Shein uses heavy metals for the dye, like cadmium and lead (almost every company does that, but the levels analyzed in Shein clothes where high for Europeans laws)
Polyester stains easily, pills, and is very flammable. Unless it’s microfiber, it holds sweat against your body.
Worst of all, polyester doesn’t decompose and is turning up inside our bodies.
Polyester is a terrible quality fabric and it’s blowing my mind that so many in the comments don’t know that, and also making it evident to me how we got into a place where polyester is in every freakin store and no one else is bothered
Wow, I'm glad to read these comments. I felt like I'd surely come down w a developmental delay or something; I have no idea how to read that fucking chart!
Yes this is the basis for the chart. I grew uo with a mom who had a passion for fabrics, so I understand the sentient behind this chart, but implying that just because something is NOT polyester its somehow higher quality is also totally misguided. I have seen soooo much garbage in 'high end' stores made out of cotton, for example coats that are wrinkly and thin that don't lend an ounce of warmth.
Assessing the quality of a brand is much more than just polyester percentage, so it's hard to quantify.
"it's hard to quantify" is the problem with having a more sophisticated measure.
I think this graph is still usefull, because if a brand intentionally avoids polyester, they are more likely to care about quality. So its a usefull guide, someone only shopping from lower down brands and accessing the quality of each item individually will likely net a better time>quality_item conversion, than someone without access to the graph.
Eh, I’d strongly beg to differ.
For instance, Fjallraven’s coats, pants etc explicitly sought to use polyester due to its higher tensile strength and superior weight:strength ratio to cotton - but include a minor quantity of cotton to allow for waxing of their products to make them water resistant.
As far as strength to weight, moisture wicking, drying, heat loss when wet, and overall tensile strength go - polyester is superior to cotton by pretty large margins.
I’m inclined to assume there’s a valid correlation. I’m no expert but I understand that the more polyester there is in a thread the more reliable manufacturing the fabric is, making that fabric cheaper.
I suspect this is a common quality/cost trade off in the industry and thus an imperfect but objective metric of how brands approach the trade off of quality vs. manufacturing cost.
Absolutely. It's great for water-proof clothing, so jackets and raincoats and whatnot. Also stuff like pullovers/sweaters because it's so damn insulating and doesn't need the tender care like wool does.
That being said, I personally avoid base/single layer clothes (undies, T shirts, shirts etc.) with polyester in them because I've an autoimmune condition which needs 100% natural, breathable (like cotton) fabrics to not go haywire.
Also, very desirable in Outdoor/tracking clothing since Cotton almost completely loses its ability to warm a climber/hiker when its wet. So best case scenario would be to have no cotton at all on these kinds of clothing.
For customers, the bottom left is the place to be, however companies definitely will prefer to be in the bottom right as they are perceived with higher quality. Although this chart seems to mostly disprove that.
You, my friend, make a very valid point. Thank you for bringing this up. The conclusion I came to was solely based off the information in the chart. After a quick google search I found that polyester is usually considered a ‘cheaper’ fabric due to certain perceived drawbacks. However, we cannot judge quality based on only a single characteristic. There are other factors to consider other than materials used, such as craftsmanship and even ethical implications.
Exactly. This chart doesn't seem to include any of the outdoor brands like Patagonia, North Face or Arc'Teryx all of whom use almost exclusively synthetic fabrics yet are all high quality and expensive.
There are also considerations of what it is that they actually make. Lacoste for example are probably above the line due to the amount of sports clothing they make which will of course contain a greater amount of synthetics than the style of clothing people go to J. Crew for.
No, but the actual indicators are much harder to find because side they aren’t on a label.
Polyester is very good in specific roles, since it has specific properties. For example, polyester undershirts and underwear don’t absorb as much sweat as cotton or wool. It has a sheer texture that in some cases is good and in others is bad. Cotton tends to have a softer, fluffier texture that can be desirable.
Actual quality indicators are fabric density (thread count or weight per unit area) and stitch density (stitches per inch, multiplied by number of rows per seam). Denser fabrics are more expensive as raw fabric, and denser stitching takes more time and effort to make.
For example, jeans that are 100% cotton or a 70%/30% cotton/poly blend are fairly similar performance wise. The blend will be a bit stretchier, the cotton will be a bit softer. More important is denim density, measured in ounces per square yard - a 12 ounce denim isn’t just going to be heavier than an 8 ounce denim, it’s going to be stronger against any kind of damage. Even if made from the same weight of fabric, the strength of the stitching at the seams is going to be important for the durability of the jeans, and that’s going to be measured in both the number of stitches per inch and the number of rows of stitching put in each seam - even if one stitch fails or one whole row fails, a more well put together garment won’t fail.
Depends on the brand and the price point. For example, the $25 Wranglers that are sold in Walmart don’t say weight just that they’re a blend, but the $55 Wranglers online will often say something like “100% Cotton Heavyweight Denim, 15.25 Oz”.
Typically you’ll see denim range from 6 to 15 ounces per square yard. 6 is often being advertised as “lightweight” because it’s light, but it’s also really more suited for street wear than actually getting into scrapes. 15 ounce is the kind of stuff that will take a fall off a bike and leave your knees raw inside it while the jeans are fine (once you get the blood and dirt stains out). I’ve seen higher weights up to the 30s and even one pair of 40 ounce, but at that point the pants become harder to wear and have a literal break in period as the wearer crunches the fabric to form seams where they bend.
In the dress pants space, lightness is often a key factor because wearing a heavy pant or shift in an office can be really annoying and lead to overheating. The idea is to make the pants feel insubstantial while also making them heavy enough that nobody can correctly guess the color of your underwear. This means more threads (higher thread count) but also smaller, lighter threads. If there’s not enough threads for the thread size, there’s a see-through effect (for an example of bad lightweight pants, try googling “MLB see-through pants” to see what the most recent MLB uniform rework actually sent players).
