TECHWEAR GENERAL
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /fa/ - Fashion
You are currently reading a thread in /fa/ - Fashion
old 1 red
>>8940561
ded*
>>8917158
>>8940574
Thanks Mutt, my gf gets frustrated at the lack of good tech/streetwear inspo
>>8940594
no prob
dinner time, will dump more soon
>>8940561
god, that picture gets it sooo right. Cant even imagine going in the snow in leggings and sneakers tho.
>>8940580
wow
that jacket. what line is it from? more info?
>>8940978
penelope veilance, sorry, should have tineyed first.
![Houdini+Men's+Power+Houdi+true+black-shadow+grey_02[1470x849].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/TlgAP97.jpg "Houdini+Men's+Power+Houdi+true+black-shadow+grey_02[1470x849].jpg")
>been thinking of copping pic related for mid layer
>yesterday find one in a store
>try it on
>comfy as fuck and looks great
>200 dollarydoos
I hate being poor
Are there any more pics of old people in tech fits? I wanna look dope when I'm an old fart
>>8941163
Ton
Unless you are trying to find memechrome techninja fits
>>8941146
>just spandex with a design screen printed on it
>niggers think it's some sort of cutting edge fabric
HEAT_UUU TECH_UUU
>>8941053
I feel you on that, being poor and being into techwear is a never ending cycle of disappointment.
>>8940561
that must be chilly
>>8941239
AYYY_LMAO
my architecture studio does this_shit
all_the
_time
hanging out on the track
Reasonable priced techwear online?
Coming into summer over here in Australia. I want to wear cold clothes
>>8941594
this is more futurism than techwear imo
>>8941606
I imagine there's a lot of overlap
>>8941594
w2c pants?
>>8940561
I can't imagine going through snow in flyknits
Anyone got some suggestions for shoes that might last well for winter?
>>8941596
Yeah, same here.
No idea what I'm going to wear. I'm thinking black chino joggers, sneakers and edgy t-shirts to get me through until I can crack out the hardshell in winter.
>>8941606
>>8941609
Yeah, there's a huge overlap imo. I hate when people criticise techwear for being unrealistic and wannabe futuristic, meanwhile they wear 50s inspired workwear fits to college and office jobs. I like techwear because it represents and matches our time and culture more than most styles.
>>8941713
>I like techwear because it represents and matches our time and culture more than most styles.
I think that's pretty damn narrow way to look at techwear. Techwear /= monochrome waterproof ninja outifts, I consider plenty of hiking and other /out/ brands to be techwear since they are clothing with focus on functionality and protecting you from weather.
>>8941053
A lot of brands do similar hooded stretch fleeces. You should be able to find one cheaper.
>>8940561
>those cold, wet feet
>>8941746
wow i just realized, and cringed thinking about it
>>8941730
>monochrome waterproof ninja outifts
Apart from the trainers that are literally filled with holes..
>>8941713
i saw some jacked asian dude with a white singlet with the sides almost totally cut out, super baggy neon shorts and big ass nike high tops (maybe force commanders?), and a mohawk/mullet hybrid dyed bright purple. looked very cyberpunk and cool for summer
where can i find some minimalistic waterproof gloves that are thin so it doesn't look so bulky?
>>8941742
http://www.trekkinn.com/outdoor-mountain/mountain-hard-wear-desna-jacket-black-man/63946/p?utm_source=google_products&utm_medium=merchant&id_producte=305064&country=uk&gclid=CMHyz6HLqcECFa7KtAodWTkARQ&gclsrc=aw.ds
Mountain Hardwear is /out/ approved too.
>>8941757
Sealskinz
>>8941730
Yeah, I agree with you. My post mainly refers to techninja and I make no excuses about it, I like the aesthetic as much as the functionality. I feel bad for generalist techwear fans us memechrome ninjas have kinda co-opted the term.
