Patrik Ervell General

[Anonymous No.9455247]

Patrik Ervell

[Anonymous No.9455308]

Patrik Ervell

[Anonymous No.9455394]

[Anonymous No.9455398]

>>9455394

[Anonymous No.9455399]

I kinda assumed he made very well tailored basics, like many other designers. Does he ever really branch out from his dress shirts and pale jeans?

[Anonymous No.9455462]

>>9455398

[Anonymous No.9455474]

>>9455462

[Anonymous No.9455495]

>>9455308
wish this were in color

this is a super dope fit

[Anonymous No.9455524]

>>9455247
dope basics but too steep for me

[Anonymous No.9455543]

>>9455399
'Sometimes there’s drawings, but it’s menswear, so we’re not reinventing the wheel. We’re using forms that we all know. A lot of it is about details and fabric and print.' - Patrik Ervell

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SadDI0kpyJo

It's mostly about materials/fabrics with Ervell. He has done some things I really consider interesting in terms of design.

[Anonymous No.9455569]

>>9455474

[Anonymous No.9455574]

Not really a big fan of ervell, outside of sweaters. Sure he's made some cool stuff, but it usually never reaches any stores. The stuff I have is good though. Would probably buy more if there were any decent eu retailers that had some different stock instead of 4-5 different basic items.

[Anonymous No.9455667]

>>9455569

[Anonymous No.9455673]

>>9455667

[Anonymous No.9455677]

He's basically Schneider lite x Helmut Lang Jr : Sports edition which I think is neat but he kinda fell off atm.
Things I like from perv
>All his pants
They have a silk waistband and the cut is perf but they do run 100% TTS
>All his knits
Always dope. Aim for alpaca and pocket sweaters
>Printed shirts
He has cool prints
Things I don't like
>Inconsistent sizing
Speaks for itself
>Overpriced
C'mon man you make your shirts in portugal now , don't be a cunt.
I can't find the pic of a qt girl wearing a pocket sweater so here's a pic of a gold foil mylar jacket he made

[Anonymous No.9455712]

>>9455247
>tfw you will never own one of his flecked unstructured summer (SS11?) suits
You had one too, straw, all I had to do was buy it ;-;

[Anonymous No.9455731]

>>9455677
>fell off atm
How so? SS15 was honestly one of his best shows so far, especially the materials--the vinyl and polyurethane were great, as was the sportswear influence, it seemed a lot more apparent in this show than many of his others, and it worked out pretty well.

Just look at the translucent coats.

FW15 is showing tomorrow, hopefully that's also a good show.

[Anonymous No.9455745]

>>9455574
what shoes is he wearing?

[strawtengu !oxQHe5qDU2 No.9455753]

>>9455712

Hahaha that was waay before I got into erv, I can't believe i sold that and a perfect lightwash pair of jeans by him. my erv lineup nowadays is 3 shirts, hat, and pants.

I was gonna post the link to this hat because it was mad cheap, but it looks like its sold out. might as well link it cause there are a couple more hats on sale

http://www.fwrd.com/mens-brand-patrik-ervell/4cebf8/

[Anonymous No.9455754]

>>9455712
It is quite a nice piece. If Strawtengu was lucky enough to pick one up maybe you will be too

[Anonymous No.9455758]

>>9455754
Strawtengu's picture

[Anonymous No.9455765]

>>9455753
How do you like the granite print? Missed it when it dropped and I haven't been able to find one since, probably copping this one from SS15 to make up for it

[Anonymous No.9455769]

>>9455731
Quality has dropped and all his shows are formulaic and predictable. I know that's what people about him , how everything is so cohesive and he plays to his strength but I think he should go back to doing cool science stuff like the oxodised shirts instead of all this sporty stuff.
Don't get me wrong I still like him but he's on his last vestige of exciting clothes imo.
"Oh look another couple of prints that he bases his collection on with some cool futuristic/non organic material used in abundance on his coats and one pair of trackies."
To surmise and reiterate , I just don't find his collections exciting anymore and would rather buy something just as cohesive but twice as interesting like Schneider.
Pic related. SS10 perv iirc.

[Anonymous No.9455789]

>>9455677

>they do run 100% TTS

so true. his size 30 pants literally have a waist measurement of exactly 30 inches. which is pretty small, more like a 28-29

[strawtengu !oxQHe5qDU2 No.9455791]

>>9455765

not much to say, its really excellent even if the cut is a bit closer to the body than i'm used to. Looks like a cool print, i hope you get it!