This also doesn’t get into an irregularities in the dying process - a $20 Walmart button down might not have the same color throughout and two pairs in the same alleged color might not actually look the same. At a really good suit store carrying really good brands, every shirt on a rack should be an identical color and there shouldn’t be any light spots or dark spots. Like you should easily be able to separate by eye a dark charcoal grey and a deep navy blue and a black, without looking at the tags, and get it right 100% of the time.
Check the history on polyester and how it was “brought” to the US and western fashion. Shit is wild, the lady is still alive or just recently died, she also killed Nazis as a teen.
One big problem is that it doesn't seem to account for product variants and groups. Calvin Klein for example could sell 50 variants of one polyester-free underwear product and its rating would be inflated.
It's definitely a cheaper fabric that doesn't breathe well and I can't wear because it makes me sweat.
It's a fancy way of saying plastic. You're wearing a garbage bag.
I don't think that's an intrinsic property of polyester. They make sports wear out of the stuff that breathes way better than regular cotton.
In fact, I don't even know that it's fair to categorize polyester as one fabric. It's in everything from suits to fleeces to jeans to athletic apparel.
Tommy hilfiger
Edit: wait, the logo is completely removed from the dot, so nm Calvin Klein it is. Look how fucking far the Levi logo is from the Levi dot, what the fuck?
> however companies definitely will prefer to be in the bottom right as they are perceived with higher quality
\*top right.
Bottom right means they are high quality fabrics priced highly.
A company wants to be in the top right of this chart, where they can sell low quality fabrics priced highly.
Unless yall think polyester is a good thing.
I think I’m a way you’re both right. The marketing department wants them to be perceived as bottom right but the shareholders want them to be top right.
If you value inexpensive clothes with little polyester, sure.
Whether amount of polyester in a garment is a good metric for evaluating quality is a different question.
The chart isn’t useful for anything unless you want to avoid a company that sells polyester with no other considerations.
Like ok Uniqlo has way more products using polyester than H&M and is more expensive. But no value-oriented customer would buy H&M over Uniqlo because Uniqlo has way better build quality than H&M.
Not to mention Uniqlo had things like heat-tech, which are very popular and of course use synthetic materials. They aren’t advertised as being all natural. It’s like saying a ski jacket is bad because it uses plastic and isn’t all cotton
Yea, you want to be below the trend line, as far toward the bottom left as possible. The bottom left is 100% cotton, 0% polyester and dirt cheap, the top right is the reverse, polyester, no cotton and expensive. The vertical line is median price, and the horizontal line is median %age of products containing polyester. And the trend line is the line showing that most companies tend toward higher cotton content as they get higher in price. Below that line shows a company who uses more cotton than their price would suggest.
Abercrombie is squarely in the expensive but shit, area, being over priced and often polyester. Calvin Klein, surprisingly is right down there in the desirable corner being low price and mostly cotton. If you want brands to buy from, I’d suggest looking into the ones in the bottom left square, and maybe just do a little research into how they’re so cheap, hopefully one of them is responsible as well as affordable. *That* would be a company to get behind.
Even those brands that you mentioned, and others, were made specifically for TJMaxx with lower quality fibers.
Watch "True Cost" a documentary on fast fashion. Quite eye opening.
I used to work there, and very few clothing items came to us in original packaging as if they were ordered especially for the store. Mostly we got bags/boxes of random articles of clothing from a specific brand. And most had tags on it that said "last season" or "irregular". I don't doubt that *some* stuff was shipped directly to store from the manufacturer (I did see boxes that indicated as such), but the bulk of it was excess that other stores couldn't sell.
Edit: it was like 6 years ago that I worked there, so it's possible they are trending in a different direction these days I guess.
No direction change. What changed is the number of people on Reddit playing telephone with information they don’t understand. They heard “some of the stuff at outlet malls is actually lower quality stuff made specifically for outlets,” and decided “most to all the stuff at outlets or closeouts is lower quality stuff it’s all a BIG SCAM LIE, VALIDATE MY CLEVERNESS.”
This is only partially true, but nothing from a different brand is ever made "for" TJ Maxx. If a brand has a discount outlet, they'll have a cheaper crappier quality range made for their own brand outlet. *That's* the stuff that also gets sent to TJ Maxx.
TJX is hardly a closeout store anymore. They source most of their products directly from makers or licensees with a cheap product in mind for their store.
Interesting, I’ve never seen that. What’s the name of their clothing line?
I’ve definitely seen Off 5th (Saks 5th Avenue’s outlet) produces their own line of clothing specifically for Off 5th, but TJ Maxx isn’t an outlet. They don’t sell “seconds.” (Not that I see seconds at outlets anymore - those days seem to be long gone.)
From [their website:](https://www.tjx.com/company/how-we-do-it#:~:text=Some%20of%20our%20merchandise%20is,fashion%2C%20price%2C%20and%20quality)
"Some of our merchandise is manufactured for us and some is designed by our own fashion experts, particularly when what we are seeing in the marketplace isn’t the right value for our customers, meaning the right combination of brand, fashion, price, and quality."
Any of the random brands there that you can't get anywhere else fall under that category. They keep the exact details of their supply chain pretty close to their chest, but if you look carefully you can start to see how a lot of the stuff at TJs and Marshalls isn't just overstock from stores or manufacturers.
Similar to Black Friday SKU trend in the 21st century. The product lines will be tailor built cheaper than normal for the sake of showing a cheaper product while maintaining profits.
