Archive for the ‘fit + patterns’ category

New Year’s Resolution 2010 – basic TNTs – first thoughts

January 22, 2010

My big focus for this year is planned to be a basic set of ‘Tried ‘N True’ patterns.

I think there are several types of TNT. There are ones that emerge from experience. You find a pattern that you love wearing and love making, so you make it again and again. It suits your personal style and your life style and your sewing style. What could be better. I’m returning to clothes making after about 30 years away, so sadly I can’t talk about that special kind of pattern.

As my wardrobe needs major revitalising, I really need very quick and easy patterns that require minimal sewing skills and little or no fitting, and are flattering and in my style. Is that impossible 😀 Some people base their whole wardrobe round patterns like this. But I think that sort of TNT too is a separate issue.

I’m interested in TNTs as a deliberately developed ‘core wardrobe’ of well fitting patterns, for each of the types of garment you wear.

So what should I be working on ? There was an inspiring strand at Stitcher’s Guild where people said what was their absolute minimum set of basic patterns. And it was interesting what different ideas people came up with.

I’m going to take the basic 5 patterns suggested by Shannon Gifford as my starting point. She used to have an article about it on her website, and discussed it in her March 08 newsletter :

“Our basic five patterns are as follows : basic pants, classic shirt, basic fitted tee, basic jacket, a-line skirt.”

In her March 08 newsletter, Shannon says :
“The concept of sensible sewing is this : use basic patterns and update them with current details. This concept is true sewing economy. Money is saved because a minimal investment of patterns is needed : only five basic patterns will serve as our foundation. Time is saved, because we need only fit each pattern once, and then reuse it multiple times. Fabric is saved, because we know exactly how much to purchase for each item. Energy and mental effort are saved, because we are familiar with the making of each piece.’

I would love to have all the confidence about fit and technique that such patterns can give.

I’m also interested in simple style patterns because they allow for a wide range of variations without having to do all the fitting again to get a ‘new’ style.

Shirley Adams of Alternatives has this idea. She provides patterns for a basic shell and vest, and for fitted and dropped shoulder loose jackets. She has a vast range of pattern add-ons, extension pieces which change design elements such as necklines and sleeves, or which add to the basic shapes to make a wide range of other styles, such as blouses, dresses, and fitted jackets. These are the patterns I’m using for some of my inspiration.

Nancy Erickson of Fashion Sewing Group provides more formal classic patterns with similar flexibility. Her instructions about variations are in her booklets and newsletter. Her patterns are intermediate in difficulty for fit and sewing, so I’m planning to use them later.

For a simpler starting point on how to make small pattern changes, there’s the Easy Sewing the Kwik Sew Way book.

Or the MacPhee Workshop patterns : 335 for knit tops, 305 for shirts and shirt-jackets, and 30 for jackets, are individual patterns specifically oriented to making simple style changes.

And for another ingenious way of trying your own variations, there’s the Brensan Studios Shirt Club patterns in which you can use any body with any sleeve. There are Big 4 patterns that have that idea too – design elements which you put together in your own combinations : the Project Runway patterns from Simplicity, and some of the Crafty and DIY Style patterns from McCall’s.

– – –

Thinking about Shannon’s 5 patterns, my basic basics would be :

basic pants –
yes, and for me that means fitted not elastic waist.

classic shirt –
I’m better in styles with darts and fitted shoulders, so will start with a fitted blouse. I like yokes, so plan to fit a looser shape shirt later.

basic fitted tee –
I think Shannon means a knit tee. I don’t wear them except as underlayers. Closely fitted knits are not flattering on the small busted. So I will go for a short sleeved woven top here.

basic jacket –
I think Shannon means a ‘proper’ jacket, but I don’t look or feel good in structured tailored or notched lapel collar styles. Learning to fit and make a more advanced jacket isn’t one of my basic needs. As a first step, I.m going for an easy unstructured jacket, unfitted and collarless.

a-line skirt –
At this stage I’m not going to worry about skirts as I rarely wear them. A basic pattern is easy to adapt from the waist and hips of a pant pattern. I also don’t wear dresses or jumper dresses, which are essentials for many people.

I do wear layering vests and tunics, and they would certainly be in my next round of key TNTs. But my Starter 4 patterns will be simple basics for :
– fitted woven short sleeve top,
– pants,
– fitted long sleeve blouse with collar,
– loose jacket

– – –

Possible wardrobe patterns ?

My first focus needs to be on styles which it’s easy to make small styling alterations to. If you just wanted to use the minimum of co-ordinating patterns, you might look for a wardrobe pattern.

The simple basics I am thinking of are like Connie Crawford’s Butterick 5053 wardrobe,

”ccwardrobe”

with her Butterick 5300 blouse.

