Bespoke Cutter And Tailor

I'm guessing that the second draft compensates for the distortions caused by suppression and the darts. When the jacket is made up, everything will be on grain.

Perhaps it's more fitted, which would result in more distortions. The inclusion of a side pannel would suggest this.

Best to wait for a coat maker to answer, though (I merely dabble).

Quote from: posaune on September 13, 2024, 01:49:53 AMI will sew a trouser from a bielastic viscose elasthan jersey (on the heavy side). I measured a stretch factor 50 % in the width and 20 % in length of the fabric. The trouser should not be tight just showing figure. I thought about taking for construction away 10 % in width and 5% in length.  Hip = 100 cm will be than 90 cm and
length 110 cm= 104,5 cm.
Can it work?
lg
posaune

Hello Posaune, how dit it go?

Cheers, Hendrick

Hi everyone!

I've been observing different pattern-making techniques, and a question came up. As an example, I'll bring up the systems of Rory Duffy and Sven Jungclaus. My question is actually about the grainline.

In Jungclaus' system, the grainline in the front of the jacket follows the dart, which he constructs perpendicular to the hemline of the jacket. However, this line is not perpendicular to the chest line, which Reza mentions in his video should always be parallel to the ground. On a checked fabric, this would likely be quite noticeable, right?

What happens if I modify Jungclaus' system by making the grainline perpendicular to the chest line, and thus aligning the dart with it as well? (I've started testing Jungclaus' system, and indeed, the dart does come out quite slanted.)





Additional question: Why does Jungclaus (and, for example, Rundschau) tilt the side of the back panel (left side of the hemline) and the other panels in the opposite direction? What does this affect? I haven't seen this approach with Italian tailors or in Rory's system either.

Brilliant Music, Thank you for sharing. 

So sad to hear of Quincy Jones passing

"Quintessence" performed by the WDR Big Band

It's funny how things can happen in life at times,... after a discussion recently recalling what is detailed here with a good friend that helped, on the day, I decided to try and look for this .... and unbelievably, I not only found it posted on Youtube but also managed to find and purchase a later CD of what was initially only released as a Cassette would you believe.

So, with Christmas coming up, I thought some of you may like and/or appreciate this recording, made by myself and a couple of professional Audio engineer colleagues of mine way back in 1988.

It was Recorded 'Live' in 2 x sessions on the same day, at a lovely old Live drama recording space (previously used by our ABC and others) at Pilgrim House here in Sydney.



We recorded it in MS or Mid-Side Stereo using 2 x AKG C414 microphones onto an early Sony Digital recorder.
Utilizing M-S allowed the depth and width to be adjusted during mastering and whilst it does sound quite nice, I guess I was expecting slightly more than what was achieved, the resulting product being perhaps 'Cautious'  :smiley:

Anyway, these people were and are very capable and excellent singers and actually have quite a catalogue of product, now,.. our recording was their first  :smiley: 

You can listen here on Youtube: Christmas with the Elizabethan Singers and if you like it you can download the tracks from the CD from my Dropbox here:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/yr2kz8jsoy80b3rw9yph9/AIci8TgqEYRDXvMWniwveHo?rlkey=46n8z4l5a2vgvrrfb4kttnztl&st=abpiqiyi&dl=0

 

Agree!

Four threads are just too much for plain finishing of seams!
I have a very old singer industrial three thread that makes a beautiful serged finish.
Four threads are for stretch because three is not secure enough there.

I totally agree, it's overkill. Four threads are necessary for securing seams when joining jersey etc; but for merely finishing a raw edge that's sewn (or going to be)? Three-thread is all that's necessary IMO.

This year I've acquired a small collection of original, Italian-collar shirts, so that I can copy their collars. All have sewn-on front-facings with exposed edges that are merely overlocked. All of the overlocking is really skinny, as you describe. It's held strong for around 75 years and not one shirt has four-thread overlocking.

I just went over some trials I did this week. And a question came to my mind; why is everybody using these wide (broad) 4 thread overlockers that to me have a "stiffening"effect on seams. In "olden days" these things were only used for constructing jersey garments but not for overcasting single layers of wovens; three threaders were the norm because they leave movement to the seams. On top of that on finer work seam widths were often at 7mm or a quarter inch, but these machines cover that width almost entirely. Whenever I cut something woven (at a price that makes me think at least twice) I always fall back on a trusted old 3 thread babylocker (basically a "japanised" Singer 81k) that forms a beautiful 1/8 inch stitch and is far easier to use because of the small presser foot whereas the 4 threaders have a presser foot the size of a small skate board...

Anyone; warm welcome to let me know your take on finishing seam edges.

Cheers, Hendrick

I am having a hard time believing that the first and second sleeve are the same. Nevertheless, draw a line between the two back armpoints and see where the "grimasses"come from. First, your back center seam, from this line up needs more curvature; the body needs it because it is pushing up and pulling width. Note that more curvature ads length so the excess length from the line between back arm points and back collar point will only get worse. Correct the length. Your back waist needs adjustment, but specifically not only from the center back; the back parts will need more curve. The sleeve position is not correct; the sleeve "blows"below the upper arm. The left shoulder is lower; clean it out and correct the sleeve accordingly.

Cheers, Hendrick