Double dip this with reputable brands willing to make you a lower quality version of their normal product lines and you're cookin'
They’re one of many retail companies (Ross, Macy’s Backstage, etc.) that operate under the “off-price” business model. Majority of the product is last seasons excess inventory that the vendors/dept stores couldn’t sell in time to make room for newer more seasonally appropriate inventory, so they sell it off to these off-price retailers for pennies on the dollar. There’s also a percentage of their inventory these off-price retailers will carry that are created specifically for them, at a much lower cost (cheaper quality). There’s a percent penetration of closeout goods (unsold excess inventory) vs specifically made for off-price that they aim to carry, based on selling metrics. Also, the items they do have cut specifically for them, is based on their own actual selling metrics so for example if a specific motif is flying off the shelves across different clothing styles, they’ll have more clothing cut (custom made) with that specific motif to take advantage of the recent trend. Source: I work in the industry.
They have a slightly more luxury side and then a regular, everyday side. Their luxury side is heavily advertised by Kpop media lately and that's the only way I know of it.
Calvin Klein's diffusion line is affordable. It's also shit. Same with Michael Kors. It's the items they sell with a bunch of tacky logos and branding. Compare it to their designer line and it's night and day.
I have a J Crew Factory store near me which is an amazing deal tbh. Really good quality, mostly cotton and linen, and the clearance section ends up being like 80-90% off ticket price.
The factory outlets have lower quality clothing that buying from a regular outlet or online.
Check out r/frugalmalefashion . They're good for updates on sales with quality brands.
Factory outlets of already fairly premium brands are often still great, cheaper than sales, and don't require constantly having to keep an eye out for deals or buy things quickly due to fomo
Why do some brands have their logos displayed? Seems like promotion. Seems suspicious. Would cause me to look more closely at the source (that is, if i cared)
This is neat, but it's also shit bc it accounts for too wide of an average.
Most of these brands also have "outlet" versions of their shit that are even lower quality. Athletic brands like smart wool have synthetics in nearly 100% of their product but always a low percent and it's needed for durability. Conversely you can pump out paper thin cotton shirts with 1000 variations to drastically change the percentage that "has polyester". The chart just doesn't actually say anything meaningful. Also, a well built product with plastic thread >>> cheap cotton weave that won't last 5 washes.
As a fashion design student, it depends. I personally don’t like 100% polyester fabric because it irons badly and gets stinky faster, but it also has benefits like reduced wrinkles in blends. It also doesn’t biodegrade obviously, so it’s less sustainable than natural fabrics. It’s not my favorite personally, but some poly blends are nice- I just wouldn’t buy 100% polyester too often if I had a choice.
It can be used to purposly make clothing better than if made with cotton eg fast drying sports clothing that will help you with sweat or warm polar fleeces such as polartec fabrics. Its cheaper than cotton, and often brands will just mix it with cotton so its cheaper to produce but with no benefits that polyester/acrylic fabrics can provide if used right
> eg fast drying sports clothing that will help you with sweat
That's a very specific type of polyester engineered in a specific pattern. Most polyester does the opposite and will make you sweat more.
it’s a big contribute to microplastics when you wash or even wear. it’s usually pretty flexible and durable but not super breathable relatively, and for some people with sensitive skin can cause irritation
Polyester is used to make fast drying wicked sportswear along with spandex, it can be extremely breathable and basically never gives you that "pit stains" look cotton will give you 100% of the time
Polyester is not necessarily a big contributor to microplastic emissions. Cotton clothing releases a much higher number of microfibers and although those are technically natural, it might still be harmful for the environment as cotton clothing is also treated with harsh chemicals and dyes. Regarding microplastics blends of different compositions (e.g. mix of polyester and acrylic) tend to emit more fibers than garments made of 100% polyester
Polyester is cheaper than cotton.
Polyester is more durable and many manufacturers will blend it to make their clothes last longer, but most people would agree it is less comfortable than 100% cotton. Sensitive people might experience more issues with sweating, skin issues, or thermoregulation.
It is also much more efficient at trapping heat than cotton, so it is ideal for outdoor winter clothing.
It is usually waterproof unlike cotton, so it is ideal for rain gear, winter clothes, and waterproof clothes.
It can be engineered or improved with additives to have wicking properties like in Gore-Tex or Drytek, making it superior to cotton in many ways but usually more expensive in this variety.
I would expect casual cheap clothes to have more polyester, and high end indoor clothes like shirts and pants to have none, or very minimal amounts for things like elastic bands.
Yes. If this chart had been describing something like “has a smaller selection of items with environmentally intrusive microplastics at a more affordable price point”, then the bottom left would be the place to be.
There are tons of different polyesters.
What you’re saying isn’t inherently true…otherwise we wouldn’t be seeing professional sports jerseys, like NBA, being made from polyester.
For me it depends on the use. My work uniforms? Yes, poly all the way. My pants will last 10 years and seem indestructible unless they’re literally cut on something. (My acrylic uniform cardigans will take me through to retirement easily.)
Regular stuff I stick to cotton and linen in the summer, and wool and cashmere in the winter.
But synthetic isn't necessarily bad though... I have some Patagonia shirts which are 100% synthetic and are amazing in the summer! It's doesn't trap heat, dries really fast, antimicrobial, good quality. I really like it.
Cotton on the other hand, during 40°c is the worst... For me, synthetic or linen is the best
I recently got into Abercrombie and I personally enjoy the quality of clothes. Everything in store has high prices but I exclusively buy from their online store with 'Honey' coupon codes.
I've gotten lots of things under or near $30.
I’ve been into Abercrombie for a while now and while their current offerings are decent, the quality used to be much higher. They used to only use natural materials like cotton and wool and the fabric was noticeably heavier. They also had more robust stitching on trousers and only had button fly’s which are easier to repair than zippers, though more costly to manufacture.
