Claire Kennedy Design

Another post on Style and Shape

Fitting for a shape other than a post-apocalyptic waif (I need to abbreviate that, my spelling head is esplodin' - PAW!!!), takes on some challenges, but they are not insurmountable, no matter what society and media tell us.  We are all shaped differently and that's just the way of the world.  For heavens sakes, the sun doesn't even rise or set in the same place every day - you think our bodies might change a little - ya think?!

OK, enuf of that, back to our shapes and what we can do with them.  I loved Juliet's link from the last blog and that Judi Dench bought a lot of her clothes from the store she linked to.  Below is an example of one of their things.

And although I don't like to dis period, I like to emphasize the positive, this is not positive.  This is the sort of thing that I try work against.   And I know a lot of people out there feel this is all that's available to them.

But it's not. 

For one thing, what the garment is trying to do is cover a large area one place while drooping over a smaller area.  With fitting techniques, and some very basic ones, a garment can be fitted for this shape.

It has always been confusing to me why men could find clothes in their sizes, like these, but somehow women can't or they just aren't available.

If a suit can be designed to fit Michael Oher......and....

if one can be design to fit Gianfranco Ferre?.....then why not women?

Well, it can.  It does take some learning of techniques, but it can be done. 

Most of all that "cover it all" or "cover up" look really doesn't do anything other than just accentuate an already large area. 

 

There were some things that Dame Judi was wearing that did have draping to it and did have some style and line to it.  Those were the things I just adored.  They were close to her body.  They were either tapered or slightly gathered or were not waving about.  For a figure like Dame Judi's you have to be careful of the side. 

 

See now we can see her sides?...well, maybe we can't see all of them but see how her side comes in under her elbow there?  That's enough to give the hint of a figure...a shape...that's what we're looking for.  The contrasting scarf also adds length.

OK - I worked with this a little and see the difference.  I took that scarf thing on her left side that was hanging straight down off, and believe me, I gave her a generous waist and even at that, she looks so much better.  See how just at the midriff (above the waist) area, it's contained.  It's non-cluttered;  it's clean - no gathers, no draping, no extra fabric.  That's what does it.  On the right is the original and even though there's not a lot of gathers, it's that scarf thing hanging down that makes her look way bigger than she is.

That's why I'm not a fan of those big, cover-it-all, coverups that are gather-y around an area that we need to keep clean and contained.  Basically I'm talking about a full-chested/busted area, with smaller shoulders.

 And I'm certainly not talking about when you're at home and want to be comfy - be comfy or if you're out running a quick errand.  But if you want to look nice, professional, together, official, and all that, keep that midriff contained - it does wonders.

And what's my favorite method of doing that - the side bust dart!  It's magical.

 

Why are pants so hard?

Part of what makes fitting pants so hard is to know what a good fit is.

I thought it would be interesting to take a look at some movie stars and their pants and how they fit.  Mostly these are from the 50's and 60's because these were made of fabric, not stretch fabric.

Why?

Because stretch is not a fit.  Stretch is a fabric that fits no matter what, and fitting and making stretch pants doesn't require that much fit.  The other side of the coin is that stretch pant show ever error of your body, whereas a great fitting pair of woven fabric pants will make you look great.

So here we go.

I love using Marilyn cause in my day, she was the penultimate sexy symbol...she had the perfect figure that everyone wanted to emulate.  She was not skin and bones, she was voluptuous and very sexy.

Look at these pants...even though she's not standing straight, which is where you want to fit your pants, you can see that she has wrinkles in her pants.  Some of these are due to her position, but some are natural...the wrinkles in the middle are from when she's sat or stooped in them and these are natural wrinkles in woven fabric.  Also look to see how small her waist is compared to her hips.  This is fit well too - no drooping or excess around waist or hips.

I would like everyone to cut the picture below out and past it on their wall.  Look at the stomach this gal had and it was considered sexy.  It's also fit well.  If you look closely here you can also see some saddlebags - albeit small, but it's there.  See how there is fullness just below the hip line?  This helps mask this saddlebag look.