>>8941749
top kek
Fits still look sick
>>8941587
b careful
>>8941615
I 2econd this
>>8941811
i got gore-tex man
trains got nothing on me
>>8941742
Yeah I know I could but I really like the simplicity and the model, I tried few others on at the store but fuck if that wasn't the comfiest.
Might just have to save up or wait for sales.
>>8940561
>techwear thread
>dude wearing nikes in wet snow
why nigga, his feet must be drenched
>>8941975
it's not a dude, bruh
Any decent tech styled boots for <$200? (black and wont die in the winter?)
>>8942111
Haglofs Observe Gore-tex
>>8942182
>Haglofs Observe Gore-tex
look decent, any other recs?
>>8942182
>Haglofs Observe Gore-tex
(found them for 200~ euros)
(w2c in us)
What's a good site where I can sort of "one-stop shop" techwear stuff? I just don't wanna have to order from a bunch of different sites.
>>8942232
ISAORA, missionworkshop, acronym, aether apparel, outlier (and nike)
prepare your wallet though
>>8942128
tech-nazi detected. no room for aesthetics in your hardcore lifestyle right?
>>8940610
w2c sweater?
>>8942519
teechwear is about functionality and eventually aesthetics if you are into /fa/shion.
So this might be "cool" but it has nothing to do with techwear because it's not particularely functional.
>>8940966
get out.
>>8940561
this image perfectly describes the ignorance and futility that encompasses techwear
>snow everywhere
>cold as fuck
>wearing only leggings
>wearing fucking flyknit trainers, or at the very least not trainers that are practical for the snow what so ever
>not wearing gloves
i see way too much of this shit. just because youre wearing a slim compact all black silhouette with a single water resistant jacket doesnt mean what youre wearing is at all suitable for techwear
>>8942652
хахаахахаахаха
maybe you fuck off whoreson?
we're on /fa/
we're discussing techwear aesthetic
we're not 2045 anti corporational rebels
we're not outdoor hikers
we dont have to stay 100% waterproof and warm and have hidden pockets big enough to fit a dagger, a fedora and a can of tuna in it.
JUST
AESTHETIC
fucking whoreson retards, wow.
>>8942745
u2
*tips goretex fedora*
>>8942766
jesus christ dude are you 12? who types like this
what these fits are is NOT techwear, therefor they cant be part of the fucking aesthetic
you may as well dress in all Yoji and say "MAN LOOK AT THIS WORKWEAR AESTHETIC, IT HAS A DENIM JACKET IN IT"
>>8942778
*salutes multitool*
>>8942745
Yeah, I'm a fan of heavy jackets with exposed ankles and gym shoes
>>8942766
>we're not outdoor hikers
>we dont have to stay 100% waterproof and warm
Speak for yourself faget
>>8942789
>get thoroughly BTFO
>resorts to reddit tier memeshitposting
>>8942802
stop.
>>8940561
>shorts in the snow
does techwear force you to dress like an idiot?
>>8942811
yes
>>8942197
s-someone?
>>8942811
>shorts
That's her coat.
>>8942191
>>8942870
Sick, but other than haglof.
>>8942870
they don't look that good tbh
>>8942900
He was wanting winter boots - probably not be wearing them with shorts.
Whose t-shirts do you swear by?
(pic related is Isaora)
>>8942778
there's a reason we discuss inspo/function/aesthetic/whatever
when you get too strict on what defines this stuff you take the fun out of the whole thing
>>8943010
NO SHUT UP WE HAVE TO BE WATERPROOF TO GO HIKE 30 MINUTES AWAY FROM THE CITY
SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP
>>8943026
i need to be covered head to toe in gore-tex for my trips to trader joes mang
>leggings
>techwear
>>8943095
>that shitty running technique
>techwear wankers
>>8943114
but the wicking of running tights is tech
>>8943114
i've bumped so hard i blumped
thanks for posting these
would contribute but harddrive crashed and waiting on my recovery kit to arrive
this image gets me everytime
>>8943107
w2c jacket??
