Bespoke Cutter And Tailor

Quote from: jruley link=msg=13573I am wondering what your "calico" is called on this side of the pond.  Ask for calico in a US fabric store and you will probably be directed to a rack full of small colorful prints on cheap plain weave cotton.  After checking with my friend Google it seems to mean something completely different in the UK...

In the 18th century, calico, floral prints from India became so fashionable that imports were restricted, because the wool industry was suffering. The flowery design became known as 'chintz'. Whether this cotton was calico or not, I don't know, but here are some examples of cotton chintz that I snapped at the V&A during a past visit:









According to Wikipedia: "while Europe maintained the word calico for the fabric, in the US it was used to refer to the printed design". What we in the UK call Chintz.

Looking at US terminology, the nearest thing would probably be unbleached Muslin with a tighter weave than cheesecloth. In the UK Muslin tends to have a sheer quality, and is also referred to as cheesecloth. Calico is denser and it has a little 'spring' (stiffness).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calico#Terminology

Interfacing doesn't create roll in a collar, as shown in my photo. That's down to the unique design of a IC shirt. The interfacing merely enhances/supports the roll, which is inherent. As mentioned, the interfacing in my vintage shirts tends to be quite thin and soft, yet most of the shirts have a roll. Arguably many would benefit from a springier interfacing, but they still work.

Quote from: Gerry on May 22, 2025, 07:49:27 AMThe interfacing isn't that critical, Hendrick. These shirts have an inherent roll due to the way they're designed; and the roll can be controlled to a certain extent when drafting (once the basic principles are understood).

That said, I favour light-weight calico. It has to be soaked in very hot water because of the shrinkage (typically around 10%); plus whatever chemical treatment the cloth receives needs to be washed out - the water after soaking is noticeably discoloured (a brackish yellow).

What I like about calico is that it has natural adhesion to the cloth compared with a lot of purpose-made collar canvas. The latter tends to have a glassy feel and shirting shifts around easily over its surface. It's one of the reasons why people get wrinkles in the corners of collars that have sewn-in interfacing. It's not only that they iron in the wrong direction (towards the tips rather than away from them), but also that the interfacing doesn't grip the shirting, so there's no resistance to the motion and weight of the iron. Whereas calico feels a part of the cloth when used as interfacing.

Calico also has some spring to it. Not as much as canvas, but enough to make it viable as an interfacing. It creates a soft collar, but that's appropriate for casual shirts. Many of my vintage examples have thin, cotton interfacing (possibly batiste?). Like I say, it's not that critical.

Edit: the calico has to be unbleached. The bleached stuff is too soft and the needle can punch fibres through to the underside of the shirting so you get what some people call 'ghosting': tiny white marks along the stitch line. It's impossible to remedy and ruins a collar.

PS using calico is a good way to recycle toiles.

Nice looking collar, Gerry!

I am wondering what your "calico" is called on this side of the pond.  Ask for calico in a US fabric store and you will probably be directed to a rack full of small colorful prints on cheap plain weave cotton.  After checking with my friend Google it seems to mean something completely different in the UK...

Quote from: Hendrick on May 22, 2025, 07:21:50 AMReminds me by the way, dear shirtmakers... A few years ago I was in a french mens' store, trying on a shirt with a cutaway collar. The guy at the store said it was a "col Italien", Italian collar... I told him "we call that a cutaway collar" and that an Italian collar is a "one piece collar". No no, goes the salesguy; "that we call a "bowling collar". Another person, I guess German was looking round the store as well and interrupted him, saying "no, that is a "schiller collar".

Italian-collars were originally called 'convertible' collars, because they could be worn open-necked or closed by using a tie to 'button up' the front. This is evidenced in the original patent (filed in Italy in 1949 and a year later in the US and parts of Europe):

https://patents.google.com/patent/US2651042A/en

It's probably why all the early 50s examples I've seen have huge collars. They only start to get sexy from around 1956/57 onwards.

Quote from: Hendrick on May 22, 2025, 06:02:46 AMI am just curious to know what sort of interlining you used that gives this roll...

