Jump to comment form
April 17, 2008 at 7:55 am
Great look! I love the color of her dress!
April 17, 2008 at 7:57 am
Lovely NY atmosphere! The dress of the ‘civilian’ couple to the left proves that spring is really coming!
April 17, 2008 at 7:59 am
two words: chic simplicity!! :) (the younger woman in the forefront, that is)
April 17, 2008 at 8:14 am
I love the colors of the picture, but I suppose that was part of the point. You are bloody fabulous Sart, I am officially hooked on your blog :)
April 17, 2008 at 8:16 am
I absolutely love this! She looks way comfy and love the scarf! This is how I would have worn it as well :)
April 17, 2008 at 8:21 am
the navy trench/dress goes so well with boots (or at least i think so)
my attention was drawn the couple in the background however, and i really like that lady’s shoulder bag.(:
April 17, 2008 at 8:28 am
are the couple in the background her mom & dad?
April 17, 2008 at 8:39 am
aw, they’re holding hands :) Lovely navy dress. Finally, someone’s smiling!
April 17, 2008 at 9:05 am
bare legs! bare legs!!
thanks for the reminder.
April 17, 2008 at 9:10 am
Working in times square, I see this juxtaposition everyday..tourists vs new yorkers. This picture captures it amazingly.
April 17, 2008 at 9:17 am
What a great shot! I love the awestruck tourists to her left (I’ve been there, too!).
April 17, 2008 at 9:32 am
I like the red hair on the lady in the background.
April 17, 2008 at 10:14 am
please god remove those scarves from the new york fashion or otherwise scene.
Day Glow Girlfriend
April 17, 2008 at 10:23 am
I really like the look of this picture.The juxtaposition of this chic girl, with two normal tourists is so great.
She’s chic and alone, and they’re normal, and so connected. (Holding hands, awestruck, sharing a moment)
In a way, it’s almost very tragic. Her playful smile seems almost like a way to cover up being alone.
And in another way I simply really like the shape of the coat/dress,the positioning of her feet, and I’m happy to see someone happy in a picture!
April 17, 2008 at 10:28 am
The contrast between tourist and locals is what makes this pic for me. :) I love it! (The black shoes are great too.)
except i thought you didn’t like the height of those boots. i think they sort of cut her legs in not the most attractive spot, like you said about the girl who will be getting the sartorialist makeover
April 17, 2008 at 10:37 am
i thought you never shot this kind of boot? i do like the outfit, though.
April 17, 2008 at 10:42 am
Great outfit. The boots look like a potentially awkward length but the socks draw the length upwards and prevent that, I think. Love the colour and shape of her dress.
April 17, 2008 at 10:47 am
Yep, the rest of America wouldn’t know style if it smashed it in the face (just stirring up controversy, but goodness that couple does look quite awful).
April 17, 2008 at 10:50 am
judiThe socks fit a lot closer to her leg – big difference.
April 17, 2008 at 10:51 am
The boots aren’t the same length as the Ugg-type boots on the makeover candidate. They’re ankle length, but look higher with the socks. The difference is that socks are more form-fitting than any boots, so they don’t have that same leg-thickening effect, in my opinion.Love the combo of indigo and black!
April 17, 2008 at 11:10 am
wow another take on the Keffiyeh! I’m not impressed.
April 17, 2008 at 11:17 am
Im going to bet she was on her way from the Conde Nast building.
April 17, 2008 at 11:21 am
Must be a Conde Nast-er, right? Since the Conde Nast Building is now in Times Square, a person probably sees this wide difference in dress between tourists and real NYers all day. One of the reasons why I am so glad to be a New Yorker! The woman in the center looks simple and cool and just goes to show what a great scarf can do to up an outfit’s chic quotient. And I see inward pointing toes again, and this time, it’s a pose.
