Culottes, Then and Now: Muslin 1 Begins

OK, here are side-by each shots of the, left to right. TNT, altered Butterick (modern) and altered McCalls (vintage) culottes front pieces:

And here are the altered back pieces in a totally different order: Butterick, McCalls and TNT:

Like I said, I've got to start somewhere, so I've made reasonably minor crotch depth adjustments and I've also shortened the length by 1.25 inches. You'll also notice the shaded area with the arrow pointing to it which is where I added a reasonable amount (2/3 of an inch) of extra paper to straighten the hip to waist curve slightly. Thing is, looking at it now - and comparing it agains the original curve (see the 5th of 6 photos), that curve is practically as evident - the whole area is just wider. And, according to my estimations, widening this waist isn't going to help matters.

Well, the muslin is going to tell us whether the altered waist is too big and boxy, or whether it works.

Now below you can see the muslins I've cut out from some regrettably holey (bug-eaten?) worsted wool, vintage fabric that was gifted to me. (The kind gifter didn't realize that the fabric had seen better days. Guess that's what happens when fabric sits in your basement for 40 years.)

At any rate, it gives me the opportunity to make a muslin out of a wool fabric with good drape that I don't have to be sorry to use in this disposable capacity.

Note:

• I didn't cut the entire length of the patterns - I don't really care about the width of the leg below the crotch, at this point. It's not the puzzle I'm currently trying to solve. It's possible that the finished legs, as is, may be very wide. I am a person with narrow legs. But I think I can manage proportion by taking fabric out of the inner and outer legs at a later stage. I also don't have that much fabric to use in this capacity.

• You can see here how I've kept the inner-leg pleat closed for the muslin cutting. I really don't know if this is going to have some unintended (read: bad) consequences. Do I need to sew that pleat in order to determine what's happening with the crotch? Or is it actually a distraction on the matter of fit (it's just an extraneous element that doesn't actually impact the crotch so much as it abuts it)? I really have NO FREAKING IDEA. I mean, the pleat does go up to the waist on the McCalls. And it isn't like I'm going to leave out sewing the darts and (in the case of the McCalls) front pleats on the muslin. Again, if any experienced sewists can weigh in, I'll gladly take your feedback. Otherwise, wait till this weekend and, apparently, I'll play the role of the experienced sewist. :-)
  

Here's the McCalls (vintage) muslin:

OK, you can see where I've straightened the waist on the back piece, after all...

And here's the Butterick (modern) one:

Man, this is STRAIGHT compared with the McCalls above.

So, in the abstract, which shape of culottes do you prefer? You can really see the modern propensity for straight lines, yes?

Personally, I prefer the vintage shape (even as I may have mangled the waist to hip ratio on the back piece - or not). I like the way the legs flare. It's interesting to note that both patterns are basically the same length and the rise / waist height in both version is almost identical.

Please let me know your thoughts!

Culottes, Then and Now: Comparing Crotch Curves

Most sewists will tell you that the most challenging part of making pants - and I believe that culottes do fall into this category for this purpose - is navigating the crazy minutiae of crotch depth.

How wide to make the back or the front crotch? How steep to draw the angle on each?

To complicate matters, culottes are not exactly pants. They're supposed to hang away from the body at the crotch by a longer distance - though who knows quite how much?? They're made (at least in the case of my modern and vintage versions) with an inner leg pleat on both front and back pieces.

Will that pleat meaningfully impact crotch depth? I suspect not, which is why I've cut my muslin fabric - see next post - with the pleats closed on the pattern pieces. At the muslin juncture, my goal is to ensure the tubes fit, not to manage non-impactful design elements. Of course, if I'm wrong - and pls. feel free to let me know your thoughts - my now-cut muslin fabric will be garbage.

Most sewists will also tell you to use one of your TNT pants patterns (those that fit like a glove due to 5-odd alteration cyles) to determine how best to adjust, prior to muslining, your next pants pattern.

I can tell you that works very well when you're going from pants to pants. Pants to culottes is more challenging, in the absence of relevant experience, because I don't know how - or how much - the crotch curve is meant to differ from that of the TNT pants. I've worked hard to make them the same. But you'll see how it's almost impossible to extrapolate one from the other, cuz pants fit against the crotch quite closely, while culottes will not.

Below is a shot of the crotch-area of the TNT on top of the Butterick back piece. I've shaded the areas that diverge particularly. You'll note how much taller from crotch to waist the modern culottes pattern is than the TNT. However, the crotch curve isn't all that different, in the scheme of things. Note that my TNT and the Butterick culottes delineate the crotch line on the back pieces. (The McCalls vintage pattern does not...):

The pen lines, in the photo below, demarcate where I've cut the Butterick back piece to reflect the TNT:

Below is the TNT pattern over the Butterick front piece. There's slightly more divergence here - it appears that the culottes angle is a bit more extreme than that of the TNT (see arrow):


Note: The top of the curve on the TNT piece (no arrow pointing) seems wider than the Butterick piece it rests atop because the seam allowance of the Butterick pattern centre front is folded back, while the TNT's is not. Because I've folded the culottes pleats it's not possible for me to show this differently without ripping the pattern.

