Curious about the back of the corset - Is that inverted V at the small of the
back correct?
http://www.simplicity.com/designFrontBack.cfm?design=3635http://www.simplicity.com/designFrontBack.cfm?design=3635
Sg
___
h-costume mailing list
At 16:54 21/07/2007, you wrote:
Curious about the back of the corset - Is that inverted V at the
small of the back correct?
http://www.simplicity.com/designFrontBack.cfm?design=3635http://www.simplicity.com/designFrontBack.cfm?design=3635
Sg
Those underwear patterns look like they have come
-cost] New Simplicity patterns-corset question - Bjarne?
At 16:54 21/07/2007, you wrote:
Curious about the back of the corset - Is that inverted V at the small of
the back correct?
http://www.simplicity.com/designFrontBack.cfm?design=3635http://www.simplicity.com/designFrontBack.cfm?design=3635
Would butterick 4484 work better?
-Original Message-
At 16:54 21/07/2007, you wrote:
Curious about the back of the corset - Is that inverted V at the
small of the back correct?
http://www.simplicity.com/designFrontBack.cfm?design=3635
Sg
Those underwear patterns look like they have
In a message dated 7/21/2007 12:21:52 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The corset is laced edge to edge
in the Simplicity pattern, which I prefer not to do, and I always
have the back edges level, so no, in my opinion, that inverted V is
not correct.
In a message dated 7/21/2007 5:09:09 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Would butterick 4484 work better?
*
It, too is from Corsets Crinolines. It's a late 1700s corset. It's not
my favorite pattern. The Simplicity looks to be more useful as it is more