April 17, 2008 at 11:33 am
the difference between your response to the question of boot height and iheartfashion’s is the reason you sometimes come off elitist and defensive. people’s questioning of what sometimes seem a contradiction in your take on style seems to me a great opportunity for education, but your clipped and glib responses can leave the reader thinking that she’s an idiot for not understanding those differences… rather than saying there is a big difference but leaving us to guess – why not enlighten us too? that is after all, why we are here.
April 17, 2008 at 11:36 am
Why does everyone think if you throw on a scarf with a sad outfit that it will make you well dressed or look “cool”?
April 17, 2008 at 11:38 am
This photo is amazing. You adjusted the depth of field just right to make the girl the main focus of the picture while still keeping the tourists (in all their hilariously shocked glory) visible. Amazing balance.
Her boots also rock.
April 17, 2008 at 11:51 am
It’s an interesting juxtaposition. Your subject is awesome in style, and the couple you’ve included are touching. I don’t find them to be as offensive as some do, esp. anon 10:47, whose comment strikes me as provincial.
caveat: The pigeon toed pose is becoming tiresome.
April 17, 2008 at 11:57 am
This is so cute! lovely shot!
April 17, 2008 at 12:00 pm
The way she ties that scarf is desirable.
Ankle boots?! Bare legs?! Not so stunning.
April 17, 2008 at 12:03 pm
i love how the other two can join the picture!
I absolutely LOVE this picture!! You really captured the moment! And her…WOW!
April 17, 2008 at 12:39 pm
She is a ray of light for those who feel style and fashion is resevred for the young. She still looks very much her age and the clothes complement that as opposed to pushing for a stylish wardrobe and looking out of sorts.
April 17, 2008 at 12:42 pm
Ultra chic look..!
April 17, 2008 at 12:49 pm
I kind of love those people in the background. they are so vulnerable.
April 17, 2008 at 12:51 pm
Does anyone know who makes those shoes? Also, is that a trench coat or a dress?
April 17, 2008 at 1:08 pm
my goodness, those of you hating on the tourists certainly give style appreciation a bad name.
April 17, 2008 at 1:17 pm
I like the colour of her dress/coat and her smile.
Sick of the scarf look- the carefully contrived “I just threw it on” scarf shape.I love the couple behind. They spell tourist in capital letters, I love how they’re holding hands… maybe they’re really lost and want to make sure they’re sticking together through the tough streets of new york.
Thanks for the pic.
April 17, 2008 at 1:23 pm
April 17, 2008 at 1:26 pm
This look sort of Cory Kennedy’ish to me, except cleaner.
Or I am I just confused?
-h of candid cool
April 17, 2008 at 1:28 pm
It’s her stance that really elevates everything.
April 17, 2008 at 1:43 pm
I’m chuckling because I was struck by Mr. & Mrs. Louisville in the background, and so was everyone else! Agreed she’s likely a Conde Naster. I tend to dress traditionally so I’m still wrapping my thoughts around the scarf and bare legs together.
April 17, 2008 at 1:49 pm
Her outfit, which includes those bare legs draw my attention, and as chic her look is, I don´t like the sight. My legs are as “strong” as hers and I would rather cover them in thick tights. I am tall and if I wore a skirt without tights there would be plenty of skin, I really hate my own bare legs and already worry the summer ahead!
April 17, 2008 at 2:02 pm
Now I prefer Phoenix outfit to this one, and they are so close as to beg comparison. The scarf looks mussy, the bare legs don’t work with the heavy boots and coat, but break the line up. I agree with you about the tighter ankle being more becoming. Of course they are both beautiful women.
April 17, 2008 at 2:12 pm
The composition of this photo is awesome. The awkwardness (yet sweetness) of the couple on the left, contrast wonderfully with the self-assuredness of the main subject. Sort of funny that the couple on the left “seem” to be wearing what would be considered more comfortable clothes, yet look very uncomfortable compared to the girl with the shift and boots on.