The McCalls (vintage) culottes are very similar to the TNT at the front crotch (no photo available) - though I did straighten the waist down to the hip (as you'll see in the next post, which shows a photograph of all the pieces side by side). I did that because the TNT and the modern culottes share that design and, as a woman of a relatively full lower stomach, I didn't want to tempt fate. I don't adjust modern patterns in this way, but this vintage one has such a pronounced curve, it makes me nervous.

Update: I actually did the waist straightening on the back piece - for some reason I forgot that. The rationale is the same, but that's where I applied it. And I'm wondering at this moment - why did I alter the back piece for straightness when the area that concerns me (and that, apparently warrants straightening as the alteration) is the front waist, as it skims over my stomach? Hmmmm...

Finally, below you can see the rather extreme way I've had to modify the McCalls vintage back piece to more closely approximate that of the TNT (and Butterick, for that matter). I don't know how successful I've been - or (given the different hang needs of Culottes vs pants) how necessary that will be... Next post shows side-by-each shots.

It would be interesting to know how much of this modification - on all the pattern pieces - was required because of the difference between garment sizes: The TNT is a modern 14, the Butterick culottes are a modern 16 and the McCalls culottes are a vintage 18.

Any thoughts so far?

And while were talking, please let me know if these posts are making sense. I'm spending a ton of time on documenting this project which, I'm totally thrilled to do if it makes sense and interests my fab readers. It's possible I need more experience before writing about sewing in this kind of detail. Just cuz I can think it, doesn't mean I can tell it! So feel free to offer up advice...

Culottes, Then and Now: The Experiment Begins

I've got so many things to say about the culottes experiment, I barely know where to start.

I suppose it would be useful to remind you all now:

• I'm no expert at either a) sewing or b) culottes. Follow along at your own risk. I recommend waiting to see how it all goes before using any of the info I opine about at length.

• I'm totally enlisting your feedback. You who are sewing experts, you who have made many vintage patterns - those of you who've made culottes (specifically) - we need your help! I'm going to say a bunch of things based on what I've read, or what I've surmised, but if you know better (or different), do tell.

• I'm showing a lot of photos of the versions of Culottes (M9805 aka vintage and B5681 aka modern) and, at least for the next couple of posts, they're all displayed with the inner leg pleats folded closed. That's the only way I could reasonably compare the crotch curves. You'll see what I mean as I go on.

• My Vogue TNT is a modern Big 4 size 14 pattern. The Butterick modern pattern is a size 16. Hmmm. Wonder why I didn't consider cutting the Butterick in a size 14 given that modern sizing is standardized. Size 14 correlates to waist 28", hip 38". Size 16, as I've mentioned, is a 30" waist and 40" hip. I'm somewhere, size-wise, between the two but by using slimmer seam allowances and in light of pattern and fabric ease, I tend towards 14. Interesting that I forgot this... And to complicate matters, the vintage culottes are a (vintage standard) size 18. That correlates to a 30" waist and 39" hip. But vintage patterns are sometimes said to fit small. No doubt, fabric and pattern ease are really going to factor in. I only wish, at this point, I could predict how.
  

So, to get started, here are a few intro photos of side-by-side views of my now-traced TNT (V1166), M9805 and B5681. I urge you to notice on the "non-crotch" sides of the pattern pieces, specifically:

• How utterly straight to the waist the TNT is. (Left piece)
  
• How relatively curvy the vintage pattern is. (Right piece)
  
• How the Butterick is more like the TNT. (Middle piece)
• How much longer in the crotch both culottes pieces are in comparison with the mid-rise TNT pants pattern.
  

Back pieces, side-by-side

Front Pieces, side-by-side

Even accounting for my generally necessary, short crotch adjustment (about 1.25 inches on both front and back pieces - which you'll observe has already been done on the TNT), the culottes are way longer in the rise. I think that's partly cuz they're meant to be higher waisted than the pants. And I've read, in Pants for Real People, that culottes are meant to hang away from the body at the crotch by a much further distance than pants. How much farther, alas, they didn't say. We're merging the skirt with pants, peeps. Currently, it's a mystery.

First thing first, I removed some length in the crotch on both culottes pieces - approximately 1.25 inches. I don't know if it's the right course of action, but I have to start somewhere:

Back pieces, adjusted for crotch length

Front pieces, adjusted for crotch length

I think that's enough info for this post. My eyes are starting to cross...

