FAUX LEATHER

imo it can only be "it's own material" when its not in the place of real leather just to cut cost; it should be there for an explicit reason

>LEATHER.

DISGUSTING.

>FAKE LEATHER.

RIDICULOUS.

>>12104941
I actually started this thread because I went to a store in m town and they had this faux leather Guess Jeans bomber jacket that I really liked. I didn't buy it, but it made me curious what most people think.

So are you saying that a faux leather biker jacket is a no, or only when a leather jacket has faux leather on some spots to cut costs? And can you give me an example of the exception?

>>12104932
faux leather is only acceptable if its because of your ideology. if real leather is too expensive you are living out of your class. same goes for fake brands. there is enough of cheap and /fa clothing

>>12104955
i mean if you like the bomber, go ahead and get it, but if its faux leather its not going to be that subtle genuine leather that'll age nicely. an exemption i would say is if a vegan person bought a faux leather item to conform with their beliefs, or a plus would be that faux leather doesn't crack, and is much much more easier to maintain and clean than actual leather

>>12104953
stop writing in caps. you are the most cancerous tripfag.

its kinda stupid to say faux leather since there are so many different ways to make to faux leather and there are huge difference on quality.
cheap faux is usually realy bad.
i am waiting for that pineaple tree faux leather since it felt and looked realy good.