Re: [h-cost] 1880 Ball Gown
Elizabeth, I heard one this weekend...referring to a figure: an hourglass running out of time. Penny Ladnier, Owner, The Costume Gallery Websites www.costumegallery.com www.costumelibrary.com www.costumeclassroom.com www.costumeencyclopedia.com ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] 1880 Ball Gown
- Original Message - From: "Aylwen & John Garden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, July 30, 2007 11:02 PM Subject: Re: [h-cost] 1880 Ball Gown I am 5' 2" and extremely curvy, or should I say bottom heavy?! the best term I ever heard was 'an hourglass with a bit more sand at the bottom' at 5' 10" I don't qualify as a pocket Venus but I thought it was a fabulous way to describe someone like me who isn't truly pear shaped (the standard definition of pear shaped usually includes a small bust, which I don't qualify for) but has more hip than bust. Elizabeth Walpole Canberra Australia ewalpole[at]tpg.com.au http://au.geocities.com/amiperiodornot/ ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] 1880 Ball Gown
I am 5' 2" and extremely curvy, or should I say bottom heavy?! I wear an 1880s bustle gown in a plaid silk dupion. The bodice and apron are out of plaid, then the bustled underskirt is another colour. There is a photo at http://www.earthlydelights.com.au/2006/govt/100_2045.jpg where we are being a bit silly after a formal display and have let our hair down a bit, and also at http://www.earthlydelights.com.au/2006/NFF2006/100_2220.jpg Right now our whole group are making cancan outfits. I'm sick of ruffles! Cheers, Aylwen ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] 1880 Ball Gown
At 07:08 PM 7/27/2007, you wrote: And I had forgotten the term "pocket Venus." That will thrill Terry, who is tired of being the shortest of her peers no matter what group she's with at the time. As I'm the same height as Terry, I rather like that term myself. :-) Dianne ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
RE: [h-cost] 1880 Ball Gown
Hi, Lynn, well, the dark blue and rustle part is easy--- Blue/black changeable taffeta! I don't have the book, what will it look like? Sharon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lynn Downward Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 1:40 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Historical Costume Subject: [h-cost] 1880 Ball Gown (Sorry for the cross-post) I'm out of my design league and could really use some help from anyone who has worked in the 1880s era. I'm making a gown for my 16-year old daughter for a ball in March. After looking through all my books, she has chosen one from "Victorian and Edwardian Fashions from 'La Mode Illustree' ", edited by J. Olian (Dover). "Her" dress is the first one on page 60, an elegant ball gown from 1880. Unfortunately, the legend only says that it's made of satin, no more info. First, I'm a bit concerned about whether the dress will flatter her or not. She's 5' nothing and curvy. She's in proportion but weighs 125-130, so she's kinda built along the lines of Jennifer Rabbit only not so tall. Should I try to guide her away from this style and suggest more bustle, from maybe 1875 instead? I first thought of making the bustle a bit wider but maybe the thinness of this bustle dress is a good thing for my girl, to lengthen and slenderize. Yes? No? Her initial criteria: it has to be dark blue, it has to have a train, it has to rustle, it has to be beautiful. No pressure, Mom. Normally, I'll keep a picture of the design near me for several days so I can dream on it and kind of work out the kinks before I purchase anything, but time is tight. I'm going to Costume College and will have a day for shopping in the fabric district before I have to come home to the real world of work and family. While I'm in LA I can pick up the fabric and maybe even the trim, but I haven't any idea of how much material that dress will require. She may only wear this dress a couple times, so I'm going to go with a changeable poly taffeta rather than silk. I usually buy 10 yards minimum, but I haven't a clue how much that skirt might require. I'm guessing 2 for the bodice, another 2 for the underskirt, but where do I go from there? Is 10 yards enough or will I need more? Too much? Do you think there are two dark colors in this dress or only one? I'll probably trim/contrast with black if two colors. So there's not too much contrast. I'll use a heavy, twice-worked lace to reproduce that embroidery on the edges. And the yards and yards of lighter laces on the dress, both dark and light. How can one gauge - from a picture - how much to buy? I'm already working on Laughing Moon's corset pattern for her and I'll get the bustle pattern from Truly Victorian while I'm at College. I've made one of each of their two bustles and they work wonderfully, but my size is too big for Terry. I'll probably go to TV for the bodice and skirt patterns too because I don't feel comfortable draping yet, but I'd sure like any suggestions or help you can give me. I've done several Elizabethan outfits and several more 1840s-60s but never anything so late - even though I have plans to make one for myself. I swear I'm not asking for you to make the darned thing, but it's overwhelming me right now with the many things I don't know about this style. Thanks for any help you can toss my way, LynnD ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] 1880 Ball Gown
