Shirt *Construction* techniques

[Hendrick]

Fuse destroys the purpose of the weave. Weave in cloth has purpose and you can take advantage of it. Find the best bias if that helps.

I thought about that, and what I imagined doing was only fusing it in certain parts so it would stick enough to simplify assembly, basting it in effect, while still allowing me to stretch/ease as needed to get the curved collar shape I ultimately want. It's an experiment, so maybe it won't work. I only bought a small amount to try this with, we'll see.

Iron the parts together with some spray starch... I will give hold enough for assembling and will go as you manipulate the piece...

Cheers, Hendrick

[Gerry]

I have picked apart some old dress shrts in the past. The nicer numbers had a coarse but fluffy floating interlining, so anything but glazed!

I've also found that in American shirts. The collars and cuffs tended to be softer than those in the UK, which could be very rigid.

Nowadays in this country, school uniforms can be purchased from supermarkets or any number of outlets. When I was a kid, however, specialist suppliers had a monopoly on their sale. The collars of the shirts they sold were traditionally made and can only have had canvas in them; the sort that is glazed, because the shirting slid over the interfacing with no resistance whatsoever. Needless to say I was clueless about the correct way to iron them (I ironed all the family's shirts on Sundays to give my mother a break) so all the corners were wrinkled. The interfacing felt like stiff cardboard. Horrible stuff that made the skin of the neck sore. Nevertheless, that's what I associate with dress shirts (they're 'character building')! 

I have a vintage dress-shirt from the early-to-mid 60s: a round, tab-collar example, the sort worn by the Rolling Stones in the very early days. It has a really stiff collar (and I mean stiff!). No way am I taking it apart because it's NOS [EDIT: New Old Stock - it's not an obvious acronym apparently] and too nice to destroy. The interfacing is thick- probably buckram - despite the shirting being on the fine side, but there's no give to the cloth. It feels at one with the collar. Unlikely to have been fused, because that wasn't the norm then, but I'm wondering if some sort of glue wasn't used. Or simply that it was heavily starched and the starch adhered the cloth to the interfacing. The base of the collar has a curved 'lip' to it, so they must have had a press to shape and compress the whole collar. If anyone knows how to do this without a mould/press, I'm all ears. [EDIT: This is a photo taken by the seller that I saved (not a great quality pic):

[Gerry]

A lot of 1920s repro shirts with round collars also have the same shaping:

revivalvintage.co.uk/products/byram-round-collar-shirt-flax-stripe

https://www.etsy.com/uk/listing/1339045848/mens-edwardian-high-penny-collar-and-tab

https://vintagedancer.com/roaring-1920s-mens-shirts/

Some sort of press is being used?

[Gerry]

Well I never!

[jruley]

The base of the collar has a curved 'lip' to it, so they must have had a press to shape and compress the whole collar.
If anyone knows how to do this without a mould/press, I'm all ears.

This is just a guess, but could you turn the collar up, then press from the back side over a ham?

[Gerry]

The base of the collar has a curved 'lip' to it, so they must have had a press to shape and compress the whole collar.
If anyone knows how to do this without a mould/press, I'm all ears.

This is just a guess, but could you turn the collar up, then press from the back side over a ham?

It's a thought Jim, but I think even a ham will be too flat. The lip is right at the edge of the collar and it's quite pronounced.

I'm pretty sure that large shirt-manufacturers have specialist presses to do this, but that video I posted pretty much shows how to do it with a domestic iron. I always wondered what the slot at the front was for.