Believe it or not, you get completely different results FOR THE SAME BODY if you use different schools of pattern making. I prefer the German / Dutch school to the American school. I shall explain why.
It will be easier to do that, if I use for this purpose a commercial pattern (Carolyn Pajama from Closet Case Files).
Va rog sa ma credeti ca daca veti desena un tipar pentru acelasi corp, deci cu aceleasi masuri, veti obtine tipare diferite in functie de tehnica de desenat tipare pe care o veti aplica. Eu prefer metoda germana sau olandeza metodei americane si am sa incerc sa va explic de ce, folosindu-ma de un tipar comercial despre care am scris putin ieri, Carolyn Pajama de la Closet Case Files.
The starting point is 'first the armhole, only after that the sleeve' ("Zuerst das Armloch, dann der Ärmel", Mueller&Son / M&S).
Punctul de plecare este regula formulata de Müller&Sohn (Mueller&Son / M&S): "intai rascroitura manecii [pe tiparul de corsaj] si abia dupa aceea maneca".
I copied the front and back armhole from the pyjama bodice (seam line, not cutting line) and I drafted a new sleeve using the German method of pattern drafting. Then I compared the sleeve pattern I got with the original sleeve pattern. I took size 20, because it was the biggest size and the lines were very clear on the pattern, sleeve as bodice. It is not my size, because it was only an experiment.
Pentru acest experiment am copiat rascroitura manecii de pe tiparul de la Closet Case Files, de care am nevoie ca sa pot construi tiparul de maneca pentru acest tipar, folosindu-ma de metoda M&S. Am ales marimea cea mai mare, desi nu este marimea mea, pentru ca erau cele mai clare linii in tipar si nu trebuia sa-mi bat capul urmarind linia pentru o alta marime.
Fig. 1 - Drafting a sleeve for the Carolyn Pajama bodice (copying the armholes)
Then I drafted the sleeve using the M&S method. I used the same sleeve cap height as in the pattern. The sleeve cap length could vary - according my drafting system - between 55% and 65% of the armhole height (23,2 cm, midpoint between the front and the back), thus between 12,76 and 15,27 cm, according to my calculations. The sleeve cap in the pattern was 14,8 cm.
Am folosit aceesi inaltime a capului manecii ca in tipar. Dupa regulile folosite si tinand seama de inaltimea rascroiturii in tipar (23,2 cm, mijlocul liniei dintre cele doua puncte pe umar), puteam sa aleg o inaltime intre 12,76 si 15,27 cm. Inaltimea capului manecii in tipar este de 14,8 cm, deci OK.
The rule is: the higher the sleeve cap, the narrower the sleeve width (from a Japanese drafting book, Fig. 2).
Regula care se aplica la tiparul de maneca este: cu cat este capul manecii mai inalt, cu atat este maneca mai stramta pe linia de la subrat (citat dintro carte japoneza, Fig. 2)
Fig. 2
Fig. 3 - A new sleeve for the Carolyn Pajama (original bodice).
The original sleeve cap is marked in green
The differences between my pattern and the original pattern:
Diferentele dintre tiparul meu si tiparul original:
Front / Fata
Pattern / Tiparul comercial:
* Armscye bodice / lungimea subratului pe corsaj 29,4 cm;
* sleeve cap length (from side seam to sleeve cap) / lungimea liniei de custura pe capul manecii, de la subrat pana la punctual de pe umar 29,8 cm
* EASE / SURPLUS 0,4 cm
My sleeve / Tiparul meu:
* Armscye bodice 29,4 cm;
* sleeve cap legth front 30 cm
* EASE 0,6 cm
Back / Spatele:
Pattern:
* Armscye bodice 29,3 cm;
* sleeve cap length (from side seam to sleeve cap) 29 cm
* EASE 0 cm to negative ease
My sleeve:
* Armscye bodice 29,3 cm;
* sleeve cap legth front 30,3 cm
* EASE 1 cm
The sleeve width / latimea manecii pe linia subratului, peste biceps:
* original sleeve pattern / tiparul original 48,5 cm
* my sleeve pattern / tiparul meu 50,5 cm
(if I want a narrower sleeve I have to rise the sleeve cap length / daca vreau o maneca mai stramta, trebuie sa aleg un cap al manecii mai inalt).
