Author Topic: A Close-Fitting Sloper  (Read 85890 times)

peterle

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 347
  • Experienced Professional
Re: A Close-Fitting Sloper
« Reply #45 on: April 06, 2016, 01:52:54 AM »
Some terminology:

I think you mean there is a lot more WIDTH at the hem? Everything measured horizontally is called width, everything measured vertical is called length.

This width is needed at the waisline to accomodate the belly that protrudes the chest in profil. Most probably it will create a wavy hemline, but this will be dealt with later. At the moment we are looking for a straight center front.

Balance is a terminus technicus that means the length/ distance between the neck hole and the chestline. There is a front balance and a back balance. A garment is"balanced" when the chestline runs horizontally all around the body because the back balance and the front balance have the right length for the individual body.

jruley

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 536
  • Human Being
Re: A Close-Fitting Sloper
« Reply #46 on: April 06, 2016, 03:03:01 AM »
Some terminology:

I think you mean there is a lot more WIDTH at the hem? Everything measured horizontally is called width, everything measured vertical is called length.

This width is needed at the waisline to accomodate the belly that protrudes the chest in profil. Most probably it will create a wavy hemline, but this will be dealt with later. At the moment we are looking for a straight center front.


Yes, exactly.  The hemline has gotten longer (as you would measure with a tape); so we call it wider because it's horizontal.  I'll try to remember that in future.

Question:  So what do we call an increase in a diagonal length?

Quote
Balance is a terminus technicus that means the length/ distance between the neck hole and the chestline. There is a front balance and a back balance. A garment is"balanced" when the chestline runs horizontally all around the body because the back balance and the front balance have the right length for the individual body.



So, by this definition balance is only measured on the CF and CB lines.  And you can change balance either with wedge adjustments or by moving the whole back up or down at the side seams.  Obviously these will have different effects and you need to consider where the extra length is needed.  Have I got it right?

peterle

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 347
  • Experienced Professional
Re: A Close-Fitting Sloper
« Reply #47 on: April 06, 2016, 04:03:05 AM »



Question:  So what do we call an increase in a diagonal length?





So, by this definition balance is only measured on the CF and CB lines.  And you can change balance either with wedge adjustments or by moving the whole back up or down at the side seams.  Obviously these will have different effects and you need to consider where the extra length is needed.  Have I got it right?

Well not exactly. Balance is measured vertically from the neckpoint( inner end of the shoulder seam) to the chestline, best over the peek of the shoulderblades/chest muscle). This is the minimum length the back balance must have.  This measurement is not easy to take and not easy to apply to the pattern piece. Thatīs why it isnīt used that much.


Yes, you have to consider where extra length is needed. (But always think how you would manipulate the paper pattern. Then you can consider how to transfer it to a yet cut fabric piece. Sliding the back up is just an emergency technique in a yet cut fabric piece that simulates a strip inserted across to lengthen the back balance).

jruley

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 536
  • Human Being
Re: A Close-Fitting Sloper
« Reply #48 on: April 06, 2016, 05:44:58 AM »
Changes were made as discussed.  Here is the new body pattern:



And here is the result:













I may be jumping the gun, but I have a feeling the next correction is to crooken the side and back seams, as in this draft (from the C&T forum):


« Last Edit: April 06, 2016, 08:00:47 AM by jruley »

peterle

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 347
  • Experienced Professional
Re: A Close-Fitting Sloper
« Reply #49 on: April 06, 2016, 08:49:56 PM »
The folds starting at the belly dissappeared. Thatīs good.

I see yet an imbalanced garment: the chestline is straight (good, no more wedges needed) but it is slanted to the back. Seems to be about 1"(2,5cm).
To correct this, you have to lengthen the front balance and/or shorten the back balance. I would try it with shortening the back balance for 1cm and lengthening the front balance for 1,5cm. both evenly across the pieces.

Did you decrease the back width in the new pattern? It seems the back is as wide as before.

The neckhole is a bit tight now. Maybe thatīs just the SAīs.

Today: defenitely a dropped shoulder...

jruley

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 536
  • Human Being
Re: A Close-Fitting Sloper
« Reply #50 on: April 06, 2016, 10:40:50 PM »
The folds starting at the belly dissappeared. Thatīs good.

I see yet an imbalanced garment: the chestline is straight (good, no more wedges needed) but it is slanted to the back. Seems to be about 1"(2,5cm).
To correct this, you have to lengthen the front balance and/or shorten the back balance. I would try it with shortening the back balance for 1cm and lengthening the front balance for 1,5cm. both evenly across the pieces.


So, I could test this by removing the sleeves, and passing the front up on the side seams by 1".  Correct?

Quote
Did you decrease the back width in the new pattern? It seems the back is as wide as before.


Yes.  I moved the armhole back 1/4".  So the back is 1/2" narrower (on full width) and the chest 1/2" wider.  I didn't want to go too far, but maybe I didn't go far enough...


jruley

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 536
  • Human Being
Re: A Close-Fitting Sloper
« Reply #51 on: April 06, 2016, 11:44:13 PM »
Terri sent me a suggestion for balance measurement:

Quote
In order to analyse any figure it is important to have good measurements, including a balance measurement. I use a basic nape to cf waist. A twill tape or one inch wide elastic is in place at the waist level-navel height for this.
When drafting, i measure the back neck then apply that at one inch below the front waist construction line and measure up to the front neck point. Change the position of the neck point based on the measurement. That could be simply raising the neck point and shoulder point above the line, or in your case that plus opening the wedge, so a lot depends on the figure you are drafting for.

