The thing I can't quite figure out is wether adding front balance AND back balance is possible or sometimes necessary while fitting a garment.
I hope this makes sense.
Lets say I add 2 cm front balance and 2 cm back balance. Does this cancel each other out? Or does this only change the armhole depth? Or maybe this does change how the garment falls on the body?
And does it matter wether you change the balance through the shoulders or through the side seam?
Kiem, it would be the kind of thing you might need if the person was narrow waisted with big development in the chest.
Alternatively, the person may be somewhat stooped as well as with a protruding chest?
That would be a situation that deviates from the proportional model of the draft. I.e. means that the proportional model is less developed that the person you have. You have to account for that difference. so there is a longer length of cloth required over the distance from neck point to centre front waist as well as centre back than the orignal draft.
There might also be a wider back, to measure and add in as well.
It is going to be important to measure these amounts. AND to judge where to put the bigest part of the expansion.
G
Kiem which system do you use?
I can only answer for Rundschau: the balance for a (normal) shirt is determined through the Rh (back height, measured) called At. The front length is in the proportional draft At = Rh (+ ease) - 1 cm. This is the balance value for a shirt. If you add it to Rh the armhole will be deeper. And sure this can change the fall of the garment.
Think of a seesaw: if you put on each side the same weight in the same distance from the center the seesaw bar will stay level. It is in balance
If you do a Corpulent draft the balance will be smaller because of the slant of the Centerfront and depends from the Bu-Tu difference.
lg
posaune
I use mostly drafts from modern tailor outfitter clothier.
For shirts I use a draft from Die Gewand Sammlung, which I compared and looks pretty much just like rundschau.
I needed a break from shirts so I am playing around with a waistcoat.
Trying to implement the forward shoulder alteration I learned in my shirt thread on the forum and comparing some drafts to find out why one works and the other doesn't and how to understand both better to make them both work. Some studying I guess.
reason I was asking is because it sometimes seems I need back balance to go over my blades based on some creases, but on every side picture the front balance looks really short. I think I figured out why the back creases are there, has to do with short front balance pulling things out of place and waist suppression in the wrong place.
The creases threw me off. Everytime I add back balance to a garment I have to then pin that away because the back gets messy, but I figured I might have missed something.
Another thing is that, when looking at this picture:
(https://i.postimg.cc/hXcLx8Vb/stooped-figure-alteration.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/hXcLx8Vb)
It seems that adding the same amount of balance to both front and back nothing really changes except armhole depth.
You could try this:
https://www.muellerundsohn.com/shop/haka-schnittaufstellung-grundwissen/
It teaches you how to draft basic drafts.
(https://i.postimg.cc/347Zcjs9/Schermafbeelding-2020-04-30-om-08-26-14.png) (https://postimg.cc/347Zcjs9)
If you add 2cm to Rh in the Rundschau draft it will drop the Armhole - because it is automatically added to the At.
In the shown example you shift the pattern against each other. With stooped posture the backheight (Rh) will now be longer and the back armhole too, the front stays. The hem of back will be higher. (This method you do too when you have already cut the garment and have enough inlay around shoulder and neck) And you shift the neckpoint!
sometimes when the balance is of, the front (or the back) are stealing length from the opposite.
lg
posaune
I thought this might be a great topic to "chime" in with some balance related questions of my own. I was musing about the different possibilities of adding balance and what it does to the rest of the shirt since I'm currently having some issues with that.
Now, I made a little sketch with some possibilities (sorry for the bad drawings). The first method is the pivoting method posaune was suggesting a while ago. You slash the pattern horizontally to the armhole, pivot it open and make a new CF (green). This, I think, is the best method so far, since it leaves the armhole intact and I think provides necessary changes to the neckhole as well. On the downside it shortens the Av-line the more you add to the front. The question is if you can add to the chest afterwards since it seems to me that a lack of front balance often occurs with an overly errect posture, meaning you would need actually more width in the chest than in the back? I also tried a different method, whereby you avoid taking from the chest by also slashing perpendicularly from the the shoulder seam to the chest. Here the neckhole would stay the same (which is a downside I guess) and the shoulder line will be elongated, which you could easily alter.
