5 ms·
One interesting observation is how much less variation there has been in clothes for the past 20 years or so. Someone from 2005 could look completely undisguisa
by TrackerFF 1y ago
One interesting observation is how much less variation there has been in clothes for the past 20 years or so. Someone from 2005 could look completely undisguisable from someone today, by just wearing regular non-fashion forward 2005 clothes. Same goes for haircuts.
Same can't really said about someone from 1955 and 1975, 1980 - 2000, etc.
edit: Score
4695
Avg. Years Off
3.0
- 2mlWQbCK 1y agoIs that really true? It is true for me, but I always assumed that is just because I were younger last century. In 1990 I could easily tell if someone was looking like 1980, but today I could never guess if someone looked like 2015 or 2025. I would be happy to learn that this is because fashion actually slowed down, but until proven wrong I will just assume it is because I am older and not paying attention.
- Jensson 1y ago> could never guess if someone looked like 2015 or 2025. If you don't think the younger generation dress crazily then fashion didn't change. Every previous generation thought the next generations clothes were crazy.
- simgt 1y ago> I could never guess if someone looked like 2015 or 2025 It's the length of the socks
- trinix912 1y agoAnd the width of the pants
- btbuildem 1y agoAnd the length of the pants vs the socks
- thfuran 1y agoHow long are socks supposed to be now?
- manfromchina1 1y agoApparently Gen Z prefer crew socks as opposed to millennial ankle socks.
- calderwoodra 1y agoIt's easier to identify women's fashion among millennials imo: 2000's: jeans 2010's: leggings 2020's: not those
- rafram 1y agoIt’s because you were younger. As a “Gen Z” person, there’s a huge difference between 2010s fashions and the fashions of today.
- jillesvangurp 1y agoIt's an interesting phenomenon that you can observe with other things as well like tastes in music. I think it has something to do with people having access to about sixty years of people trying out just about everything they could think off. It's all been done before at this point and it's all available in new and fresh forms. So, it's no longer about collectively picking something that is genuinely new but individuals cherry-picking whatever that they like. And it helps of course that we're not funneling media through a handful of TV channels, newspapers, etc. anymore like we used to. So people cherry pick where they get their information as well.
- numa7numa7 1y ago> It's all been done before Until something new is done ;) The sound pallette is just about infinite with what's possible.s. I think modern music has become homogenous because true art is risky and won't pass a modern focus group.
- dgfitz 1y agoI keep waiting for inside-out clothes to be a thing. Hipsters were getting close at one point.
- fsckboy 1y agoback around 2002 I had some T shirts from the Gap (so, pretty mainstream) that had the visible stitching and tags look like the shirt was inside out; sort of a duplicate in that if you actually wore them inside out they still looked inside out. the only way to really tell was the little washing instructions tag on the inside. i really liked them, was sad when they went away
- rafram 1y agoThey are. Lots of sweaters with seams on the outside.
- dgfitz 1y ago
- pyb 1y agoThis cultural phenomenon is sometimes called "the Long 90s"
- cheschire 1y agoWell there's very little "common" cultural influence these days. It used to be that you could see a significant episode of a TV show and EVERYONE was talking about it the next day in the office. Now you're lucky if you can even find one person that has seen the show you're even talking about, let alone if they are "caught up" on it since many people prefer to buffer a few episodes while they watch other things.
- victor106 1y agoAgreed, I think the last of the shows where everyone talked about was Game of Thrones.
- ksec 1y ago>edit: Score 4695 Avg. Years Off 3.0 How is that even possible? Only three years off? I thought guessing it which tens would be good enough. Getting the last digit right is impossible without blind luck? Or am I missing something?
- echoangle 1y agoFor some images, it involves some luck. But one image was WWII for example, that one is much easier to get accurately.
- macintux 1y agoI averaged 5 years off, but my average would have been much better without one photo that I botched by 16 years because I'm unfamiliar with early 19th century swimsuit styles. There were 2 major world events represented, that helps. Clothing style helps.
- earthtograndma 1y agoIf you guessed the 19th century, you were off by a bit more than 16 years.
- macintux 1y agoAnd here I complain about people erroneously specifying EST all summer along. They’re only off by 1 hour.
- kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 1y agoI skip specifying Standard or Daylight time altogether, and just use ET (or CT, MT, etc). Much easier on my brain, and nobody actually cares which they're in at the moment.
- lolinder 1y agoI got 3.2. Spoilers below. Round 1 I just guessed in the middle of the 70s. Round 2 I was 5 years off, but I should have been able to get closer if I'd slowed down. Someone with a better knowledge of modern Middle Eastern uprisings or Arabic could have read the signs, but also the tech in everyone's hands was pretty closely dated. Round 3 was pretty clearly the London Blitz—the uniform was WW2 era and people were piled on top of each other in a London Tube station—which narrowed it down to basically a single year. Round 4 was another guess-the-decade shot, I was 6 years off (I guessed 1940). Had I thought about it harder it would have been unlikely to have been taken during WW2, which would have bumped my guess up a few years to be closer. Round 5 was a bunch of protesters who were pretty clearly in the mid-to-late 2000s (cell phone in the background), and the topic of their protest was gay marriage which had a single very important flashpoint in that decade with Prop 8 in 2008.
- sergiotapia 1y agoIt's called "stuck culture". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pyi-KGwuR9c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pyi-KGwuR9c
- I-M-S 1y agoI would say athleisure is a recent development. 10 years ago you'd see far fewer women wearing tight leggings outside the gym. Heck, even in gyms you'd be hard pressed to see the kind of tank tops and sport bras you regularly see nowadays [1] N.B. I'm just noting the phenomenon, not commenting on its merits [1] https://www.vice.com/en/article/women-are-intimidating-men-with-workout-bikinis-says-gym-owner/ https://www.vice.com/en/article/women-are-intimidating-men-w...
- Oreb 1y agoI’ve never seen women wearing that kind of outfits in gyms in Norway or France, but I see it all the time online. Is it an American thing?
- I-M-S 1y agoCan't comment on the USA, but I'm seeing a fair number of them in Canada and (somewhat less commonly) in Croatia.
- MzxgckZtNqX5i 1y agoNot uncommon in Norway, at least at few gyms I've been to after they reopened after COVID.
- hnpolicestate 1y agoLindy.
- dredmorbius 1y agoClothing variation has a lot to do with not only fashions but fabrics. Considered over a longer timescale, up through the late 19th century, the principle options for clothing were cotton, flax, silk, wool, leather, grasses (in some regions), and metal, with very few other options. Viscose rayon was the first synthetic fibre created, in 1899. It was followed by Nylon (1930s) which pressaged a slew of additional synthetics, notably polyester. Adoption was somewhat slowed by various factors, including WWII, but by the 1960s synthetic fabrics and brilliant dyes were exploding into popularity. Flagrant use of synthetics faded somewhat through the 1970s and 1980s, with fabric blends and natural fabrics becoming more prevalent (yes, I'm aware that the leisure suit was prominent in the 1970s, but it was less so by the end of the decade). There've been variations in specific styles since, though most to my eye have been evocative of earlier 20th-century periods since the 1990s, rather than distinctively original. (I'm far from an expert in clothing fashion, take with heaping handfuls of salt.) Other scene-setting elements include architectural styles (notably houses in the West), automobiles, and since ~2000, the presence and style of handheld mobile devices, smartphones after about 2010. Camera styles would be a useful indicator for much of the 1900s ("Brownie" box cameras, SLRs, "Instamatics", and the like).
- foobarchu 1y agoI found it equally interesting how much you can identify a photo's time period by the film qualities.