The interfacing isn't that critical, Hendrick. These shirts have an inherent roll due to the way they're designed; and the roll can be controlled to a certain extent when drafting (once the basic principles are understood).

That said, I favour light-weight calico. It has to be soaked in very hot water because of the shrinkage (typically around 10%); plus whatever chemical treatment the cloth receives needs to be washed out - the water after soaking is noticeably discoloured (a brackish yellow).

What I like about calico is that it has natural adhesion to the cloth compared with a lot of purpose-made collar canvas. The latter tends to have a glassy feel and shirting shifts around easily over its surface. It's one of the reasons why people get wrinkles in the corners of collars that have sewn-in interfacing. It's not only that they iron in the wrong direction (towards the tips rather than away from them), but also that the interfacing doesn't grip the shirting, so there's no resistance to the motion and weight of the iron. Whereas calico feels a part of the cloth when used as interfacing.

Calico also has some spring to it. Not as much as canvas, but enough to make it viable as an interfacing. It creates a soft collar, but that's appropriate for casual shirts. Many of my vintage examples have thin, cotton interfacing (possibly batiste?). Like I say, it's not that critical.

Edit: the calico has to be unbleached. The bleached stuff is too soft and the needle can punch fibres through to the underside of the shirting so you get what some people call 'ghosting': tiny white marks along the stitch line. It's impossible to remedy and ruins a collar.

PS using calico is a good way to recycle toiles.

Reminds me by the way, dear shirtmakers... A few years ago I was in a french mens' store, trying on a shirt with a cutaway collar. The guy at the store said it was a "col Italien", Italian collar... I told him "we call that a cutaway collar" and that an Italian collar is a "one piece collar". No no, goes the salesguy; "that we call a "bowling collar". Another person, I guess German was looking round the store as well and interrupted him, saying "no, that is a "schiller collar".

Cheers, Hendrick

Nice! The collar shape is great and falls perfectly. I am just curious to know what sort of interlining you used that gives this roll...

Cheers, Hendrick

Quote from: Greger on May 21, 2025, 11:21:38 AMBeautiful rolls on the shirt. Like the pockets, too.

Thank you Greger. The pockets are period specific (late 50s). Mostly they were done as rectangles when on the hip, but I saw a couple of vintage IC shirts with these slant openings and copied the look.

At some point I need to redo this design and in a better cloth (Oxford). I have around 15 vintage shirts now, most of them IC, and I've learned a lot from examining them. The one-piece collars had a slightly lower profile. Typically the height at the back was 2.5 inches plus an eighth or a quarter to account for the fold. Once folded, the collar is approx. 1.25 inches high. It's a more sporty look, whereas a higher collar is for dress/normal shirts.

That's only a minor thing, but virtually all of my vintage examples did two things to create a better-looking front. The button-stand overlap is invariably 5/8ths as opposed to 3/4 in (which I used); and although the buttonholes are spaced 5/8ths from the placket edge, the buttons are brought closer to the front by a quarter, so they're sewn 3/8ths from the edge. By minimising the wrap at the front, there's better symmetry between the two sides and the roll on the right isn't choked by the left. It's a bit like double vs single breasted jackets, but on a micro scale for a shirt. This arrangement also allows for a higher neck-opening (if desired).

Quote from: Gerry on May 20, 2025, 05:46:15 PMSchneiderfrei, I've posted these images before. An Italian Collar Shirt I made a couple of years ago:

Hi Gerry,

Thank you very much. I had forgotten.

Also great design, almost like a shirt waistcoat. very elegant.

G

Beautiful rolls on the shirt. Like the pockets, too.

Schneiderfrei, I've posted these images before. An Italian Collar Shirt I made a couple of years ago:





I've only known about these shirts for a few years, but have become totally obsessed by them. The one piece collar has a facing that extends into the body. Without the normal 'hinge' of a collar seam, the tension at the neck resolves in a beautiful roll. Same thing as the 'Cooper Collar', which was a refinement of the ICS and came later (I'm such a nerd I looked up the patents).

The shirt is cut in such a way that one wouldn't be able to button it to the top, even if a buttonhole was  provided. Hopefully we can all agree that it would look terrible too, ruining the aesthetic created.