As you can see below I measured a lot!!! (Fig. 4 & 5). Especially when I placed the notches on the front or back, because the front notch is at the same distance on the sewing line as in the bodice, but the back notch should be 1/10 of the total ease further on the seam line than on the Back bodice (Fig. 4).
Dupa cum vedti in Fig. 4 & 5 am masurat din plin! Mai ales cand a trebuit sa plasez punctele de la subrat la fata si la spate.
Punctul de pe fata se copiaza exact de pe tiparul fetei / corsaj, dar punctul de la spate se plaseaza adaugand la lungimea de pe corsaj la 1/10 din surplusul total din capul manecii (Fig. 4).
Fig. 4 (sleeve back)
Fig. 5 (sleeve front)
Pay attention that I made a drafting mistake. Not a big one, but it bothers me now. When I drafted my sleeve I missed an important point in the back. The sleeve should be less flat as in my first attempt in pictures. Look below what I did wrong (Fig. 6).
Vreau sa va atrag atentia ca am desenat ceva gresit. Nu este insa o greseala mare si se poate repara usor: cand am desenat curbura manecii la spate am uitat sa trec printr-un anumit punct de pe linia ajutatoare (Fig. 6). Din cauza asta capul manecii la spate la mine in poza este mai putin curbat decat ar fi trebuit sa fie.
Fig. 6 - My drafting mistake, because I missed a point (half distance on the vertical line)
What it puzzels me about the sleeve in the original pattern is not the different form of the sleeve cap, but the ease and how it is distributed.
It is OK to make a sleeve with a (very) flat sleeve cap without ease. But if you use ease, this is how it should be distributed: 1/3 in the front - Shoulder Point / SP - 2/3 in the back. Or 1/4 in the front and 3/4 in the back.
From the back ease 1/10 of the whole ease should be before the back notches, under the arm. The rest of the back ease (2/3 minus 1/10 or 3/4 minus 1/10) should be between the back notches and the SP.
The back get always more ease than the front. After you draft a sleeve you measure the length of the armholes (back and front) on the sleeve, starting from the under arm. Between these points, around the shoulder point you have the ease.
These portion of the sleeve is important for the real shoulder point, which is located, as I already wrote, 1/3 from the front measurement.
You can see this in Fig. 3 or in Fig. 5, where I marked the ease with black (1,5 cm) and I distributed it between the front and the back to get the correct SP.
As you can see in Fig. 3 (where I have both sleeve caps) the front sleeve on the original sleeve pattern for Carolyn Pajama is clearly much wider than the back sleeve. I wonder: maybe the sleeve is correctly drafted, but the notches are wrongly placed: the front in the back and the back in the front??? What if you would put the sleeve with the back in the front and the front in the back??? If you move the arms, you need more space in the back, why in the front as in this commercial pattern?!?
As you can see in Fig. 3 (where I have both sleeve caps) the front sleeve on the original sleeve pattern for Carolyn Pajama is clearly much wider than the back sleeve. I wonder: maybe the sleeve is correctly drafted, but the notches are wrongly placed: the front in the back and the back in the front??? What if you would put the sleeve with the back in the front and the front in the back??? If you move the arms, you need more space in the back, why in the front as in this commercial pattern?!?
Ce ma intriga pe mine in acest tipar nu este atat diferenta dintre forma capului manecii din tipar cu tiparul meu, ci felul in care este distribuit surplusul de material din capul manecii intre jumatatea din fata a manecii si cea din spate.
Este OK sa ai o maneca cu un cap foarte jos si sa nu ai nici un surplus (ease). Dar daca alegi sa folosesti un surplus in tiparul de maneca, trebuie sa il distribui intr-un anumit fel dupa metoda de facut tipare germana: 1/3 in fata inaintea punctului de pe umar si 2/3 in spate, in spatele punctului de pe umar. Sau 1/4 si 2/4.
