A Torso Line shirt

[Greger]

"the grain should be vertical. A slight bias of the fabric will distort the hang of the shirt and would eventually twist."

Righty O.

[jruley]

Is this an oriental style shirt?

I don't know where the style originated.  The pattern book I am using has it, and lepus also posted it on the C&T forum at the link I included in the first post.

I prefer the separately cut panels to darts, since I think it will be easier to get a clean looking finish.

This is primarily a fitting exercise, but if it works out well I will make it up as a solid color dress shirt.  I prefer a more relaxed fit for casual wear.

[Henry Hall]

The draft can't place your waistline in a different place than where it is, it relies on the measurements you take.You control the draft, not the other way around!
I'm not trying to get into a quarrel with you, I'm saying that I don't think the red line is your waistline (the one necessary for dealing with the shape of the garment), and which you agreed was above the indicated red line. If this is so then the red line is surplus to requirement and should be dispensed with. You need to mark out the actual waistline or the toile will fail. It's that black and white.

[jruley]

You need to mark out the actual waistline or the toile will fail. It's that black and white.

But I thought it was red!  (j/k)

Seriously, as I said in post #7, the red line is the "proportionate" waistline for my height.  It's not my actual waist level.

I understand what you are saying, but these lines are only references.  The really important thing is to put the deepest point of the dart at the place it needs to be.  I can put it above the line if I choose, and in fact the pattern book instructs me to.  Whether this is trade standard or "best" practice is another debate.

[Henry Hall]

Well it completely baffles me why the waistline would be placed in one place then advice given to have most suppression at a point not on the natural waist (though I'm sure someone has a convoluted explanation - including pseudo geometry - as to why).
'Proportionate' is standardised, you should be marking 'your' waistline, which is achieved in a jiffy with the tape. If there are going to be this many steps and revisions it's perhaps best to work with 'bespoke' measurements rather than those of Joe Bloggs, est-ce pas?

From what I've seen of this 'sloper' drafting method, it seems like a lot of constant bother and juggling and jumping through hoops. There are loads of methods for drafting a shirt and applying a fairly limited number of fitting solutions to pare down the process and simplify it.

[Greger]

Probably one reason why the author of the book says higher waistline is rotation of the upper body. The lower it is the more drag on the hips, strain wise.

[jruley]

'Proportionate' is standardised, you should be marking 'your' waistline, which is achieved in a jiffy with the tape. If there are going to be this many steps and revisions it's perhaps best to work with 'bespoke' measurements rather than those of Joe Bloggs, est-ce pas?

It does seem strange that the authors have the student compile a table of personal measurements, then specify proportionate ones for the sloper draft.  I don't have the accompanying teacher's guide; maybe this is to help the student find out how he compares to standard sizes.

From what I've seen of this 'sloper' drafting method, it seems like a lot of constant bother and juggling and jumping through hoops.

Actually the sloper draft was extremely simple.  What has required all the bother, juggling and hoop acrobatics was the fitting process, which went well beyond anything addressed in the book.

There are loads of methods for drafting a shirt and applying a fairly limited number of fitting solutions to pare down the process and simplify it.

So, how many of those address a dropped shoulder combined with spinal scoliosis?

It's beyond the scope of this thread, but if you (or anyone else) would like to suggest a different shirt block pattern as a starting point, I'd be happy to give it a try.

I will be happy to have any needed measurements taken, but in the spirit of the exercise only your textbook fitting solutions could be applied  - no a priori
knowledge from the previous sloper thread would be assumed.

Since I'm hardly a textbook case, I have a feeling a similar level of effort would be needed to regain the point currently arrived at.

[jruley]

Before this goes further off topic, I would like to respectfully point out that the old sloper thread is still open.  If someone wants to criticize the original draft or process, please do so there. 

To avoid confusing current and future readers, I would like this new thread to be about turning the current draft into a finished shirt.

Although there have been disagreements, and sparks have flown at times, I sincerely appreciate everyone's input and the benefit of your experience.

Thank you.

[Henry Hall]

That may be true. Though I think fitting for a dropped shoulder, which is a very common fitting procedure, would take you a long way. The other regular fittings for shoulder slope, prominent hip etc, will refine it. It seems to me that there has been too many quick revisions, though on the other hand it's also worthwhile seeing the changes occur piecemeal for the purposes of study.

Your scoliosis is quite mild.

