Club Obi Wan

Yes, I realize that this topic has probably been discussed a million times before, but I'd like to rip off some stitches and expose the old scars! Figuratively speaking of course

It seems that on these forums, the consensus is that the length of Indy's jacket should fall 1-2 inches below the waist. But in anticipation of ordering yet ANOTHER Wested... , I've rewatched Raiders and noticed that the jacket seems to be a good 3-4 inches below the waist instead!

Here is an example.

In an earlier post, Rusty Jones asked if his jacket length was too long, and most thought so:



Now observe this scene from Raiders. Granted the jacket is a little longer on the left (our left) than the right, but I'd believe if the jacket was straightened, it would be similar to the jacket above.



Now considering what knowledge we know about the pocket specs, and the distance between the bottom of the pocket and the bottom of the jacket, there seems to me that there is no way the picture below has a jacket of less than 3 inches!



And finally, I don't mean to put down anybody, so please don't take this personally, but let's look at Indiana G's photo of his very impressive Flightsuits jacket.

Here is a perfect example of 1-2 inches below the waist:



However, if we look at the final comparison photo:



You'll note that Indy's jacket is the same length at the bottom. HOWEVER, consider that he is leaning backwards, and has him arms slightly raised. This would also bring up the hem of the jacket a couple of inches, and you folks at home can even try it out!

It has been argued that certain jackets in Raiders may be longer than others, but I would believe that the number of examples listed above are quite wide-ranging, and encompass many of the key scenes from that movie.

So ladies and gentlemen, what say you? I'll let you be the judge.

Personally, I'm really anxious to hear what the old-timers have to say... Especially Michaelson!

this is the correct way by wearing the noel howard pants and shirt
[img]

http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o102 ... 011064.jpg

[/img]

IMO everybody should make sure to get the extra inch in front.
2 Inches below the waist is imo the right way.
Castor your wornlook lambskin jacket is IMO for SA about an inch too long what I have seen from your pics. Seems like you got a Long Jacket with the extra TOD inch.

Much regards

orb

I support the idea that the jacket was longer that just 2 inches below the waist. Maybe 3-4. I suggest we obseve the jacket in the temple scene.

orb wrote:IMO everybody should make sure to get the extra inch in front.
2 Inches below the waist is imo the right way.
Castor your wornlook lambskin jacket is IMO for SA about an inch too long what I have seen from your pics. Seems like you got a Long Jacket with the extra TOD inch.

Much regards

orb

I believe the Worn Look currently only comes in one length (slightly longer than a nornal TOD). If you're less than 5' 8" it will look a bit too long.

Looks right to me and on MY monitor, my friend. I think you have a winner there myself!

HIGH regards! Michaelson

You know bro, I was wondering the same question (duh).

From my knowledge of anatomy (as I've been drawing for years and years and years), I can judge that the picture where Indy's next to Sallah, his pants are not exactly on his waistline, rather slightly below (1/2 to 1 inch) his bellybutton. And in the pic where he's under the wing and is about to get punched, the pants are actually ON his waistline.

Also, the jacket doesn't look like it rides up THAT much with his arms raised.

The ONE concern I have however, is that nobody seems to care or notice the wrinkling on Indy's sleeves. I'm not 100% sure, but it looks almost as if they were slightly curved, not quite like a motorcycle jacket sleeve but slightly.

Castor, judging by the position of Rusty's arms to his waist, I officially declare that I think that his pants are too high up. And that the jacket isn't too long, in fact it seems perfect.

I always preferred the Cairo look anyway, where he's a bit sloppy. I think his waistline is lowered in most action scenes, as opposed to slower scenes, as it would be in real life and cause it's really freakin' uncomfortable to have your waistline to your bellybutton when you're bouncing on the front of a truck.

Oh and since people argue about the color, I just thought I'd drop my opinion in. In the beginning of raiders, the jacket seems more unsaturated than later. That's because in the opening sequence, apart from the fact that they put a daylight jell on the lights (and it seems like they have about 4 or 5 lightsources in the picture where HF is next to AM) but also drastically cut the amount of light with scrims.

The pic where he's next to sallah, there's a yellow floodlight pointed in their general direction, which makes any color look a lot richer.
The sun's actually yellow, so in daylight, the authentic lamb should be a pretty rich brown color.

Thus I conclude that the actual color of the jacket wouldn'tve been a very dark brown, rather a rich brown (as shown above).