[Anonymous No.9455797]

>>9455731
There is no world without Verona walls,
But purgatory, torture, hell itself.
Hence-banished is banish'd from the world,
And world's exile is death: then banished,
Is death mis-term'd: calling death banishment,
Thou cutt'st my head off with a golden axe,
And smilest upon the stroke that murders me.

[Anonymous No.9455834]

>>9455769
>Quality has dropped
I suppose I can agree to this, but it I don't think there's been a massive drop in quality, has there? He's just changed production and come out with unfavourable results, I think. Plus, the majority is still made in the USA, so I don't think this is a massive issue.

The other point is opinion based, his shows are pretty formulaic but he said himself that he isn't 'reinventing the wheel,' so his shows were pretty much bound to become repetitive at some point, because he doesn't and won't ever change much. I do see how this would reduce his appeal, but I find what he's doing now pretty interesting, but that might be because I've only been following Perv for a couple of years. I prefer the sporty stuff.

[Anonymous No.9455840]

>>9455797
>>9455834
So explain how Schneider has a similar mentality yet none of his stuff feels stale and still looks unique show after show and perv regurgitates stuff he did 5 years ago in a different pallet?
C'mon bro , you gotta secede defeat sometimes and not just fight blindly.
Like I said I still like him but to not acknowledge a flaw is to settle for mediocrity.

[Anonymous No.9455846]

>>9455769
that looks fantastic though

[Anonymous No.9455857]

>>9455846
I like it but that was 5 years ago and perv is trying to peddle his coats as something new when he's really just rehashing them. He had right the first time with the capes , no idea why he didn't expand on that instead of the aforementioned lazy rehash.
>>9455398
>b-but he switched up the material and styled them differently
Cut and so on is still the same and hardly innovative (for perv).

[Anonymous No.9455864]

>>9455840
>you gotta secede defeat
>secede defeat
>secede defeat
>secede defeat

[Anonymous No.9455873]

>>9455840
Schneider is more interesting than Ervell for the most part, I don't think that's a contest. But Ervell's stuff still manages to look interesting to me, especially with him further embracing influences from sport, which he hasn't really done fully before. I can appreciate his work, but it isn't as though I'm blindly defending him--I've stated why I think what I do. If he continues releasing shows like this, with the same influences, the same pieces in different materials, then I'll see what you mean.

SS15 looks like a step in the right direction, but I didn't say and don't think you're completely wrong.

[Anonymous No.9455874]

>>9455864
Your thoughts on perv = inane = your losing this "debate" = defeat
secede from defeat is to withdraw from a losing battle
=
You're dumb

[Anonymous No.9455876]

>>9455874
That wasn't me you silly

[Anonymous No.9455886]

>>9455791
be gf

[Anonymous No.9455887]

>>9455876
Well that person is dumb and I respect you for not being a cunt and actually thinking about what I said friend :))))))
Nice to see /fa/ is getting more open minded and not just defending designers to stave off their regret

[Anonymous No.9455893]

>>9455874
you're mixing phrases. the phrase that you were trying to use is "admit defeat". secede, as your attached photograph clearly shows, does not mean to withdraw in general, it means to withdraw specifically from some sort of compact, agreement, union, or party. furthermore, you did not originally say "secede from defeat" (which is an awkward phrase in any case) and you're now trying to backtrack. another acceptable usage might be "secede from battle", but, again, you were not even close. it's a miracle i can even understand you as you're just barely using what might qualify as some form of english.

[Anonymous No.9455900]

>>9455893
>what are implications and metaphors
I was trying to connote his love for Ervell being like a patriot defending a country and so on which is pretty easy to understand when you're not trying to be a pedantic cunt on the internet.
I did forget the "from" though , oops.
Feel better about your life now?

[Anonymous No.9455933]

>>9455900
so you think (and i'm basically quoting your argument or paraphrasing it verbatim) that the phrase
>secede defeat
is "easy to understand" as a metaphor comparing a person's apologetics to specifically "a patriot defending a country"?

it's easy to understand as your clumsy attempt to convey that you think you were being victorious in an argument, which very loosely compares the argument to a battle in general. however, this specific image of "a patriot defending a country" is not evoked in the slightest by your groundbreaking literary device "secede defeat". if you want to call up this specific image, perhaps you should use certain evocative words, for example: "patriot", "defending", and "country".

to put my thesis in a manner that you might readily understand: you're not the sharpest bulb in the hay-stack, are you?

