- Messages
- 10,562
- Location
- Bozeman, MT
Since there seems to be so much more interest on this vintage site in reproductions rather than original garments, I have a question. How do you know that what you've bought is an accurate reproduction? Have you handled an original to have a point of direct comparison? Have you done research into styles, how they were originally worn, what they were made from and how the designs changed? Do you simply buy into the marketing?
My wardrobe has shifted more and more toward reproductions in the past couple of years. As a dealer, I just can't afford to keep originals any more. An original work shirt is worth money, a secondhand Ralph Lauren copy of the same thing is worth a tiny fraction of the real deal and keeps on depreciating. As someone well versed in original garments, I try to keep my repros as accurate to original garments as possible, but it can be difficult.
Despite what the advertising says, I, for instance, have no way of comparing my LVC jeans to an original pair. Despite the advertising claiming complete authenticity to the original, from my experience with other denim of the era, I can assume the rise has been lowered and the material lightened on this particular version of the copy. Can I be positive? No. Does it bother me that they may or may not be accurate to a vintage garment? I don't know. When the accuracy of a reproduction is one of the major selling points of something, you hope it's not just a marketing line.
Sometimes it is. A couple of years ago, I sold a an original late '40s- early 1950s half-belt to a repro jacket maker who I know many people on here have bought from. When the reproduction based on my original came out, it was marketed as early 1930s and authentic to a particular maker's design (the original was not made by that company or in that era). From what I saw, it was an accurate copy of the original, but the marketing was entirely used to deceive.
I can say that almost all of Schott's advertising is entirely made up, yet they keep using it and people buy jackets based on it. I can say many of the reproduction leather jackets I have been made from a weight of leather which wasn't commonly used until the 1970s. I can say that the fabric and workmanship on most reproduction workwear is much better than what was used on the originals. I can say that all the high end makers putting replica Hookless zips in their jacket are reproducing something that never existed, since that design of zip was out of production for two years before the separable bottom zipper was invented. Does it matter? Not really, but when you get into such a minutia driven thing as reproduction clothes, the closer you get to the real thing, the more the details stand out.
When dealing with vintage, details matter. The presence of a certain label, a certain zipper, a certain type of snap can place the date ten years in either direction. Particularly in the self-consciously hyper-manly world of leather jackets and repro workwear, knowledge and attention to detail is often written off as "stitch counting". But in buying, identifying and selling vintage items, the details are often the biggest clues to solving the puzzle.
Do you care about your jacket having any basis in an original style , or would you rather have something heavily modernized, with larger zippers, a longer cut to fit with low rise jeans, longer sleeves to suit modern styles and leather twice as heavy as what was ever originally used?
Even the nicest reproductions I've had have tweaked the fits for modern tastes. Japanese market garments have slimmer sleeves. RRL pants have low waists and repro jackets have added 2-4 inches onto the length of waist length styles, with a modern short half-belt or motorcycle jacket creeping well into what was considered surcoat length 50 years ago. It makes it more wearable with modern clothing and modern body types- something that doesn't require a complete vintage wardrobe to make the proportions work.
My wardrobe has shifted more and more toward reproductions in the past couple of years. As a dealer, I just can't afford to keep originals any more. An original work shirt is worth money, a secondhand Ralph Lauren copy of the same thing is worth a tiny fraction of the real deal and keeps on depreciating. As someone well versed in original garments, I try to keep my repros as accurate to original garments as possible, but it can be difficult.
Despite what the advertising says, I, for instance, have no way of comparing my LVC jeans to an original pair. Despite the advertising claiming complete authenticity to the original, from my experience with other denim of the era, I can assume the rise has been lowered and the material lightened on this particular version of the copy. Can I be positive? No. Does it bother me that they may or may not be accurate to a vintage garment? I don't know. When the accuracy of a reproduction is one of the major selling points of something, you hope it's not just a marketing line.
Sometimes it is. A couple of years ago, I sold a an original late '40s- early 1950s half-belt to a repro jacket maker who I know many people on here have bought from. When the reproduction based on my original came out, it was marketed as early 1930s and authentic to a particular maker's design (the original was not made by that company or in that era). From what I saw, it was an accurate copy of the original, but the marketing was entirely used to deceive.
I can say that almost all of Schott's advertising is entirely made up, yet they keep using it and people buy jackets based on it. I can say many of the reproduction leather jackets I have been made from a weight of leather which wasn't commonly used until the 1970s. I can say that the fabric and workmanship on most reproduction workwear is much better than what was used on the originals. I can say that all the high end makers putting replica Hookless zips in their jacket are reproducing something that never existed, since that design of zip was out of production for two years before the separable bottom zipper was invented. Does it matter? Not really, but when you get into such a minutia driven thing as reproduction clothes, the closer you get to the real thing, the more the details stand out.
When dealing with vintage, details matter. The presence of a certain label, a certain zipper, a certain type of snap can place the date ten years in either direction. Particularly in the self-consciously hyper-manly world of leather jackets and repro workwear, knowledge and attention to detail is often written off as "stitch counting". But in buying, identifying and selling vintage items, the details are often the biggest clues to solving the puzzle.
Do you care about your jacket having any basis in an original style , or would you rather have something heavily modernized, with larger zippers, a longer cut to fit with low rise jeans, longer sleeves to suit modern styles and leather twice as heavy as what was ever originally used?
Even the nicest reproductions I've had have tweaked the fits for modern tastes. Japanese market garments have slimmer sleeves. RRL pants have low waists and repro jackets have added 2-4 inches onto the length of waist length styles, with a modern short half-belt or motorcycle jacket creeping well into what was considered surcoat length 50 years ago. It makes it more wearable with modern clothing and modern body types- something that doesn't require a complete vintage wardrobe to make the proportions work.