April 17, 2008 at 2:51 pm
this is so new york with the tourists in the back. looooooooove it
April 17, 2008 at 3:00 pm
She’s great, but I have to say….you just a week ago explained how boots that are this hight never look good on women. How do you explain this one, because this lady is rocking those boots. Do tell.
April 17, 2008 at 3:34 pm
The Louisville jersey and kakhis really make it all work very nicely!
April 17, 2008 at 3:39 pm
i love her outfit, love everything.. but,, why does she stand like this? it looks like something’s about to drop down between her legs! : )
displaced new yorker
April 17, 2008 at 4:01 pm
she looks wonderful, I love the picture…and is is Roopal Patel the director at Bergdorf?? It looks kind of like her!
April 17, 2008 at 4:11 pm
interesting to compare/contrast this girl to the makeover subject…
April 17, 2008 at 4:12 pm
bare legs!! seems pretty damn cold! But then again, if you want to look good…
April 17, 2008 at 4:18 pm
Great look, though I am a bit tired of that particular kind of the shemagh. I’ve seen a lot of those this as of recently. Maybe s different scarf with some colors might punch up the outfit even more.
The couple in the background –made me laugh! The white tennis shoes are the mark of an American. When I was traveling alone through India and Asia, I’d often look for white tennis shoes when I wanted to speak with someone from home!
donna AND navaz
April 17, 2008 at 5:16 pm
What a fab shot! How about a range of postcards from The Sartorialist brand extensions department?!
April 17, 2008 at 5:18 pm
For anon 11:33If my answers are short it is not because I am elitist it is because I spend much of my time out shooting.
April 17, 2008 at 5:28 pm
Homage `a Isabel?! Mais oui!
I love it — taking ideas from the runways of Paris, and realizing them via ones own wardrobe! Very good.
I even prefer this lady’s take on Marant’s SS08 — she has taken the styling inspiration from there (or maybe she is just ingenius herself?) but with less of an “Afghan combat fighter”-touch to it.
PS: the boots are a completely different story in this picture from the other one. And please note that the legs are bare and the strange stockings are absent here.
PPS: there will be a secondary inspiration effect, as in me taking a take on this lady’s take on Isabel Marant’s look. That’s what the Sartorialist is about. Cheers mate!
April 17, 2008 at 5:58 pm
these boots are not the same length as phoenix’s. Her boots went to the point where her calf tapers, making it look like she just had one long calf muscle. these boots sit much lower on the woman (maybe the same height as the others, but this woman has longer legs) and because they sit lower, you can see that curve of the leg.
April 17, 2008 at 6:03 pm
and I love you for it sart…the haters need to shove it and go buy teen vogue or some other processed fluff if they don’t appreciate the quality of this site.
April 17, 2008 at 6:22 pm
isn’t this meg cuna from lucky magazine? great outfit
April 17, 2008 at 6:23 pm
The combo of winter wear and bare legs is confusing, but still very chic looking.
I am not loving those heavy black boots and black socks! IMHO, a complete downer to the whole outfit.
April 17, 2008 at 6:36 pm
thank you for showing us that you CAN mix indigo, black, and brown
April 17, 2008 at 6:38 pm
They sell those scarves at Urban Outfitters now.
April 17, 2008 at 6:47 pm
I really don’t know how I feel about these ‘fashion Keffiyehs’ I keep seeing lately. On one hand, I think they’re fabulous, on the other I find them a little offensive, considering their political connoations.
April 17, 2008 at 7:04 pm
I am loving the socks and boots look. Gotta say Sart, you created a storm with your make-over, people are still commenting.. And to those who think THESE boots in the pic are the same as the make-over girl- that are completelty different. These boots show a lovely leg line, they cut in close to the leg and show off the shape of her legs. Look a little closer people…
April 17, 2008 at 7:28 pm
Perfect. The vibrancy of the girl and Times Square juxtaposed with those sweet, awestuck tourists (who look like they’re straight from Central Casting). I love it.
