Different Pattern Companies

I have read where the patterns of Simplicity, McCall's, Vogue, and Butterick are all pretty much based on the same industry standard (with respect to size) and that if you have need an alteration (i.e., forward shoulders) for one pattern of one company, you'll probably need to make the same adjustment in patterns from other companies.

The pattern I've been working on for DD is a Simplicity pattern, and it definitely requires a shoulder adjustment for forward shoulders, as well as bust enlargement.

I made a dress from a McCall's pattern for my daughter a couple of months ago. It wasn't a good fit, and that was before I got tips from you guys on how to fit her. So I fit her to that pattern again last night. Much to my surprise, no adjustment for forward shoulders nor bust enlargement was needed (same size). I'm wondering why this one doesn't require an adjustment for forward shoulders. Any comments?

Thanks!

Karen C./KY

Reply to
KCunnin502
Loading thread data ...

Hey Karen,

Basically, they are all different. They may say they work from the same model....and I could say I have the same body I had before I had children. lol

What I have found is I have to make the same adjustments to each pattern from one company. Like say I have to shorten the bodice on every McCall's pattern I use. But the New Look patterns fit me fine lengthwise. Then I might have to shorten Butterick patterns, but not nearly as much as McCall's. From brand to brand the fit of patterns varies pretty widely. But within each brand, I have found I have to make the same changes each time.

I can't tell you **why** that is, but I promise you it's been my experience. It's just one more thing you learn to deal with.

Sharon

Reply to
Mike and Sharon Hays

Hi, Sharon! Thanks so much for the feedback. I was beginning to worry that I'd not made the correct alterations for the dress I cut out last night. Got to say it looked good on the pin-fit, though. I am anxious to see how it will work up.

Well, after dealing with the pattern last night, I can see exactly what you're saying.

As stupid as this will sound to you guys, I never realized how important it was to shorten/lengthen at the waist, hips, etc. I always just shortened at the bottom. I didn't realize how much shortening at those different levels made a difference. I don't know why it never occurred to me before (probably because that's how Mom taught me). That pattern-fitting sure looked a whole lot better this time around than the last dress I attempted to make! I'll let you know how it turns out in the finished product.

Well, it sure helps to know this is the way it is. Thanks a bunch! I appreciate your feedback.

Karen C./KY

Reply to
KCunnin502

From my experience, I would go one more step. Just because one Butterick or McCall's pattern fits one way is no guarantee that the next pattern from the same publisher will fit the same way. I don't know if it's because of the individual designers or some other factor, but I strongly recommend that you double-check each pattern to see if it needs adjustment.

Reply to
Joanne

I don't doubt what you say one bit! I will definitely take your advice and do so with each pattern. Thanks for your feedback.

Karen C./KY

Reply to
KCunnin502

Well, maybe the companies aren't as different as I thought.

I had made the same dress (McCall's 8171) a month ago (didn't turn out that great, but I assumed it was because I had made it out of stiffer fabric (jacquard) than was suggested on the pattern). Also, I used the incorrect size (12 instead of 14), which I found out later, after trying to learn the basics of pattern fitting.

So I got some nice challis fabric (kind of wild, tropical print, but the kid chose it). I added 1/2" at the neck because it shows a little bra strap. I made the adjustments for length at the four different areas, midrif, waist, knee, etc. I even took another bold move and made a dart-type adjustment at the back neck, which went down to the midrif area. The length and tne dart adjustment did make a big difference, and I was feeling quite smug.

It didn't appear to me, at the time of tissue fitting, that we needed to make the forward shoulder adjustment, as I've been doing with the Simplicity pattern I'd previously written about. Boy, was I ever WRONG about that! Not only do I need a forward shoulder adjustment, I need to take up a little slack in the front neck area, because I've got a gap.

Am I just exceptionally dense, or is this the way you guys learned to fit too? Here I thought I was doing so well. I worked on the McCall's because I thought I was closer, due to the original jacquard one being so close. LOL! I guess the difference in the fabric really made a big difference.