Any thoughts about the experiment at this point? Please weigh in!

Less is Less*

What do you want first - the good news or the bad news??

Right. Good it is, then:

V1166 pants are finished (unlined cuz I don't like lining / the wool has stretch, the use of which would be nullified by lining). Peeps, the construction is just freakin' gorgeous. For any of you who suggest that I'm a perfectionist who can never see the excellence in my own handiwork, let me disabuse you. I made these flawlessly and I rock.

For starters, observe the inside (you know, the part with the visible seams):



Here's the full garment (right side):

And a shot of the hem (the equivalent of subjecting you to photos of a beloved baby doing something cute - it's meaningful, for the person who took the photo):

OK, on with the bad:

I followed my many notes and guidelines - this is something like the 7th time I've made these, not including the muslins. But I did one thing differently. Instead of leaving the outer leg seams unserged i.e. giving me the latitude to rip them out and alter the leg width, as necessary, I serged that seam too. Why did I do this? Cuz it's prettier construction, IMO. And I've done my time with this pattern (so I thought) to be able to take a nervy step. Note: I did baste the pants together first, to ensure they would fit. And, at that point, I did think that the 4 inches I removed from the outer leg (2 inches on each side), was slightly excessive - so my goal was to leave a little excess by serging to the outside the baste line. That line would then be removed to reveal a slightly roomier seam.

Alas, I didn't eyeball the serge line well enough and I ended up serging the pants to more or less the same width as the baste line i.e. I didn't build in my margin. Y'all know, you can't put that fabric back on, right? (Insert diatribe about how knitting has this all over sewing.)

As a result, the pants are too tight in the hips. Not hideously, not enough that I'm not going to try to wear them and enjoy their abstract beauty, but enough that you can see notable pull lines at the crotch - and my thong is too visible through the (admittedly drapey) fabric for my liking.

This may be the moment to qualify my perspective on modern pants-wearing. Have you noticed that a majority of the younger generation - yes, I did just write that and I do mean those who are younger than 30 - wear their pants too tight? I'm not talking about jeggings and skinny jeans. I mean pants one wears to work, to the lawyer's office, to funerals. I don't want to see the peach-like outline of one's derriere, even if it is youthful and high. And note: The zipper shouldn't pull.

Well, I'm about to flout my own dressing guideline for the potential pleasure of wearing great new fall pants (though it does remain to be seen how much the hip whiskering is going to torment me).

You may be thinking: Kristin, how about the recalibration? Isn't that leading you to a land of relative slimness? Well, the answer is, probably. But not yet (I'm not dieting, just eating moderately). And furthermore, the issue with the pants is in the hips - an area I rarely lose any mass in, because I don't have much there to lose. I mean, I'd have to be very skinny to note a change in hip size. Though losing volume in my butt would likely ameliorate the situation somewhat.

Thoughts and feelings? Do share...

*Something tells me I've used this title before...

Stripper Zipper

Yesterday I made my pants sloper (V1166) with some great textured black denim and I have to say I love them:

Ooooh, pretty twin stitching!

Nice leg width, huh?

They are without a doubt, the best constructed pants I've made so far. I actually serged all the seams except the inner leg seams (that means the crotch seam is serged in addition to those of the outer leg). As a result, they are very clean on the inside. I also worked really hard on the waistband - which I slip stitched. Here's hoping it lasts. I have this hatred of zippers that don't go up to the top edge of the waistband. I don't like hooks and eyes. Extra fluff, IMO. Fitting zippers perfectly, of course, is practically a pipe dream. So I'm always on the fence.

Note that the waistband, where it abuts the top of the zipper, is not perfect - but it's better than I've managed so far. I am improving.

I used a cool pewter zip which I wanted to show off. I made sure that the fabric didn't overlap it. I wanted to see the teeth. It went in like a dream - one try. In truth, the fabric is uber-forgiving. And I just decided to do it - no over-thinking, no endless reading and prepping and psyching out.

All was well until I tried on the pants and observed that the zipper (apparently too long) looks like it's bifurcating my ass:

Really.

Oh well - you live, you learn.

(Note to reader: I still intend to wear them.)

Happy New Year!

I promised you shots of the new hand-sewn jeans - the (so far) ultimate ones. The ones without stretch. And I simply had to throw in a few of me in the new top.

So, without further ado:

It's particularly stupid to be wearing these shoes. But I REALLY wanted to look my chicest.

This is the shot where I'm badass.

This is the shot where I can really see that I need to work on my waistline.

This is the shot my mother will like... (She wants you to know I NEVER wore braces.)

This is the shot we had to take 5 times because the others were particularly unflattering.

This is the gratuitous shot of the top of my hair. Which Scott says, incidentally makes my boobs look huge.

