My wedding - a bit downscaled

Congratulations!

> Unfortunately I've got no idea where to get a pattern for> something like that. How about : I *really* like: Any of those give your sewist a starting point for the jacket and skirt, and most have pants, too (and it's a simple matter to add width to the pant's leg).

HTH,

Beverly

I really do like two of the patterns Beverly suggested, especially the last one, but also the #2925, too. Emily

IF I were planning on getting married again (which I'm not), that's just the kind of outfit I would be thinking about for this "mature" bride. ;-}

Beverly

------

Congratulations on your very sensible decision. Starting a new life is stressful enough without adding the fancy-dress wedding. I am sure that you will be a beautiful bride, and that your wedding costume will be a welcome part of your wardrobe for many years, rather than a one-time dress that costs a fortune and is worn for only a few hours.

I will leave it to the others to address your questions - you will receive lots of good counsel!

Looks lovely - on that skinny little girl.

No, let me thank you first for the trouble you've taken. Other groups will send you a-googeling directly. But seriously, I'm afraid that the jacket of that one has a rather unflattering length for my hips. I don't have that much waist. Well, I've got quite a belly, so I'm afraid I won't feel comfy in something like that. And, just like Joanne pogonip said: the whole thing is meant to be a "welcome part of my wardrobe for many years". Am I too tightwad or what? To me it would feel like a bad omen if I started my married life with something wasteful as a bridal dress for just a few hours.

Anyway, I remembered that my mom used to buy the Burda magazine, so I went there and found one or two nice ideas as well. This one:

has anice jacket, but I'm not so sure about the skirt. I found that the straighttype is most becoming for me. Like this one: the pattern is only for the jacket. Nice jacket, too, by theway, as is this:'m really afraid that all skirts with extra width will make me look like awalking tent or some such thing. Please do tell me: is making a skirt likethat one with Burda #8239 easy enough so that I can tell the lady to "justgo ahead" or should I go hunting for a suitable pattern (no idea where,though).

For the trousers I thought about this one

,although I'm not sure if a pair of trousers made of tweed are a good idea.The problem: that particular little spot where my thighs are rubbingtogether when I walk - I'm sure you know what I mean. Currently I've gotthree pairs of denims that need repair in exactly that place - urgently!What can I do about it? Any ideas? Should I forget the idea of trousers togo with the ensemble?Ahh, it feels really good to be with you, though, I can talk about my sillylittle problems with you. I had no idea that getting married is such a fuss,even if you cut it down to the merest basics. I really can't understand whyanybody would want to do it more than once, or even be eager for the wholething (like Muriel in 'Muriel's Wedding). Hey, don't get me wrong, I stillwant to be with the man, it's not that! ;-) U.

I know how you feel! I was prepared to do that, but Alan wanted the big dress, the church - the lot! It's lasted 24 and a half years, so who's to say he was wrong! ;) But I made my dress, from a Burda pattern... I made my dress, two bridesmaid dresses, and bought a sewing machine for less than buying a wedding dress like I wanted in the shops! :D So I had the wasteful dress AND was economical.

No, she might be able to do it, but the patten we used for this one has a straight version: Butterick pattern 4131. It has a silly little demi-train godet in the back seam, but you can just leave that out and make it straight. I didn't use the waistband as this gave us a flatter look under the top.

Hehehehe... I'd have taken my dad's offered £50 and a ladder and eloped, but DH wanted to do it 'properly'.

I don't have final pix yet.Ah yes, I remember, the mother's wedding dress made into a new one. ;-) Well, she seems to be a pretty girl, with a rather feminine shape. So, when she wears the flared skirt, the whole figure will have a very becoming A-line, and with her round shoulders she'll look good enough to eat, if I may say so. ;-) I have such broad shoulders that when slimmer and with shorter hair, I was once actually mistaken for a guy (OK, those were my cabinetmaker days and I was wearing my woking outfit, brogues, folding rule and all.) Anyway, I looked around at Butterick's once more and found these: # 3756 (my favourite), # 4452, # 3908 and # 4021. The slim versions all have the slit on the back, which might be important.

OK, then no trousers.

Oh, about the jacket, could you give me your opinion which might go best with Butterick # 3756? I think that Burda # 8530 might look best since I like the 3/4 length arms and the 'complete' look of the thing. I suspect that adding pockets on both sides will not be too difficult.

Yes, my SO is the driving force here, too. Anyway, I come to feel that the real meaning of a biggish wedding is to impress the fact that the couple in question is not 'living in sin' on the public, much more than just two lovers exchanging vows with each other. Well, my 'heart ceremony' will be the pagan wedding, and I'm not sure when that will be, some time next summer, or the one after that... ;-) Anyway, our civil wedding will probably be just the two of us and not even any witnesses. Well, we might think about the witness part.

U.