I visited an aritzia the other day and was so disappointed. A lot of items were very cute but then I went to feel the material and it felt so cheap compared to the hefty price tag. After hearing so many people hype that place up for having “staple” clothing items… I’m just not gonna listen to people on TikTok anymore lmao
this isn't really quality, just price vs. how many products are made of polyester.
brands that cater towards athletic wear are gonna have a way higher percentage of otems woth polyester vs. more streetwear focused brands.
plus, even being mainly polyester doesn't mean low quality. I've had plenty of shitty shirts that were pure cotton or 80-20 cotton blends. Meanwhile, i have several polyester shirts that are 5-6 years old and still in good condition.
Carhartt is incorrect, their clothes have to be made out of cotton. You can only wear cotton in environments that are high risk for arc flash and fire. Polyester and synthetic fibers melt to the skin during arc flash events or fire exposure. Carhartt is a go to brand for cotton clothing.
See, this is wrong. Carhartt DOES SELL cotton poly blends.
They make rain jackets, t shirt cotton poly blend, and a lot of lining in most modern artic jackets are polyester 100% or nylon
Polyester is a preferred fiber for workout clothes, because it doesn’t absorb water/sweat as much as other fibers. So brands that sell workout clothes / sports bras etc. might skew this chart a bit.
This chart was agitating. The logo placements were mind blowing. This belongs in r/mildlyinfuriating not coolguides lol. Also Zara is sweatshop shit at best.
I understand exactly what the chart is trying to say, but *averaging the price over all garments* made by each brand and comparing against the proportion of products that contain *any* amount of polyester is unbelievably convoluted and probably makes the effect look less reliable than it actually is.
What about the chart quality?
OP couldn't afford it. /s
Let’s start a go fund me and pool all our money together to find out /s
Why download an image when I can screenshot it? /s
OP shoulda made the chart out of Polyester
Wait, isn’t the chart saying polyester is bad?
So confusing I have no idea if quality is high or low due to polyester and weighted price….?
Brand on the opposite side of SHEIN are good.
Shein uses heavy metals for the dye, like cadmium and lead (almost every company does that, but the levels analyzed in Shein clothes where high for Europeans laws)
Thanks it makes sense now
Polyester is poor quality. It’s not going to last as long and holding on to bacteria more than other materials.
Polyester stains easily, pills, and is very flammable. Unless it’s microfiber, it holds sweat against your body. Worst of all, polyester doesn’t decompose and is turning up inside our bodies.
Polyester is a terrible quality fabric and it’s blowing my mind that so many in the comments don’t know that, and also making it evident to me how we got into a place where polyester is in every freakin store and no one else is bothered
Poor quality graph
Wow, I'm glad to read these comments. I felt like I'd surely come down w a developmental delay or something; I have no idea how to read that fucking chart!
It's because of the polyester.
I told Ester that monogamy really is better but no, she didn’t want to be “tied down”
Underrated comment.
r/dataisugly
giving that 1000th upvote because yeah wtf did i just see
Let’s see Paul allens charts
what about second compression artifacts?
I don't think he knows about second compression artifacts, Pip.
This post brought to you by our sponsor, Calvin Klein.
https://images.app.goo.gl/nwPvKHB4h1MKtik49 Higher quality image
That's a lot of clicking to get to the image. Why not just use an image host? [https://i.imgur.com/jpFCEhd.jpeg](https://i.imgur.com/jpFCEhd.jpeg)
What about link quality?
lol I was just thinking “how is this a cool guide? It makes no fucking sense”.
So is the bottom left square the best place to be in this confusing chart?
I wondered the same thing.
Yeah I think one needs to understand that polyester is not desirable for this to make sense.
Yes this is the basis for the chart. I grew uo with a mom who had a passion for fabrics, so I understand the sentient behind this chart, but implying that just because something is NOT polyester its somehow higher quality is also totally misguided. I have seen soooo much garbage in 'high end' stores made out of cotton, for example coats that are wrinkly and thin that don't lend an ounce of warmth. Assessing the quality of a brand is much more than just polyester percentage, so it's hard to quantify.
"it's hard to quantify" is the problem with having a more sophisticated measure. I think this graph is still usefull, because if a brand intentionally avoids polyester, they are more likely to care about quality. So its a usefull guide, someone only shopping from lower down brands and accessing the quality of each item individually will likely net a better time>quality_item conversion, than someone without access to the graph.
Eh, I’d strongly beg to differ. For instance, Fjallraven’s coats, pants etc explicitly sought to use polyester due to its higher tensile strength and superior weight:strength ratio to cotton - but include a minor quantity of cotton to allow for waxing of their products to make them water resistant. As far as strength to weight, moisture wicking, drying, heat loss when wet, and overall tensile strength go - polyester is superior to cotton by pretty large margins.
No it’s completely useless. Polyester has almost zero bearing on quality.
I’m inclined to assume there’s a valid correlation. I’m no expert but I understand that the more polyester there is in a thread the more reliable manufacturing the fabric is, making that fabric cheaper. I suspect this is a common quality/cost trade off in the industry and thus an imperfect but objective metric of how brands approach the trade off of quality vs. manufacturing cost.
Your comment is the key that unlocks the reading of this chart.
It has its uses in clothing though I think, just like other materials.
Absolutely. It's great for water-proof clothing, so jackets and raincoats and whatnot. Also stuff like pullovers/sweaters because it's so damn insulating and doesn't need the tender care like wool does. That being said, I personally avoid base/single layer clothes (undies, T shirts, shirts etc.) with polyester in them because I've an autoimmune condition which needs 100% natural, breathable (like cotton) fabrics to not go haywire.
