Duke of Marmalade
Imperial Majesty
- Joined
- May 19, 2007
- Messages
- 14,597
- City
- Frankfurt am Main
- Country
- Germany
It's a classy enough outfit but in total a bit old, length, sleeves etc. Colour is great choice.
It's a classy enough outfit but in total a bit old, length, sleeves etc. Colour is great choice.
Do you know what the stones are
I agree. I'm not really keen on it, but it is an appropriate choice and means that Kate doesn't outshine the bride. I don't really like that fascinator either.
Agree Duke and Marmalade, appropriate but old.
The color is lovely. And weddings the one time it's good to blend in, let host, this time the bride, shine.
But the dress in style, length and such is very eighties. Not a fan of fascinator.
Her hair is lovely and love the earrings.
Same. It's very 1940s. I happen to love that look, especially on a person with Kate's body type, but I can absolutley see why it's not everyones cup of tea.I was thinking 1940s. Something you would have seen then Princess Elizabeth wearing.
The Duchess at her sister wedding wore Alexander McQueen. I love all her style
http://media.gettyimages.com/photos...ss-charlotte-of-cambridge-picture-id685747296
http://68.media.tumblr.com/ae73f7de189c6a6a69ddef2fb37dfc30/tumblr_oq9270PcCp1tc20kuo1_500.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DARFX_SXsAAOJo5.jpg
Same. It's very 1940s. I happen to love that look, especially on a person with Kate's body type, but I can absolutley see why it's not everyones cup of tea.
I do like the v-neck though, it keeps it from feeling like a 40s replica and also from being too matronly.
I think the colour of Catherine's dress is beautiful and the style itself seems quite vintage to me, i.e. late 1920s - 30s; and I like that. I'm not a fan of her hat however, but then again I've never been much of a 'hat person'.
After a second look I am not so impressed about the bustière department. On some pictures it gives the impression of empty tea-bags instead of a healthy bosom. The use of the materials and the draping had an unfortunate effect, I am afraid to say.
http://www.mercurynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/pippa4.jpg?w=620
I have a question for those more knowledgeable about headgear. How does one determine what is a hat and what is a fascinator? I always thought that a fascinator was a small decorated headband or clip--but that doesn't seem to be the case. I've seem some fairly large headgear that I would call a hat being described as a fascinator.
Thanks.
I don't think it is "ill fitted" actually. Not in the "sewn badly/wrong" way at least. It is a very standard 1940s bust style. I quite like it but very much see why others do not. But I do think it's a style choice and not a "bad fitting" if that makes sense?I think the dress was ill-fitted, her posture didn't help
I have a question for those more knowledgeable about headgear. How does one determine what is a hat and what is a fascinator? I always thought that a fascinator was a small decorated headband or clip--but that doesn't seem to be the case. I've seem some fairly large headgear that I would call a hat being described as a fascinator-like Kate's today
Thanks.
Yes, I agree with you. Plus the bony chest isn't too pretty, it could have been camouflaged a little betterAfter a second look I am not so impressed about the bustière department. On some pictures it gives the impression of empty tea-bags. The use of the materials and the draping had an unfortunate effect, I am afraid to say.
http://www.mercurynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/pippa4.jpg?w=620