so far what I've learned from this thread is:
>if you wear like a slav but slim/skinny then you are tech
>if you wear totally inappropriate for the weather then you are tech
>this means you must wear sneakers at all times
>acronym is THE brand, The one and THE only
>Even tho most of tech wear takes military design and paints it black you are not allowed to wear actual mil-spec wear
>>8942045
w2c andro-dressed sportswear qt
>>8943210
wow.. looks so shopped
>>8943224
what you should have learned, is that there are different kinds of tech suitable for different activities. there is no ONE specific style or function that MUST be adhered to. wear what you NEED for the moment anon, mil spec is fine if it suits your mission
>>8943224
what I learned from your post:
you're stupid
you're poor
you're pathetic
you're bitter
you're a retard
you should be ip banned for ten thousand years, castrated and have all your relatives killed
>>8943235
pic taken in aquarium me thinks
>>8943266
what's technical about cotton joggers and trainers?
First bad techwear thread in a while.
Most of those pics of girls wearing a pair of nike shoes and leggings have nothing to do with real technical clothing and fashion
>>8943253
What I'm saying is ITT I saw only tryhards that wear acronym hard shells with nike sneakers in snow or similar, you've got a picture
I still hope that there are ppl who by 'tech wear' mean 'I can stand in rain/snow/cold/sandstorm all day every day and don't get horribly sick'
>>8942995
Still curious about this, despite being lost in the sea of inspo
>>8943291
Ur mom
>>8943305
> last thread the only guy who dumps pics (or 90% of them) said hes gonna dump women techwear inspo
Well the point is that ican't see any real techwear in those female's fits
>now pls, gtfo and create your REAL MEN TECHWEAR HIKING GEAR YEEEEEEAH on /k/ or somewhere else.
mfw i'm more tech than all those fuccgirls when wearing my budget-core tech fit composed of a hy-vent jacket, proper fleece hoodie, cargos and runners
>>8943324
you're so cool man
so cool
I hope your hy-vent jacket absorbs your >tfw_no_gf tears well
>>8943324
post fit
>>8943297
the only thing that really annoys me here is when people don't post some kind of fit that represents their argument. this is an image board anon. AN IMAGE BOARD. do i really need to link you to the FAQ? the least you could do is back up what you say with some inspo of your own
>>8943294
w2c everything
>>8943355
not sure, but here's a different angle to help identify
>>8943381
7. Hamburger
?
>>8943385
>>8943389
that's greasy!
>>8943385
>>8943389
holy shit lol
>>8943381
thank you based anon
[spoiler]w2c hamburger[/spoiler]
>>8940949
where to cop sometime like the right pants but for guys? simple cheap lightweight jogging material
>>8943170
w2c similar pants? male here
here
w2c boot x trainer like this unbuyable nike sfb?
>>8943584
left,sorry
>>8943618
lol woops
not much for kanye, but dig this fit
>>8943619
cold dry environments anon? what are you doing curiously
>>8943637
winter is coming, rain is my favorite weather and it rains all the time here. I spend quite a lot of time outside plus I have 2 doges
>>8943655
although, those shoes? doesn't seem like techwear
>>8943666
before people complain: fuck off.
is it techwear proper? dunno. maybe not. just take inspo from it, anyways. the silhouette, the layering, the texture, etc.
>>8943678
>>8943686
>>8943692
>>8943619
there are a ton of these at a couple of my local ross for $15 a pair
they're tan though
should I cop a pair? they had some in my size
>>8943697
wondering what people think about these shoes? i like minimal shoes, so it's kinda hard for me to find shoes that match a techwear aesthetic while avoiding the bulk, esp. for city wear
>>8943210
2deep4me
>>8943706
>>8943636
you think yeezy teaches kim how to dress?
>>8943716
>>8943706
wanna get one of these, soon. thoughts?
>>8943772
haha of course
>>8943780
>>8943733
>colour
>>8943792
watch dogs x assassin's creed
>>8943775
w2c
>>8942197
someone?