Just my professional opinion.

You can't fret too much over the length, because few people are going to fit into the actual HF proportions. The length/sleeve has to fit your figure. But I agree that the raiders jacket has been though to be shorter than it is.



Does anyone notice the torn right pocket - matching the flying wing scene?

No, but I notice his rounded left collar -same as today's wested collars.

Looking at this picture again:



Look how low the collar sit It's nearly below his shoulders.
I haven't seen this spec on any jacket yet.
Maybe the necksize of the filmjacket was intended for a bigger neck like Tom Selleck's
That's maybe why the jacket looks so long in the front in some shots.
Because it just hangs in the front. If he would stand tall with the jacket right on I think it would look much shorter!
Sorry for my poor language. Sometimes I'm just too tired

Much regards

orb

camera angles and props can play tricks on your eyes....bogie1943 should be able to attest to this

the picture of my indy flightjacket was taken from a declined point of view, with me wearing low sitting, low rise deisel jeans and an oversized belt. i do see the illusion of the jacket being too short.

just for kicks, i measured my tod wested, my todd's jacket, and this jacket from collar seam to the bottom of the back panel and all of them measured within the 25" to 25.75" range. however, they do all differ in cut and the way they sit. my tod wested is the longest in the backpanel but it looks to sit the shortest because of the fact that its the most form fitting of the bunch (especially around the shoulders).

as you can see below, the length of my flightjacket indy is about right and i wouldn't want it much longer than that.

orb wrote:Castor your wornlook lambskin jacket is IMO for SA about an inch too long what I have seen from your pics. Seems like you got a Long Jacket with the extra TOD inch.

Hi Orb, I agree with you on that. My worn lamb is a couple or more inches way too long for screen accuracy due to measuring problems. It's actually more of a modern jacket length! But I was not referring to my jacket in this post, I was talking to Indy's jacket

But if you want to discuss length of my jackets, below is a link to my first Wested which is 3-4 inches below the beltline, which I believe resembles the length of the screen jacket:

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t167 ... MG1226.jpg

orb wrote:Look how low the collar sit It's nearly below his shoulders.
I haven't seen this spec on any jacket yet.
Maybe the necksize of the filmjacket was intended for a bigger neck like Tom Selleck's
That's maybe why the jacket looks so long in the front in some shots.
Because it just hangs in the front. If he would stand tall with the jacket right on I think it would look much shorter!

I think the scene set indoors with Indy's hat off is a good example of where the jacket when standing straight.

Speaking of angles, I rewatched the Well of Souls scene, and though I'm not sure how to copy pictures from the dvd, if you have the dvd, you can find a whole bunch of low camera angles looking up at Indy where the jacket still looks long.

In fact, when he begins to climb the statue, he raises both arms (with his back towards us), which raises the back of the jacket significantly. When he does this, only a little bit of the back of his shirt peeks out. If the jacket was shorter though, wouldn't it reveal alot more of the jacket?

And in the scene at the fertility idol temple, if you watch the scene right after the whip swinging, when both Indy and guide enter the shot by turning a corner, there is a perfect full view of Indy standing in front of a 'gong', albeit a bit dark.

In that scene, if you pay attention to the jacket length, you can clearly see that the jacket ends on either the halfway mark, or at the 3/4 mark of his holster. Camera angles and visual trickery aside, considering that the jacket keeps hitting the holster, and even when he brushes back his jacket a second later and it rides up on his holster, I guess we can take this scene as a fair judge of where the jacket ends.

Castor Dioscuri wrote:In fact, when he begins to climb the statue, he raises both arms (with his back towards us), which raises the back of the jacket significantly. When he does this, only a little bit of the back of his shirt peeks out. If the jacket was shorter though, wouldn't it reveal alot more of the jacket?

The "Indy" that climbs the jackel is actually stuntman, Martin Grace, and not Harrison Ford. That "Indy" is a different body, and a different jacket, a stunt jacket instead of the hero jacket. Most people try to emulate Harrison Ford while wearing the hero jacket. Technically speaking, they are both "screen accurate".

Bufflehead Jones wrote:

Castor Dioscuri wrote:In fact, when he begins to climb the statue, he raises both arms (with his back towards us), which raises the back of the jacket significantly. When he does this, only a little bit of the back of his shirt peeks out. If the jacket was shorter though, wouldn't it reveal alot more of the jacket?