”ccblouse”

I’m just showing those to illustrate the sort of styles I’m going for. I’m not sure 5053 would be a good idea for larger ladies, as that top is the one which Debbie Cook had a low opinion of (top review) – though she likes the blouse. (blouse review) (Reviews may only be viewable by Pattern Review members.)

Most Butterick-McCall’s-Vogue wardrobe patterns have a strongly styled jacket, so would not be good for variations. Simplicity-New Look wardrobes include a much bigger selection of simple patterns which could be restyled, and suit a wide range of personal styles and body shapes.

Among independent designers, Textile Studio patterns (many originally designed by Loes Hinse) are simple soft classics. Sadly, comparing my fitting sloper with them shows that they would be a lot of work to fit for me. I think they were designed for a different body shape, perhaps an inverted triangle. But I know many people happily base their wardrobes on Loes Hinse’s patterns.

– – –

Using and moving on from the basics :

So I hope that will be a good basic TNT set, so I could make many different garments by :
– using different fabrics,
– adding embellishments,
– making small pattern changes.to design elements such as necklines, collars, dart distribution, sleeves, cuffs, etc.. though not to the overall shape, fit or ease of the body of the garment.

With those TNTs sorted out, that should be my main fitting problems understood. So I might use other patterns with more confidence that I knew the alterations needed to get a good fit.

Much later I might go through another TNT cycle, preparing more formal styles with more advanced sewing and fitting techniques.

Well, where sewing’s concerned, there’s always a lifetime of possibilities to work towards. And I’m a great one for changing plans. . . 😀

– – –

P.S. Elizabeth has started a strand at Stitcher’s Guild in which people list their TNT patterns.

– – –

Patterns and links available January 2010

Bonfit Bodice Patterner

January 16, 2010

I recently got a Bonfit bodice patterner – a few dollars from ebay just to try it out.

It’s fun to have something you can physically hold and draw round to make a pattern. And obviously a lot of thought has gone into it. So it’s a pity the Bonfit patterner has many problems.

Initial impression and basics

My first reaction was that it’s overwhelming when you open the box. I can imagine people getting excited about a demo at a sewing show, taking the patterner home, opening the box, seeing the jumble of unexplained peculiar shapes, and never looking at it again. I don’t know if the video helps. The previous owner of my set hadn’t even unwrapped it.

The Bonfit patterner is a set of tough plastic shapes that slide relative to each other to alter width and length. I had to read the book slowly while looking carefully at the pieces. But once I got past that stage it is a method that ‘comes naturally’ for me, I like having something physical and robust. I haven’t tried but think it’s possible to draw round the template and mark stitching lines directly onto fabric without making an intermediate paper pattern.

Here is the basic set of parts. It consists of a ‘base’ piece (top right) with neckline shapes, plus an inset to change front to back neckline. Added to the side of that are fitted armholes for front and back, or a dropped shoulder piece. The body section is added below.

”bonfitbasic”

There’s a choice of three body pieces. One is for back, and for front without darts. Then there’s one with bust dart, and one with waist dart.

”bonfitbottom”

There are separate pieces for a variety of sleeves :

”bonfitsleeve”

and for collars :

”bonfitcollars”

The sections slide against each other in ingenious ways, so you can alter the usual width measures of :
bust
waist
hip.
And you can adjust the length measures of :
bust height
back length.
Everything else is standard, doesn’t allow for individual differences.

Instruction book : One reason why people go no further may be difficulty with reading the instruction book – small low contrast print, few diagrams. I know Bonfit had a lot of information to fit into a small space, but this book is not for a visual or physical person, while the patterner is.

– – –

How well does the patterner fit ?

Well, as usual that depends on the individual. Bonfit’s and McCall’s (fitting pattern 2718) shoulder lengths and armhole shapes are surprisingly different.

What about the big issue of cup size ?

The same body section is used for both back and front without darts. So back and front without darts are the same width, with different necklines and armholes.

This is standard practice for loose fitting casual styles with no darts. For example, the front and back at bust level of the tops in ‘Easy Sewing the Kwik Sew Way’ are the same. So although this can’t give a good result for people with a generous front, there’s no point blaming Bonfit for using standard practice (except of course if they claim to be helping you get good fit. . .).

More problems arise when using darts for a fitted pattern.

The front body section with darts is about 1/2 inch wider than the back section at bust level.

That wouldn’t work well for all women. McCall’s (fitting pattern 2718) has a choice of front patterns for different cup sizes (though they don’t say so on their website). The front-back differences in size 14 are :
A cup : front half pattern 1/4 in. wider than back at bust dart level
B cup : 1/2 in. wider
C cup : 3/4 in. wider
D cup : 1-1/8 in. wider
DD cup : 2-5/8 in. wider

So the Bonfit is the B cup size that most patterns are designed for. Anyone with a larger bust cup would have difficulties.

