Black silk shirt
Evidence
Segment hashes
Listing Match
PHOTO 1
Show more match frames
Condition Observations
Loose/fraying embroidery threads visible on right-side hem embroidery cluster — red thread end visibly trailing away from the floral motif, consistent with seller's stated flaw of minor embroidery fraying.
Loose embroidery thread also visible trailing from left-side hem embroidery cluster (red thread end extending beyond motif boundary).
Collar lies slightly open/relaxed rather than fully flat; mild softening of collar structure observed, consistent with light use of a woven camp-collar shirt. No pronounced deformation detected.
Show 2 more frames
General wrinkling/crease lines across back panel and body — consistent with the crinkle-weave/gauze texture of the fabric and lay-flat photography; no evidence of permanent set creases or fabric degradation.
Show 1 more frame
Fabric material appears to be a lightweight woven (likely gauze/cotton or viscose blend) rather than silk. No sheen, drape, or surface characteristics consistent with silk detected in any frame.
Show 3 more frames
Claims Assessment
| Claim | Observation | Verdict |
|---|---|---|
| Black silk shirt | Color is confirmed black. However, the fabric surface texture, drape, and weave structure visible across multiple frames (FRAME_3, FRAME_4, FRAME_6, FRAME_9) appear consistent with a gauze or crinkle-weave woven fabric (likely cotton or viscose), not silk. No characteristic silk luster or drape is observed. | inconsistent |
| Gently used | No stains detected in analyzed frames, no significant fabric wear or fading observed, embroidery is largely intact with only minor thread fraying, hardware (buttons) appear functional. Overall presentation is consistent with light use. | consistent |
| Minor fraying on embroidery | Loose/trailing embroidery threads visible on both the left and right hem embroidery clusters in FRAME_10, consistent with minor fraying as disclosed. | consistent |
| Stated size XL? | No size label text is legible in any frame; the '27 Nov.' brand label is visible but size information cannot be read. Garment silhouette appears oversized/relaxed cut but size cannot be confirmed visually. | not_assessable |
Coverage & Limitations
- —Tag & collar
- —Front
- —Back
- —Collar / neckline
- —Left cuff
- —Right cuff
- —Underarms
- —Disclosed flaw: Minor fraying on embroidery
None recorded.
Lighting is adequate across most frames; FRAME_9 (underarms) is slightly darker but sufficient for assessment. FRAME_4 (back) shows the full back panel clearly. Frames are generally well-focused. Overhead lay-flat angle used throughout limits assessment of three-dimensional fabric drape.
- —Care/composition label not shown in any frame — fabric content (silk vs. other) cannot be confirmed visually; seller's 'silk' claim is inconsistent with observed fabric texture but cannot be definitively resolved without label inspection.
- —Size label text is not legible in any frame; stated size 'XL?' cannot be confirmed.
- —Armpit/underarm area shown in FRAME_9 but at an angle and distance that limits detection of faint staining.
- —Interior of garment (lining, if any) not shown.
- —Button placket not shown in close-up; individual button condition not fully assessable.
- —Overhead lay-flat photography limits assessment of collar shape retention and three-dimensional drape characteristics.
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.