The "Indy" that climbs the jackel is actually stuntman, Martin Grace, and not Harrison Ford. That "Indy" is a different body, and a different jacket, a stunt jacket instead of the hero jacket. Most people try to emulate Harrison Ford while wearing the hero jacket. Technically speaking, they are both "screen accurate".

Actually, there's a shot a second after that with Harrison Ford in the same pose, when he turns around to look at the camera before turning back to whip something. It's clearly HF in this shot, and his jacket hardly even rides up over his shirt.

I would not base jacket length on Harrison's waist line. Mainly because it is hard to tell whether he is wear the pants on his actual waist or whether he is wearing them like most people wear their pants today. If he is wearing them "high waist 1930's style" it will make the jacket look longer. If he is wearing them where people waist their pants today then the jacket is just long. One thing I have noticed with my jackets is how they wear with the full gear. Some of my jackets are little longer than others. The shorter jackets work much better dealing with the holster, bag, and whip.

Yes Indiana G, camera perspective can play all kinds of tricks on us. That is a big reason why I do not rely on screen grabs.

Regarding where Indy's pants sit, I would like to post more pictures, but as I've reached the quota for this thread, I'd like to point you to another thread:

viewtopic.php?t=21604

Go halfway down the thread to see where the debate begins!

Doesn't look like much debate. Looks like there was no intention of making him wear period-correct high waistlines (and corresponding high-rises), and instead wore them at the commonly worn level at the time the movies were made.

Regardless, the comment about the 'screen accurate body' still applies. Unless someone has torso measurements for HF (and if you do, I do NOT want to know), good luck using the info about wear his pants waistline was to figure out jacket length, apparent or true.

Now...if you had an original shirt, you could start counting buttons to guess, but then we'd have to have completely different threads about shrinkage of the shirt, wrinkliness shortening it, weather he was slumping his shoulders...painful.

You might be forced to go back to just figuring out what length looks right ON YOU, just as we've had to start taking our own face/head shapes into account when determining a complimentary brim size.

I concur with all of the above, but the point I originally was trying to make was to challenge the commonly accepted view in CoW that an Indy jacket should rest 1-2 inches below the waist...

Jacket length keeps me awake at night... well almost.

I keep thinking my Wested is too short:




But as you can see it looks so different depending on what trousers I'm wearing...

djd your jacket doesn't have all the SA Raiders specs so why bother about the length? I think it fits you fine. Seems like a nice Wested Indy Style jacket. I have seen and even had a much shorter jacket once than you have.

Much regards

orb

... because I think the length of the jacket contributes more to the correct SA look than many of the other SA specs... Anyway, how can you say it doesn't have the SA specs when it was made from the 'original' patterns held by Wested??

Castor Dioscuri wrote:I concur with all of the above, but the point I originally was trying to make was to challenge the commonly accepted view in CoW that an Indy jacket should rest 1-2 inches below the waist...

Ah...I rarely hear that bit of info. Really. But I don't always spend a lot of time here (don't let my moderating this forum fool you on that point, they just needed extra eyes here). So I wouldn't be able to tell you if that really IS a common viewpoint on the board or just something that's been bandied about quite a bit. Certainly it sounds like it's about in the ballpark, but since it relies so heavily on where somebody's hiking up THEIR jeans too, it sounds like it's really only a valid discussion for strict SA, not any particular person's style or jacket length.

Or was that your point I just stomped on?

Either way, good cross-ref to the other thread rather than restate it all. Thanks for using the resources of the forum the right way.

djd, would you mind putting a line break btwn your two pics? side by side they make this thread toooo wiiiiide to fit on the page, and folks stop reading when they have to pan left/right as well as up/down.

orb's and castor's pics up above are already overly wide enough, and if someone has an issue with those then they should be shrunk down as well, but if this thread is just about wound down already it's easier to let it go than resize them all. Another mod/admin is welcome to overrule this (as I'm still learning) and nuke them until resized, if required.

Thanks in advance -
J

djd I'm sure their patterns are original but they doesn't really look 1:1 like it was in the film. Thanks to Platon etc. it's possible to get a Custom jacket with 99% SA specs. I don't want to start another SA discussion here. There are many other threads about this

Much regards

orb

Sorry chaps... Put a line break in now.

Orb- I was being ironic regarding Wested... I'm waiting on my Todd jacket for a more SA version

Thanks, djd. Looks like the original screen caps are what are making it too wide, but I appreciate your help.

