Crotch seam

Good question. I noticed a few years back that for reasons unknown to me that pants had begun to look like everyone was wearing an industrial strength layer of wadded Pampers underneath. We might suspect that the shape was cheaper/faster to construct. It may be that lots of our population is carrying around a lot more weight that they used to. I don't know. We will look forward to the answers from the folks who truly comprehend fitting. Polly

"FarmI" <

Not a website, but if you can get your hands on "Sewing Pants That Fit" from the Singer Reference Library series of books, it has a really good section on how to adjust this that and the other for different body types. Like all the books in that series, there are lots of pictures. :)

Someone else will chime in pretty soon with a gem of a website though, I'm sure.

Sharon

I have that book and it's great!

-Irene

I just ordered it from Amazon. They have it very low priced. I don't know if you have access to Amazon in OZ but why not check and see. I also use Patti Palmer's "Pants that Fit." Juno

Some help, maybe:

(from the book, Every Sewer's Guide to the Perfect Fit) (by the way I was taught to draft,only the Burda pants are correctly balanced.)and the jeans and pants fitting tutorials here:

I think you're talking about what Kathleen Fasanella refers to as "camel toe" and "wong"... and here's why:

Thanks for the suggestion of that book, but I think I've worded my question poorly. I'm not (yet) needing to adjust the shape. This isn't (yet) a fitting question, it's a question about how the curve from the inseam point to the waist impacts on appearance and thus (later, once one starts sewing) fit.

For example, the pants I like and which are comfortable, have an elastic waist and the crotch curve is shallow - not much of a J at the bottom at all and the line to the waist once it comes out of the curve is a / rather than the upstroke of the J - it lays backwards and isn't very upright).

These pants I like are bought ones and are very popular with women of a 'certain age'. The cheap clothes chain I buy them from has been selling this same shape/style with very minor tweaks for at least 15 years and that is astonishing in Oz which has such a restricted market in comparison to bigger countries.

I can sew reaonably competently, but I just dont' 'get' a lot of sewing theory relating to styling/fit/alterartions unless I'm told, can read about it etc and then realisation can take quite some time to strike - I mull and eventually may then have a 'Eureka!' moment or I still may not 'get' it.

I was wondering if the shallow curve and slow slope of / rather than J is why I find these pants comfy - ie, if being thicker round the middle as most 'certain age' women are, contributes to them being comfy and how they look.

Since I wrote my question, I've been scouring the internet and also looking at my own sewing books. There is an intriguing comment in the Palmer/Pletsch book 'Pants for Real People' at the end of Chapter 2. there is says under a heading 'Style changes affect Pattern Drafting': When pants go from very fitted to a wide-legged trouser, the shape and the length of the crotch changes. some of our needed alterations may even go away! Here is what happened in the 1970s when the first trousers appeared since the 1940s (Pink is the fitted pant and black is the trouser). After that is a diagram and I'd have to say that my comfy RTW pants look like the fitted pants rather than the trouser but my comfy pants aren't fitted at all so I dont' 'get' that.

Does that Singer book discuss this issue in detail?

Fran

:-)) I found her articles and they are well worth a read - quite funny in fact. But just so Polly knows that 'wong' should be a 'wad'.

Thanks for those Kay. The curves on those pants don't look anything like the RTW one's that I find comfortable. My comfy pants are dramatically different to all of those. the simplicity pattern I'm comparing them against is more like those shaped - very J.

I'm not yet up to the fitting stage, but thanks for that site. I found it last night and was very impressed with it as their is so much useful info there.

Fran

Heck, since you've got a pair with a good crotch curve, put one leg inside the other, like you were sewing the crotch curve front to back, and copy that curve. Use that instead of the simplicity's curve. Once you've got a good crotch curve, hang on to it... it'll hold through at least one size up and down if it does fit you.

