File: 1452188356849.jpg (32.7 KB, 800x524, 2016.jpg)
No. 166536
>>166533I just got back from the mall and a lot of 70's inspired stuff is coming out (suede skirts, turtlenecks, off shoulder tops, chunky sandals, a line skirts, etc)
And also a lot of korean fashion inspired stuff like the taobao/shopinuinu stuff.
No. 166537
File: 1452202114813.jpg (600.89 KB, 2353x3000, emporio-armani-pre-fall-2016-l…)
Look up what the top designers are putting out, commercial designers will take "inspiration" from their collections and pup it out for the masses.
Also, be aware of what has been done recently, because chances it wont be in fashion for another 10 years (babydollgirls im looking at you).
Heres the Vogue collection of collections, pre-fall is happening right now,
PRE FALL 16
http://www.vogue.com/fashion-shows/pre-fall-2016RESORT 16
http://www.vogue.com/fashion-shows/resort-2016/I think there's a swing towards 80's power women and we will be seeing many colours of faux-fur jackets.
Is anyone else saddened by Issey Miyake's stuff? He used to have a really serene and abstract style of design, but recently its been super tacky and boring.
No. 166538
File: 1452202185601.jpg (997.78 KB, 2000x3000, issey-miyake-pre-fall-2016-loo…)
>>166537Like wtf Issey, this is what a 65year old fat woman would wear to new years eve.
No. 166541
File: 1452204970530.jpg (136.37 KB, 1163x1600, dyacdl.jpg)
>>166537If they bring back power shoulders I will seriously sploosh.
No. 166546
File: 1452207557352.jpg (1.25 MB, 2529x3000, giorgio-armani-pre-fall-2016-l…)
>>166545Run for the hills, the power shoulder is nigh
No. 166547
File: 1452208167210.jpg (29.54 KB, 680x1022, 58386.3.detail.jpg)
>>166546Awwwwww yis.
Also, I am predicting an influx of caped garments this year, bigger than two years ago.
And yellow. Lot's of yellow.
>when will oxblood, wine and burgundy come back No. 166548
>>166547Yellow hey? I totally didn't pick that but I'm down with yellow.
Oxblood was like 2013/14 right? Maybe next winter season….
No. 166550
File: 1452209377212.jpg (104.55 KB, 900x897, pat-mcgrath-models-polaroids-0…)
Have we got anyone into make-up here?
http://www.vogue.com/slideshow/13379941/sofia-malamute-makeup-portraits-pat-mcgrath-phantom-002-launch-party/#1Brooklyn Diner Takeover is everywhere on tumblr, but its pretty boring. Its kinda like if a 14 year old had just discovered makeup and was decent at the application.
>>166549Enjoy being passe you filthy low-life.
No. 166551
>>166548I might be wrong with the yellow, it's just a feeling anyway.
But yeah I think those deep reds popped up again during those periods, but I remember the were enormous the year mock socks/over-knee tights came into fashion and you could buy these stunning, rich, deep red garments in virtually every high-street store.
I don't really change what colours I wear according to trends but certain colours being in fashion make them easier to acquire.
I've only just hopped onto the nude bandwagon and now they're so hard to find in quality fabrics /slowpoke
No. 166553
File: 1452210249347.jpg (23.93 KB, 250x376, tumblr_lges2cVuOI1qe4hs8o1_250…)
>>166550Fucking ew what is this 2003?
Picture related is my favourite style of makeup.
It's almost soft but sharp at the same time, and usually it's so hard to match harsh eye makeup with dramatic lip colour without making the model look like a whore.
It being vintage Gemma wearing it helps of course.
>>166552I'm a vegetarian that despises fur with a passion and even I can tell they were being ironic.
How embarrassing.
No. 166557
File: 1452211794275.jpg (866.75 KB, 1118x1682, 1118full-gemma-ward.jpg)
>>166553>>166555Oops I was on my mobile so didn't realise if posted an image for ants, here you go.
