I wrote: > > I can't help you there, as I never transfer to paper. I keep the original > > linen pieces. When I use them as a template, I iron them out and > > straighten out the grain lines, and match them to the grain lines on the > > new fabric.
Elizabeth replied: > But if you're using the pieces that you've fitted as the lining of > your final dress then you've just lost your pattern and you've got to > start the fitting process again from scratch next time you want to > recreate that dress. If I intend to make only one dress for a person, I cut and fit the lining, and it goes into the dress, and that's that. If I intend to make more than one dress, I fit a linen template using the same sort of fabric as the lining. I fit with panels that go about to mid-thigh (long enough to fit all the necessary bits, and to mark the angle of flare on the pieces for purposes of cutting out full-length ones later). I use these then as a guide to cutting a full-length lining, which I can then assemble and tweak, and in turn use that to cut the outer fabric. Note that the template is not a pattern -- it's a starting point, and you have to check (and if necessary adjust) the fit on everything you cut based on it. You can use a full dress as a starting point as well, though it's not as convenient. > Re-doing it from scratch makes sense from a medieval point of view > when you've got a household/neighbourhood full of women who all know > how to sew and how to do this sort of fitting (especially given the > cost of paper). But in a modern re-enactor's world where it's often > hard to find somebody who knows how to sew & is willing to try this > unfamiliar technique it makes sense to have something that is almost > right and requires only the sort of minor fitting that you can get a > non-sewer or a modern only sewer to do for you while you give them > instructions. Yes, this is one of many differences between our situation and that of the medieval woman. If this was simply "the way clothes were made," it would have been a standard approach that everyone who sewed had experience with. A modern re-enactor learns many techniques for different styles/periods -- but the medieval person lived in one place and time and would learn only the methods that were common at that place and time. When you do it a lot, you get really quite good at it. When I'm not teaching, I can do a fitting pretty quickly, because I can make a lot of the fitting decisions by sight and feel, skipping some of the preliminary steps that I have to teach to someone who is not so experienced. (Think of the stories of Korean or Vietnamese tailors who can look at you when you walk in the shop, and then produce a suit that fits you a week later.) Consider also: Most medieval women would not have had more than one fitted gown, so there would not be the issue of needing to reproduce the dress many times. For a second dress or a replacement, you would use your old one as your model. If you had changed size or shape, you could probably guess at the adjustment based on what you had originally. Or (say in the case of a growing girl who's just developed a new figure) you could try on dresses belonging to sisters, cousins, or friends till you found one close to your size, and adjust that as necessary. In other words, the use of the template is a modern solution to a modern problem of "I want lots of these dresses." It preserves most of the benefits of on-the-body fitting without turning it into a modern paper-pattern approach. --Robin _______________________________________________ h-costume mailing list [email protected] http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