1/10 din surplusul total se pune la spate, intre punctul de subrat si punctul care marcheaza subratul pe capul manecii. Din nefericre tiparele europene / Burda nu dau acest punt, asa cum fac tiparele americane, ceea ce este foarte practic.
Ca sa stii cat surplus ai, masori pe linia de cusatura a capului manecii, pornind de la subrat, lungimea rascroiturii manecii din tiparul corsajului de la fata sau de la spate. Diferenta dintre punctul obtinut in acest fel pe partea din fata si pe cea din spate a manecii iti arata cat surplus total este in capul manecii.
Vedeti in Fig. 3 sau 5 cum am masurat, ca sa obtin 1,5 cm surplus (ease).
Determinarea surplusului pe linia de cusut a manecii este foarte importanta pentru ca se foloseste la plasarea punctului de pe umar (cel mai inalt punct din maneca): impartiti suplusul in 3 si marcati punctul de pe umar la 1/3 spre fata.
Dat fiind ca maneca la Carolyn Pajama este in mod evident mult mai large in fata decat in spate (Fig. 3) ma intreb daca nu este o greseala pe tipar: adica acolo unde este marcata fata, ar fi trebuit sa fie spatele si invers.
Miscati bratele spre fata si veti intelge de ce ai nevoie de mai mult material in spate, decat in fata.
Ce ar fi daca la pusul manecii, ai orienta maneca altfel, decat se cere in tipar si ai pune fata in spate???
Dat fiind ca maneca la Carolyn Pajama este in mod evident mult mai large in fata decat in spate (Fig. 3) ma intreb daca nu este o greseala pe tipar: adica acolo unde este marcata fata, ar fi trebuit sa fie spatele si invers.
Miscati bratele spre fata si veti intelge de ce ai nevoie de mai mult material in spate, decat in fata.
Ce ar fi daca la pusul manecii, ai orienta maneca altfel, decat se cere in tipar si ai pune fata in spate???
These aspects are very important for the the fitting of the sleeve, because a wrong position of the shoulder point on the sleeve will make the sleeve twist. I suppose you know that, too. It is one of the main difficulties for home sewers: where is the correct shoulder point after we altered the bodice and the armhole? For example for a forward shoulder.
Aveti nevoie de punctul de pe umar corect, pentru ca altfel maneca nu va pica bine si se va suci. De fapt asta este una din problemele de baza pe care le intalnim cand coasem haine fara scoala de croitorie. De aceasta problema ne lovim mai ales cand modificam rascroitura bratului pe tiparul corsajului si trebuie sa modificam in mod obligatoriu si maneca. Sau cand trebuie sa mutam capul umarului spre fata.
As I said, I was not very much interested in the form of the sleeve cap. I know that different drafting methods lead to very different forms of the sleeve cap. Please compare the following examples of different sleeve caps for shirts with low sleeve caps.
Pentru ce nu m-a interesat prea mult forma capului manecii? Pentru ca stiu ca in alte metode de facut tipare se obtin maneci care arata mai mult ca tiparul de la Carolyn Pajama, decat tiparul de maneca pe care il obtin cu M&S.
Comparati va rog manecile de camasa in exemplele de mai jos.
Fig. 7 Japanese pattern drafting / metoda japoneza
Fig. 8 Anglo-American style?
(Ann Hagar, "Pattern Cutting for Lingerie, Beachwear and Leisurewear")
NB. I should have chosen the illustration on page 16, instead of page 117
Metoda anglo-americana din cartea lui Ann Hagar
Fig. 9 German school of paterndrafting / metoda germana M&S
As you can see, in German (Burda) and Japanese patterns the back of the sleeve cap is always bigger than the front of the sleeve cap. Even in sleeves with a low sleeve cap.
I believe that this will affect the way the sleeve fits. This is what I would like to research, if I was a professional seamstress or if I had more time than now.
I would like to know what a professional think about it. Vera???
Dupa cum vedeti, in scoala germana sau japoneza partea din spate a manecii este mult mai lata decat partea din spate. Chiar si in manecile cu cap jos.
Eu cred ca acest lucru influenteaza felul in care pica maneca si as fi foarte curioasa sa stiu ce zice cineva cu scoala de croitorie despre asta. Vera, tu ce parere ai?