Ursula Noeker wrote: I have such broad shoulders that when slimmer and with

As you have broad shoulders, the "shoulder princess" line jacket is much better for you than the "armhole princess". I have narrow shoulders compared to my bustline, so always choose the armhole princess style. I have seen trumpet skirts on large ladies and it was most attractive. I am thinking of making one for myself. Otherwise, I find that straight skirts with a walking pleat, or several of them either at center back or center front, are the least unflattering.

If you live anywhere near a decent shopping area, I would suggest you take the time to try on whatever is available and see how it looks on you. It doesn't cost to try on, and sometimes is very revealing.

Olwyn Mary in New Orleans.

You're welcome. I love poking about on the pattern sites. ;-)

pattern (no idea where, though).

If you want pants, make 'em! But, either line the entire garment, or at the very least, have your sewist add a triangle-shaped bit of lining to the area over the inner leg seams and extend up into the crotch seams front and back.

My DD is a lab tech, and I make her scrubs. The first couple of pairs, she wore out in the inner thigh *way* too quickly (long before the tops showed any wear). So now, I add the second layer of fabric in the crotch-inner thigh area when I first make them, and they last much longer. And they are more comfortable, because that inner-thigh seam is covered with smooth fabric.

HTH,

Beverly

I wrote an essay on this a while back, and posted it at

.There's half a book in file 24; plug "One way to patch the crotch inpants" into your "find" or "search" function to jump down to theessay. Comments and nit-picks welcome; you will note that the article isn't complete.

I would go for that one too, for myself, but I would turn those inelegant hemline slits into pleats. However, Ursula mentioned she has broad shoulders, which I think this armhole princess line would exaggerate, and why I think the shoulder princess line would be better for her.

Olwyn Mary in New Orleans

OK, it's just the jacket I need, the dress is - uh. I intend to wear a white silk blouse/top/whatever (to be bought yet) with the ensemble. Nothing wrong with the neckline, though, a little decolleté won't hurt, especially when the rest of the figure isn't that much of a jackpot. But help me out of my ignorance: what is armhole/shoulder princess? I admit it, I'm stupid. ;-)

U.

Oh, I'm sorry that I didn't express myself more clearly, I just meant preventing the rubbing and repair. However, I've long since bookmarked your site, Joy, and when looking over the text from the above link, I was once more surprised by the ingenuity of textile workers. I'd never have gotten the idea to mend knitwear with blanket stitch. Industrially manufactures stockings I tend to mend with a normal kind of weaving patch, while my precious pairs of hand-knit ones I mend as soon as they wear in the normal spots. I follow the original thread with another one, although I found it a bit difficult at the tip. Guess I've got learn how to make a foot of a stocking. ;-) Anyway, thanks for the hint.

U.

"BEI Design" schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:sdqdnbyHqPMZ17jYnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@comcast.com...

Oh, I've got to think that through. I always thought that the inner thigh seams increase the destruction of a garment and always thought that I'd like to make a pair of pants with gussets? in that area. However, I still might end up without a pair of pants. We'll see, thanks for the good idea anyway.

U.

I think you're right the bulk of the inside-leg seam is a source of friction, which caused the fabric to wear out.

To be clear, I add the triangle shaped piece on the *inside* of the pants, after the leg seam is sewn. That covers the raw edges of the inside-leg-seam and prevents chafing to *her* leg. For some reason, it also helps defer wear of the *outside* of the fabric, and even when it does wear through, there is now a second layer of the identical fabric in place, so thin spots don't "show through". She used to bring me her worn-through scrubs, and I'd add a scrap of the original fabric to the outside (opening the crotch seam) and stitch all the way around. That repair did have the 'look' of a gusset. Not elegant, but it made them wearable for a bit longer.

HTH,

Beverly

No such thing as a stupid question (except the one you *didn't* ask)! ;-)

An *armhole* princess seam curves over the fullest point of the bustline and then over to the armhole.

Look at the detail sketch of:

see how that shaping takes place.A *shoulder* princess seam continues from the fullest point of the bust on up to the shoulder seam. The sketch of: C and D shows a shoulder princess seam. HTH,

Beverly

to see how that shaping takes place.>> A *shoulder* princess seam continues from the fullest point of the bust on > up to the shoulder seam.>

> Views C and D shows a shoulder princess seam. Uh-oh, I had quite a hard time to get the difference, but I think I understand now. However, I still find it hard to tell in the Burda patterns. Would you say that # 8141 has the flattering armhole while # 8530 has the unflattering one?

U. - asking to understand thoroughly. ;-)

> to see how that shaping takes place.> >> > A *shoulder* princess seam continues from the fullest> > point of the bust on up to the shoulder seam.> >

>> > Views C and D shows a shoulder princess seam.>

Of the three links you provided previously, 8141 and 8530 both have armhole princess seams, while 8239 has shoulder princess seams. But I'm not the person who suggested that one style was more flattering to your figure type, and I would suggest that before buying a pattern you try on several ready-to-wear jackets to see what *you* think. In addition, if you are planning to hire a sewist for the actual work, his/her input would be invaluable.

Beverly