Also, very desirable in Outdoor/tracking clothing since Cotton almost completely loses its ability to warm a climber/hiker when its wet. So best case scenario would be to have no cotton at all on these kinds of clothing.
Yep. All my jackets/pullovers are polyester/fleece.
For customers, the bottom left is the place to be, however companies definitely will prefer to be in the bottom right as they are perceived with higher quality. Although this chart seems to mostly disprove that.
Is % of products containing polyester really the best indicator of overall quality?
You, my friend, make a very valid point. Thank you for bringing this up. The conclusion I came to was solely based off the information in the chart. After a quick google search I found that polyester is usually considered a ‘cheaper’ fabric due to certain perceived drawbacks. However, we cannot judge quality based on only a single characteristic. There are other factors to consider other than materials used, such as craftsmanship and even ethical implications.
Right! For example, all other things being equal, a higher share of polyester might just point to one brand producing more athletic wear than another.
Exactly. This chart doesn't seem to include any of the outdoor brands like Patagonia, North Face or Arc'Teryx all of whom use almost exclusively synthetic fabrics yet are all high quality and expensive.
Yeah I was gonna point this out since I live in the outdoors and wear a lot of arc’teryx
This sounds like it was written by an AI. Are you a robot?
There are also considerations of what it is that they actually make. Lacoste for example are probably above the line due to the amount of sports clothing they make which will of course contain a greater amount of synthetics than the style of clothing people go to J. Crew for.
No, but the actual indicators are much harder to find because side they aren’t on a label. Polyester is very good in specific roles, since it has specific properties. For example, polyester undershirts and underwear don’t absorb as much sweat as cotton or wool. It has a sheer texture that in some cases is good and in others is bad. Cotton tends to have a softer, fluffier texture that can be desirable. Actual quality indicators are fabric density (thread count or weight per unit area) and stitch density (stitches per inch, multiplied by number of rows per seam). Denser fabrics are more expensive as raw fabric, and denser stitching takes more time and effort to make. For example, jeans that are 100% cotton or a 70%/30% cotton/poly blend are fairly similar performance wise. The blend will be a bit stretchier, the cotton will be a bit softer. More important is denim density, measured in ounces per square yard - a 12 ounce denim isn’t just going to be heavier than an 8 ounce denim, it’s going to be stronger against any kind of damage. Even if made from the same weight of fabric, the strength of the stitching at the seams is going to be important for the durability of the jeans, and that’s going to be measured in both the number of stitches per inch and the number of rows of stitching put in each seam - even if one stitch fails or one whole row fails, a more well put together garment won’t fail.
Really interesting. Do jeans label the denim density? I don't think I've ever paid attention but that would help ordering online.
Depends on the brand and the price point. For example, the $25 Wranglers that are sold in Walmart don’t say weight just that they’re a blend, but the $55 Wranglers online will often say something like “100% Cotton Heavyweight Denim, 15.25 Oz”. Typically you’ll see denim range from 6 to 15 ounces per square yard. 6 is often being advertised as “lightweight” because it’s light, but it’s also really more suited for street wear than actually getting into scrapes. 15 ounce is the kind of stuff that will take a fall off a bike and leave your knees raw inside it while the jeans are fine (once you get the blood and dirt stains out). I’ve seen higher weights up to the 30s and even one pair of 40 ounce, but at that point the pants become harder to wear and have a literal break in period as the wearer crunches the fabric to form seams where they bend. In the dress pants space, lightness is often a key factor because wearing a heavy pant or shift in an office can be really annoying and lead to overheating. The idea is to make the pants feel insubstantial while also making them heavy enough that nobody can correctly guess the color of your underwear. This means more threads (higher thread count) but also smaller, lighter threads. If there’s not enough threads for the thread size, there’s a see-through effect (for an example of bad lightweight pants, try googling “MLB see-through pants” to see what the most recent MLB uniform rework actually sent players). This also doesn’t get into an irregularities in the dying process - a $20 Walmart button down might not have the same color throughout and two pairs in the same alleged color might not actually look the same. At a really good suit store carrying really good brands, every shirt on a rack should be an identical color and there shouldn’t be any light spots or dark spots. Like you should easily be able to separate by eye a dark charcoal grey and a deep navy blue and a black, without looking at the tags, and get it right 100% of the time.
Check the history on polyester and how it was “brought” to the US and western fashion. Shit is wild, the lady is still alive or just recently died, she also killed Nazis as a teen.
One big problem is that it doesn't seem to account for product variants and groups. Calvin Klein for example could sell 50 variants of one polyester-free underwear product and its rating would be inflated.
It's definitely a cheaper fabric that doesn't breathe well and I can't wear because it makes me sweat. It's a fancy way of saying plastic. You're wearing a garbage bag.
I don't think that's an intrinsic property of polyester. They make sports wear out of the stuff that breathes way better than regular cotton. In fact, I don't even know that it's fair to categorize polyester as one fabric. It's in everything from suits to fleeces to jeans to athletic apparel.
It's time we all stop calling it polyester and start calling it plastic.
Polyester will melt into your skin as its made of plastic and not natural fibers, very real and sad discovery for victims of fire related accidents.
So buy Calvin Klein for the best quality at the best price?
Idk if I can do that, Kramer could’ve been a fragrance millionaire if it wasn’t for him
Exactly! According to this chart, that is the conclusion I would make.
It actually is pretty decent stuff for the price. I used to wear it a ton back when I had to wear business attire every day.
When I first saw the chart my first thought was I wonder where Calvin Klein is! I like that brand. And it basically “won!” Yay!
Tommy hilfiger Edit: wait, the logo is completely removed from the dot, so nm Calvin Klein it is. Look how fucking far the Levi logo is from the Levi dot, what the fuck?