Another great shot of Marilyn's stomach and how well it's fit.  You can see in this check the darts and how they fit her waist and stomach.  And notice again the fullness below her saddlebags which helps mask the fullness through the lower hip/upper thigh area.

Reading the wrinkles here, the ones that are in her inseam, are natural for the position she has where she's standing on one hip.  This is common, but not ill-fitting.  If these wrinkles were pointing toward the crotch area, then we'd have a fitting problem, but seeing them being parallel to the ground, makes them OK - they just come from her body position.

OK - to one of my favorite movies (Gentlemen Prefer Blonds.  Note to self:  record the movie and take out some stills showing how well the clothes fit in this movie)....Look at Jane Russell's waist - it's small, small especially compared with her hips.  This was considered hugely sexy. And although it's really tough to see the detail on Jane's pants, you can see that every it fitted well here (see below for a better photo).  But there's something else - a little off subject, but the tromp l'oiell that is created by the men wearing nude colored trunks with black trim.  It really makes them look like they're not wearing anything which is kind of a fun way of doing these trunks.

OK - I lightened this up so you can see Jane Russell's pants better.  First notice the seams in her bodice, and notice the wrinkle in her right inseam.  This is caused by her standing on one hip. (Don't try and fit yourself while you're standing on one hip or another!).  But in my book this is fine.  The part that is amazing here is that Jane Russell has a very small waist to very large hips.  So this fit can be done.

Hopefully some of these make my point about fitting and how it actually can be done.  The actresses, models and women of the 50's and 60's had voluptuous, full figures - that's what was considered healthy (probably after seeing so much starvation in the conquered areas after WWII), being full-figured meant that you were healthy.

But what I wanted you to see out of this, is that not only is it possible, but it's done.  Fitting voluptuous bodies, full-figured bodies, irregularly shaped bodies - it can all be done.

And remember this.  Once you have that pattern, 99% of the battle of making pants is done.  It takes literally little or no advanced expertise to make pants.  The hard part is the fit.

Movie costumes

One of the things I love about the movies is how well clothes fit.  My favorite example is Gentlemen Prefer Blonds:

I know I've blathered about this before...but Marilyn Monroe and Jane Russell had completely different figures, yet Edit Head did a remarkable job of costuming them so that one didn't take away from the other or that one looked different from the other.

But there's another aspect to this, although most movies are filled with thin, emaciated women who are well fitted (which isn't much - to fit bones and skin is a whole lot less complicated than fitting a regular body ruled by genetics rather than starvation!).  Although if a star "makes it" she can be relinquished from the starvation mode and begin to have a normal figure - like Meryl Strep or Glenn Close.

 

 

But back to my main subject.  One of the films, I really have liked is The Fifth Element.  It's very creative, plot, acting, humor...

and....

costumes!

 

 

They were done by Jean-Paul Gaultier and if you look closely you can see the remarkable fitting and tailoring techniques used in making up the designs.

What's so special about this picture...look at the fit:

Remarkable...let's take it apart:

First of all, the designer is wanting to accentuate the heftiness of this actress...that's the whole idea of the scene...she's supposed to accompany Bruce Willis as his wife and we are not (as the audience) suppose to want or like this. 

But look at how well this fits her...the pink lines (the princess seam) and the green lines all act as darts.  And look at how well this looks through the shoulders and lapel area.  I guarantee you this jacket took a lot of fittings to get to this point.

There is a tiny wrinkle through the underarm (yellow arrow) which has to be there for ease, so this is a necessary wrinkle. 

One caveat here is that the jacket fits very tightly and in movies remember the designer knows how much or little the person has to move. In this scene all this actress had to do was bow her head a couple of times - no other movement, so the designer was able to really fit up close, knowing that the actress really didn't need any more ease.

That said, this is still a great fit job, and the reason I'm pulling this out and making such a big deal about it is cause it shows that a robust figure can be fit and fit well.  Granted, you may not want something that tight or firmly fit and want something with some more ease, but you can still have a fit. 