[Anonymous No.9455949]

>>9455933
B U T T B L A S T E D
U
T
T
B U T T B L A S T E D
L
A
S
T
E
D

[Anonymous No.9455960]

>>9455933
>is "easy to understand" as a metaphor comparing a person's apologetics to specifically "a patriot defending a country"?
Well I obviously didn't mean that word for word , it was just a simple way of explaining it for someone like you who takes everything literally. As the word secede is used mainly to describe what the definition i posted earlier , one would see it , draw the correlation and apply the same principles to it which would convey my point easily in a nice mildly poetic way.
Not hard to understand really but continue to cry about it all you want in the hope that it validates your lack of an English degree or whatever fuels you to complain about the way people use words on the internet.
Which if you did actually care about the English language would fascinate you rather than bother you and you would find my attempts to put a slight modicum of poetry into my tired thoughts.

[Anonymous No.9455969]

>>9455933
you giant fucking faggot lol
holy shit, this is cringespo

[Anonymous No.9455987]

>>9455960
you're just wrong, dude. stop trying to defend your obvious fuck-up. "secede defeat" doesn't mean anything and it also doesn't mean anything close to what you were trying to say. "...would fascinate you rather than bother you" just wow lol honestly pitiful

[Anonymous No.9455993]

>>9455247
Another good thread, ruined by semantics.

>>9455960
Firstly, 'secede' usually has the connotations of retreat in that it's a /drawing apart/ from something, in the sense of demarcation; so to use it in this case might not be technically wrong but it's not an obvious meaning either, and it sounds a bit forced and unnatural, which isn't helped at all by the fact that you chose an expression which sounds very similar to the far more commondly used 'concede defeat'. I personally appreciate the joke, but it does sound a bit unsettled.

Congrats, though, you've managed to move from an argument about fashion to one purely about your expression, and thus derail the thread entirely.

[Anonymous No.9456006]

>>9455993
Semantics would be saying "that's not a snake, it's a cobra", this 'secede defeat' idiot is just simply/boringly wrong

>>9455960
>Which if you did actually care about the English language would fascinate you rather than bother you

I can't say morons misusing words is fascinating to me, sorry : - /

[Anonymous No.9456009]

>>9456006
don't spoil the joke!

[Anonymous No.9456019]

>>9455993
>i personally appreciate the joke
Thanks , been playing around with the way I express stuff atm.
Could have said it another way but I still like the way it sounds.
>>9455987
>>9456006
Gj on ruining a thread because of your vendetta against people trying to use words in a slightly unconventional way.
Can we talk about Ervell again or do you want to tell me that James Joyce is shit and spout some /lit/ memes?

[Anonymous No.9456034]

>>9456019
>slightly unconventional
>comparing yourself/something youve said to james joyce

lol

found a pic of this guy

[Anonymous No.9456042]

>>9455960
in fact it does bother me, but not for the reasons that you presume. i love poetry, but poetry is not merely the sloppy use of language. in fact, it's usually just the opposite. if any groups are attentive to how they use language, those groups are the pedantics, the poets, and the lawyers.

i did give you credit in that your poorly constructed words did vaguely make a comparison to some sort of military campaign:
>>9455933
>it's easy to understand as your clumsy attempt to convey that you think you were being victorious in an argument, which very loosely compares the argument to a battle in general.

i bring this up in order to clash with you on your claim
> it was just a simple way of explaining it for someone like you who takes everything literally.

obviously i understood your *intended* meaning. but what you intended to mean and what you actually said, as i've repeatedly shown, are at odds. and instead of just admitting this (to yourself, i don't care if you admit it to me) and committing to, in the future, the application of rigor to the manner in which you (barely) function as a human being, you're bending over backwards to try to ret-con and justify an untenable position.

[Anonymous No.9456043]

>>9456034
>thinking I was comparing myself to James Joyce
>not realizing I was comparing you to a /lit/ shit poster
Epic

[Anonymous No.9456050]

>>9456043
>so far up his own ass he subconsciously compares himself to james joyce and doesn't even realize it
>still trying

[Anonymous No.9456062]

>>9456050
You're embarrassing

[Anonymous No.9456070]

>>9456062
i think it's time for you to secede defeat actually

[Anonymous No.9456072]

ITT: Undistilled autism.

[Anonymous No.9456077]

>>9456042
You still understood what I was conveying.
Don't make this into anything more than you not liking the way I conveyed it ,you're not grading an english paper m8.
I rarely use the word but you seem disgustingly autistic.
>>9456070
But anon.
I have won :^)
Even your fellow autists agree that I used it in a perfectly valid way , even if it was slightly unnatural.