I think maybe I'd better concentrate on getting the one dress finished with a proper fit before I work on the other one.

Anyway, it's back to the old drawing board. Remind me not to get to acting so smug till I get one actually finished, will ya?

Karen C./KY

Reply to
KCunnin502

Reply to
Kay Lancaster

Pretty much, though I learned to really sew about the time cast iron polyester doubleknits were the in thing -- they all draped pretty much alike, and the fit was more geometric then. And my mom's best friend was a tailor, so I learned a lot from watching her. But yes, it takes practice.

Yup, fabric does make a big difference. Sometime when you're at the library, stop by the interlibrary loan desk and get them to borrow Winifred Aldrich's book on drape of different fabrics for you -- there's a great chart in the back on what fabrics have similar drapiness; very handy to have.

(Did you do a neckline facing? Or bias band? If it's a bias band, you may be able to pull the gappiness up a bit by shortening the bias as you apply it. Be sure to stay stitch the neckline!)

The other things I encourage you to do is start looking at the "bones" of a pattern -- those black and white line drawings are really useful for that. Many, many patterns are the same basic thing over and over again, with variations in neckline, collar shape, cuff shape, tabs, placement of zipper and buttons, etc. Find a silhouette you like, and work on that pattern till you've got the fit honed... then do theme and variations. No one will know that you're making the same thing over and over, and you'll save tons of time. (that, btw, is the Shirley Adams/Sewing Connection approach, too.)

FWIW, I'm decidedly unfond of Big Three patterns... I far prefer Stretch and Sew or Kwik Sew, and Jalie appears to be good-- don't have enough experience with Jalie yet, though. They may not look especially fashionable in the book, but that's easily remedied by the person designing with that pattern. The fit is more consistent within KS or S&S than within a "big 3" pattern.

Reply to
Kay Lancaster

Couldn't agree more - that's what I've been doing for years. One of the first things I learned to make was a simple 'kimono' top, and I made it in every fabric under the sun, on the straight, on the bias, with batwing sleeves, with gussetted sleeves, with every length of sleeve, type of neckline, buttoned or zipped and cowlneck. I'm certain no-one would've guessed it was basically the same design.

This is why I'm finding PMB incredibly useful, actually - you design a basic dress, say, and get the waist seam and the bust darts, etc, in the right place, then just change any other bits you need, such as collars, sleeves and skirt types - it's very fast.

Who are the Big Three? Butterick, Burda, and someone? McCalls? I don't know Jalie - where might I find them please?

Personally, I'm fond of Vogue, and Sewing Workshop patterns, though they're not the cheapest.

:) Trish

Reply to
Trishty

The Big Three used to be the Big Four--Vogue, Butterick, McCall, and Simplicity. Now the first three are all one company, although they're still being operated as three separate pattern companies.

Don't know where the "Three" came from, except that Vogue and Butterick have been one company for many years. They still have distinct looks, though, very different.

Karen Maslowski in Cincinnati

Reply to
SewStorm

Not quite true. They all start from the same basic measurements, but each one has a different proportion. Vogue and Butterick use the same fit models, so they're fairly close in fit. New Look uses a different fit model, as do Simplicity and McCall's.

If you make an alteration on a New Look pattern, you'll probably need to make that same alteration on a different New Look pattern, but you will probably make a *different* alteration on a pattern from a different pattern company.

(I use Vogue and Butterick patterns almost exclusively...I *cannot* get McCall's or Simplicity bodice patterns to fit me without a lot of work....)

jenn

-- Jenn Ridley snipped-for-privacy@chartermi.net

Reply to
Jenn Ridley

Ah - mystery solved. I know the website you mean. I think in England it might be slightly different in terms of what's most popular. You see Burda catalogues in shops far more than Vogue, for instance (bit high-end for most Brits!). Does Burda sell so well in the US? I only found out recently that European garments are cut rather differently from American ones - maybe this difference is why I love my Orvis clothes.

