes I just posted with a black sole.

>>7617040

I haven't found a better one. I think they're one of the most ripped off shoes for a reason.

>>7617053

Nope, but they were made in Taiwan. UC has always had production and quality issues. I usually let it slide if I really love the design which was the case here.

And Stan Smiths to me have always been $100-$150, Firmament has the reissues right now for €100:

http://www.firmamentberlin.com/adidas/25480/stan_smith.html

>>7617060

>but the execution is awful

No it's not. The originals are actually pretty nice considering they're a mass produced sneaker from a mega company. The leather isn't buttery soft or anything but they're pretty decent and I think the construction is actually very sturdy. Better than a lot of designer sneakers I think. Although I know for a fact that the point of sale influences the quality somewhat. The shipment that Barneys gets I know is going to be more spotless than the shipment Footlocker gets.

As for the replicas a lot of people have done them and that's what I wear at this point because I like to be a special snowflake but the reality is they're still replicas, you have to give credit where it's due. I don't like the profile or outsoles on those SL's. I think Visvim has pushed the design the farthest with the gum sole they've started using. Feels like the ultimate combination between the Stan Smith and German Army Trainer.

Also Hender Scheme is doing big things, I don't like their styling as much (I think they use a shell toe) but the idea of a sneaker made like a bespoke leather shoe is pretty mental. The SL's feel like a step backwards. It's already been established that the overall shape is perfect. Why mess with perfection? That iteration looks more like plimsolls or something, I really don't dig it. Hedi normally does great shoes too and really gets sneakers, I think with that he probably just got bored and figured why the fuck not.