[Anonymous No.9456104]

>>9456077
>Even your fellow autists agree that I used it in a perfectly valid way , even if it was slightly unnatural.

the only posts itt that i've continued to read are yours (obvious which ones those are) but if anyone has said anything other than you're wrong then they are also wrong

i knew i was making a mistake entering into an "argument" with the type of brain that would cook up something like "Which if you did actually care about the English language would fascinate you rather than bother you" lol very weird.. think i should probably decline continuing this out of mercy

[Anonymous No.9456109]

>>9456077
>You still understood what I was conveying.

i understood what you were attempting to convey, it's only incidental that your sloppy usage was not too dissimilar from a superior usage that i might divine your intended meaning.

furthermore, i never made the argument that i could not understand you. therefore you're not even clashing with me, much less winning a clash, by stating that people agree that you were barely intelligible. in fact, i think i spelled out my thesis (that contention with which you should be clashing) pretty clearly here: >>9455933

[Anonymous No.9456117]

>>9456104
>think i should probably decline continuing this out of mercy
:^)
>>9456109
> it's only incidental that your sloppy usage was not too dissimilar from a superior usage that i might divine your intended meaning.
Except I chose those words to convey and connote the same things that the "superior usage" does.
It wasn't incidental , it was a purely conscious decision.
We done yet?

[Anonymous No.9456128]

[Anonymous No.9456146]

>>9456117
>:^)

i knew you (a coward) would be thrilled that the mean guy saying mean things would probably be stopping
"WHEW" -you[sweating]

[Anonymous No.9456155]

>>9456117
>Except I chose those words...it was a purely conscious decision

so, you chose words that not only sound extremely awkward in comparison to the standard phrase (which would have sufficed perfectly fine), but also are close enough to that phrase to make it seem as if you're mixing up your words out of ignorance?

first of all, i don't buy it. if we apply occam's razor, we can see a simpler explanation that comes from that convoluted mess: you actually just mixed up your words out of ignorance. and now you're trying to backtrack.

but, for a moment, let's pretend that the convoluted mess is true: you intentionally chose an awkward, confused phrase. and your motivation for doing so was, as you've tried to state, your desire to be poetic. well, if that's the case, i would absolutely love to read your poetry. i'm sure i would find it endlessly entertaining, but perhaps not for the reasons you intended.

[Anonymous No.9456156]

>>9456146
Feels good when you win an internet debate and a meanie pants leaves
This must be what being autistic feels like
:^)

[Anonymous No.9456166]

>>9456156
>win

mfw

[Anonymous No.9456171]

>>9456155
I chose those words to express my point in a similar way to another phrase of sorts.
Might not have sounded organic but the point still came through as all of you have agreed :)
I think poetic was the wrong word , I was mainly trying to express myself in a more interesting way because why not?
>>9456166
I love it
:^)

[Anonymous No.9456175]

>>9456171
>wrong , I

slightly unconventional comma usage............

[Anonymous No.9456177]

>>9456166
In outing another, I think the autist outed himself.

[Anonymous No.9456182]

>>9456175
>usage............
Toooooooooooooooooo many dots haha
>>9456177
In one autist there are many - James "lol ireland right" Joyce

[Anonymous No.9456188]

>>9456171
>in a more interesting way because why not?

because it sounds fucking awful.

>but the point still came through as all of you have agreed

this was never a point of contention.

[Anonymous No.9456195]

>>9456182
could cook an egg on this guys face rn

[Anonymous No.9456201]

>>9456188
Ok we all agree that while it didn't sound natural it still worked.
So lets go back to talking about Ervell.
>>9456195
Actually it's scientifically impossible to cook an egg on someones face.
Bet you feel dumb now right? Hahaa

[Anonymous No.9456204]

>>9456171
>more interesting

[Anonymous No.9456210]

>>9456201
>we all

[Anonymous No.9456213]

>>9456201
>worked

[Anonymous No.9456220]

>>9456155
>you actually just mixed up your words out of ignorance. and now you're trying to backtrack.

this

[Anonymous No.9456223]

im looking to recruit people to post james joyce pictures anyone up for it?

[Anonymous No.9456226]

>>9456201
it didn't work, fella, because it didn't make sense. Still, let's move on.

I kind of want to shift my ervell jacket, but maybe it'll get more wear once summer rolls around. It's a navy canvas bomber, but i'm not a huge fan of the pockets... Love my shirts though. Also have some jeans, but they're khaki so I don't wear them much... Also think they might be too big now. Ho hum.

[Anonymous No.9456240]

>>9456019
>/lit/ memes

pls no corn father

[Anonymous No.9456333]

>>9455769
Agreed, what he does now feels stale compared to how it looked/felt like a few years ago.

[Anonymous No.9456442]

>>9456070
kek