Hose - Question

[TheBrus]

Hello, all,

Let me begin by stating that I do not have any type of permission to use this photo, and that I just saved it from FaceBook, from a kiltmaker's page. I don't know these people, though they look lovely, to be sure. I'm not picking holes in anyone's coat, but I just wanted to show this photo of this man's hosiery to ask something.

Is this how the tops of my hose are supposed to look? I have slightly shorter than average legs, and I feel that this is how my hose are supposed to look (not that I wear them this way) based on the length of the garter flashes I have been sold. It seems to me that these tops should be folded back upward to halve them, but that's just how I do it.

I don't intend to start a discussion, I just wanted to consult an expert or two.

Thanks!
Jared

11143416_1088764577817599_4759660990766603069_n.jpg

[Father Bill]

I'm having problems seeing up close, but the top fold-over looks excessive to me. I might be tempted to double fold them. The flashes might move closer to the front too.

With the smile on the young bride's face though, I don't think anybody will take a glance at his legs except perhaps she.

[JohntheBiker]

From the photo, the hose appear a little high (i.e. not enough leg showing) - the practical result of kilt hose that are a bit too long for the intended leg.

One practical option for the "too long hose" is to fold your hose over once, roughly the width that you want your fold-over to be, put on your flashes or ties and then fold over once more to the desired height. You may have to adjust a bit until you get it right. I suggest that this is less obvious than folding back upward and looks better than wearing your hose too long.

[mookien]

I agree with Father Bill, though my hose often come up to the bottom of the kneecap. They help keep me warm, especially when there's snow on the ground.

[figheadair]

Oh dear This looks like someone has dressed this chap rather than him being a frequent kilt wearer.

[Big Mikey]

I know there are some hose (I own a pair) that have a lengthy top. These type are meant to be "back folded". You fold the hose down, such as in the picture and then you fold them back up half way. In this way the finished edge becomes the top. This allows for the "finished" side to be out for all to see. In essence you wind up with three layers of material for the cuff.

When wearing ties or garters I place them before the first fold down, then complete the back fold. The ties wind up at the top of the cuff and they should be a bit to the front, looking down, you want them at "10" and "2".

[OC Richard]

I've often seen hose with ample cuffs and I like the way they look, though the ordinary traditional thing is fairly narrow cuffs, which can be seen on diced and tartan hose (which have a specific cuff width built in).

What I don't like is for the cuffs to look any narrower than that width, like these, which look a bit skimpy to me



This is what looks best to my eye; first a soldier



and now some vintage civilians





Flashes don't have anything to do with cuff length IMHO, for example the civilian gents above aren't wearing any. With my Cheviot hose the flashes are nearly covered, just a bit showing, which is fine with me.

Here's the cuff width usually built into diced hose

[BadenochWolf]

I've often seen hose with ample cuffs and I like the way they look, though the ordinary traditional thing is fairly narrow cuffs, which can be seen on diced and tartan hose (which have a specific cuff width built in).

What I don't like is for the cuffs to look any narrower than that width, like these, which look a bit skimpy to me



<SNIP>

Here's the cuff width usually built into diced hose

Hope you won't mind my saying so, but the gent in the first picture seems to have about the same width of hose turned over as the two pipers (major?). It appears to be a rather Procrustean regulation of unnecessary precision. But then, without them, how else would Sergeants Major have any work to do? *ducks*

(EDIT: I wasn't paying attention to anything but the bandsmans' calves in that picture -Lord, I hope that phrase is never read out of context- and therefore missed the fact that one is obviously a drum major. Many apologies to the pipers and drummers in our midst.)

[MacCathmhaoil]

I tend to wear hose made by House of Cheviot or bespoke hose, all of which have a substantial fold over. I really don't like the look of the narrower hose tops personally. I've never seen hose that are back folded for a third layer and I've worn all variety over the last 50 years from military issue to off the rack and bespoke! Out of interest may I ask the brand name?

[Mathew MacKillop]

I tend to wear hose made by House of Cheviot or bespoke hose, all of which have a substantial fold over. I really don't like the look of the narrower hose tops personally. I've never seen hose that are back folded for a third layer and I've worn all variety over the last 50 years from military issue to off the rack and bespoke! Out of interest may I ask the brand name?

I have a pair of basic black kilt hose from Stillwater Kits. If I do not fold them back up again (to make 3 total layers), only about 1 inch of flashes stick out the bottom, and the cuffs are about 6 inches long, so those definitely need that 2nd fold...unless the person wearing them has very long lower legs compared to normal size feet, I suppose.

Best,

Mathew

Edit: please forgive the missing "n" from Brand in the title; wireless keyboard + distance and furniture in the way leads to typos, I am discovering.