How scooped out the curve is (front and back) depends on the shape of the wearer-to-be.

you take a look at the Burda pattern here... this is one meant fora sweet young thing with little or no belly and nice, firm back porch.The front curve is a shallow J because there's no need for low belly shapingin sweet young things, and broad J in back for the prominent gluteals. As we age, most of us lose the backside shaping -- it flattens out, so the back crotch curve becomes too deep. And many of us develop bellies that require a more pronounced J in front. Hence the common menopausal issue of discovering your pants fit better backwards, :-(

The other thing to look at in that page of curves is to "see" the woman the pattern was intended for in cross section. That McCalls in top center is only going to fit a paper doll... not someone with any front to back depth. On the other hand, the Style pattern expects both belly and backside.

Kay

Oops... she changed the wording a bit since the last time I read it.

Actually, any of her fitting quizzes are fun... here's the last one:

Kay, thanks so much for your help to the group! Barbara in SC "

OK. But learning how to fit, or how a pattern should be changed to allow for fit, or just looking at picture of altered patterns, will show you how the crotch curve impacts the fit. There's no reason to put off learning something new, right. :) It's just a minor something new, and you don't have to act on it right now. I just can't think of a way, other than giving you examples of how to alter a pattern, to explain why your pants are the way they are.

You have several pattern adjustments going on there. First off it sounds like they've been adjusted for a protruding rear end, and if they look like that in the front also, they have been adjusted for a protruding stomach. As we age, our butts don't all become flat pancakes, but they do drop. (gravity sucks and that's all there is to it.) We also develop pouchy bellies from the belly button down. (this apparently comes with the 41st birthday....stinking birthday fairy.) To accommodate a protruding behind, you tilt the top half of the back of the crotch seam away from the body like a /. To accommodate the tummy you tilt the front way like a \. All this happens above the hip line on the pattern. Then if there is very little at the bottom hook of the J, they have altered their pattern for skinny little bird leg thighs. You add to that part of the crotch seam if you have very full thighs to deal with. They also allowed for the elastic to pull the waist in a good bit. An elastic waist pant pattern will always have more of a \ / fit at the front and back waist than a zippered pant pattern. That waist has to have the fabric in it to stretch over the hips to go on and off.

Yes it is. That is Exactly why they are comfortable on you.

Well, depends on what you mean by "in detail."

The Singer book explains all the basic fit issues in enough detail that you can make those changes to your pattern. Or grasp the technique quickly. The thing I like about all the Singer books is they give you enough information that you can learn the new skill but they don't BURY you in so much information you can't process it all. (and did I mention lots of pictures??? lol)

My opinion of the Palmer Pletsch books and patterns (and I'm bracing myself for backlash here).... they really tell you how to build a clock when sometimes all you want to know is what time it is. It's great that the PP books tie in so much information, if that's what you're after. But there are times I've been very frustrated with them because they include so much information they sometimes muddy the waters.

So if I want to learn how to do a new technique, first I'll pick up one of the Singer books. Then once I'm beyond the basics of something, I might look for a more in depth reference. For getting the initial grasp of something, I really love the Singer books. That's why I will so often suggest one when someone asks about a new to them technique.

Sharon

Oh, Lord it's good to hear someone else say that! I have bought two or three Palmer Pletsch patterns over the years. There was a really cute peplum jacket pattern where I simply could not get the strange sleeve and front assembly to work, and I have been sewing since 1964. The pants pattern also was just too complicated and too hard to fit if you didn't want to follow their confusing directons. All the patterns eventually ended up in the trash, and I have learned my lesson (not the ones I hoped to though!)

Iris

;) Glad to oblige, Iris. I know lots of folks really like them a lot, and I'm glad for them. But they're just not my cup of tea.

Sharon

No backlash, different strokes for different folks. I don't have many P&P books, one "Bridal Gowns - How to make the wedding dress of your dreams" has some useful information. But for serious wedding gown construction information I much prefer the Susan Khalje's "Bridal Couture - Fine sewing techniques for wedding gowns and evening wear". I also have "Sew a Beautiful Wedding" by Brown and Dillon, and "How to Alter a Bridal Gown" by Susan Ormond. YMMV, NAYY.

FarmI wrote: > Has anyone come across a good site that explains how different shaped crotch > seams work?

Well, here's a site that explains how to get better fit in the crotch of your pants pattern, which might help:

There are books on drafting patterns from finished clothes that will tell you how to reproduce that crotch curve, and I highly recommend doing just that to overlay on the pants you want to make.

Good website. Thank you Katherine