This is the picture that comes to my mind when my students or clients tell me that they can't be fit - it's like they've dared me....

oh yeah....

lemme at it!

I'll fit ya!

Fitting - there's more to it than just the physics

When I work with a client - no matter what it is, I'm digging into their life and head a little.  I get to know her really fast and very well and sometimes this can be a little unnerving.

Oh Dear - what is Claire up to now!  No, I don't use this method - although it might work pretty well.  I tend toward the dialogue method:  Did you go to Cheryl's birthday party?....why?....when did you leave?....did you have fun?

What business of mine is that anyway? (other than just being innocently nosey).  If my client tells me she went cause she's family, that's one thing, if she tells me she went cause she carpools with Cheryl that's another - if she went cause her hubby works with Cheryl's hubby, that's something else - if she went cause she thinks Cheryl is higher up on the social chain, that tells me a whole lot!

So what in the world am I after?

Well, I'm looking at her dress and I want to know how deep to make the plunge in front?.....or how va-va-voom does she want to be? ...respectible? ....conservative? ...playful? ....uppity? ...is she a carpooling mom? ...is she a seductress? ...is she a social climber?   I'm after what SHE wants.

The same thing happens when we are fitting ourselves.  We go through transitions in our lives...rebellious teens, smooth collegiates, sexy newlyweds, sophisticated working gals,  responsible moms, respectable parents, proud grand-parents, and you don't think that your style of clothing changes with all that?  It does big time.

As in....from this

....to this....same actress, same character - different whole look!

This is one of my fav transformations in moviedom....from Evil Under the Sun.

Who wants to wear the same thing you did when you were in college now that you're giving your daughter away in marriage - please don't!!!  (Please no more hip-huggers EVER again!!!)

Imogen Lamport does a good job of describing a lot of this on her blog - science meets fashion.  But it still comes down to knowing what you like and what you don't.

Why is this so hard, because it presents questions that we didn't even know to ask, much less the choice.  When he don't know how a good garment is supposed to fit, how can you possibly know what a good fit is, if you've never had one?

Neither one of these is a good fit, just because it's "in style" for the moment, may look good on that anorexic model, or because it stretches to fit.

This is important because stretching to fit, is not fitting.  Before the day of stretch fabrics, seams would break and rip, so it couldn't be done.  Today with those knit and stretch fabrics, there is no limit - to the stretch.

This changes the game when you're talking about fitting and sizes.  This makes fitting much more complicated.  Fitting in stretch type fabrics is different than wovens.  And although it may appear easier in stretch fabrics, it's really not.  When you have a fit in a woven fabric, you look neat, well-groomed and well-kept, whereas in a stretch, there are many fitting details that are just not done.

Here's the fun part.  When you have a pants pattern that fits, and you develope a pattern from that for stretch fabrics, you get that same style and well-groomed look that you have with the woven.  THEN you understand what it's like to have a good-fitting pair of pants.

So why all the fuss - woven smoven. stretch smetch!!!  Because this gives you heads up.  If you know that it's going to take you 2 hours to fly from Atlanta to Miami (hopefully), then you know what to expect.  If you know it's going to take you all day to travel from Seatle to Miami, you're prepared.  If you know that you are taking on a big project in fitting a pair of pants, hopefully that will keep you from being discouraged during the process.

The process WILL take a some time

The process will be fraught with confusing signals from your pants pattern.

The process will take some effort.

The process will most importantly yeild a very valuable tool.

Cause once you have that pattern, it will take you an afternoon at most, but usually about 2 hours to whip up those pants.  Talk about empowered.

So remember that you're not only fitting your body, you're fitting your mind too.  It's a very personal process...you are basically bargaining between being too baggy in the rear to feeling comfy when you sit down,  Some of my clients love to feel comfy when they sit, and some hate being baggy - that's all personal, and we as sewists get to make the choice and see that choice into reality!

Enjoy!

Nancy K and the Vogue 1167 Jacket

I was over at Nancy K's blog and noticing that she was having a dilemma about picking out a new pattern.