April 17, 2008 at 8:24 pm
I bought some boots that are really similar just a few weeks ago! I like her way of wearing them but it’s far too cold here in England to go out with bare legs at the moment. My intuition was to lace and tie them halfway up, and to have socks going a little higher too. It looks much better that way and in my opinion is a very distinct style compared to the kind of boots Phoenix wore. (I can’t wait to see what she will look like next time we see her here!)
I also love the shade of blue that she’s wearing, that colour is taking over my wardrobe lately.
April 17, 2008 at 10:33 pm
The height of this girl’s socks come up to the same unflattering place on her legs as the ‘make over’ girl’s boots, but you don’t make any note here. What’s the deal?
April 17, 2008 at 10:43 pm
Awesome pic! love her whole outfit(bare legs esp!), her smile, her whole posture & esp the two lovely tourists behind! haha awesomeeee
April 17, 2008 at 11:37 pm
Hey is Carine Roitfield a la madison sqaure style!!!! She looks modern and busy. Like the background – great work and juxtopositioning Sart
April 17, 2008 at 11:41 pm
April 17, 2008 at 11:49 pm
I think there are two different looks in this outfit, one in the middle and one on too and bottom. The blue coat in combination with the brown bag. And the shawl and the boots with socks.I think the firs one could do without the second.
April 18, 2008 at 12:13 am
I think she looks cute, and the boots work with the socks. and the length of the dress.
I think it is adorable.
The scarf is not a problem for who ever said that in the earlier post. Besides, they provide warmth.
And the couple in the background, is also adorable, which is not always about style.
April 18, 2008 at 1:44 am
she looks so easy going and happy. almost like she doesn’t have a care in the world. she can’t be in fashion and if she is, she must have it all figured out. who is she?
April 18, 2008 at 1:54 am
pretty nice all in all. but i dont like the scarf. not just for political reasons, i just hate those cheap looking “twines”. reminds me of the tatty left-winger students here in germany.btw: doesnt the original palestine scarf have a slight different pattern? i think its not just simply plaid.
April 18, 2008 at 2:27 am
Fabulous use of color. Like a rainbow at night with the tv on in stereo. Too many newspapers involved on that scarf for my tastes, but the target bag brings it right back to hotel deluxe for me. Sometimes, a vision like this brightens the “strange encounters” feeling of Times Square. Good thing she and her glory came through for us on this rough day.
April 18, 2008 at 2:31 am
For the love of God…do we want the boots or boots/socks combo to hit this part of the leg or not? I’ve been perplexed since Makeover Girl and just don’t know what to do.
April 18, 2008 at 2:55 am
This style of scarf (anything moderatly similar to the Keffiyeh) is, in my opnion, a desparate attempt at trying to be stylish.
April 18, 2008 at 5:50 am
Wow at all the boot drama.
There’s a world of difference between the two pairs of shoes. These have killer heels and flaunt the shape of her calves, so they’re flattering.
I also never realised that that scarf had political connotations. It was fashionable with young people in France literally 5 years ago (I went on a school exchange…) and I think it’s interesting that it’s now fashionable more generally, though when I see it in France I can’t help but think it’s a bit ‘over’.
Anyway…it’s just a scarf, and the majority of people don’t know its implications. So I think its political connotations have been lost in favour of its fashion ones.
April 18, 2008 at 8:55 am
The expression of the lady in the background (teh tourist) is absolutely priceless.
I can see this photo in an ad for New York :)
I’m staying away from the boots politics. lol.
April 18, 2008 at 10:08 am
There’s such a big difference between these boots and the other! It’s not just about the lenght.
The makeover girl’s boots are large while these fit her perfectly so they actually show the curved shape of the leg.
April 18, 2008 at 10:09 am
Great photo – I’m not so fond of the NYer’s outfit as I am of the juxtaposition of the touristy couple caught in a hand-holding moment with the solo girl vogueing for the shot. I think the best part of the outfit is her dimple.