No. 166558
File: 1452211831222.jpg (25.87 KB, 375x626, 6858693948.jpg)
>>166557And another angle.
>>166556Not her but
>>166550 is obviously real fur.
No. 166559
>>166558nobody was taking about the fur coat in
>>166550pls read the thread before you post
No. 166560
>>166559
>pls read the thread before you postWhy would somebody randomly call a person an animal killer in response to an image of a woman wearing a fur coat but have it not directed at the fur coat…
I think you should read the thread before you post next time bby
No. 166561
File: 1452213896357.jpg (93.69 KB, 683x1024, f51bd46fd6ec0adef78951f213866b…)
>>166560They were responding to the lowlife slur in
>>166550 which was a response to a comment
>>166549 about glitter and pastel.
Nobody was talking specifically about the coat in
>>166550 then you sperged.
Comprehension will always be fashionable, you should work on that.
No. 166563
File: 1452216189676.jpg (26.48 KB, 392x557, lwKjD6X.jpg)
>>166561Bullshit people don't use the "animal killer" as a generic slur lmao you fucked up.
No. 166566
>>166564Eating is necessary and removing animal products from one's diet without becoming malnourished is 1. a hassle 2. expensive, so it's forgivable. Wearing fur is not exactly necessary, and exchanging actual fur for fake fur is not only easy but also cheaper. Clothes made from animals are cruelty for cruelty's sake, it's killing for vanity.
Not that I care tbh, just explaining the logic behind it.
No. 166567
>>166564I can explain this in a way that doesn't make me sound as retarded as
>>166565.
I'm not personally against eating meat (veg here), I'm just revolted by the meat industry as a whole, but with that being said ultimately hundreds upon thousands of cows are slaughtered daily for their meat, some humane, others not, but it makes no sense to toss their skin that is so effective in a number of textiles.
The leather of a cow will always be a byproduct, but fur itself is not.
There is not an animal on this planet that is killed for it's meat primary and it's fur secondary.
Mink, leopard, seal, fox, even python, not a damn person in the developed world consumes the meat of these animals, and yet it is exclusively we of the developed world who mercilessly slaughter them for revolting, overpriced garments.
You could try to argue rabbit, but nobody makes rabbit fur coats. Only really the Chinese use their fur in hideous trims but even then they raise the animals in cages for their fur which they habitually tear out, allow to regrow, and tear out again.
The main issue here is, is it necessary? Well, no it's not, synthetic furs and textiles have been around for decades now. There is simply no need for the slaughter of these animals. No need.
The leather of cows slaughtered for meat would go to waste if not used, but we aren't slaughtering these animals for their meat, only their fur, for an outmoded luxury that has not been required for over a century now.
PETA can get fucked, but they have a really good video up illustrating how rabbit fur, particularly angora fur, is obtained.
I'd like to see if anybody can watch this and still support fur.
No. 166568
>>166566You can become easily malnourished on a vegan diet but on a vegetarian diet it's a piece of piss.
I'm technically pescatarian but only because it's kind of difficult to abuse a fish the way you can sheep, cows and pigs.
No. 166570
>>166568Yeah, but there's little point in not consuming meat if you're still consuming milk et al
If you mean vegan but with fish then idk.
No. 166571
>>166570A lot of cows, at least for me in the UK, are all milked humanely, and the hormone stuff really isn't even a "thing" here (not too long ago there was an outcry about the UK banning growth hormones in our livestock but allowing imports of American products that did, such as Betty Crocker). I personally don't consume it because I hate the taste.
Even so I think it's kind of bad to apply this sense of "all or nothing" in these kind of situations. The most important part is that people are trying to make a difference.
Sometimes it's difficult to draw a line, such as with leather because I'm pretty sure that synthetic leathers are actually much worse for the environment.
No. 166579
>>166578I love them too bby.
Capes make me look like the evil, malevolent Queen I know I am deep down inside. Also they flap in the wind.