The section on fitting in the Bonfit book is short and at the end. If you are full busted you might well have discarded the patterner for its bad fit long before getting that far.

Full Bust Adjustment

A true FBA is an ingenious method of adding length and width in the middle of a front pattern, without changing the finished length of the neckline, shoulder, armhole, side, and waist seams. The bust and waist darts are deeper, and the shape of the armhole changes.

The Bonfit doesn’t cope with this well. The only thing they suggest for larger cup sizes is to widen the front pattern. As bust size and shoulder length are related on the patterner, changing front body width also changes front shoulder length. You might move the lower body piece without moving the armhole piece, but that wouldn’t give you the changed armhole shape needed for a true FBA. There is also no way of deepening the bust dart, or of increasing the centre front length without lengthening the side seam.

So if you want a good FBA, you need to make changes to the basic pattern produced by the patterner in the same way as you do with a conventional pattern.

What about other fit alterations ?

I have sloping shoulders and a forward neck. These aren’t included in the patterner. So I would have to make the sort of sloping shoulder alterations that I need with any pattern. But I think with this physical template that should be easy to do by pivot and slide .

– – –

Otherwise, for making other styles, it’s the same as any fitting sloper

Basically the Bonfit is an easy way of making a fitting sloper for average cup sizes. If you want to make classic basic styles, by just changing necklines / collars and sleeves, or to make basic slopers for a range of different people, then it could get well used. But to make styles other than simple classics, you have to draw a basic starting point paper pattern using the patterner, and then do conventional pattern making changes (described in the accompanying book). The Bonfit doesn’t automate pattern making for other styles.

And I think many pattern making instruction books explain the process much more fully than the Bonfit book, with more diagrams.

So if you already have a good fitting sloper, the patterner won’t make other styles easier for you. And if there’s anything unusual about your shape, I think you’d be better off doing the work needed to make a proper fitting sloper.

I wouldn’t expect to make anything other than basic garments from a patterner as I don’t enjoy the ‘cutting up a sloper’ method of pattern making. For other garment styles I prefer to do the alterations needed on a commercial pattern, so I am sure what style features I’m getting.

Conclusion

If you have average shoulders and an A or B cup, you may be able to draw round the bodice patterner direct onto fabric for the stitching lines of a basic repertoire of tops : tee, blouse, shirt, tunic, light jacket.

And there could be advantages for someone who needs simple patterns for a wide variety of people but doesn’t enjoy using pattern making software.

I think this only suits a small group of sewers. People have different personal clothing styles (classic, romantic, casual, etc.) and different ease preferences (close fitted, loose, etc.) We have different sewing style preferences (quick, couture, etc.). And there are also many different methods and preferences for pattern making. And many different methods and preferences for getting a good fit. I suggest the Bonfit patterner only works for a few of these.

Altogether, once I understood it I found the Bonfit patterner fun to play with. But I doubt whether it will get much real use, so I’m glad I didn’t pay full price. I may use the collars and sleeves, as they’re so easy to draw round. But I haven’t yet tested them for fit !

(P.S. 7 years later – when I moved and sorted out my possessions I threw most of the Bonfit away as I had never used it for drafting, but I have kept the sleeves and collars.)

The perfect shirt ?

December 3, 2009

Style is not just in the major choices, such as whether to have a straight or a gathered sleeve, but also the details. All the possible style adjustments in pattern making software gave me this ‘aha’ moment.

– – –

Which immediately reminded me of two patterns I’m intrigued by : they’re both shirts yet they’re so different. The differences need an eagle eye for detail, a way of looking at patterns that I’m not used to. Perhaps that’s part of why I’m not a top clothes designer 😀 I found it very interesting to look slowly and carefully at these patterns.

”photos”

Left oop Vogue 2972 by Alice + Olivia.
Right McCall’s 5433 by Palmer-Pletsch.

In picking out these two shirt patterns, I’ve already made several major shirt styling decisions :
– I look better in fitted armhole styles, I don’t look so good in dropped shoulders.
– Although a yoke is a classic feature of a man’s shirt, and looks good on me, neither of these has a yoke. Yokes are difficult to fit on my sloping shoulders, but a yoke gives my shoulders more definition, which helps me as I don’t like shoulder pads.
– Some people say a style only counts as a shirt if it has no darts, and neither of these patterns passes that test either !

I prefer the shirt on the left, but I’m sure many people like the one on the right – it’s softer and more relaxed in effect, and more suited to the full busted. No pockets in the wrong place ! and the vertical lines of waist darts can have a slimming effect.