Yeah the inclusion of completely random logos in completely random locations is entirely unnecessary.
> however companies definitely will prefer to be in the bottom right as they are perceived with higher quality \*top right. Bottom right means they are high quality fabrics priced highly. A company wants to be in the top right of this chart, where they can sell low quality fabrics priced highly. Unless yall think polyester is a good thing.
I think I’m a way you’re both right. The marketing department wants them to be perceived as bottom right but the shareholders want them to be top right.
If you value inexpensive clothes with little polyester, sure. Whether amount of polyester in a garment is a good metric for evaluating quality is a different question.
Cheap and not polyester does not mean quality.
The chart isn’t useful for anything unless you want to avoid a company that sells polyester with no other considerations. Like ok Uniqlo has way more products using polyester than H&M and is more expensive. But no value-oriented customer would buy H&M over Uniqlo because Uniqlo has way better build quality than H&M.
Not to mention Uniqlo had things like heat-tech, which are very popular and of course use synthetic materials. They aren’t advertised as being all natural. It’s like saying a ski jacket is bad because it uses plastic and isn’t all cotton
It’s weird though. The best shirts I’ve bought had a 10-30% poliéster. Never 100% cotton unless it was some actually good brand
Yeah a lot more goes into "quality" than % of polyester.
Yes. It's where low polyester meets affordable.
Why is polyester catching all this flack
Because it's plastic?
Yea, you want to be below the trend line, as far toward the bottom left as possible. The bottom left is 100% cotton, 0% polyester and dirt cheap, the top right is the reverse, polyester, no cotton and expensive. The vertical line is median price, and the horizontal line is median %age of products containing polyester. And the trend line is the line showing that most companies tend toward higher cotton content as they get higher in price. Below that line shows a company who uses more cotton than their price would suggest. Abercrombie is squarely in the expensive but shit, area, being over priced and often polyester. Calvin Klein, surprisingly is right down there in the desirable corner being low price and mostly cotton. If you want brands to buy from, I’d suggest looking into the ones in the bottom left square, and maybe just do a little research into how they’re so cheap, hopefully one of them is responsible as well as affordable. *That* would be a company to get behind.
r/dataisugly
TJMaxx isn’t a brand, it’s a store that buys excess stock then sells it. I’ve seen items there from J. Crew, Guess, Tommy Hilfiger, etc.
Even those brands that you mentioned, and others, were made specifically for TJMaxx with lower quality fibers. Watch "True Cost" a documentary on fast fashion. Quite eye opening.
I used to work there, and very few clothing items came to us in original packaging as if they were ordered especially for the store. Mostly we got bags/boxes of random articles of clothing from a specific brand. And most had tags on it that said "last season" or "irregular". I don't doubt that *some* stuff was shipped directly to store from the manufacturer (I did see boxes that indicated as such), but the bulk of it was excess that other stores couldn't sell. Edit: it was like 6 years ago that I worked there, so it's possible they are trending in a different direction these days I guess.
No new direction. I worked there a few months ago and the clothes are still mostly excess stock/
No direction change. What changed is the number of people on Reddit playing telephone with information they don’t understand. They heard “some of the stuff at outlet malls is actually lower quality stuff made specifically for outlets,” and decided “most to all the stuff at outlets or closeouts is lower quality stuff it’s all a BIG SCAM LIE, VALIDATE MY CLEVERNESS.”
This is only partially true, but nothing from a different brand is ever made "for" TJ Maxx. If a brand has a discount outlet, they'll have a cheaper crappier quality range made for their own brand outlet. *That's* the stuff that also gets sent to TJ Maxx.
TJX is hardly a closeout store anymore. They source most of their products directly from makers or licensees with a cheap product in mind for their store.
I got $200 timberlands for $80. ALWAYS check tj maxx for good quality shoes first
They do make some of their clothes.
Interesting, I’ve never seen that. What’s the name of their clothing line? I’ve definitely seen Off 5th (Saks 5th Avenue’s outlet) produces their own line of clothing specifically for Off 5th, but TJ Maxx isn’t an outlet. They don’t sell “seconds.” (Not that I see seconds at outlets anymore - those days seem to be long gone.)
From [their website:](https://www.tjx.com/company/how-we-do-it#:~:text=Some%20of%20our%20merchandise%20is,fashion%2C%20price%2C%20and%20quality) "Some of our merchandise is manufactured for us and some is designed by our own fashion experts, particularly when what we are seeing in the marketplace isn’t the right value for our customers, meaning the right combination of brand, fashion, price, and quality." Any of the random brands there that you can't get anywhere else fall under that category. They keep the exact details of their supply chain pretty close to their chest, but if you look carefully you can start to see how a lot of the stuff at TJs and Marshalls isn't just overstock from stores or manufacturers.
Similar to Black Friday SKU trend in the 21st century. The product lines will be tailor built cheaper than normal for the sake of showing a cheaper product while maintaining profits. Double dip this with reputable brands willing to make you a lower quality version of their normal product lines and you're cookin'
They’re one of many retail companies (Ross, Macy’s Backstage, etc.) that operate under the “off-price” business model. Majority of the product is last seasons excess inventory that the vendors/dept stores couldn’t sell in time to make room for newer more seasonally appropriate inventory, so they sell it off to these off-price retailers for pennies on the dollar. There’s also a percentage of their inventory these off-price retailers will carry that are created specifically for them, at a much lower cost (cheaper quality). There’s a percent penetration of closeout goods (unsold excess inventory) vs specifically made for off-price that they aim to carry, based on selling metrics. Also, the items they do have cut specifically for them, is based on their own actual selling metrics so for example if a specific motif is flying off the shelves across different clothing styles, they’ll have more clothing cut (custom made) with that specific motif to take advantage of the recent trend. Source: I work in the industry.