Edit - In order not to derail the thread further, I'll leave this matter alone.

[Schneiderfrei]

I think you did a great job to go thru that whole process.  I know that it is very confronting to put yourself up on the WWW.

[lepus]

Well it completely baffles me why the waistline would be placed in one place then advice given to have most suppression at a point not on the natural waist (though I'm sure someone has a convoluted explanation - including pseudo geometry - as to why).

That amounts to an irresistable challenge  . I'm not privy to the details of the Kim & Kim book, but I'll venture a go. My "convoluted explanation" will thus be based on the little information I have as well as some guesswork.
For the construction of the slopers (I shall use that American term, the authors give a reasonable explanation for it) the authors place the waist line at a distance of back waist length from the reference point. I suspect however, that they measure the back waist length of the figure not vertically, but following the body contour. That introduces a difference.

If I take as an example what they show on page 33, where they transform the Close-Fit sloper into one with waist darts, they first raise the waistline by ½" and then take out a total of 2", divided between 2 darts and the side seam on that new waistline. I assume that they realise that the waistline of the figure lies higher than the waist construction line of the sloper. Where the waistline exactly is, is insignificant until waist shaping is introduced, as the sloper describes just a straight tube.

Now for the "pseudo geometry" bit, which should show us if this is a reasonable supposition.
Let's assume we have a figure of regular type with a chest measurement of 40", what they call in the book 40R. According to the table the back waist length is then 18¼". I'm unsure if there is any ease incorporated in this; let's assume there isn't. The measurement will begin at the reference point, follow the natural curves of the spine, and end at the waist. The sloper however will be drafted with the measurement straight down. If, for an approximation, we use the image in the book with the usual neck and waist indentations, the curved line ends up at a height of about 95% of the straight line. For a length of 18¼" this means a bit more than ¾" higher, which does seem to be in the ballpark.



Perhaps this somehow satisfies the "convoluted explanation - including pseudo geometry" criterion, but if not, I'll look forward to what a successor has to say about it.


On the present issue of obtaining a shirt pattern. Is it really thought that this design is suitable for this particular figure? If I remember correctly, it was proposed in reaction to David Coffin's suggestion to a poster in the other place who wanted to make tight-fitting shirts for body builder types to use princess seams. For those mushroom-shaped figures with well-developed shoulders and chests and small, trim waists the design seems suitable. They didn't come back for further discussion however; what would have been interesting as well was how to handle the apparent balance problems, probably resulting from removing too much width.

I have no clear picture of what the objective here is I'm afraid. Is it just an exercise in handling waist suppression? An exploration of how to divert attention to the chest region? And what exactly is a "dress shirt" in this context, is it a garment for formal (evening) wear? In the latter case I would not use this design. If it is about buffing up the upper area, I would try to extend the shoulders outward as far as possible, perhaps even use epaulettes, or saddle sleeves or similar, and would keep the chest roomy (I find the front chest too narrow here, and there seems to be tightness over the right shoulder).
In this particular figure the waist could then be narrowed in back and side, but I would hesitate to take anything out in front. Other options would be to use a large front yoke, or some plastron-type design, or a limited length opening with broad elements, pockets; the possibilities are endless really.

I further notice that it has been decided to keep the current front/back imbalance, as well as the deviating centre back. One has to be aware though that if striped or chequered fabric is used, those lines are likely to be emphasised.


On another note, I'm afraid I have to respectfully disagree with the Experienced Professionals if I understand correctly what has been said upthread. It's more important that the darts follow the general and apparent shape of the body than that they are "vertical". In fact, the darts themselves aren't vertical anyway if they are plotted with their centre lines vertical. The most vertical you can get is to make one leg of a dart lie on the straight grain. The other leg will then be off-grain if the dart doesn't include an angle of n × 90°. In this back I see the centre back line consistently deviating to the right, and I assume it is on the lengthwise grain. This arrangement has obviously been chosen, even if it implies that the hang of the back is not following the grain accurately. The back waist suppression darts should then, when sewn up, appear symmetrical with respect to this line. If angled, i.e. off-grain darts pose a problem, depending on the fabric, they can be stabilised, and in fact the stitching itself provides some stabilisation. Nobody bats an eyelash about a very slanted bust dart in a dress anyway, or extended dart rotations to unusual positions. Moving the direction of the darts away from the centre back line will present ugly distortions in striped fabrics.