For these reasons I personally draft my own sleeve after I adjusted the bodice (even for commercial patterns) and I changed the armhole in a pattern. After more experiments I shall explain here how I do that, because it is easier to start from scratch than to modify a commercial pattern.
Din aceste motive eu imi fac singura tiparul de maneca, daca modific intr-un fel sau altul tiparul de corsaj si schimb ceva la rascroitura manecii. Chiar daca folosesc tipare comerciale. Dupa ce voi experimenta mai mult o sa scriu aici cum fac, pentru ca este mai usor sa incepi un tipar nou, decat sa te chinuiesti sa modifici maneca din tiparul comercial.
For Carolyn pyjama I drafted my own block for the bodice with 15-18 cm ease and added the details in the commercial pattern to my block. I drafted with M&S's method, of course.
I shall show you how I did that another time. The muslin is now much better, but I do not regret a bit that I bought the pattern, which I recommend to all of you. Especially if you are slender and have a B-cup. Besides, as I already wrote her sewing instructions are SUPERB (how could I express myself in a different way?). The instructions - a first class sewing lesson!!! - justify why you should buy the pattern.
Dupa prima proba, de care nu am fost multumita, am facut un tipar de baza pentru o bluza cu un surplus peste piept de 15-18 cm, care in engleza se numeste ' block'. Tiparul este facut in intregime - corsaj si maneca - cu metoda M&S.
La acest tipar de baza am adaugat detaliile de pe tiparul de pijama de la Closet Case Files. O sa va arat alta data cum am facut, pentru ca este foarte practic sa ai o baza cu care sa compari tiparele comerciale sau pe care s-o adaptezi la tiparul comercial.
Dar nu regret de fel ca am cumparat tiparul pentru Carolyn Pajama. Ba chiar vi-l recomand din inima, mai ales daca sunteti subtirele si aveti cupa B la sutien.
In plus, asa cum am mai scris si nu voi inceta sa repet, instructiunile sunt EXCEPTIONAL DE BUNE. Cred ca am sa fac tutorial, daca reusesc o pijama exact cum vreau si nu altfel. Macar numai pentru instructiuni - un adevarat curs de croitorie pentru incepatoare!!! - si tot merita sa dai bani pe acest tipar. Fiind tipar care se descarca puteti sa il cumparati impreuna cu o prietena, ca sa economisiti.
Something interesting about the sleeve I drafted for my block, compared with the sleeve pattern in Carolyn Pajama 's pattern.
By chance my sleeve pattern had the same sleeve width, but look how different the back and the front of the sleeve cap are and how the sleeve width is distributed. My front width on the bicep line is much narrower than in her commercial pattern (Fig. 10).
Ceva interesant despre tiparul meu de baza si tiparul manecii pe care l-am obtinut, comparat cu tiparul manecii din Carolyn Pajama. Din intamplare am pbtinut aceeasi largine a manecii si aceeasi inaltime a capului manecii. Atunci m-am gandit sa compar maneca mea cu maneca din tiparul comercial.
Uitati-va ce mare diferenta este intre felul in care ea imparte latimea manecii sub brat intre spate si fata. Latimea jumatatii din fata la mine este mult mai mica decat la ea, iar pentru spate am mai mult spatiu la maneca.
Fig. 10.
Compare the placement of the shoulder point on my pattern (black arrow, top of the sleeve) with her mark of the shoulder point (pink arrow).
NB. The sleeve from Carolyn Pajama is a sleeve for a different pattern, the form of the front and back of the sleeve cap cannot be compared. I am talking here only about the width for the front sleeve cap compared with the width for the back sleeve cap. I am also talking about the difference between the European / German / Japanese drafting school versus the American or Anglo-American drafting school (Fig. 7-9). At least this is how I look at it.
Comparati unde este punctul de pe umar la mine (sageata neagra) si unde este la ea (sageata roz).
NB. Trebuie sa tineti seama ca maneca mea este facuta pentru un corsaj care nu este identic cu al ei. Deci nu pot face o comparatie prea detaliata intre cele doua maneci.
