Frames That ONLY Look Good On Display - NOT On A Human

[Herbsley]

Well, it has finally happened.

After some 14 months of waiting, someone has finally (but unknowningly) put a valid case forward for the OTT to be removed from the 'Look good on display but not on a human' list.

Post #1464 - http://www.oakleyforum.com/oakley-s...ell-me-yes-no-do-i-suit-these-thread-147.html
Post #8416 - http://www.oakleyforum.com/oakley-sunglasses-discussion/822-what-oakleys-you-wearing-today-842.html

Original post in this thread being amended to 'Pending' . . . .

 

[Eckstream1]

I think I pull off the XS better than the Juliet...

 

[Ecko]

I think I pull off the XS better than the Juliet...

It does appear that the XS fits better.

 

[Herbsley]

Juliet all the way.
:thumb:

 

[Duke Nivram]

Why is the Eyeshade not on the list?

 

[Herbsley]

Why is the Eyeshade not on the list?

You are correct, of course.

Added it, along with the similarly comical Blade.

 

[V2oak]

Here is the wiretap, I also have another pair as my everyday RX and ive been receiving a lot of compliments for my RX for the past 8 years

 

[Herbsley]

I've always thought the orbitals were far too wide apart, especially when viewed front on, but I grant you they look OK in that pic.

 

[Deleted member 24]

Flame suit on....Every Holbrook ever made. I just hate that frame but it looks good on display.

 

[Herbsley]

I'm not a fan either - and I look a complete wally in them.

But I doff my cap to those who can carry them off - Jono and Wrist being two just off the top of my head.