Now, I'm not sure if I'm at all correct with this observations. I add a picture of my rundschau book on alterations and hope I don't get into trouble for it, but it seems to me, that this is essantially the method posaune was suggesting, but since it is a jacket there wouldn't be any problems with the chest width.
(https://i.ibb.co/B63p7xW/IMG-20200430-102153.jpg) (https://ibb.co/X5LQdg0)
(https://i.ibb.co/c2DXy5Z/IMG-20200430-102630.jpg) (https://ibb.co/Jr5FcLG)
Kiem, to give you the answer you are looking for: Yes, addding the same amount to back and front balance will just deepen the armhole but doesn´t have an influence wether the garments swings to the forwards or backwards at the hem.
Schneiderfrei pointed out why this could be necessary.
But I have some tips for you:
Mark your chest line and waist line on your garment for fitting, You will see wether it is horizontal all around or not.
Take your balance measures( you need another person for this). You can measure the armhole depth, the front and back balance and compare it to your pattern.
Lookin at your side view pics I´m pretty sure your problem lies below the chest line. Your belly is swinging forward i.e. Your belly protrudes your chest in the profile. Your whole waist ring is shifted forwards compared to the norm figure. Thus the diagonal distance from the belly to the shoulder blades is longer than in the norm figure. Your hip ring on the other side seems to be in the norm position. When you try to correct this shortness by adding back balance you will produce problems in the hip area causing folds in the back.
The recipe is to shift the waist ring in your pattern forward also, wich means the belly point of your pattern will protrude the chest point (try 1,5cm). This will result in a center front line wich is not straight anymore. This is OK in a waistcoat; the CF will run slightley slanted from the chest point to the belly point and then vertical. A shirt on the other side needs a straight CF, so you have to draw a new CF from the neckpoint through the belly point. It will be straight but not right angled to the horizontal lines anymore.
Quote from: peterle on April 30, 2020, 07:30:18 PM
Kiem, to give you the answer you are looking for: Yes, addding the same amount to back and front balance will just deepen the armhole but doesn´t have an influence wether the garments swings to the forwards or backwards at the hem.
Schneiderfrei pointed out why this could be necessary.
But I have some tips for you:
Mark your chest line and waist line on your garment for fitting, You will see wether it is horizontal all around or not.
Take your balance measures( you need another person for this). You can measure the armhole depth, the front and back balance and compare it to your pattern.
Lookin at your side view pics I´m pretty sure your problem lies below the chest line. Your belly is swinging forward i.e. Your belly protrudes your chest in the profile. Your whole waist ring is shifted forwards compared to the norm figure. Thus the diagonal distance from the belly to the shoulder blades is longer than in the norm figure. Your hip ring on the other side seems to be in the norm position. When you try to correct this shortness by adding back balance you will produce problems in the hip area causing folds in the back.
The recipe is to shift the waist ring in your pattern forward also, wich means the belly point of your pattern will protrude the chest point (try 1,5cm). This will result in a center front line wich is not straight anymore. This is OK in a waistcoat; the CF will run slightley slanted from the chest point to the belly point and then vertical. A shirt on the other side needs a straight CF, so you have to draw a new CF from the neckpoint through the belly point. It will be straight but not right angled to the horizontal lines anymore.
That makes perfect sense, thanks you for the explanation.
Thinking about it now, my protruding belly pulls the side waist line forward, and therefore creating a false sense of too much waist supression, I think this might cause those creases that I mistaken for lack of back balance.
I have tried doing a balance measurement by myself.
I found the finished neck point and marked that on a shirt. I pinned a measuring tape right on that mark at 50 cm (so I have 50cm to measure forward and backwards).
They I made sure the waistband of my trousers was nice and horizontal on the body and measured with the tape over the blades and chest to the waistband.
I realize this is hardly as accurate as it should be.
I posted below everything I have gathered on balance. Some things are found on this forum already, others I found somewhere else.