The left style has :
– crispness of fabric.
– visible ‘button’ detail
– this detail appears on the placket whether it is open or closed. (This is done by using poppas rather than buttons.)
– 3/4 sleeve (this sleeve is also a bit shorter than the 3/4 sleeve in the right hand pattern).
– neck opening worn up even though unbuttoned – that could be because of crisper fabric, or the way the placket is constructed, or the use of interfacing in the front band.
– deeper collar
– bust pockets
– shoulder point is at outer corner of shoulder, not above arm articulation point

Here are the line diagrams for the fronts :

”fronts”

(The size of one of the diagrams had to be changed. I’ve got them to the right relative proportions as far as I can.)
The line diagrams show there are differences in :
– collar point angle
– number of buttons, and button spacing
– depth of side slits
– possibly different angle of bust darts, related to possible differences of armhole depth.

The back drawings are :

”backs”

Personally I get better armhole fit with back shoulder darts, so I might add them to these patterns.

Both have double button detail on the sleeve cuff, though the buttons are placed differently. Sleeve placket type not clear from these drawings, but there are several options.

The left pattern has an underarm sleeve seam, while the right pattern has the sleeve seam moved to the back so the placket is easier to make.

These two shirts don’t include several other shirt style choices such as : different collar / cuff / sleeve widths, different front and sleeve plackets, different yoke shapes.

– – –

So even something that looks as obvious as a basic shirt actually involves many detailed style decisions. No wonder we’re willing to buy patterns, to pay someone else to choose all the details that ‘look right’ to our individual taste. To use pattern making software to make something equally satisfactory, I would have to be aware of all these details and how they affect the look of the final garment. And I haven’t naturally got that sort of awareness. I expect I could learn a bit about it, but it wouldn’t ever ‘come naturally’.

Perhaps my ideal shirt pattern is a combination of these two patterns, details of styling from the Vogue pattern, combined with added waist darts, and shoulder darts or yoke. Perhaps it would be better if I looked for a different pattern altogether, some sort of ‘shirt-blouse’ . . . There are multiple possible patterns for a basic blouse with set in sleeves, wrist cuffs, waist darts, and either convertible (very easy) or band (easy) collar. I think I’ll choose between them just on how I react visually without detailed analysis – though of course the eye can be tricked by the style and quality of the illustrations, the fabric used. . .

Patterns available December 09

Pattern making software, armhole depth

November 28, 2009

One thing I’ve found is that I haven’t got an average distribution of upper body length above and below my armhole.

I’ve been checking pattern making software for which versions include this in their basic measurements. As far as I can discover from web sites and demos :

Yes, this software includes armhole depth in the basic measurements :

Bernina My Label

Dress Shop

Garment Designer (link on left in menu along top)

My Pattern Designer

No, does not include armhole depth in the basic measurements :

Pattern Maker

Pattern Master from Wild Ginger.

– – –

All except Garment Designer are for PC only, not for Mac.

Armhole depth is just one detail among the many ways they differ, and it won’t matter for most people. Software differs in the measurements and styles included, the way styles are chosen, and how design changes are made. If you’re interested, have a thorough check of information and demos as they really are very different.

Also some people find they don’t enjoy sticking computer printer paper together to get a pattern.

If you want to try this, you could download a free pattern from : BurdaStyle

Or there are a couple of ways to include some of your own measurements :

Pattern Maker based software CD in a book : Marie Clayton Make your own clothes.

Click and Sew selections from Pattern Master on CD from Wild Ginger.

(Again, I’m just saying these are available, not how good they are !)

– – –

Some people are enthusiastic about pattern making software. Some use it a few times and then go back to conventional patterns. Others do not get on with it at all. For me the problems are :
– although I put in a great deal of effort, I never managed to get it to fit me.
– I’m a physical person, I like to see what is happening in front of me, in paper shapes, scissors, pens, rulers, not hidden away out of sight.
– I’m not a designer. I can look at a pattern drawing and decide whether or not I like it. But all those little details that distinguish a pattern I like from one I don’t – those I can’t think of for myself. So I don’t like designs I get from my own decisions using software as much as the designs I get from a commercial pattern. Or perhaps I could make decisions about a design by looking at and changing a trial muslin in front of me, rather than by deciding in the abstract that I want a cuff to be 3 inches rather than 3-1/4 inches deep. . .

Tip 1 : if you have problems with fit, make a fitting sloper by conventional methods, and then try to get the software pattern to match your fitting sloper (that’s how I found the software I was using was impossible for me).
Tip 2 : it may be necessary to put measurements into the software which are not exactly your measurements, to get the software to produce something that fits.

– – –

P.S. Oh dear, I’d forgotten that ‘pattern making’ means something very different to software engineers ! If you follow up the suggestions automatically made by WordPress, you’ll end up in some unexpected places. . .