This thread is about wound down, but note for next time, guys: The max pic size is also meant to avoid the overly-wide threads. We've noted that WIDE threads often don't get any more replies, people just give up.

No need to go back now, just a reminder.

I think jacket length should not be measured in relation with the pants waist but in relation to sleeve length which remains constant regardless of what pants you are wearing (even if you are not wearing any pants).

That said, I believe that distance from end of sleeve to bottom of the jacket should not exceed 2 inches.

Just my two cents.

PLATON wrote:I think jacket length should not be measured in relation with the pants waist but in relation to sleeve length which remains constant regardless of what pants you are wearing (even if you are not wearing any pants).

That said, I believe that distance from end of sleeve to bottom of the jacket should not exceed 2 inches.

Just my two cents.

Bear in mind that some people's arms are shorter/longer in relation to their torsos than others. So you can't have any hard and fast rule of body to sleeve length.

At the end of the day it's what fits you that counts. The length compared to the "Indy" trousers you want to wear the jacket with or the type of trousers you most often wear, whichever is more important to you, is probably the best indicator.

My 2 penneth.

I was talking about the jacket HF wore meaning that if you get size 40 80s fit and have HF's torso and arm length then my above post should be true.

And when we examine the jacket details I don't think our model is a 4 feet tall 400 pounds guy....

Something I have not seen mentioned here is demonstrated below. I wish I had Indy pictures to show it, but I will have to use X-Men pictures. The same thing will apply however.

Look how much the jacket appears to change in a shot with Hugh Jackman standing very straight...



...and with only a bit of a slouch:



The length at the waist, the sleeve length are noticably different. It really does not take that much to make a jacket look different lenghts.

Rick, Hugh Jackman is in those pictures? I didn't even notice.






Oh, yeah, there he is.

I think those two pics demonstrate that effect very well. That jacket that Hugh Jackman has on, also has the ride up in front that some people get wearing a Wested Indy jacket.

I have a shirt that looks just like the blue one in the top photo. I guess I already have a start in collecting X-Men gear. Put on the shirt and a pair of jeans with a belt that has a big buckle and my Wested, and I would have a very close approximation to that outfit. Oh, and I would have to avoid my barber and my razor for awhile.

Okay, let's look at this a different way. Check out HF's right elbow. See where it falls in relation to the side of the jacket? Now, that might shift a LITTLE, but that geometry is pretty stable.

Where does your elbow come in relation to your waist? When my arms are bent, they almost reach my natural waist. I can lean only slightly and dig my elbow into my sides at the waist/top of pelvis. Is this typical proportions? If that is the case, then the pocket flap sits AT HF'S NATURAL WAIST in the above pic.

I'm only saying this to point out that no jacket is going to look like Ford's ON YOU unless you are built like Ford. I think he might have had an unusual build in the waist/arm proportion department.

Now, in the above pic he is leaning to the right - you can see that by looking at the left pocket flap and see how much higher it is. Nevertheless, the pocket on each side is going to stay with the elbow no matter how much leaning there is.

Discuss...

Re the X-Men 3 photos -- Get a load of those continuity errors that managed to slip by. Jackman's shirt is different and Halle Berry's not even wearing the same outfit. Who was responsible for continuity on that set, Cyclops?

SD

...and so, could they be two completely different jackets as well? Not to continue an 'X-Man' discussion on an Indygear site.

Regards! Michaelson

Hahaha. I thought of that, but for some reason, those two pictures seem to illustrate this the best. Even the first one, you can visualize Jackman leaning forward and having the jacket drop. I know that my Indy jackets do this. If I stand straight - which I rarely do - the jacket seems short and it rides up a bit in the front. Standing normally, makes the jacket a bit longer in the front and standing with a slouch further lengthens the front of the jacket. Of course, you can guess what is happening to the back of the jacket as the front appears to be growning longer... But there is that one famous Raven bar scene that I would swear makes that jacket appear almost waist length. If we could see this shot from the front, the jacket would be down to Indy's knees.

I know you were joking, but that really looks to be the same jacket.

I think you can use screen caps all day long to prove whatever you want. At the end of the day it's going to be YOUR jacket, so the only person you have to prove it's "screen accuracy" to is yourself. It's not like COW members get bonus miles or cash rebates or better parking spaces for having the most people think your stuff looks screen accurate.