In a message dated 7/27/2007 8:56:17 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: short women should always wear one color, or at best, different shades of the same color. ** Hm... whatever. Most fashion advice is very subjective. I can't think of a much more flattering look for a short woman with some curves than an 1870's princess gown with a contrasting plastron front cut to accentuate the curves and going right down to the hem. There's a particularly fine example in...oh what is it?... "19th Century Fashion in Detail" of a blue and cream bold floral brocade with a solid cream entirely ruched plastron front that spreads at the bust and hips and nips in at the waist. The brocade is subtly draped to form some slight folds at the hip and no doubt some more dramatic folds at the backbut I can't see the back in the picture. Lemme see if I can get my hands on the book. Yes...it's "19th Century Fashion in Detail" by Lucy Johnston. The dress is on page 62 and 63. The drawing of the back view reveals a big vertical bow at the bustle. It's actually draped from the hips on down, with horizontal rows of lace on the widening plastron below the hips. This, with its contrasts and horizontal detail, would look fantastic on a short person. I was mixing it up with the gown on page 200, which is 1880's. Another bold blue and white-ish floral brocade but this time a bodice and skirtbut the pattern on the fabric practically hides this. Beautifully and skimpily draped at the front with a big, but not complex, bustle. This was definitely a short person's dress, again looking fabulous. There is also in the book another princess gown of cream with a plum pin stripe widely spaced. It has a cascading pleated ruffle, cream on one side and solid plum on the other which you see as it formally zig-zags down the front from high neck to hem. Very lovely. Page 174. All these gowns' designs could be tweaked for evening. [Well, the 1st one is an evening dress] ** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] 1880 Ball Gown
I planned to flat line everything in black and line the bodice. Do you all think the skirt needs flatlining and lining? Unless it was a sheer fabric (and sometimes even then) late-1870s/early 1880s dresses were usually fully flat-lined. If you are draping trim all over the skirt, the flat lining will help support its weight. However, you do not need to flat-line _and_ line the skirt. These styles run heavy, so don't add more weight than you have to. Fran ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] 1880 Ball Gown
A lot of photographs and portraits from this era show women wearing the fashionable silhouette, whether it flattered them or not, in our eyes. Yes--although the standard 19th-century fashion advice, in magazines and beauty books, was to wear what _was_ appropriate to the individual's figure, complexion, social position, budget, and the occasion. Fortunately, modern reenactors, and people going to period-themed social events, are very often not restricted to wearing an extremely narrow range of styles or colors. They can even often choose among the styles of an entire decade, or even a longer period. (Sometimes several centuries, as in the case of many SCA members.) Most modern people spending a lot of time and often, a fair amount of money making a historic outfit, want it to be something that looks good on them. So, if someone has a free choice of a period ranging over some years of the 1870s or early 1880s (which is what has been under discussion), it would be silly for them to choose an unflattering style, or one they disliked, just because some people "in period" did so--when a flattering style the modern person liked would be equally appropriate and suitable for the modern occasion. But even in the 18th century, whether drawn on the imaginary ideal or a painted portrait, artists tailored their work to an ideal that few women could meet. And until the latter part of the 20th century, with the advent of diets, plastic surgery, and just the rare draw of the right DNA, very very few women did. Sure. I suspect most people on this list know all that. In fact, most people still don't look like the (modern) fashionable ideal. Proper drape and scale of fabric in both weight and design is critical for both dolls and short persons like me(below 5')Keeping to a single color tone is best on the short I'm not quite sure what your point is, but I'll say: I'm 4'9" tall, and I've probably read most of the standard modern wardrobe-planning advice for petite women. Yes, part of the hackneyed modern advice (though the 1870s and 1880s, the period that was under discussion, were periods when multiple-color dresses were very fashionable) is that short women should always wear one color, or at best, different shades of the same color. I've never paid the slightest attention to that "rule," nor to a lot of the other modern fashion advice for short women. And I have studied fashion and pattern design, formally. So I have known, for many years, all about how horizontal lines add width, and vertical lines