Wednesday, January 21, 2009

The Look of a Decade

This post by Becker has me thinking "Will my wedding day look stand the test of time?"

All of these brides are ridiculously beautiful but you can definitely tell some of them are brides of the 90's by looking at their photo.



Did you focus on a wedding day look that's classic, or did you embrace the 2000's and go with what you love? Do you have any predictions for what the look of a bride married in this decade will be? What will Becker be posting 10 years from now?

12 comments:

Miss Capitol Hill said...

I don't really think anyones look will 100% withstand the test of time...as in, fifty years from now no one will look at your dress and think you got married yesterday, but I guess the question is will people look at it and still think it's beautiful and not dated. I can easily identify a dress from the twenties, fifties, seventies, etc. and some I think are hideous while others I still think are beautiful. And if that's the aim then simplicity I think is the key to that. The more different the cut, the bigger the shine, the bows, the more different the hairdo, jewelry, etc. the easier it will be to identify when the wedding happened.

I think the overwhelming identifier for a wedding from this decade will be handsdown any dress that has pickups. They were just so popular that it will be identified as something from this time. I think possibly drop veils will be identified with this time as well as they get more popular. Probably colored shoes too.

Kacey said...

i agree. pick-ups are going to be what the puffy sleeve was for the 80's. and the colored sash was way too popular, too.

i avoided both of those things, but it wasn't necessarily because i was concerned about "standing the test of time." i just wanted to look like the bridal-version of myself. so, i picked things that worked for me. and i didn't like the pick-ups or the sashes...

however, i think the key to looking both timeless and up-to-date is sticking to somewhat classic and traditional styles for major elements, then adding personal details that are more modern or trendy. for example, wear a dress and veil with a classic feel, but throw in a little personality with the flowers or shoes or something. if the shoes or some little detail seems dated in a few years, it's not that big of a deal because the majority of the look was pretty traditional.

but if you look like a walking fad...like some of this year's brides with the enormous skirt with pick-ups, AND the criss-cross bodice, AND the colored sash, AND the colored shoes, AND the super trendy jewelry, AND the drop veil, AND the modern bouquet, AND the trendy hairdo, etc...the look will be dated before you know it.

rksquared said...

Like Miss Capitol Hill, I think it is virtually impossible to avoid all things that will date a wedding. Aside from attire I think one of the things that will most quickly date weddings of this decade are the pictures themselves. So many couples seem to eat up the highly edited images that only Photoshop actions, textures, and layer masks can create. I have to wonder if in 10, 20, or 30 years those brides will wish they had images that reflected the true colors of what they saw on their wedding day rather than the ethereal images their photographer created for them.

Katy and Landon said...

I TOTALLY thought of this when I was planning our wedding (6 years ago). I'd like to think that at the very least, my look was timeless - it didn't scream 2003 like I felt all the other Utah gals getting married in Salt Lake did.
I know a woman who married in the 60's and her look was so simple and elegent (no crazy hair, 3/4 sleeve dress) that it always looked to me like they could have been taken yesterday. That's what I wanted for my look at least. I carried a simple white and pink tulip bouquet tied with ribbon-maybe that will look dated someday (like the cascading mountain of flowers women carried in the 80's). Oh well, but so interesting that you should post this because I always think about this!

hannah is mariages chic said...

I think it really is all about balance. You are always going to look slightly dated - that's inevitable.

That being said, there is a difference between 60s sheath dated and 1992 polyester sparkle organza dated. I think if your choices are chic today, they will still be chic in ten years time, just in a "of the past" way.

I think that since 2005, bridal style has really developed in a direction that is more timeless, but that in itself is probably just a fashion.

I think the best way to make your wedding stand the test of time is to make sure it reflects your core personality and natural tastes. You'll look comfortable and the choices will still make sense down the track, because they were made by you, for you.

Cate Subrosa said...

Strapless A-lines and coloured sashes.

I actually thought it would be cool if our wedding pics looked really dated, but I don't think they will really because we ended up in pretty classic old-school stuff.

Ruby Slippers said...

Everyone's said what I think - and what I thought when I saw that post, because I also Becker-stalk! Simple and elegant is the way to go. I think drop veils will still look all right in the future...they might date you, but not in a hideous, "OMG what was she thinking?" way (read: the eighties). Pick-ups and those dresses with the long coloured panels at the back are definitely going to date brides too. I hadn't thought about the coloured shoes, but Miss Capitol Hill (and everyone else)is right! I am going to be so dated! Doh.

rksquared makes an excellent point about the over-photoshopping being dated. I think if I was choosing a photographer who did that, I would make sure they gave me the original unedited photos too. I did read on someone's blog that they often do a few different effects to each photo, but the couple gets all the versions so they can choose.

Nicole said...

I tried to go for a timeless look, but every era has a style that we don't really notice until we're looking back.

Nicole said...

Oh and I TOTALLY agree about the over-PhotoShopped photos. I'm getting soooo sick of seeing the layers and antiquing and (most of all) the photos where just the bouquet is in color. I can't wait until that stuff is out of style!

Funny thing is, some people think that stuff is the mark of a good photographer, when in fact it's the total opposite!

Cyd said...

I tried to stay as timeless as I could, while still opting for something I absolutely love today and feel confident I always will. I suspect the brides of the 2000s will be most easily characterized by strapless dress and a lot of side rouching.

bridechic said...

I think everyone here's pretty much broken down what separates fad from fashion. I agree with Cate on strapless A-lines with contrasting sashes; Miss CH's idea on pick-ups is pretty on the mark too. I remember some 15 years back when Ulla Maja reinvented pick-ups; they were considered pretty radical and only bold brides wore them (or ones who could afford Maja's gowns). Now David's Bridal sports them on just about every page of their catalog. I'd say the photos presented in this post may reflect 90s but I'd say the very best of 1990s chic.
We're going to be marked by out fascinator headwear and plumey hats; birdcage veils and net poufs.

bridechic said...

I think everyone here's pretty much broken down what separates fad from fashion. I agree with Cate on strapless A-lines with contrasting sashes; Miss CH's idea on pick-ups is pretty on the mark too. I remember some 15 years back when Ulla Maja reinvented pick-ups; they were considered pretty radical and only bold brides wore them (or ones who could afford Maja's gowns). Now David's Bridal sports them on just about every page of their catalog. I'd say the photos presented in this post may reflect 90s but I'd say the very best of 1990s chic.
We're going to be marked by out fascinator headwear and plumey hats; birdcage veils and net poufs.