I notice this a lot with my students, and this is another one of those things that I do so regularly, that I don't realize I know what I know - if you know what I mean!  OK, that sounds confusing to me - can only guess how it sounds to you.

So with Nancy's permission, here is a perfectly good example (with thanks from Nancy) is how I would approach her if she were a client of mine.

First, (I would be very lucky to have her as a client cause she obviously puts a lot of care and thought into her appearance), is her shape.

I think of Nancy as being more straight up and down rather than any other shape, and she is not short, however has to be careful about being "cut in half".  Neither one of these are serious flaws, but do have to be considered in pattern selection, pattern alteration and pattern design.

She's been looking at Vogue 1167, which I think is a good pattern for her, but will require a little work before it really becomes a WOW jacket - and this is what we're after here - a WOW look!  And let's be honest - every pattern needs some work to become a WOW garment.

So I think this is a good pattern and a classic one.  But first some critique on the photo above.  Nancy got this right off....it's been clothespinned in the back - meaning that they've nipped it in, in back, during the photo shoot to make the jacket look a little better....but we can do that too, only  in a different more permanent way.

The next thing is that the jacket sleeves have some fullness to them that might be a problem for another figure, but not for Nancy, so let's not take on more here than we need to....just wanted to mention that about the sleeves.

That said, this jacket has some good points....the side bust darts are excellent, the 3/4 sleeve length is great for looking taller/less bulky, but this jacket needs more than that to make it work. 

The waist must be delineated in this pattern - there is not waist and the side bust darts are good but they aren't good enough: (the back view)

 

I mean cummon now....you can't tell me the picture of the finished garment (the one above this one) hasn't been clothepinned at the waist when you look at this line drawing!!!

 

Looking at either solution here (center back seam or side back darts) either one of these solutions will solve the waist look (and OK I manipulated the side seam of the original drawing to make my point here, but this WILL work!).  However, from an aesthetic point of view, and taking into consideration the line of the pattern, I personally like the center back seam the best on this style.....there's a boxy, sort of 70's-ish look to this, and this would have been a typical seam in those days - and I know this only cause I was sewing back then (you understand I was 3 y/o then.....OK maybe a little older!)

Here's using the Armani line technique on this waist to also help in this.

 

Armani would nip in a little above the waist, (in the illustration the red line is actual waist, and blue line is where the pattern has been nipped in the most) for the smallest part of the jacket waist (I did a little blurb on this here), but the whole idea is that if there is a more graduated line from the bust to the waist and from the waist to the hip, rather than the beloved "muffin top" look, then this is not only more presentable, but actually flattering!!!  What a concept!!!

The next thing is that Nancy has to be careful about being cut in half. So she has to be careful where the jacket hem hits her.  She also has to be careful that the jacket doesn't do a "Flying Wallenda" and accentuate an area that doesn't really need accentuating.  So where's that perfect line?!

Easy - it's where her tummy or hip (which ever is the most delicate for her) sticks out the most.

This is a mathematical formula that works every time:

If she wants to de-accentuate her tummy & bust, then she makes the line from where it sticks out the most to where it goes in the most, as smooth as possible.  In the case of her tummy, she has all the way from the most protruding spot, to the hem to make that line smooth.  In the case of her bust, she has from the bust point to the waist to make that as smooth.

The opposite works well too.....for my gals who have little or no busts, I fit right under that bust line and make it close to the body and poof - like magic, they have a va-va-voom sexy bustline - or at least it makes them look like they do!

.

So here's the bottom line on this jacket....she has to be careful of the hem, she has to do a center back seam and take in the waist a little above the waist, and take in the waist on the side seam a little above the waist, and voila - she has a perfectly great jacket that will work well in a lot of situations.  And something that is classic enough to be done again and again and still look the same!

Gee, after looking at this pattern, I like it too.  I probably wouldn't have noticed it since it doesn't have the trademark high neck collar that I love so much (to cover my thin bird neck), but the more I look at the the more I like it for summer and spring!  Oh dang, the pattern isn't even available yet.  Why does Vogue do that?!!