Black raw silk shirt
Evidence
Segment hashes
Listing Match
PHOTO 1
Show more match frames
Condition Observations
Loose/dangling embroidery thread visible hanging from one of the front hem floral clusters — a strand of yellow-green thread is visibly detached and hanging free from the embroidery motif.
Show 1 more frame
Small loose thread/fraying visible at the top of the left underarm seam area — a short dark thread end is visible at the seam junction.
Show 1 more frame
General wrinkling/creasing across the fabric body consistent with the textured crinkle weave of the material; this appears to be an inherent fabric characteristic rather than damage, but is notable.
Show 1 more frame
Claims Assessment
| Claim | Observation | Verdict |
|---|---|---|
| Black raw silk shirt | Shirt is black with a crinkle/gauze-like weave. The fabric texture visible in frames is consistent with a crinkle cotton or linen weave rather than raw silk, but fabric composition cannot be confirmed visually. Color is confirmed black. | not_assessable |
| Gently used | No significant fading, staining, pilling, or structural damage detected in analyzed frames. Fabric surface appears well-maintained. Embroidery is largely intact. Overall presentation is consistent with light use. | consistent |
| Minor fraying in embroidery | A loose/dangling thread is visible hanging from the left-center front hem embroidery cluster in FRAME_11 and FRAME_12, consistent with minor embroidery fraying as disclosed. | consistent |
| Stated size XL | The interior label visible in FRAME_1 reads '27 Nov.' (brand label); no size indicator is legible in the analyzed frames. Size cannot be confirmed visually. | not_assessable |
Coverage & Limitations
- —Tag & collar
- —Full front
- —Left cuff
- —Right cuff
- —Left underarm
- —Right underarm
- —Full back
- —The Minor fraying in embroidery you mentioned
None recorded.
Lighting is generally adequate across all frames. FRAME_7 and FRAME_8 are slightly dark in the underarm region, making fine detail assessment difficult. FRAME_11 and FRAME_12 provide good close-up detail of the embroidery. Overall coverage is thorough for this category.
- —Fabric composition (raw silk vs. cotton/linen crinkle weave) cannot be confirmed visually; seller's 'raw silk' claim is not assessable from images alone.
- —Size label was not captured in any frame; only the brand label ('27 Nov.') is visible in FRAME_1.
- —Care label not shown in any frame.
- —Interior of the shirt (lining, if any) not shown.
- —Button placket was not shown in close-up; button condition assessed only at normal viewing distance.
- —FRAME_7 and FRAME_8 underarm lighting is dim, limiting fine-detail assessment of that region.
- —Right underarm (FRAME_9) is partially obscured by fabric folds; full seam inspection not possible.
Methodology
This report presents observations from an in-app guided capture analyzed against listing photos under rubric garments-v1. Video was recorded per-angle on the seller's device using the guided capture flow; frames were extracted per segment for analysis. Condition scores are generated by an AI vision model at temperature 0 with a fixed rubric. The tier label is computed deterministically from axis scores. Timestamps are app-controlled, not cryptographically attested. The device clock is stored but labeled self-reported.
This is not an origin determination, not a professional appraisal, and does not constitute any form of warranty. The system observes visual evidence only and cannot detect issues not visible in the submitted media.
Video capture time, if shown, is self-reported by the seller. This system does not independently verify when the video was recorded.