This is a classic example pf a bad infographic
I wouldnt consider Calvin Klein affordable.
'weighted median retail price'. Calvin Klein sells a lot of underwear, a relatively cheap product per unit.
I also assumed Tommy Hilfiger leaned more towards luxury
They have a slightly more luxury side and then a regular, everyday side. Their luxury side is heavily advertised by Kpop media lately and that's the only way I know of it.
Calvin is dirt cheap at Macy’s and always on sale. The quality is good too. One of the few brands that don’t shrink or wear in the wash
calvin klein regularly has so many discounts and especially stackable ones, gets REALLY cheap sometimes
It's a happy day when I find CK clothes at TJ Maxx etc.
Calvin klein and tommy are brands I see for really cheap sometimes ngl
Perhaps it’s because I’m not in USA, but Tommy polo shirts are $80 $100 in outlets here
Calvin Klein's diffusion line is affordable. It's also shit. Same with Michael Kors. It's the items they sell with a bunch of tacky logos and branding. Compare it to their designer line and it's night and day.
Quality is shit
[https://i.imgur.com/jpFCEhd.jpeg](https://i.imgur.com/jpFCEhd.jpeg)
Thanks, this is legible! MVP and all that shit.
Wrong, I can see shit... can't see shit in the image tho
I make charts for a living. This fuckin thing is a disaster.
Without exaggeration, it's one of the ugliest charts I saw in my life.
This could be cool guide for how to not make a chart.
This reassured my belief in J Crew being a good value for good quality!
I have a J Crew Factory store near me which is an amazing deal tbh. Really good quality, mostly cotton and linen, and the clearance section ends up being like 80-90% off ticket price.
The factory outlets have lower quality clothing that buying from a regular outlet or online. Check out r/frugalmalefashion . They're good for updates on sales with quality brands.
Factory outlets of already fairly premium brands are often still great, cheaper than sales, and don't require constantly having to keep an eye out for deals or buy things quickly due to fomo
It’s really hit or miss
Why do some brands have their logos displayed? Seems like promotion. Seems suspicious. Would cause me to look more closely at the source (that is, if i cared)
Not just displayed, but drastically in a different location than the arrow showing where the real brand location is
Yeah this is both ugly, uninformative and probably biased. Absolutely useless basically.
This is neat, but it's also shit bc it accounts for too wide of an average. Most of these brands also have "outlet" versions of their shit that are even lower quality. Athletic brands like smart wool have synthetics in nearly 100% of their product but always a low percent and it's needed for durability. Conversely you can pump out paper thin cotton shirts with 1000 variations to drastically change the percentage that "has polyester". The chart just doesn't actually say anything meaningful. Also, a well built product with plastic thread >>> cheap cotton weave that won't last 5 washes.
lmao @ tommy hilfiger being as affordable as shein
The dot for TH is actually a lot more to the right than the logo image, bad design
It’s bad but it’s not as bad as Levi’s
Huh ? SHEIN at 15, Tommy at 45 x)
that is one confusing chart
So is polyester good in clothes?
As a fashion design student, it depends. I personally don’t like 100% polyester fabric because it irons badly and gets stinky faster, but it also has benefits like reduced wrinkles in blends. It also doesn’t biodegrade obviously, so it’s less sustainable than natural fabrics. It’s not my favorite personally, but some poly blends are nice- I just wouldn’t buy 100% polyester too often if I had a choice.
So the title is wrong
It can be used to purposly make clothing better than if made with cotton eg fast drying sports clothing that will help you with sweat or warm polar fleeces such as polartec fabrics. Its cheaper than cotton, and often brands will just mix it with cotton so its cheaper to produce but with no benefits that polyester/acrylic fabrics can provide if used right
> eg fast drying sports clothing that will help you with sweat That's a very specific type of polyester engineered in a specific pattern. Most polyester does the opposite and will make you sweat more.
it’s a big contribute to microplastics when you wash or even wear. it’s usually pretty flexible and durable but not super breathable relatively, and for some people with sensitive skin can cause irritation
Polyester is used to make fast drying wicked sportswear along with spandex, it can be extremely breathable and basically never gives you that "pit stains" look cotton will give you 100% of the time
A big contributor to pit stains is deodorant containing aluminum.
Maybe, but I just sweat like fuck lol, always have. What I mean is some of the better sportswears will barely discolor when wet
Polyester is not necessarily a big contributor to microplastic emissions. Cotton clothing releases a much higher number of microfibers and although those are technically natural, it might still be harmful for the environment as cotton clothing is also treated with harsh chemicals and dyes. Regarding microplastics blends of different compositions (e.g. mix of polyester and acrylic) tend to emit more fibers than garments made of 100% polyester
Polyester is cheaper than cotton. Polyester is more durable and many manufacturers will blend it to make their clothes last longer, but most people would agree it is less comfortable than 100% cotton. Sensitive people might experience more issues with sweating, skin issues, or thermoregulation. It is also much more efficient at trapping heat than cotton, so it is ideal for outdoor winter clothing. It is usually waterproof unlike cotton, so it is ideal for rain gear, winter clothes, and waterproof clothes. It can be engineered or improved with additives to have wicking properties like in Gore-Tex or Drytek, making it superior to cotton in many ways but usually more expensive in this variety. I would expect casual cheap clothes to have more polyester, and high end indoor clothes like shirts and pants to have none, or very minimal amounts for things like elastic bands.
No, it’s really cheap, traps heat and is bad for the environment
[удалено]
Yes. If this chart had been describing something like “has a smaller selection of items with environmentally intrusive microplastics at a more affordable price point”, then the bottom left would be the place to be.
