Soft Natural or Soft Classic: What’s the difference?

How do you differentiate between Soft Classics and Soft Naturals?

Soft Naturals are mostly yang (sharp, long, sleek) with curve on top.

Doris Day: a verified Soft Natural (5’ 7”)

Soft Classics are a balanced mix of yin (rounder, softer, shorter) and yang with extra yin with their curves.

Olivia de Havilland: a verified Soft Classic (5’ 3”)

They have some similarities:

  • Moderate in limb proportions.

  • Moderate in their vertical.

  • They have some yin and some yang features.

But they also have some differences:

Soft Naturals will have a more noticeable frame- most people describe this as a more blunt bone structure which can make them look “stronger”. 

A Soft Classic will have a more moderate bone structure – it’s neither sharp, blunt, nor rounded - it’s an in between. No feature immediately catches your eye. They won’t have a very noticeable hourglass figure and their bust, hips, and waist will be relatively the same widths. They won’t immediately look very short or very tall. There will be, however, some extra fleshiness or curve on top of their very balanced frame.

Picture credits:

  1. Gabrielle Arruda blog page on soft classics

  2. u/scarlett-porter on r/Kibbe Reddit page

The frame of a Soft Natural will be a little more obvious or noticeable because they’re further down on the yin/yang scale towards extreme yang, but not as noticeable as more yang dominant type.

Picture credits:

  1. Gabriellearruda.com

Soft Naturals will have more obvious curve as well as bigger curves. They have a more frame dominant figure to begin with, so naturally the curve that sits on top will just add to it visually.

Joan Blondell: verified Soft Natural, 5’ 2”

They tend to appear more conventionally curvy overall. Generally, when we talk about the traditional hourglass shapes, we’re talking about soft naturals.

They can have a more defined waist or a smaller waist in proportion to upper and lower body because the curves have width in the upper body.

Scarlett Johansson: a verified Soft Natural, 5’ 4”

Soft Classics will have less obvious curves and slightly more rounded curves or may not be as conventionally curvy as Soft Naturals.

A Soft Classic’s curve will not be as obvious as a Soft Natural and their waist tends to be less defined/not as small in proportion to upper and lower body.

So basically a Soft Natural and a Soft Classic can be similar and share that blend of Yin and Yang, but a Soft Classic is a more even blend of yin and yang with slight curve, whereas a Soft Natural is a stronger yang with more pronounced frame (yang) and simultaneously more pronounced curve (yin).

Veronica Lake: a verified Soft Classic, 5’ 2”

If you’re still confused on whether you’re a Soft Natural or a Soft Classic, a good way to differentiate between them is to see what clothes look good on you.

It’s important to remember that clothes don’t have an ID, so there’s no such thing as “Soft Natural clothing” or “Soft Classic clothing”. 

The following information is about what kind of clothing tends to make one ID shine and what looks “just ok” on the other.

If you do well with asymmetry, particularly asymmetrical tops that still define your waist and and drapey, flowy pants, you might be a Soft Natural rather than a Soft Classic.

Soft Classics really need symmetry in their clothes because they’re a classic first and foremost.

A lot of high neck clothing pieces tend to look better on Soft Classics than on Soft Naturals.

Soft Naturals need to accommodate the width in their upper back area, so high necklines can make them look stuffy.

Soft Naturals need to be careful about clothes “pulling” in their wider areas like shoulders/upper back, whereas Soft Classics need to be careful with wearing clothes that requires a stronger shoulder line than they have to maintain the shape.

Soft Classics have to have a more balanced, clean, and minimal approach to outfit whereas Soft Naturals can pull off the exact opposite: asymmetric and as natural/unrestricted as possible without adding a ton of angularity/sharpness.

Previous
Previous

Kibbe & Weight: an analysis

Next
Next

Soft Dramatics: one look does not fit all