add length, and how details should be proportioned to the body. My take is: Height (barring extremes caused by medical problems) is not any kind of health or figure flaw. It's not something that should be concealed and in fact, it's not something that can be concealed. It's also not something that can be changed. Barring any onset of medical problems, it's going to be the same for your entire adult life. No amount of diet, exercise, or as far as I know even surgery, is ever going to change your height. The most you can in terms of real, if temporary, increase or decrease is change your shoes. So I see no point in deciding that my height is a "figure flaw," just because some fashion books say so. Yes, for every person there are some styles and colors that look truly unfortunate, and I certainly avoid my set of same. But, I think going through an entire lifetime--of hopefully, 90 years or so given modern medicine--wearing one-color outfits just because some wardrobe-planning books say that makes you look "taller"--when everyone around you can't help realizing you're short anyway--is absurd. Besides, on me at least, one-color outfits look incredibly dowdy. There is nothing duller on me than one of those "ideal" one-piece sheath dresses. Even when I faithfully followed the standard advice on "dressing them up" with accessories. So I almost _always_ wear contrasting blouses and skirts (I prefer separates to dresses). I look great in wide off-the-shoulder necklines--I've bought some modern knit tops like that, just so I can wear that silhouette in the daytime. I even have a couple with sort-of-Edwardian-bertha-things. I always wear long skirts--which used to be considered good for short women, as having a long line, but have recently been declared non-PC. I love big bulky hand-knit sweaters. I like big jewelry. In period outfits, I look fantastic in big mid-1890s sleeves, big mid-1880s bustles, hoopskirts, and wide-brimmed hats. I wear lots of things I'm not "supposed" to wear. I look good, and I feel good about them. It does help to study line, color, etc. to learn how to tweak the rules. For example, the modern T-shirts and dresses with big scoop necklines. I have trouble with those, because the neckline is too low in proportion to my waist level. It's not that I look short, but I look like I'm wearing someone else's T-shirt. But
Re: [h-cost] 1880 Ball Gown
Gosh! I go away for an hour for lunch and I come back and people are full of insights and help. I love this group! Thanks for the feedback on this natural curve period between bustles. I think the princess line is flattering too, and I'm sure she'll look and feel great in this dress. I should have mentioned that yes, there is lots of self-fabric pleating iat the bottom of the skirt, so I know that will add to the amount needed. Fran, thank you for listing the fabric requirements for those different types of dresses. Once I sit down and work out some calculations, I think I'll be fine. But it's nice to have a guideline. I planned to flat line everything in black and line the bodice. Do you all think the skirt needs flatlining and lining? Fit will indeed be crucial, Cindy, and that's the part I'm hoping to have some help with once I finish the corset. And I had forgotten the term "pocket Venus." That will thrill Terry, who is tired of being the shortest of her peers no matter what group she's with at the time. Thanks, everyone. I'll keepin touch as I build this thing. I don't have a blog, don't usually read them either, but it might be a good time to start a blog on the progress of this dress. I will continue to welcome input. I leave for Costume College on Tuesday morning and will be back the following Wednesday, so if you send ideas as they pop into your heads, please don't think I didn't appreciate you notes. LynnD On 7/27/07, Abel, Cynthia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > A lot of photographs and portraits from this era show women wearing the > fashionable silhouette, whether it flattered them or not, in our eyes. > But even in the 18th century, whether drawn on the imaginary ideal or a > painted portrait, artists tailored their work to an ideal that few women > could meet. And until the latter part of the 20th century, with the > advent of diets, plastic surgery, and just the rare draw of the right > DNA, very very few women did. Also, the fashionable ideal in the later > 19th century was curvy and so-called "pocket Venuses"(short but curvy > women who could corset their waists to the fashionable ideal)rivalled > the taller women, like Lily Langtry and Sarah Bernhardt, who are more > attractive to the modern eye. > > The important most important thing is fit. The latter half of the 19th > century abounds in surviving photographed portraits where fit isn't the > best. And few women could or would corset themselves to the fashionable > ideal, just as today, few women really can meet the under-ideal-weight > of fashion models and actresses. Proper drape and scale of fabric in > both weight and design is critical for both dolls and short persons like > me(below 5')Keeping to a single color tone is best on the short--for the > tall and very thin, then as now, can wear all the wild color > combinations of the Belle Epoque when new dye technology made really > bright colors possible. > > Cindy Abel > > > ___ > h-costume mailing list > h-costume@mail.indra.com > http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume > ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