Vreau numai sa va arat cum difera distributia latimii manecii intre spate si fata in functie de metoda de facut tipare folosita. Ilustrez de fapt diferenta dintre scoala germana/ europeana / japoneza si scoala, asa cum reiese din Fig. 7-9.
The shoulder point / the highest point in the sleeve is not on the vertical line which divides the sleeve in two parts. In Fig. 11 you can see that the shoulder point depends of the ease in the sleeve (1/3 in the front and 2/3 in the back). The vertical line from the half point on the bicep line is used only to draft the under sleeve and as grain line. At least this is how I learned to draft a sleeve.
I think also that a sleeve with the shoulder point dividing the sleeve in two equal parts will not fit well.
If you think I am wrong, feel free to explain why. I would like to know that.
Punctul umarului, cel mai sus punct pe maneca, nu se afla pe linia care imparte maneca exact in doua jumatati. In Fig. 11 vedeti cum se determina punctul umarului in functie de surplus si de distribuirea surplusului intre fata si spate.
Linia verticala care porneste de la jumatatea latimii manecii la subrat se foloseste numai ca sa poti desena tiparul manecii sub brat si ca linie a firului drept, pentru pozitionarea corecta a tiparului pe material. Cel putin asa am invata eu si mi se pare logic.
Eu credo ca o maneca in care punctul de pe umar imparte maneca in doua jumatati egale nu va pica bine.
Daca credeti cumva ca gresesc, va rog sa imi explicati de ce. Sunt foarte curioasa ce parere aveti.
Fig. 11
After I fit the muslin, I shall come back to this interesting subject and explain how I use this knowledge to adjust a pattern. You will hear more about Carolyn Pajama.
Dupa ce voi proba si aceasta bluza de pijama ('muslin') o sa redeschid acest subiect foarte interesant. O sa va explic si cum modific tiparul. Veti mai auzi despre tiaprul de Carolyn Pajama, puteti sa fiti sigure de asta..
About the blogs I follow. One special blog: The Dressmaker Diaries
Recently I came to the conclusion that I must reorganise my blog list. The more I read blogs, the more I think that some old blogs (subscription) are not interesting anymore and should disappear from my list. In the beginning I liked to see what people were making, but now I pay more attention to technical information and the way the clothes fit. If the fit is poor, I loose interest in the maker. I hope you will not dislike me for this confession.
I love interesting, inspiring blogs. If I find such a blog, I start reading from the very beginning. If the blogger does not have a button for the archives, I write her or him and ask for such a button. Sometimes the postings become better and better, sometimes they are very interesting from the very beginning, like in this one: http://www.thedressmakerdiaries.com by Natalie Walker in the UK.
She wrote a (Kindle)book which I intend to buy.
Why? Because the blog (and the e-book, I think) tells the story of a woman who, after a BA in English at Southampton University, choose for a professional career in the fashion industry and the difficult path she had to follow to achieve her goals.
Despre blogurile pe care le urmaresc si despre un blog deosebit: The Dressmaker Diaries
De curand am ajuns la concluzia ca trebuie sa imi reorganizez lista de bloguri. Citind din ce in ce mai multe bloguri, inteleg din ce in ce mai clar ca unele bloguri nu ma mai intereseaza si ar trebui sa le scot de pe lista.
La inceput imi placea sa vad ce cos, quiltuiesc sau tricoteaza alte persone, dar acum ma intereseaza mai mult aspectele tehnice sau lucrurile mai deosebite si cum pica hainele cusute. Daca atarna urat, am pierdut orice interes pentru blogul respectiv. Sper sa nu ma detestati pentru aceasta confesiune.
O alta concluzie este ca imi plac blogurile care te inspira. Daca gasesc un altfel de blog, incep sa citesc de la inceput, de la prima postare de pe blog.Ba chiar ma enerveaza sa pot accesa arhiva pe blog si rog pe proprietarul blogului sa adauge un astfel de 'buton' pe blog.
Pe unele bloguri vad ca postarile devin din ce in ce mai bune, cu cat experienta celui care scrie creste.