>>8943924
Surely there must be some Haglofs supplier. Does their website not list US retailers?
god forbid someone actually wants to talk about functional clothing
another cool thing dies so you can make it out of cotton and sell it to trendwhores
>>8944002
don't give up hope.
>>8942766
this
>>8943263
top kek
>>8943963
None what so ever.
Only place I could really find them is Sierra Trading Post.
Looking for the HAGLÖFS OBSERVE HI GT though.
>>8943468
what pants?
Why does this style need to justify itself when everyone else can walk around in their workwear/dadcore/preppy/streetwear fits without question? Even though most people here aren't dads, labourers, Ivy League or rappers?
I think we just need to start embracing 'techninja' as a label, even if it sounds ridiculous, so the function police can stop getting butthurt every time we post inspo that's not full goretex.
Also, the assumption that if you're wearing one piece of waterproof clothing, then the whole fit needs to be waterproof is stupid. For a lot of people, a waterproof jacket feels adequate.
Tech (inspired by technical clothing) + ninja (from gothninja, urban aesthetic, heavy use of dark monochrome clothing)
>>8944100
thank you anon
Thank you Mutt. I see you actually posting inspo everywhere.
thanks Mutt <3
>>8944100
And you'd stay to your own thread instead of bombing techwear threads with irrelevant bullshit? Sure, do it.
>>8943733
I'd love that fit, except for those shoes.
Fuck those shoes. They ruin the entire fit.
I hate the look, i hate how the orange is just slightly off from her jacket and bag, I hate that weird accent near the toes.
I don't care if they're the best hiking shoes in the world, fuck em.
>>8944294
For some reason it's a rule with boots that if they make great hiking boots then they need to cover them with obnoxious colours in random places
>>8944324
The only reason I can think of is for visibility, but that ain't even hivis. They wouldn't be able to find you in a pile of leaves.
>>8943733
dear fucking lord
i have irl anime heart eyes <3_<3
i wish more of the pics in this thread had color
>>8944331
It's because it's the "look" for all those brands.
>>8944294
Even if the colours are off, that picture does so much for me
>>8943792
hadn't seen this shot of it
love his stuff so much, just wish he would make a few more variations
can't wait for another production
>>8940963
when techwear meets retardation
Got a pair of the non-spiky black ones, wish I could afford the olive pair though.
how2budget tech?
>>8943918
vivobarefoot
>>8944616
sample sales bru
logoless/more subtle North Face or Arc'teryx mainline for outerwear
hit up Nike factory stores or sample sales for cheap Frees
everyone's making elastic cuff bottoms nowadays
don't show your t-shirt in your pics
boom
if you're too poor to save up for all that, you've got bigger things to worry about
>>8944677
Thanks m8
>>8941615
3rd this
Holy shit this thread got long fast. For reference, I'm the guy who was answering a bunch of questions with long posts last thread, and I'll get to the leftovers in a sec.
Thanks to Mutt and everyone who posted all the great inspo, too. Probably about to save half the images ITT. Pic is Undercover F/W '09, "Earmuff Maniac."
>>8940963
Leggings could make perfect sense if it's not super cold. If you're active, even just hiking, you need to vent heat, and a Gore-Tex jacket without pit zips isn't going to do a great job of that.
Anyway, this is all immaterial, because if anyone had bothered doing a wee bit of research instead of mouthing off, simple GIS would've brought you this:
>Our final stop that rainy Saturday before returning to Seattle was an impromptu hike to Franklin Falls. As the hike was unplanned, we were completely unprepared for the snow; never before had I wished for snowshoes so profoundly and never before had eight miles been so far.
http://www.keithtio.com/franklin-falls/
So, like, it's just a sick fit someone involved felt the need to kvetch about later and so doesn't need you to do it for them.
And guys, can we just stop engaging with the "that's not techwear" shit? It's not worth it. It derails threads and brings the level of thinking down to theirs, which is barely thinking at all. It's the same rubric-based habit of thought as a dull and eager to please wannabe-gunner in high school or a freshman comp class. Think about the rules, not the subject. And when a peer passes over a paper that actually searches out into the world he smothers it in red wax.