:) Trish

Reply to
Trishty

Thanks for posting these links. I've been trying to work out the forward shoulders, and what I've been doing has pretty much gone alone the lines of this first solution you posted. I'm progressing, just not as quickly as I'd like to.

Now, this one lost me, so I'm printing it out and will take it to bed with me (I always have to read myself to sleep) so I can figure it out. I'm printing the pictures in the links, too, to help me absorb it.

Yep, I definitely have to dwell on sleeves. I think that's the part I hate worst .

This is a good tip. Thanks!

Or, in my case, for aggravation .

Thanks, again!

Karen C./KY

Reply to
KCunnin502

I'm glad to hear you are liking it that much. I'm going to take the plunge as soon as I can, but it will be later, in the fall. It's just as well that I can't get it till after the new version comes out, anyway. I do think I probably need to get more of the "fitting basics" under my belt before I tackle the software, anyway.

Karen C./KY

Reply to
KCunnin502

You don't know how much it helps me to hear this! This has been frustrating, but I have to admit I am seeing progress with each try. Don't want to admit how many attempts I've made, though (and not sure I could actually remember them all, anyway!).

Will do. I did get a couple of books at the library on draping, as well as several other books on fitting. They make it look so easy. Then, when I give it a go, and I think I've got it, it turns out I'm still way off. Closer, but still way off. Sigh.

I hadn't stay stitched the neckline. That probably didn't help matters. I will be sure to do it with the next pass. No, it was a bias band; it has a neckline facing. Another thing I realized with the second try on the 9172 McCall's dress was that I needed to take out a tad in the bustm, since I'd gone from size 12 to size 14. I pin-fitted DD again tonight, and I think this will make the difference in the gap in the neckline. I'll give it another try, anyway.

I see what you mean, and that's my aim for the Simplicity dress (the one I originally wrote the S.O.S. about). Frankly, I'm to the point to where I flat wouldn't care if anybody did notice it was the same pattern .

I've never used a Stretch & Sew or Kwik Sew, and I'm afraid I've never heard of Jalie. I know you said the fit is more consistent, but do you find either KS or S&S give a better fit than Simplicity/McCall's/Butterick/Vogue?

remedied by the person designing with

You know, I thought the same thing about the drawings in the PMB line too. But I do see that it's really a basic template, and that the sewer makes or breaks the design. (Lord knows I've broken quite a few of 'em!)

Thanks, again, for your encouragement. It may take me another few dozen tries, but I'm bound and determined to make this kid something that looks decent enough to wear out of the house!

Karen C./KY

Reply to
KCunnin502

I must admit to never trying a Burda pattern. I must give it go sometime.

Sadly, I don't think I'm a very European shape. I'm certainly not a French shape - I have an English big end ;) French skirts and jeans are cut for cute girls with little buns, which is not a description of me.

My DH used to stock up on clothes in the US, especially Banana Republic and Gap before we got them in the UK.

:) Trish

Reply to
Trishty

I am as pleased as punch with PMB, but I should add that I've been drafting patterns for years, so I'm just using it to make things quicker. If you can get to grips with Click and Sew then you should be fine with PMB. I am jealous that you'll get the new version - I can't afford to upgrade.

It is important to be realistic, though. Some people on patternmasterchatter clearly expect the program to do everything for them, and to cope with every figure anomaly, and it can't do that, especially left/right assymetries - it's not designed for it. It's like the spell check on Word will show up a typing error, but it can't teach you how to write... I don't mind a few tweaks at fitting stage to get everything exactly the way I want it - the program is still creating garments that fit better than any pattern I've ever bought (at 5' 1" and short-waisted, pattern alterations have always been a swine).

You asked about pattern makes and I must say I could never get anywhere with Simplicity. Style (does this still exist?) has also been useless for me. I love Vogue, and started sewing with Very Easy, Very Vogue. One of the reasons is that I prefer pattern companies that show the garment on an actual body. Having said that, I also love Sewing Workshop patterns, but they do have a distinctly assymetric, arty feel, which is not everyone's cup of tea.