(https://i.postimg.cc/rKHMnbyT/HPIM3970.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/rKHMnbyT)
(https://i.postimg.cc/PLshhw8F/HPIM3971.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/PLshhw8F)
(https://i.postimg.cc/349HgffP/HPIM3979.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/349HgffP)
(https://i.postimg.cc/xcLydrkj/15502058595-b48a4e8316-o-zpsjsokpsvt.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/xcLydrkj)
There is some info on balance measuring and implementing into a pattern here aswell.
http://movsd.com/BespokeCutter/index.php?action=post;topic=916.0;last_msg=6807
Petruchio, when considering balance problems you have to keep two things apart:
First the balance itself: The question is: is the relation between back balance and front balance right, so the chest line is horizontal all around? In this situation "Balance" means the vertical measure from the neck tips to the chest line. When the chest line is too high you ´ve to add the missing amount evenly across the pattern from armhole to armhole.
Second the armhole tightness: Due to the protruding character of the chest (and bosom) the pattern needs more length in the center area than at the armhole, so with a straight pattern the fabric will always be looser at the arm than at the center of the body. In women´s wear this difference is higher so there is a chest dart in the pattern. In men´s wear the difference is less and we try to get away without a chest dart although we would need one. There are a ton of methods to reach a tight armhole in a lounge or waist coat: a crooked shoulder, a hidden lapel dart, keeping the lapel line short by sewing in a tightened ribbon ecc. All this methods work, because a coat doesn´t have a straight center front doesn´t close high to the neck and the fabric takes ironwork. But it doesnt´t work for high closed garments with a straight center line and it works limited for cottons and linnen.
That´s why shirts and shirt like jackets can´t have a tight armhole.
You should try the pivoting of your second sketch in a real halve scale paper. It will have a step in the center front line and a kink in the shoulder line. How would you deal with them and with dhe shoulder dart?
Quote from: peterle on May 01, 2020, 03:40:31 AM
Petruchio, when considering balance problems you have to keep two things apart:
First the balance itself: The question is: is the relation between back balance and front balance right, so the chest line is horizontal all around? In this situation "Balance" means the vertical measure from the neck tips to the chest line. When the chest line is too high you ´ve to add the missing amount evenly across the pattern from armhole to armhole.
Second the armhole tightness: Due to the protruding character of the chest (and bosom) the pattern needs more length in the center area than at the armhole, so with a straight pattern the fabric will always be looser at the arm than at the center of the body. In women´s wear this difference is higher so there is a chest dart in the pattern. In men´s wear the difference is less and we try to get away without a chest dart although we would need one. There are a ton of methods to reach a tight armhole in a lounge or waist coat: a crooked shoulder, a hidden lapel dart, keeping the lapel line short by sewing in a tightened ribbon ecc. All this methods work, because a coat doesn´t have a straight center front doesn´t close high to the neck and the fabric takes ironwork. But it doesnt´t work for high closed garments with a straight center line and it works limited for cottons and linnen.
That´s why shirts and shirt like jackets can´t have a tight armhole.
You should try the pivoting of your second sketch in a real halve scale paper. It will have a step in the center front line and a kink in the shoulder line. How would you deal with them and with dhe shoulder dart?
Thanks, Peterle. That makes perfect sense. Acutally I tried the second sketch already. The step in the center front was rather small, so I just made a new CF and straightend out the shoulder by just cutting away the kink, but I'm not at all convinced by this method. The problem I had, was that I had to add about 8cm to the front, thereby altering the neckhole significantly and also cutting away a lot at the chest area following the first method. So my question really is, how to alter the balance when you must add a significantly amount at either back or front?
You had to increase the front balance for 8cm? That is incredibly much, and I think there is probably a different issue. When fitting mark the chest line and concentrate on a horizontal run. Also take the armhole depth, the back balance and the front balance measures, and compare them to your pattern.
The rule of thumb is, when the imbalance of front and back is bigger, you should distribute it by increasing the one and decreasing the other. Don´t pivot, add length evenly across the front part.
When you cut away things there are usually different possibilities and each one does have a different impact. When you cut away the kink, it will decrease the angle of neckhole and shoulder seam, wich will cause new issues. When you cut the center front it will decrease the chest width and changes the neckhole/cf angle. it also gets slanted. a lot of unwanted impacts. Just add the balance evenly, and live with the looser armhole.