>>8944002
>trendwhores
Though I will say to this: why are you even thinking about those people? You're not doing large scale sociology or cultural theory, you're not in the industry, you're just a singular person trying to get dressed. What do they have to do with you? I can promise you I don't think about them, or you, when I'm putting on clothes.
1/?
>>8944781
*Who thinks about
And, this goes to everyone, if you want to see something different ITT or anywhere, contribute! We probably want to see *your* inspo, and anyway people have even asked for it ITT. Why do you think I always put a ton of effort into techwear threads? It's not just Internet addiction, or the satisfactions of casual research and thinking and words, or the debatably altruistic satisfactions of being helpful. It's because I figured out a long time ago that you have to create the kind of cultural space you want, that you reap just what you sow. In everything.
Lou Reed is techwear, guys!
>>8944100
I think some etymology will actually help clear things up some.
First, the defenders of this stuff as "aesthetic" are so much more deeply right than just being right about liking stuff because of how it looks being valid. The origin of "aesthetic" is in the Greek "αἰσθάνομαι," to perceive, sense, feel. And that's what clothes are about, the experience of wearing them, how it feels (in every way, emotionally, social/ietaly, physically) to wear them.
Second, look at "tech-" itself. It's actually sort of mindblowing - it comes from Proto-Indo-European "teks-", the craft of weaving and fabricating, the same place we get "textile" and "texture." When it got down to Greek, it meant skill and craft more broadly.
So what we end up with in "techwear" is either clothing woven with skill (lol) or clothing having to do with skill, as the style or aesthetic/experience of clothing having to do with skill.
The schism here, I think, is in what relationship people want their clothes to have with skill; more specifically, where they see the skill as being located.
>>8942778
how about terming the nike/leggings-esque looks futuristic activewear? im way more into that for day to day shit anyways, since i dont live in a cold or rainy climate
>>8944792
ahahha cocksuckers
SO I REKT YOU subconsciously
tech pride worldwide
Me, and I think most of the people drawn to these threads? We see the skill as being located in persons, in ourselves, in what we do in the clothes. Techwear is clothing for/that enables/that stays out of the way of the exercise of skill, the experience of having skill: in movement, in living, in doing and accomplishing and play and work. The relationship we want is a harmonization, between our desires and striving and having a body and our garments.
The that's-not-techwear crowd wants to locate the skill in the clothing itself. The relationship they want is an additive one: they want their garments to give them skills they don't have.
You could say they have a better claim on the word (because of the original connection of teks- with weaving), but that's completely disconnected from usage. The only skill commercially available clothes (unless is someone selling exoskeletons yet?) can give you is weather resistance, in the form of shells and insulators, which explains why that supremely boring and not-often-necessary quality is the only damn thing they ever want to talk about.
And besides, fuck it, we were here first, we outnumber them, etc. etc. I don't see the need for it to be that adversarial, or adversarial *at all*, but they're the ones always on the attack and making this out to be a zero sum game over space in a very tiny tent.
>>8940594
Womenswear tech inspo is usually so much better than the standard menswear stuff. Less posey and they usually look like they're enjoying themselves more than the stonefaced men. It sucks there's just so much less of it, which tbh is why the OP image probably got posted, anyway.
>>8942182
Dat ripstop.
>>8942232
>What's a good site where I can sort of "one-stop shop" techwear stuff?
There isn't one, unless someone else knows one. I'll post a list of relevant boutiques later.
>>8943772
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=5Rndo8VOQuA#t=316
ITT Yeezy skills, guys.
Headed to Fuuka.
>>8944169
techwear fits would have like 4 posts in them if the tech-aesthetics crew left
>>8944820
?
Whatever, I Recht you.
>>8944847
wasnt directed to you clown!
to all those retards going on about sneakers and snow etc
>>8944792
p-poet?