April 18, 2008 at 10:13 am
Also – about that quasi-Keffiyeh scarf – I was wearing one in college in the early 90s in Chicago. It was a nice compromise of fashion and function to be able to wrap your head on a cold and windy day, then use it as a shawl in a drafty classroom without having hat head. I’d have more interest in the look if it had some functionality to it, or at least pretended to.
April 18, 2008 at 11:43 am
To the earlier commenter. I thought the propalestine scarf had chain link fence printed on it. This looks like just checks. I’m not going there on the politics of it all, but didn’t think they were part of this at all.
April 18, 2008 at 1:45 pm
I’m just so happy to see bare legs! It’s April–tights should be banished to the closet.
Don’t get me wrong, I love my thick tights as much as the next girl, but when the flowers are blooming, tights are just a little too dreary.
April 18, 2008 at 4:00 pm
i just love this picture! those tourists.. :D
April 18, 2008 at 4:12 pm
a cute combination of colors and accessories. the proportions, however, seem unflattering.
April 18, 2008 at 6:51 pm
I can’t decide my feeling on the resurgent popularity of the keffiyeh scarves. I feel like in past decades they were definitely political statements, but now they’re just fashion. The one in the picture is a different pattern from the traditional palestinian ones, but I’d still never wear one at the risk horribly offending someone (perhaps just for trivializing a symbol that holds a lot of importance for some people, rather than for being presumed to hold a position on the issue). Perhaps if it was a color without political connotations?
But the picture is truly an awesome juxtaposition.
April 19, 2008 at 3:57 am
really like the distortion in the background and the two on lookers. Oh, and the girl is good too.
April 19, 2008 at 11:14 am
Is that Justine Bateman?
April 19, 2008 at 11:59 am
She is very pretty, but the only thing I like about the outfit is the scarf. The boots and socks on bare legs – ugh, and the dress just seems misshapen. I do love the overall composition of the picture, and the tourist couple is so cute!
Jen Reviews Movies
April 19, 2008 at 6:11 pm
It looks like Thandie Newton! Beautiful photo. I agree with most, the tourists are both funny and a total contrast in fashion terms. Clever!
April 19, 2008 at 9:04 pm
What a hilarious photo. A comment on the tides of New York.Its inhabitants and its visitors.
April 20, 2008 at 11:06 am
I for one like the boots and the bare legs. Makes me think of this transition period we’re in between winter and spring. Can’t throw out the boots yet, but bare legs are so appealing! I love it.
Also love the sunglasses/scarf thing. And the fearless way she mixes so called ‘neutrals’.
As for the couple in the background, how very Midwest. I can say that since I am from and still live in the Midwest. I think they look quite cute myself, that was my first expression upon seeing Times Square as well.
April 21, 2008 at 9:09 am
Wow, I’d wear everything she’s wearing! Gorgeous! I love the two touristy ppl next to her too, they look surprised or are admiring something!
April 24, 2008 at 11:48 am
i love her shades. does anyone know who makes them?they are like a more subtle version of tom fords anouk, which i love. suggestions?
April 27, 2008 at 6:53 pm
She looks great, I love how she contrast the couple in the background. the shot in general in amazing
May 2, 2008 at 3:34 pm
that couple in the background is soo cute
May 3, 2008 at 8:11 pm
the scarf is french. it looks amazing.
September 14, 2011 at 10:35 am
Pretty outfit. Its funny how you can tell what a great eye Scott has once some time has passed. Amazing to see so many ungrateful and silly comments however. People: if you want to do your own blog, you can. No one is stopping you. This one is going to be done how Scott wants it, because it is his. Its a great service to us all that he does this, and he doesn’t owe you any explanations or self help hints. he just needs to do what inspires him. And of course that inspires many of us. As for the juxtaposition with the tourist couple-you don’t know anything about them or this girl. There is nothing tragic about not having a man holding your had as you walk down the street.