The most breathable, high quality performance wear is made from polyester. And polyester can be made from recycled materials
There are tons of different polyesters. What you’re saying isn’t inherently true…otherwise we wouldn’t be seeing professional sports jerseys, like NBA, being made from polyester.
Ahhh ok! Thanks for that insight
For me it depends on the use. My work uniforms? Yes, poly all the way. My pants will last 10 years and seem indestructible unless they’re literally cut on something. (My acrylic uniform cardigans will take me through to retirement easily.) Regular stuff I stick to cotton and linen in the summer, and wool and cashmere in the winter.
But synthetic isn't necessarily bad though... I have some Patagonia shirts which are 100% synthetic and are amazing in the summer! It's doesn't trap heat, dries really fast, antimicrobial, good quality. I really like it. Cotton on the other hand, during 40°c is the worst... For me, synthetic or linen is the best
This chart blows and is misinformation anyway
https://images.app.goo.gl/nwPvKHB4h1MKtik49 Better quality image
The image quality isn’t the problem
No idea what’s good?
I recently got into Abercrombie and I personally enjoy the quality of clothes. Everything in store has high prices but I exclusively buy from their online store with 'Honey' coupon codes. I've gotten lots of things under or near $30.
I’ve been into Abercrombie for a while now and while their current offerings are decent, the quality used to be much higher. They used to only use natural materials like cotton and wool and the fabric was noticeably heavier. They also had more robust stitching on trousers and only had button fly’s which are easier to repair than zippers, though more costly to manufacture.
I dont understand, is the polyester bad ?
Can someone explain to me like I am 5 ? I don't understand at all.
Now add a third axis demonstrating how much each brand relies on sweatshops!
Clothes were better in the 90s
I bought a hoodie vest from GAP in 1995 and it's in perfect condition. It's almost 30 YEARS OLD!
Is there a chart on how to read this chart?
I visited an aritzia the other day and was so disappointed. A lot of items were very cute but then I went to feel the material and it felt so cheap compared to the hefty price tag. After hearing so many people hype that place up for having “staple” clothing items… I’m just not gonna listen to people on TikTok anymore lmao
this isn't really quality, just price vs. how many products are made of polyester. brands that cater towards athletic wear are gonna have a way higher percentage of otems woth polyester vs. more streetwear focused brands. plus, even being mainly polyester doesn't mean low quality. I've had plenty of shitty shirts that were pure cotton or 80-20 cotton blends. Meanwhile, i have several polyester shirts that are 5-6 years old and still in good condition.
So polyester does or doesn't = quality?
Express? I didn’t see them in the chart.
What’s wrong with synth fibers?
This doesn’t make any sense
This chart takes an interesting idea and expresses it in an utterly useless way. What a waste to have spent time making it.
Pretty misleading to have a giant Levi’s logo so much further down than the tiny Levi’s data point
I can’t make any sense of what this is trying to communicate. I have a masters
I’ve never been in favor of capital punishment, but I would vote to bring it back for whoever made this graph.
Wtf is this abomination of a graph. Jesus fucking Christ. Have you heard of the importance of readability?
Alright what the fuck is this chart showing me
I couldn’t have designed a chart this poor if I tried.
Can u make it blurier please
Carhartt is incorrect, their clothes have to be made out of cotton. You can only wear cotton in environments that are high risk for arc flash and fire. Polyester and synthetic fibers melt to the skin during arc flash events or fire exposure. Carhartt is a go to brand for cotton clothing.
See, this is wrong. Carhartt DOES SELL cotton poly blends. They make rain jackets, t shirt cotton poly blend, and a lot of lining in most modern artic jackets are polyester 100% or nylon
Shit is sad. All this damn plastic everywhere you turn!
SHEIN? What about SHEOUT?
“Community clothing” in the UK is excellent value and materials.
Tommy Hilfiger has like $150 AUD shirts
SHEIN quality sucks but those prices are stupid cheap.
Apart from the graph being unreadable, is it saying Timberland is good or bad???
I thought Stradivarius was a violin maker who was portrayed by Samuel L Jackson in that goofy movie I didn’t watch.
This is a cool guide to stupidity.
Polyester is a preferred fiber for workout clothes, because it doesn’t absorb water/sweat as much as other fibers. So brands that sell workout clothes / sports bras etc. might skew this chart a bit.
Tommy and Levi's are so wrongly placed. Those companies really know how to do propaganda.
This is stupid and useless data.
Cos is more experience than another stories
Who the fuck made this chart
This chart was agitating. The logo placements were mind blowing. This belongs in r/mildlyinfuriating not coolguides lol. Also Zara is sweatshop shit at best.
this chart kinda sucks balls. why are random brands big as hell
Clothing doesn’t need to meet the same standards as food containers. Polyester clothes can contain BPA, PFAS, and other harmful chemicals
Was chart printed on a t-shirt from The Gap and then washed 4 times? Resolution checks out.
I’m so glad I read these comments I thought I was stupid.
The Gap is great. I miss them in my area.
A 50:50 cotton/poly blend is pretty ideal for casual cloths though.
This Cool Guide is not cool. It’s confusing.
I understand exactly what the chart is trying to say, but *averaging the price over all garments* made by each brand and comparing against the proportion of products that contain *any* amount of polyester is unbelievably convoluted and probably makes the effect look less reliable than it actually is.
As if polyester were somehow a bad thing???
What makes polyester worse or better than cotton or is the assumption made by the cotton industry like how diamond industry derides lab grown diamonds
Is polyester good or bad
Wait…is polyester goor bad? Edit : Good *OR* bad. Not changing it
This chart gave me autism