What it all boils down to is this: Unless you are putting this jacket on a manniquin or are exactly the same size and proportions as Harrison Ford was in 1980 you really, really need to look at photos of YOURSELF wearing the jacket and decide if it looks RIGHT on YOU.

I think using pants to determine jacket fit is an odd way of doing things. I also think the less thought about HOW Indy SHOULD have worn his pants the better. Yes, the movies were set in 1936, but none of his clothing was period accurate, so pics of Clark Gable with his pants pulled up to his nipples does nothing to prove how Indy wore his pants. The pants his were based on were not, nor even intended to be high waisted. It's not wrong how Harry wore his pants, and because it changed from shot to shot I hardly think it is a good way to determine jacket length.

Depending on where YOUR natural waistline is I think the standard point of deviation on jacket length should be based on YOUR arm length. Notice where Indy's jacket falls in relation to the length of the sleeve.



But remember what looks good on Harry might not look good on you, so adjust accordingly.

hahaha...Winston, you put an interesting visual in my head. Someday we will have a member with THE actual jacket, on a perfect HF bodycast mannequin, suddenly go and sell it on ebay because when he put it on HIMSELF it didn't sit right, so it must not be the real jacket...

The photo Winston posted is a further proof to what I said earlier, i.e. that we should be measuring the distance from bottom of jacket to end of sleeve.

Returning to Castor Dioscuri's question, I think the upper right photo shows the perfect jacket length.



On the upper left photo however, we see that the sleeve and bottom of jacket line up (oops not good). Basis that my friend, I 'd say your jacket is too long.


And I also want to say, I 'd rather have a jacket that's too long than having one too short.

brgds,
Platon

I agree with you Platon- I'd rather have a jacket that's a bit too long rather than one that's a bit too short.... As has been said above so much depends on the wearers build. If you have broader shoulders the whole jackets going to look shorter regardless of your height.

On any other jacket, it's pretty clear the sleeve length is driven by your arm, and the body length driven by the length of your torso.

If those two are at different heights relative to one another on different bodies (and they ARE), then that means a well-fitted jacket cannot be checked to make sure the sleeve length is EXACTLY relative to the body length. Keep in mind that between the very smallest of these jackets say, a size 34, or smaller) and the largest (someone above said they had a 50, and I swear I've heard larger here), 2 inches is going to look proportionally different on every one.

That said, sure, if you want it to LOOK a certain way because you are going for SA, do whatever you want, but know that you may be unable to fight the geometry of your own body. If your body type is close to SA, then you can strive for this, but otherwise, it might be a fool's errand.

But do what you will.

What just came into my mind. I think that the SA jacket had a much larger necksize. That's why the collar sits always so low and so the jacket falls in the front so long and looks much shorter in the back.
So a bigger necksize, one inch added to the overall length and the extra inch in front should do the trick IMO. So for me it would work I'm sure.
So you should make sure that backlength isn't too long or you have more of a coat.

Much regards

orb

Someone take a look at this and tell me the jacket falls 1-2 inches below the waist.

http://www.theraider.net/showimage.php? ... ns/r44.jpg

When I went for my fitting, Peter said "4 inches below the belt", IIRC.

Exactly!

It doesn't get any more official than a confirmation from Peter, folks!

The problem with that has ALWAYS been....where is YOUR beltline located?

Regards! Michaelson

OK, so I saw a local midnight screening of Raiders. All I did was look at the gear on the "Big" screen. After this viewing, no one will ever convince me that the jacket was short or long. It was both. The scenes in the temple, his jacket is worn off the shoulders as has been previously mentioned by numerous post. The only way I can see someone wearing it this way is if the jacket was 1-2 sizes too big. Other scenes like the Raven and Truck Chase, the jacket looks like it was a "tailored" fit. Therefore, I am quite certain that it was both-long and short

And that's the long and short of it.

For me, I believe I've found the definitive length of the LC jacket. For those of you with the Indy DVD trilogy boxset, pop the 'Making Of' DVD in your player, and watch the LC 'Making of'. In the first few seconds, Ford, Connery, and Spielberg are standing side by side, and you can clearly see how long the jacket is, since the camera seems to be shot straight on. Here, you can clearly see where the jacket falls in relation to the waist, hands, etc. And you even have the other two to compare with.

I can't figure out how to post pics of a DVD, so perhaps someone might contribute?