RE: [h-cost] 1880 Ball Gown
A lot of photographs and portraits from this era show women wearing the fashionable silhouette, whether it flattered them or not, in our eyes. But even in the 18th century, whether drawn on the imaginary ideal or a painted portrait, artists tailored their work to an ideal that few women could meet. And until the latter part of the 20th century, with the advent of diets, plastic surgery, and just the rare draw of the right DNA, very very few women did. Also, the fashionable ideal in the later 19th century was curvy and so-called "pocket Venuses"(short but curvy women who could corset their waists to the fashionable ideal)rivalled the taller women, like Lily Langtry and Sarah Bernhardt, who are more attractive to the modern eye. The important most important thing is fit. The latter half of the 19th century abounds in surviving photographed portraits where fit isn't the best. And few women could or would corset themselves to the fashionable ideal, just as today, few women really can meet the under-ideal-weight of fashion models and actresses. Proper drape and scale of fabric in both weight and design is critical for both dolls and short persons like me(below 5')Keeping to a single color tone is best on the short--for the tall and very thin, then as now, can wear all the wild color combinations of the Belle Epoque when new dye technology made really bright colors possible. Cindy Abel ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] 1880 Ball Gown
In a message dated 7/27/2007 6:03:03 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think the minimal-bustle "natural form era" styles, which is what this is, look better on shorter women than on very tall and slender ones. Tall women can wind up looking like a pole in them, if they are not careful. (I'm 4'9", BTW.) Yes. Princess line gowns on curvy figures can be very flattering...even if one is short. And you don't have that huge wired bustle to deal with. I've seen examples of the princess gown is a simple as possible... with ruching and draping in the same fabric tacked onto the princess line base gown. It looks like a complicated draped gown all in one but it's really several pieces. The only problem is I think of them as late 1870's. ** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
Re: [h-cost] 1880 Ball Gown
I have that Dover book, but my books have far overflowed my bookshelves and are stacked high all over the floors. So I can't pull it out right away to ID the picture. I can barely move my in-front-of-the-computer chair for piles of books related to the (long overdue) one I'm working on now. If it helps any, I've published two books on late 1870s and early 1880s women's clothing, with patterns. The series is called Fashions of the Gilded Age, and the two volumes can be used independently. Volume 2 contains the patterns for evening and ball gowns, and a dressmaking manual, but Volume 1 has the patterns for corsets, bustles, undergarments, etc. First, I'm a bit concerned about whether the dress will flatter her or not. She's 5' nothing and curvy. She's in proportion but weighs 125-130, so she's kinda built along the lines of Jennifer Rabbit only not so tall. Should I try to guide her away from this style and suggest more bustle, from maybe 1875 instead? I think the minimal-bustle "natural form era" styles, which is what this is, look better on shorter women than on very tall and slender ones. Tall women can wind up looking like a pole in them, if they are not careful. (I'm 4'9", BTW.) I usually buy 10 yards minimum, but I haven't a clue how much that skirt might require. That's my standard buying amount for costumes I don't have yardage for. But this is a period where different fabrics are commonly combined for evening dresses. OK, I managed to dig up my office copy of Volume 2 of Fashions of the Gilded Age. Here's a pattern for an evening dress with a long train. The yardage given is 6 yards of velvet for the bodice and trained skirt back, 7 3/4 yards of satin for the skirt itself, and 3 1/4 yard of brocaded gauze to arrange over the skirt. Here's a pattern for another evening dress, with a trained skirt back and more of a bustle effect, made entirely of canary yellow satin, requiring 20 yards 20 inches wide. Which is a point to consider for these yardages: They're not talking about modern 54" wide fabric. There are two tables of period widths for a large variety of fabrics, in the dressmaking manual in back. They vary from fabric to fabric; but if you assume a width of not more than 36" in these descriptions, you should come out OK. Here's a pattern for a reception dress with a moderate bustle effect and no train. It requires 12 yards of black satin duchesse and 5 1/2 yards of black brocade, 24 inches wide. Here's a pattern for a satin and brocade evening dress with a rather short train. The skirt and its drapery require 18 yards of light bronze satin, and the polonaise (bodice combined with overskirt) requires 6 1/2 yards of light blue