:) Trish

Reply to
Trishty

Trish, that's because Style was a division of Simplicity.

Burda in Europe is different than Burda in the US in that here the patterns have seam allowances. They didn't use to, and I guess they felt it was useless to try to educate the "Murricans", as OlwynMary puts it, and they simply retooled. I have several friends who were sad to see this change, since they actually liked adding their personal preference of seam allowances.

Burda also has a totally different, "European" pant draft, so it fits differently than American patterns. If you have trouble fitting pants with Burda, this could be the reason. They have a shallow front crotch curve, which doesn't fit me at all, but some people find it better for fitting their shape.

Trish, have you tried the Sandra Betzina patterns? They fit totally differently than other Butterick patterns (or is it Vogue?). Karen Maslowski in Cincinnati

Reply to
SewStorm

patterns? They fit totally differently

Oh heck, it's so complicated, isn't it? I didn't know Style was part of Simplicity. I haven't tried Burda yet, but I'll let you know how I get on if I try pants.

I have a hell of a time getting RTW pants that fit and even in England could only wear a few makes - mostly high end-ish - like Jaegar, August Silks and Linea, with a small waist and lots of room in the butt. For years I just made simple no-sideseam pants with a harem waist, usually elasticated, but I haven't even made those for about ten years. I was thinking of getting into doing trousers again after a good article on the Threads site about different kinds of elasticated waist, which looked very tempting.

I'd noticed Today's Fit, but in what way are they different?

:) Trish

Reply to
Trishty

It is frustrating, no bones about it. But suddenly (at least for me), the notion of "reading the wrinkles to fix the fit" suddenly meshed, and then it was all pretty easy.

Definitely didn't help matters. Always, always stay stitch necklines and anything else that has big areas of bias cut. Or at least starch or tape them temporarily while sewing. This is one of those steps that doesn't seem to make a difference in the outcome of the product before you sew, and then turns around and bites you after you've gotten the garment made up. Five minutes of stay stitching saves hours of ripping and fixing.

Might want to poke around at

formatting link
formatting link
and
formatting link
(it's a Canadian company). All of these are master pattern sheets on heavy paper, and youtrace off the pattern to work with it. "Better fit" is hard to say... pattern companies each have their own standards of fit, and their own "ideal body" they use as the basis. (Someone (Nancy Zieman?? Sandra Betzina??) once published a chart of differences between the major pattern companies with notes like company A expects a higher bust point than company B, and company A and C design for longer backs than company B). But the folks I sew for, me included, have major, major fitting issues that none of the pattern companies could reasonably be expected to address, so what I'm interested in if using a commercial pattern is predictability... I want to know that I need to lengthen the back waist 2.5 inches for this person with this pattern company, and not bother to have to carefully measure the pattern again and again to assure myself there have been no major oopses and that it's designed to fit the same body as the last time. The consistency I've seen in KS, S&S and apparently in Jalie is much higher than in Big 3 patterns. I've also found that the patterns are a bit better tweaked in KS, S&S, Jalie -- when they drop the neckline, they reduce the ease over the upper chest, etc. In my experience, that's not always true for Big 3 patterns.

There are some individual lines within the big 3 companies that appear to have special care taken with them... Claire Shaeffer's patterns for Vogue, Sandra Betzina's patterns, but I guess I've seen too many inconsistencies in the "run of the mill" big 3 patterns to want to invest my time in them -- I get better return on my personal time by starting with KS or similar.

I have been quite pleased with what I've done with Claire's Vogue patterns, but they are pretty labor intensive in their construction and not something I'd suggest for first few projects. There are also some wonderful independent designers out there, some with simple patterns like Park Bench (not my style, but I love Mary Lou Rankin's creativity and her "permission slip"), others with more intricate or structured patterns like La Fred or Cecelia Podolak. If you happen to find an independent or three that match your style and especially if the figure you're working with matches the figure type they're designing for, they can be a wonderful resource.

But do keep plugging away... this *is* a skill that takes practice.

Kay

Reply to
Kay Lancaster

InspirePoint website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.