Pe alte bloguri postarile sunt interesante sau chiar palpitante de la bun inceput.
Un astfel de blog este The Dressmaker Diaries (vezi mai sus pentru link), unde scrie Natalie Walker din Anglia, care a scris si o carte (E-book, Kindle) pe care am de gand sa o cumpar.
De ce? Pentru ca blogul (si cred ca si cartea) contine povestea unei doamne, care dupa ce a luat un titlu de bachelor in engleza la o univesitate din Anglia, a facut o alegere deosebita: a renuntat la litere si a hotarat ca vrea sa profeseze ca croitoreasa. Descrie cu ce a avut de luptat ca sa isi realizeze visul, singura activitate care o face fericita.
From the posting 'My Studio', January 2011:
>> It was glorious summer and I had had it with English Literature for good and all. I'd spent the final year of my degree finding excuses to avoid the subject. I'd swapped in Film Studies units, and History of Art and Design courses. I'd taken German and Dutch language lessons to make up for missed credits in Poetry and Critical Theory. I's even tricked my tutors into letting me write my dissertation on the Cubist art movement. Now it was all over, and the golden rush of freedom buoyed me up on a breathless sea of possibilities. Ahead stretched the summer and the rest of my life like an endless pristinely white portion of blank canvas, I was bloody well going to fill it up.
Firstly, I knew that above all else I wanted to design and make clothes for a living. I knew this because the only activity that had given me any satisfaction during the last three years had been making costumes for the university theatre group. I loved doing that, and I was now quite certain that sewing together fabric and creating amazing things to wear was absolutely all I wanted to do from now on. Secondly, I saw with clarity that the best and simplest way to ensure that this was so, was to become a professional dressmaker. Immediately if possible<<
It reads like novel, because Natalie can write! Very impressive how she and her friend made a lot of sacrifices to follow a dream, working with a Polish seamstress... You have to read in her blog, not here. Very inspiring and very helpful if your optimism needs a boost of power.
Am citit postarile ei ca pe un roman cu o adevarat eroina. Si - ce este al ei - scrie bine !!! Cate sacrificii a facut si ea si prietenul ei ca sa ajunga unde a ajuns. Restrictii materiale, realizarea ca sunt saraci, salariata poloneza de la care Natalie spera sa invete mult, etc. Nu va voi dezvaluit aici toate detaliile romanului, daca puteti citi singure pe blogul ei. Te inspira si iti ridica moralul, mai ales daca in clipa de fata nivelul entuziasmului si capacitatea de a invinge perioade mai putin bune ale voastre nu sunt foarte ridicate.
I must say that I recognize her feelings, because I had a similar start in my life and a change of direction. Just like her I said goodbye to Artistotle, Chekhov and the drama theory and jumped into law studies and sewing. The only difference is that if I had to make a choice I would take the law and only after that the noble art of sewing. Therefore I am condemned to be the eternal amateur and hobby sewer. Her blog made me dream about ... ' if....'. Just a dream.
Trebuie sa recunosc ca imi place acest blog si pentru ca am mult in comun cu Natalie. Si eu am pornit de la litere, Poetica lui Aristotel, teoria dramei si Cehov, carora prin 1992 le-am spus fara nici umbra de regret ' adio' si am trecut la drept si la nobila arta a cusutului. Au ramas numai un hobby, intre altele. Singura diferenta dintre mine si Natalie este ca eu nu as alege cusutul in acelasi fel ca ea si stiu, de aceea, ca voi ramane un etern amator. Dar blogul ei ma face sa visez ce ar fi fost daca... De visat e voie, sau nu?
The next blog I want to tell about will be about Becky (Pomona - such a wonderful meaningful name), her blog and my grandmother, who left me a lot of recipes how to dye with plants. Something I want to share with Becky. Keep reading!
Urmatorul blog va fi despre Becky (Pomona), blogul ei si bunica mea dinspre mama, care avea un caiet plin de retete pentru vopsitul cu plante. Titlul caietului era 'Boiangeria populara', sau cum scria ea pe la 1900-si-ceva: 'Boeageria populara'. Pe curand.