I support Peterle. 8 cm is (too) much. In the pics where you show your shirt I do not see this.
lg
posaune
I measured the balance according to the article on the "Problemfigur" with the weighted tape measure from Rundschau. Since I thought 8 cm might be too much I just added 6 cm by taking out 3cm at the back and adding 3cm to the front, all of this by the pivoting method. So the pictures on this forum are all after this balance alteration. Only after posting it on the forum I added another 2cm, this time only to the front.
Did you mark the true shoulder point at the neck when you measrued with the weighted tape? or did you measure to the yoke seam point?
Quote from: peterle on May 04, 2020, 04:20:08 AM
Did you mark the true shoulder point at the neck when you measrued with the weighted tape? or did you measure to the yoke seam point?
I measured Hs +1 from the center back (or from what I thought was C7). I did the measurements before drawing the pattern, so I was guessing that this might be approximately the true shoulder point at the neck.
Sounds ok. And the balance measures did differ 8cm? And you marked the same spot in the pattern to measure the balance of the pattern?
Are we talking about the shirt in "shirt fitting issues" reply no.9?
Hi Petruchio,
I can not believe the 8 cm balance difference you spoke about. I looked at your pic in the former thread (I think it was you). I measured your back length to waist (9.6), your front length (10.4), and your armlength(13).
This is not very exact I know. Now I looked at a standard measuretable for gents, where the back is measured from the 7. Vert. to waist and the front length from the shoulder neckpoint to waist, to see how big the balance is there.
I got for a size 52 (which I think you maybe are) Back 45.5 front 48.6 and length of arm 64.8, balance difference between back and front 3.1 cm
With my measurements derrived from the pic (asuming the arm length is 64.8) I got: back 47.8 and front 51.8. A balance difference about 4 cm.
(+- 1 to 2 cm. This is only measured and calculated "pi x thumb"- nothing exact). But that is what the pic is telling me.
lg
posaune
Quote from: peterle on May 04, 2020, 06:41:50 PM
Sounds ok. And the balance measures did differ 8cm? And you marked the same spot in the pattern to measure the balance of the pattern?
Are we talking about the shirt in "shirt fitting issues" reply no.9?
Yes, that is the shirt after all balance alterations. I will check it again, because I don't find the balance measurements right now, but I know I changed 8cm in total. Also, on the trial shirt in said thread, I added the last 2cm to the front evenly, but in the pattern I used the pivoting method. This might be one reason there might be something wrong with the final shirt (altough it looks much better on the photo than in reality).
Quote from: posaune on May 04, 2020, 07:58:02 PM
Hi Petruchio,
I can not believe the 8 cm balance difference you spoke about. I looked at your pic in the former thread (I think it was you). I measured your back length to waist (9.6), your front length (10.4), and your armlength(13).
This is not very exact I know. Now I looked at a standard measuretable for gents, where the back is measured from the 7. Vert. to waist and the front length from the shoulder neckpoint to waist, to see how big the balance is there.
I got for a size 52 (which I think you maybe are) Back 45.5 front 48.6 and length of arm 64.8, balance difference between back and front 3.1 cm
With my measurements derrived from the pic (asuming the arm length is 64.8) I got: back 47.8 and front 51.8. A balance difference about 4 cm.
(+- 1 to 2 cm. This is only measured and calculated "pi x thumb"- nothing exact). But that is what the pic is telling me.
lg
posaune
Thanks posaune. I will double check it, but, again, I'm sure I added 8cm in total. I add a picture of the first shirt where no balance adjustment was made at all. The guy in the photo is more a size 48, though.
(https://i.ibb.co/R04cH1L/AE8.jpg) (https://ibb.co/1qJT23H)
Comparing this pic with the ones from the thread, he has a lot more erect posture on this pic and is more relaxed in the other pics. probably he was also while measuring?
When I see the final pics in the other thread, it think, there is no more balance issue in the shirt. So I wonder where you see an issue.
Quote from: peterle on May 04, 2020, 11:42:09 PM
Comparing this pic with the ones from the thread, he has a lot more erect posture on this pic and is more relaxed in the other pics. probably he was also while measuring?
