Draft for a Slim Jacket - Rundschau 1960's

[Schneiderfrei]

Thank you peterle.

[TTailor]

Why is it that those old drafts are so better explained than all the new stuff??
lg
posaune

I think because people cared about the craft in a different way. It was taken and treated seriously as something that was worthy of in depth analysis.

[spookietoo]

Teri - I agree with you, but I also suspect that the people writing the articles and the majority of people reading the articles simply don't need to fuss with the extra "remedial" explanations.

Students learning now have instructors to explain things - and who possibly want things done a certain way. The only ones really lost are us old farts trying to learn on our own. Can't imagine we comprise a market large enough to be financially viable.

So we have the wonderful group at movsd.  Thank you!

[Hendrick]

Admitted, I prefer the "dryness" of older books and methods by far. This week I was comparing different drafts of bodices and their construction over different sizes. But, for a construction like that, to run over four pages and with all sorts of coloured codes, sidenotes etcetera is, frankly, tiresome. The scarceness of colour and the pointe of the texts are wonderful...

[posaune]

And to add more accid the abbreviations drive me crazy!
In my beloved special book done in ultra! cool! design! (you can't nearly read the orange text part) there are at least 50 of them, which you need to understand!
lg
posaune
https://www.muellerundsohn.com/shop/dob-anleitungen-zur-grundschnittentwicklung/  140 Euro for this crap!

[Schneiderfrei]

Posaune, As I look at the title page, I see that they saved ink even on the title!

[Hendrick]

Well, that's just "intellectual m*sturbation" shall we say?

[Der Zuschneider]

The scans are from "Der Zuschnitt für die Herrenschneiderei, System M.Mueller&Sohn, Muenchen" XVII edition. 1965

I was wondering, how this can be in the 60thies... when it was in the book from 1965. I have this book and it is a very interesting draft, or the most important draft of the book, like a milestone. This draft was then slightly improved and developed in the Rundschau magazines until the 70thies.

[Greger]

Hey, hey, hey! I like graphic arts. When done properly people can grasp information quickly.  Some people are more visual than wordy. But, if the context is not good it doesn't matter what kind of graphics that is used.

[peterle]

I was wondering, how this can be in the 60thies... when it was in the book from 1965. I have this book and it is a very interesting draft, or the most important draft of the book, like a milestone. This draft was then slightly improved and developed in the Rundschau magazines until the 70thies.

The Zuschnitt books itself don´t carry the year of it´s edition, but the XVII edition was announced the first time in the "oesterreichischen Schneiderzeitung"of 1965.

[posaune]

...... When done properly ........
That's the problem Gregor!!!!!

My father was a typographer. I grew up with letters and pamphlets. But the artistic work has always been coordinated with the purpose of the publication - book - catalog. Otherwise it would have been as useless as in this book. (Maybe nice to look at)  Especially here when it comes to a textbook. A textbook must be easy to understand, the most important thing here is the readable content and not the external form! A white line drawing (1 point thick) on an orange background is not recognizable (3 cm high). The format (DIN A 3) is not practical for learning. It maybe an object of art - then hang it on the wall -  but you cant learn from it.
And the price is above all discussions (139 Euro  - 30 patterns. And very, very poor explainations).

When I complained to the publisher, they replied that there was an insert with all the abbreviations in the second edition, which you can take out and which helps you through the draft. (There was never a second edition) When I protested again they sent me the insert.
Sorry that I react so agressive - but I paid the price.
lg
posaune
Back to theme
I have only the 16. th edition and it is juwel.  I do not even try to compare those 2 books.

[Hendrick]

Have to admit; I love graphic design too. But I do believe that using every possible gimmick that computers allow doesn't necessarely make design better. And of course it can be colourful, but please at the right place and time. Like Posaune said, layout is an art and the last thing a technical description needs is frivolousness in my opninion. The idea is to get as much information as effeciently as possible in as little time as possible for me...

[Greger]

Agree, posaune and Hendrick. What has education become?

[Der Zuschneider]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/sronylxd1vth62m/Remake%20-%201964%20-%20Rundschau%20Lounge%20System%20-%20Unfinished.pdf?dl=0

Someone check, if this is the same?

[Schneiderfrei]

What a good question DZ.

It's not identical, but it is very similar.

Firstly, it appears to be from a larger article from a book, whereas the draft in this post seems to be more of a magazine type of article.

The waist suppresion is not exactly the same: 

In this article the distance between T3 and t3 and T2 t2 is 1 3/4 cm, in the one you have found is 1 1/2 cm.

Ta to b is 2.5 cm in this article in yours 3.5 cm

There are other differences, the cut away under the lowest button hole is closer on ours than yours.

That is a great looking translation, DZ, where did you find that?