/fa/ - Fashion

>>7777417
>but not sure if any of their products are dressy enough.
depends on your concept of dressy
they can be a whole lot more dressy than that pic of yours

>>7777504

Oh yeah I know, that pic is just a random one off of Google. Those are ugly as.

>>7777516
how do you define dressy then?
what are you looking for in a boot?

>>7777532

There's the Church's I was looking at. I really like the sleek, slim profile to Chelsea boots. I'm just looking at RM Williams products as feeling a bit more workwear than that, am I wrong?

>>7777566
get the saint laurent ones since you like the slim profile if you got the dosh

>>7777566
i sure as hell wouldn't wear these to do yard work

>>7777607
or this

>>7777610
or any of these
maybe if i was a king's gardener or something

>>7777617
i'm getting a dark brown pair like this myself
not for work just casual stuff.

do you really want to be wearing chelsea boots with I shall assume will be a suit?

unless you're an antipodean, and are actually there, it's going to look very, very strange unless you have a very relaxed dress code where you are

5'9'' manlet here
Searching for "semi formal" shoes I can wear with black jeans. Not overly formal like black oxfords/dress boots, but not sneakers either, so something in between like brown leather or suede derbies/chelseas/whatever.
However I want to have a heel that can give me a bit more height, nothing too obvious like creepers or pic related though.

anything between 0.8 inches (2cm) and ~2 inches (counting the shoe's insoles) would be nice.
Do I have any other choices than boots? I mean are there derbies or chelseas with higher heels like that?
to give a reference I own Timbs which give me enough height but I hate how they look so I want something else with a similar sole

Price range is whatever staying decent, I don't usually care but I can't afford John Lobb or bespoke shit either

Paul Smith has a good pair.

>>7777592

God I love these, but I don't think I could justify the cost of them. I could easily afford it, but it is crazy to spend that much money on shoes, right?

please tell me no

>>7777664
>I mean are there derbies or chelseas with higher heels like that?
There are, but they're mostly cuban heels or block heels (like in between cuban and flat/standard).

Those would look ridiculous on a manlet.

You could try an all black derby with a black wedge sole like the red wing postman, chukka or derby version; not as obvious as the white wedge sole.

fit check

>>7777682
wow that's unusually tall
i don't know if i like that or not.

from thread other night

>>7777682
its not, they're beautiful

>>7777686
I don't like the Postman, so I guess buying derbies is out of question? I should necessarily look at chukka/work/chelsea boots? Nothing low top?

I'm not sure where to look if so, I own CDBs but the crepe sole is utter shit and tbh it doesn't give much height even though it's like 0.7in or something

>>7777417
Chelsea's, especially slim and black ones, are too effeminate to wear to work IMO. And who else besides Australians wear them with a suit anyway? Maybe if you're not wearing formal business wear I guess. The ones I've seen Aussies wear are the standard RMW's with the prominent welt, more prominent than these >>7777607
>>7777617
Kinda like this one >>7777610 but with the squared toe. Always black. And it works I guess. Everywhere else it's the standard black capped oxfords fare. Boots like these are pretty unorthodox outside of an Australian context.

>>7777690
wearing two shoes that are the same looks better IMO

>>7777711
Nothing's going to give you that extra height without looking very obvious. If that's all you want them for then don't waste your cash. Just get those manlet inserts that robert downey jr and co wear for their shoes. I guess you'd need to order a pair, take them to a shoe shop and see what size will take it.

There's always elevator shoes, and they're designed to be as inconspicuous as possible.

>>7777690
I don't like that upturned toe. Though I guess it's going to happen through wear anyway. Is it noticeable from top view down?

>>7777727
Eh... Very obvious, really? Like people are going to notice it immediately?
I'm eighteen, not in my late twenties if that changes anything. And I'd wear the shoes mostly casually.

I dunno, as I said anything from 2 to 5cm is good, and I know that my Timbs gave me more than 5cm in height when I put inserts in them (they're not elevator inserts though, they're orthopedic). Tbh they didn't look conspicuously "overcompensating", they were just boots

it's fine if I can't get derbies with higher heels but not even nice boots (be they chukkas or anything)?

>>7777747
I can't think of anything particularly high. I mean, everything posted ITT is already higher than say a pair of chucks.
Speaking of those elevator inserts, I'm thinking that chukka's are probably the best style of footwear to accommodate them.

>>7777747
>Eh... Very obvious, really?
By that I mean cuban heels or fat white wedge soles. The chels ITT aren't obvious in that sense, but they're not very elevating either.

>>7777718
>Boots like these are pretty unorthodox outside of an Australian context
What? Where do you draw that connection between chelseas and aussie from?

>>7777417
>I've heard a lot of bad things about Church's

U wot m8?

>>7777931

I've read a lot (on Styleforum, mind you) that their quality has suffered ever since they were bought over by Prada.

>tfw cant afford these

not OP but..
these are 30 bucks? should i get em as school beaters?

>>7778321
those look pretty gay dude

>>7778326
gay as gay or gay as ugly?
>inb4 both

>>7778336
i can imagine girly frenchy man walking in those

I bought these the other day from Next for £55. I quite like them.

>>7778290

w2c

>>7778522
SLP. $1,000

>>7778534

fug :D

>>7778544
Mr. Porter has them for $850, but they only have smaller sizes.

>>7777882
Because you won't see anyone else wearing chelsea boots with a business suit outside of Sydney, Melbourne and particularly Canberra - all those politicians are keen to be seen supporting Australia's last decent shoemaker.

Wear them in London and you'll be marked as an colonial so that'll put a nice taint on your dealings. The US? Nope.

>>7777699
w2c effay creases on my chelseas

>anything but APC or SL

>>7781902

Love the APC chelsea boots but they are sold out everywhere I can see.

>>7777671
I have these. Apart from the cheap price there is absolurely no reason to buy them.

>>7783718

there's a pair on Tres Bien

none with that rugged sole though

>>7781902
Seriously, why?

could by Lobb or GG for that money. Even CJs are better than SL or APC

anyone know any good combat soled chelseas?
Generic Man has some but I can't find them online

>>7784705
whats gc