satin brocade. The book has patterns for several other evening dresses and ball gowns for which no yardage is given. According to dressmaking instructions of the period, you were supposed to do a mock layout of your pattern on the floor and buy material accordingly. You will also need a lining fabric. I always use rather lightweight, but not sheer (except for very light fabrics) plain-weave cotton, in as close to the same color as the outer fabric as I can find. The lining fabrics they used run to a narrower selection of off white (for white fabrics), various shades of tan (for most fabrics) and black (for black fabrics). However, other colors were sometimes used. Although "colored" laces were used to some extent in this period, the majority, especially for formal wear, were yellowish off-white, ecru, or black. These are classic colors you can always use for some other project if you have too much for this one. There is a kind of coarse, off-white cotton lace that was very popular in the 1970s or so, which is a fairly decent imitation of Victorian bobbin lace. A lot of it gets sold on eBay, and you can buy long pieces in single styles. (Although, it is OK to mix lace patterns in trimming one garment if they harmonize and you do it in a logical way.) I've bought cards with as much as 50 yards of it, for reasonable prices. So my advice is, go to eBay, browse the lace in the "textiles" section, and have a field day buying whatever patterns of this lace take your fancy. If you don't use them now you will later. If it's 100% cotton lace you can dye it. I have dyed lace ecru for an 1890s ballgown by making strong coffee, and leaving the lace in there till the color was dark enough that I thought it would be right once it was rinsed and dried. I don't like black lace, so don't buy it often, and have never dyed any black. I just remembered: Dharma Trading Company, www.dharmatrading.com, recently started carrying dyeable, 100% cotton, coarse bobbin-style laces, and they're cheap. I haven't bought any yet, but you might want to have a look. Dharma also sells ecru and black dyes. I don't know why you think your daughter won't wear the dress often. But she might find it more wearab
[h-cost] 1880 Ball Gown
(Sorry for the cross-post) I'm out of my design league and could really use some help from anyone who has worked in the 1880s era. I'm making a gown for my 16-year old daughter for a ball in March. After looking through all my books, she has chosen one from "Victorian and Edwardian Fashions from 'La Mode Illustree' ", edited by J. Olian (Dover). "Her" dress is the first one on page 60, an elegant ball gown from 1880. Unfortunately, the legend only says that it's made of satin, no more info. First, I'm a bit concerned about whether the dress will flatter her or not. She's 5' nothing and curvy. She's in proportion but weighs 125-130, so she's kinda built along the lines of Jennifer Rabbit only not so tall. Should I try to guide her away from this style and suggest more bustle, from maybe 1875 instead? I first thought of making the bustle a bit wider but maybe the thinness of this bustle dress is a good thing for my girl, to lengthen and slenderize. Yes? No? Her initial criteria: it has to be dark blue, it has to have a train, it has to rustle, it has to be beautiful. No pressure, Mom. Normally, I'll keep a picture of the design near me for several days so I can dream on it and kind of work out the kinks before I purchase anything, but time is tight. I'm going to Costume College and will have a day for shopping in the fabric district before I have to come home to the real world of work and family. While I'm in LA I can pick up the fabric and maybe even the trim, but I haven't any idea of how much material that dress will require. She may only wear this dress a couple times, so I'm going to go with a changeable poly taffeta rather than silk. I usually buy 10 yards minimum, but I haven't a clue how much that skirt might require. I'm guessing 2 for the bodice, another 2 for the underskirt, but where do I go from there? Is 10 yards enough or will I need more? Too much? Do you think there are two dark colors in this dress or only one? I'll probably trim/contrast with black if two colors. So there's not too much contrast. I'll use a heavy, twice-worked lace to reproduce that embroidery on the edges. And the yards and yards of lighter laces on the dress, both dark and light. How can one gauge - from a picture - how much to buy? I'm already working on Laughing Moon's corset pattern for her and I'll get the bustle pattern from Truly Victorian while I'm at College. I've made one of each of their two bustles and they work wonderfully, but my size is too big for Terry. I'll probably go to TV for the bodice and skirt patterns too because I don't feel comfortable draping yet, but I'd sure like any suggestions or help you can give me. I've done several Elizabethan outfits and several more 1840s-60s but never anything so late – even though I have plans to make one for myself. I swear I'm not asking for you to make the darned thing, but it's overwhelming me right now with the many things I don't know about this style. Thanks for any help you can toss my way, LynnD ___ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