One other thing about those two-pointed waist darts, if used as darts opposed to being incorporated in seams. During fitting, it's perfectly fine to pin the amount to be taken out outwards. When the darts are sewn closed however, the folded seam allowance in the centre will be the shortest length, shorter than the total length of the dart. Especially in the waist region this can prevent the dart to occupy its real position. With larger darts and unstretchable fabrics this may necessitate cutting the dart open and stretching the seam allowances.

[jruley]

Thank you for that dissertation . 

Regarding a couple of points made on the present issue of obtaining a shirt pattern:

And what exactly is a "dress shirt" in this context, is it a garment for formal (evening) wear?

"Dress shirt" in my probably imprecise and inappropropriate usage means a shirt suitable to be worn with a jacket and tie.  I have no use, or I should say no present occasion, for formal dress, at least in a 21st century context.

I further notice that it has been decided to keep the current front/back imbalance, as well as the deviating centre back. One has to be aware though that if striped or chequered fabric is used, those lines are likely to be emphasised.

As stated in post #16, the current plan is to use only solid colored fabric.  I plan to develop a looser back style for stripes and plaids, probably with pleats over the shoulder blades, in order to help conceal the issues with the back.  I am not sure what is meant by "current front/back imbalance"  and would appreciate elaboration on that point.

One other thing about those two-pointed waist darts, if used as darts opposed to being incorporated in seams.

As stated in post #13, there will be no darts in the finished shirt.

[jruley]

Is it really thought that this design is suitable for this particular figure? If I remember correctly, it was proposed in reaction to David Coffin's suggestion to a poster in the other place who wanted to make tight-fitting shirts for body builder types to use princess seams. For those mushroom-shaped figures with well-developed shoulders and chests and small, trim waists the design seems suitable.

If you're trying to gently suggest that this design is liable to draw undue attention to my middle-aged gut, go ahead and say so.  I just did .

My current "dress shirts" (as I use the term) are loose-fitting and blousy, which helps hide my fitting issues.  I have a closet full of these things, and I can buy them cheaper than the cost of good fabric yardage during sales at local department stores.  So why spend time reproducing the same style?

This "torso line" draft appeals to me as one which can be made to follow my body shape exactly.  I had a couple of "tailored fit" dress shirts years ago, and liked the look; but of course I was a bit slimmer. 

This also appeals as the logical extreme of a fitting exercise, at least without resorting to stretchable fabric.  If I get tired of the resulting shirt I can always donate it to Goodwill.  Once the pattern is validated, it can be relaxed using the "classic fit" technique given in the book to produce an easier fitting, but still form-following shirt - which I expect to make more use of than this one.

Hopefully this somewhat clarifies the objective.  My next planned step is to use the pinned-up sloper to develop the body pattern with separate panels, make that up and see what it tells us.  After which comes the collar and sleeves.

[hutch--]

Jim,

This comment is probably irrelevant at this stage of your development but to address the concern of an expanding stomach (middle age gut) I learnt a trick some time ago with modifying cheap Chinese long sleeve tops for men, buy them wide enough in the shoulders and long enough in the arm length then taper then down to the minimum waist line you can tolerate. I used to do it in a couple of minutes with an overlocker.

Now with a shirt design of the type you are developing, having a bit extra room around the shoulders with the higher than average sleeve cast you are using would give you more room to taper the side seams and the extra back and front darts down to the minimum waistline you can tolerate.

[Henry Hall]

Where the waistline exactly is, is insignificant until waist shaping is introduced, as the sloper describes just a straight tube.

This is absurd. And it probably speaks of the failure of drafting in this way. Knowing the waistline height is important for proportioning the garment pattern. Unless one is drafting a collection of potato sacks. For a fitted garment the back waist can be taken to the body contour anyway (or a depression measure taken if that sort of fit is required). There are two other books: How to Draft Patterns by Donald McCunn, and the Winifred Aldrich book, both which follow the similar creation of  a standard block to be spun out into other patterns. Both of them consider waist locations throughout.

It's no wonder people are walking around dazed in circles wondering why drafting and fitting is 'too hard'. It's falsely made to look overly-hard by overblown nonsense. You see this a lot in those post-1900 drafting books where academically frustrated authors dress up fairly simple ideas as advanced trigonometry.

It seems to me there is not much merit in carving a toothpick out of a two-ton block of oak, which is the sort of methodology this particular 'sloper' rendered into other garments seems to want to pursue.