Creating

Only a very short post this week. I am busy trying to finish Butterick 7729 before the end of the month, and haven't taken enough pictures along the way to write both an in-progress and a completed post. Taking the time to properly draft a bodice front with a full bust adjustment greatly improved the fit of the second mock-up, and rotating the armscye slightly inwards had the double benefit of making the shoulder seam the correct length and also absorbing the excess fullness from the sleeve head. I had to remove some length from the bodice once it had the weight of an attached skirt to pull it down, but I'm pleased with the final fit.

Still needs buttons and other details

(Please excuse the mismatched belt. I've ordered a covered belt, but it hasn't arrive yet, so instead I used the belt I had made by the same firm for my Rosalind dress - also a mid-1950s Butterick pattern.)

The most important part of this project isn't going to be the completed dress, however. When I started it in mid-August I wrote that "I need to be making something to maintain my sanity", and that has definitely been the case. It's been a tough couple of months. My mum, who is in her nineties, fell at the end of July and was in hospital for a month - and very poorly for some of that time. She is home now, but unable to resume her old routines so has carers coming in. There has been - and still is - a lot to set up, and as her only relative, I've been doing it all. (A friend who is in a similar situation memorably summed it up as "Being an only child is not the problem, it's being an only middle-aged adult that you really need to worry about"!)

Amid all this, sewing a dress, even (or perhaps, especially) one which has taken a lot of work, has provided welcome respite. I'm a natural worrier, but many times I have found that tasks such as drafting pattern pieces, marking darts accurately, or constructing a collar with the correct turn of cloth have absorbed me so completely that my brain has had a rest from the hamster wheel of doom that I can get stuck on. There's just something about making, that steady progress through a series of steps, that acts as a reset. And I'm very grateful to have it.

Name that dress!

Following on from last week's post, I've spent some time trying to work out the definitions of soft dresses, tailored dresses and suit-dresses - with a notable lack of success. In the hope that some readers may be more clued-up than I am, I've added a quiz at the bottom of this post.

Soft dresses

This should be straightforward. I'm guessing flowing and unstructured, in pliable fabrics. Perhaps with a drape detail for emphasis.

S-4999

Maybe a full skirt with unpressed pleats.

6762

Or a sheer overlay.

6757

But then there's something like this. Yes, the skirt has a drape, but the bodice looks more . . . tailored.

6811

Tailored dresses

Once more, some examples seem to fit the bill exactly.

S-4975

But what about this? Again, the bodice is structured, but the skirt is definitely softer.

6797

All the examples so far have been one-piece dresses, but there are two-piece dresses (?) as well. They can be all in one colour, or not.

6747

To me, the scallop detail on the bodice definitely softens the look.

6804

And surely a dress for sport should be soft, and not tailored?

6803

Suit-dresses (and suits)

In theory, suit-dresses should be easy to identify. But they share a section of the pattern catalogue with suits, and I really can't work out the rules for which is which. Even though it's a jacket and skirt, and all made in the same fabric, this is a suit-dress.

6688

As is this, with a choice of matching or contrast pieces.

6533

And this.

S-4005

This one looks a little less structured.

6829

I did wonder if a suit-dress was intended to be worn with nothing underneath the jacket, like this.

S-4926

This suit, with a blouse under the jacket on the right, seemed to confirm my theory.

6539

But then, this suit didn't!

6729

Suits don’t have to be all the same fabric. And this example also disproved my theory that suit jackets must have pockets.

S-4909

I'm completely lost.

Quiz

Think you can spot the differences? Test your skills with this quiz!

Click on the image to enlarge it

And the answers are . . .



Keep scrolling . . .



1 - S-4893, soft dress
2 - 6786, tailored dress
3 - 6732, soft dress
4 - S-4962, suit
5 - 6805, tailored dress
6 - 6719, suit-dress
7 - 6711, tailored dress
8 - 6602, soft dress
9 - S-4002, suit-dress
10 - 6559, suit-dress


So how did you do?
8-10 - Your grasp of the nuances of 1949 clothing is truly impressive, well done!
4-7 - Not bad, there were some easy ones in there but also some tricky ones
0-3 - Clearly you are as confused as I am!

August 1949 patterns

I have acquired another pattern catalogue. It's always good to find one of these, but now there's the added interest that if tissue patterns do cease production, then the catalogues used to sell them may become historical curiosities. At least, that’s my excuse!

Vogue Patterns, August 1949

It's the same shape and design as my December 1940 catalogue, but obviously with very different patterns. One thing which hasn't changed is the distinction between types of dresses which, to me at least, is impossible to decipher.

