Marc Jacobs small Camille

#16
spaceyjacy said:
I know that an inch here or there doesn't seem like a big difference, but if you compare the volume of the two there is a difference of 297.5 cubic inches. That's a big difference when you are considering how much can fit inside! Thats bigger than an extra bag measuring 10 X 7 X 4, like a Cammie or something!

The small Camille would have a volume of 1102.5 cubic inches vs. the regular Camille which would have a volume of 1400 cubic inches.

Also I think the measurements given are correct. From the pics posted it looks like Iluv is just measuring a little differently than they probably would to post on the site. For instance, measuring all the way across the bottom instead of measuring seam to seam.
Click to expand...

it's so sexy when you talk math. ;)
 
#20
comparison -- the small looks *slightly* shorter, but because the body is so soft, I suspect it will do the same thing that the larger one does - the bottom will drop down causing the bag to look taller/longer than it really is. The Camille looks entirely different when its carries (full of "stuff") from when its sitting on a shelf or table or when its stuffed w/tissue

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • 007.jpg
    007.jpg
    125.5 KB · Views: 458
#21
despite the miniscule difference in measurements, i prefer the look of the new one. it's very close to the *golden triangle* measurements on the stam: perfection!
 
#22
To my eye, that modeling pic makes it look like the size difference is quite noticeable. Plus the shape looks great! This is getting more and more intriguing!

(thx for the great pic, JJ!)
 
#24
wow, thanks for that modeling pic, jj! it really shows how an inch or two here and there can make a huge difference. the regular one is just too big for me but the small one is perfection.
 
#25
I think the best thing to do is to see the bag in person and try it on WITH a few of your own things inside (not just tissue paper). You may also want to try various colors

When I was first looking at the Camille, I thought the black looked HUGE and I didn't like it at all, but the lighter Mouse color looked a lot better. It wasn't so obvious and didn't stick out as much as the black (or even dark brown). Whereas the bag looks short and wide when it's on display (or even modeled w/tissue paper), once you put your things inside, the bag takes on an entirely diff look and shape. The bottom of the bag drops slightly which pulls the ends (sides) of the bag upwards - the settings on the ends of the bag will also affect the way that the bag looks. If you have the bag on the widest setting and leave the top of the bag open (fully unzipped) the bag will look wider and larger. If you set it on the smallest, most narrow setting and leave the zipper hooked and zip the bag closed, it will look more triangular and a little flatter.

it's definitely a bag that needs to be "played with" to find the most comfortable way of carrying it.
 
#26
the new size is a definite improvement. to me, it's the difference between an overnight bag and a satchel. the garbo leather is pliable, but still thick and has enough heft to it to provide some structure. i don't think that the bottom would sag so much as to greatly alter the size or overall look of the bag. although don't quote me on that if you carry anvils. :P man, they should've made it this size all along!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Back