I applied this to the latest draft, and it looks like the front neck point is about an inch too low.  Which seems to agree with peterle's observation.

EDIT:  Actually I misinterpreted the instructions, and was comparing the back length to the front length.  I think I understand now what Terri is getting at, so will have to try it again.



« Last Edit: April 07, 2016, 06:38:59 AM by jruley »

Schneiderfrei

  • Research
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 687
  • Resembles Human Being
Re: A Close-Fitting Sloper
« Reply #52 on: April 06, 2016, 11:57:20 PM »
It is possible to measure the balance prior to drafting and incorporating prior to making the toile.

jruley

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 536
  • Human Being
Re: A Close-Fitting Sloper
« Reply #53 on: April 07, 2016, 02:09:48 AM »
(no content)
« Last Edit: April 07, 2016, 06:39:53 AM by jruley »

peterle

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 347
  • Experienced Professional
Re: A Close-Fitting Sloper
« Reply #54 on: April 07, 2016, 02:23:21 AM »
 Passing up the front  will just give an impression because the back balance would stay the same. I think the back balance could be a tad shorter because  now the back hem  swings forward a bit instead of hanging vertical in the profil pic.

Please mark the new chest  and waist line.

Did you construct your new neckpoint with Terrys method? Or did you just check the  paper pattern neckpoint with Terryīs method and it seems to be too low?

I wonder why Terry applies the balance measurement shortend by 1"? Has it something to do with the construction of the waistline?

By the way: Your posture with the shifted hip will most probably give you two different balance measurements depending on wich side of the neck you pass the measuring tape. Maybe you should measure it by beginning at cf elastic, pass the tape around the neck and end at the starting point. The half is the seeked measurement.



TTailor

  • Venerable Member
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 250
  • There is no formula!
    • A Tailor Made It
Re: A Close-Fitting Sloper
« Reply #55 on: April 07, 2016, 02:50:02 AM »
The horizontal construction waistline of a draft will never look level on a person. A visually level line on the body is actually lower on the front.

jruley

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 536
  • Human Being
Re: A Close-Fitting Sloper
« Reply #56 on: April 07, 2016, 03:37:25 AM »
Passing up the front  will just give an impression because the back balance would stay the same. I think the back balance could be a tad shorter because  now the back hem  swings forward a bit instead of hanging vertical in the profil pic.

OK, I will make the changes properly (sewing out/inserting strips) so it's not just an "impression".

Quote
Please mark the new chest  and waist line.


If I use strips, it will not change.

Quote
Did you construct your new neckpoint with Terrys method? Or did you just check the  paper pattern neckpoint with Terryīs method and it seems to be too low?


What I did was measure the adjusted length of the back shoulder seam, once the back width and neckhole changes were made.  I transferred this length to the seam line of the front shoulder, and added the seam allowance for the collar.  I then followed the existing curve.  In effect this added 1/2" seam allowance all around the existing front curve.

As far as the balance measure goes, what I actually did was apply the CB length from back neck to waist line to the CF line, starting 1" below the drafted waist and going up to front of neck (which is not the neck point).  I completely misinterpreted Terri's instructions so this was no value.


« Last Edit: April 07, 2016, 06:44:32 AM by jruley »

peterle

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 347
  • Experienced Professional
Re: A Close-Fitting Sloper
« Reply #57 on: April 07, 2016, 04:19:48 AM »
The horizontal construction waistline of a draft will never look level on a person. A visually level line on the body is actually lower on the front.


Thanks for the explanation. So the twill tape/elastic sits a bit lower than the drafted waistline.

jruley

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 536
  • Human Being
Re: A Close-Fitting Sloper
« Reply #58 on: April 07, 2016, 06:33:21 AM »
The horizontal construction waistline of a draft will never look level on a person. A visually level line on the body is actually lower on the front.


This got me thinking.  The side seam on the sloper is not vertical.  Part of that is balance, yes.  But does part of that come from my posture?

So, once again - do I need to crooken the side and back seams as shown in the corpulent draft?

Put another way:  What is the reason for cutting the side seams crooked in the corpulent draft?


jruley

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 536
  • Human Being
Re: A Close-Fitting Sloper
« Reply #59 on: April 07, 2016, 08:30:47 AM »
I attempted to take Terri's balance measure and apply it to the new draft as a check.

First, my wife arranged a piece of elastic around my waist.  This was placed just under the waist line marked on the toile, and adjusted until it was as horizontal as possible:




Next, my wife measured from the CB at neck seam down to the top of the elastic strip at CF.  I am holding the tape in the approximate position (no, I didn't measure myself, and this photo was taken after the measures had been recorded).  The measure was 23 inches (to the nearest 1/8") on both sides.



Now I applied the measure to the draft.  First, the back neck at the seam measures 2-3/4":



Here is the tape in position on the front, with the 2-3/4" measure placed 1" below waist line on CF:



And here is a closeup of the shoulder, showing the length to neck point (1/2" inside the seams) as about 23-1/4".



Provided the setup was correct and the measures accurate (big "IFs"), insufficient front length should not be the problem.

So, did I do it wrong?  Or are these small differences just very hard to measure?