When I see the final pics in the other thread, it think, there is no more balance issue in the shirt. So I wonder where you see an issue.
Yes, I think that his inconsistent stance was the cause for a lot of the issues. Concerning the final shirt, the problems are not the balance, but it somehow looks off when he moves. Especially in the upper chest area there some major horizontal pulling sensations from the shoulder to the front occur. I know that this is a shirt and with movement there will be creases and stuff, but it looks different than on other shirts. I therefore think that there is an issue with the way the front meets the yoke and the way the neckhole is cut and I thought that might have to do with the way I changed the balance.
I can see the stress fold, especially at the left shoulder bone. Also the sleeve sits a bit too tight at the top of the crown, so it seems the sleeve causes the pulling. Probably a bit more volume in the front top of the sleeve crown (where the fold points to) will care for relieve.
Quote from: peterle on May 05, 2020, 01:45:36 AM
I can see the stress fold, especially at the left shoulder bone. Also the sleeve sits a bit too tight at the top of the crown, so it seems the sleeve causes the pulling. Probably a bit more volume in the front top of the sleeve crown (where the fold points to) will care for relieve.
Just out of curiosity I think I will start from scratch, remeasuring and doing all the balance alterations by distributing it evenly, so avoiding any change in the neckhole and the shoulder seam.
Thanks for the advice, it really looks as if the the cap of the shoulder is way too tight, I think I took away too much trying to make it look clean, ie took away at the wrong position.
good decision Petruchio. I attach a standard measuretable for gents (average german and who is stamdard anyway?). After measureing your customer compare the values. When the values differ a lot and you can't explain it because of his posture or otherwise then measures those values again. You will be of the sure side then.
lg
posaune
(https://i.postimg.cc/14wnPP4H/herrenmasstabelle.png) (https://postimg.cc/14wnPP4H)
The thing I seem to struggle with is that on some days (or parts of the day) I am more erect and sometimes more stooped, depending on my leven of fitness/fatigue.
On a good day I need +- 2 cm front balance, on a bad day I probably need 1 cm back balance... So far this has been most noticeable while wearing a waistcoat.
Where would you go with this info If I were a client?
Go for ideal situation? or somewhere in the middle?
I think you are overfitting. It's a shirt, not a fitted tunic so don't try to take out every little wrinkle. You are looking for a happy medium and what looks good from ten feet away.
In a waistcoat the back balance should be about 1cm longer than usual, because of the non elastic back fabric and to avoid a gaping front when sitting down. So when in doubt take the version with the longer back balance for a waistcoat.
Anybody has different posture and body tension from day to day and even in front of a mirror everybody changes his posture. Human nature, not a problem.
Petrucio, this is the biggest problem with the modern expectation of shirts.
Even in the 60's the shirt was still just underwear for most people. it is primarily supposed to be comfortable. The earlier you go back the less people worried about how closely fitted the shirst was.
In the 70's two things happened, firstly, the 60's happened, anything goes. Then they invented stretch fabric. Voila, the body shirt. you could wear a closely fitted shirt, and have some comfort. Nobody seems to understand this now.
It isn't possible to expect movement from lovely, crisp poplin.
G
Then came the 8ties... And Lycra became the plutonium of fashion...
Hendrick that is very true.
:)
Any its truly horrible stuff to wear, great for swimsuits where you are in the water but atrocious for cycle pants as it gets sticky and itchy.
When I find the neck point on a finished garment, (same as one would do when measuring balance on the body) and measure the front and the back. Can I then accurately determine the balance used on that particular garment?
I compared the balance measured this way on a decent fitting rtw jacket and my coat pattern, and came to the conclusion that there must be about 3 cm front balance added.
Same thing for my rtw overcoat.
These measurements seem to workout on the alterations I once made to a coat muslin as well, where adding 3cm front balance seemed to be just right.
Though when I measure my body I measure the need for 0,5 cm front balance that needs to be added.
Does a coat (or waistcoat for that matter) need more front balance be due to the canvas inside, and the fact that it is worn over other garments?
Lycra is also not nice to sew...