Soft dresses and tailored dresses and suit dresses, oh my!

At least there is a vague description on the front page of some sections.

Vogue 6781

I was intrigued by this image, as it appears to be the cover of an issue of Vogue Pattern Book. I have all the issues for 1949, and this isn't the cover of any of them. All became clear later on.

The image for the Tailored Dresses section does look more businesslike.

Vogue 6767

Suit dresses only get a black and white image.

Vogue Special Design 4969

While the picture for Couturier designs clearly uses the same backdrop.

Vogue 494

Another pattern book cover appears at the start of the Vogue Paris Originals section, but this one I do recognise.

The cover of the Summer 1949 Vogue Pattern Book

The larger sizes section (44" and 46" bust) appears to be the poor relation of the entire womenswear section, with only a line drawing.

Vogue 6666

Separates, on the other hand, merit a colour photograph.

Vogue 6756 and 6701

And then we come to Evening and Bridal.

Vogue Special Design 4892

This is described as "Photograph from June-July Vogue Pattern Book", which seemed odd, as there are only four issues of the 1949 pattern book and they are named by season. However, a check of the small print on the inside cover confirmed that the catalogue was printed in the USA, so the images will be from the American pattern book. Clearly that came out six times a year whereas the UK version, either due to post-war shortages or because it was a new publication (or both), was only quarterly. Now, of course, I'm wondering if the covers were mostly different, or if the "Soft Dresses" picture is from one of the two 'extra' issues.

The UK version of Vogue Pattern Book used very little photography at the time, most of the illustrations were line drawings. The photograph of Special Design 4892 doesn't appear in any of the 1949 issues, but the pattern features twice in the spring edition.

S-4892 as seen in Britain

Sportswear, that category entirely confusing to British sewists, has a black and white photograph. And an explanation of the term!

Vogue 6795, for spectating rather than playing

While Lingerie gets a faintly sultry photograph of a very demure nightdress.

Vogue 6661

Children is another 'poor relation' category.

More line drawings "as shown in Vogue Pattern Book"

And finally, Maternity uses a slightly fuzzy image of a very loose garment to skirt over the entire subject of the section.

Vogue 6610

At some point, I'll look at the sections in more detail - and try to understand what makes a soft dress, a tailored dress, and a suit dress!

How not to do it

The horror, the horror

A bit of a wordy post this week, as it's mostly a cautionary tale.

Despite everything that's going on, I have been trying to carve out a little time to work on Butterick 7729 for this year's Shirtwaist September. So far I have attempted, and failed, to redraft the bodice to fit me. My old method of shortening a bodice by 5cm/2" all round no longer works, so I began by making a toile with the pattern unchanged except for adding an extra ¼" width to each piece - i.e. 1" in total - to match my actual measurements. The end result was too long, of course, but also weirdly baggy at the sides and with too-wide shoulders. Also, the bust dart was oddly short, and the waist dart was very long indeed, which produced an alarmingly pointy effect.

So much going wrong here

At this point I decided to try taking out the extra width and replacing it with a full bust adjustment. I had sort of tried this years ago, and the end result had more or less matched the alterations I had already made to the pattern, so my memory had somehow filed this half-hearted attempt under 'roaring success'. This, along with currently needing to grab my spare time where I find it, may explain my decision to plough on with the redraft even though it was getting very late.

This was not a good idea. I can't post a picture of the end result because it was so obviously unusable that I just scrunched it up, binned it, cursed a bit, and went to bed. And then I left well alone until I had enough free time to try again, properly.

The first thing to consider was the darts on the original pattern piece. The waist darts sloped inwards a little from the waist to the bust, and the bust darts sloped slightly downwards. Neither slope was pronounced enough to suggest a definite design choice, so I guess they were just badly stamped out. Ah, the joys of unprinted patterns. Either way, this hadn't helped my first attempt at the FBA process, so this time I rotated the darts slightly to properly vertical and horizontal. Next, I shortened the bodice pieces in line with the amounts I had folded up on the first toile, and then I used this tutorial to do the FBA.

I did make one change from the instructions. After spreading the pattern piece, you fill the gaps with spare paper and tape it into place. I discovered on my first attempt that wherever you place the tape, it is always, always, exactly where you need to draw on the pattern later, so this time I flipped it over and did the taping on the wrong side.

Almost ready to fill in the gaps

The end result does at least look like a usable pattern piece.

So now I’ve cut out the pieces for a second toile, and hope to find some time to sew it up tomorrow. But not tonight. I may have finally realised that, night owl though I am, some things should not be tackled in the small hours!