This is the shot where my head actually competes with my boobs. My eyes are urging you to look into them, but I just don't know...

This is the one of the back of the Theory Fionula sweater. It does look better in real life...

And this is where I give you an air kiss cuz I think you rock and I want you to have a wonderful new year.

Topsy Turvy

OK, I finished the 5th pair of pants and, woohoo, I think they're a go. To remind you of the history:

• Original pattern in 14, in muslin (way too big everywhere but in the waist)
  
• First wearable pants in modified 14 (narrowed side seams), in wool suiting, lined
• Second wearable pants in modified 14 (see v. 1), in stretch denim - required additional reduction of side seams, the crotch and waist height were problematic, but the garment does fit fairly well...
  
• Third wearable pants in a modified 14 (see v. 2), modified still further to reduce the waist height and dart depth
  
• Forth wearable pants in a massively modified 14 (see v. 3), with even lower waist (3 inches lower than the original), extended darts and modified crotch depth, in non-stretch blue denim. Note: I'm pretty impressed with the crotch alteration!
  

Got it?

(BTW, I promise I'm going to take a photo of myself wearing these, hopefully tomorrow, but I have to wash my hair because I'm scary right now.)

The great thing is that, through a variety of iterations, I've pretty-well drafted my own wide-leg pants sloper. I'm sure that's going to come in handy on a regular occasion. And the next time I make these it's going to be with some special fabric that comes with a special story that I keep meaning to document but it hasn't happened yet.

Here's the bad part. I have systematically worked through every challenge I can think of (coats, pants, woven blouses) and now there are no more delay tactics. Friends, it's time to return to the bra project. Newish readers, you may not even know of this passion - my (so far) unsuccessful attempt to make a bra that a) fits perfectly and is b) sexy and chic.

I know I can go out and buy one. I know that most mega-crafty people think it's a crazy undertaking. But they don't love lingerie as I do. Or they're not insane. This is a code I've got to crack.

Of course, the combo of extreme frustration and disappointment (vis a vis my previous attempts), the fear of future failure (as I run out of fit options, at least in my own mind) and having come to the conclusion that, this time, I will have to start by ripping apart a new bra, purchased just for this purpose (it has a similar fabric i.e. very little to no stretch and it fits well) really isn't motivating.

But this bra isn't going to make itself.

Note: After the last set back, I did contact a well-known sewing studio in Toronto that purports to source and send out teachers of all varieties to help students of all levels to learn about whatever technique they desire. I spoke with a woman who sounded engaged and then never bothered to call me back. Can't say I'm blown away by the professionalism. (It isn't the first such experience I've had with this place.)

If this next attempt doesn't yield an attractive and wearable bra, I'm booking a weekend in Hamilton with the Bra Maker's people. But I really don't want to go to Hamilton.

So please wish me luck. Maybe 12th time is a charm? I am committed to achieving success. Really, really, really. Over and out.

Pants: The Gift That Keeps on Giving...

I made the V1166 pants again in the same stretch denim and, gotta say, the fit is improving. You might recall that, for this iteration, I:

• Lowered the waist by 2 inches
• Increased dart length and width slightly (1/4 inch on all sides)
• Lengthened the pants legs by an inch
• Increased waistband by 4 inches to accommodate the increased width requirement of the lowered waist

I will maintain all of these alterations but I need to add a couple more:

• Lower the waist 1 inch more (for a total of 3 inches). No need to increase the waistband because the 4 inch increase from the previous alteration is adequate.
• Lower darts another .25 inch
• Take .25 inch out of the front crotch starting 2 inches from the base (i.e. the lowest point of the curve)

The front crotch alteration is a wild card adjustment, but I fixed 2 pins in place (seriously carefully!) and determined that it pinches out that puffy lower front thing. Seems that darting the front can only do so much because the excess fabric is lower than the dart extension.

Again, in the latest version, my outer side seam allowances were more than 1.5 inches because of the stretch in the denim. I really should cut the pattern rather than the fabric next time. I have wasted so much! (Natch, the minute I switch fabrics, all bets are off...)

Some thoughts so far:

• What were the Vogue people thinking when they determined the rise of the original pattern?! I know I'm short-waisted, but seriously - I will have removed 3 inches of fabric from the waist when all is said and done. And they aren't "low rise"!
• I'm amazed by the volume of alterations I've made overall - and that practically all of them are on the front legs. I placed the new front leg pattern over the (uncut) original and it's an entirely different size and shape. I mean, there are NO similarities at this point. The crotch is a different curve and length, the overall length is different, the waist is lower, the legs are narrower (by an inch). And there I thought (admittedly, only for 5 minutes) that they were perfect right out of the package. Hmmm...
  
• I'm intrigued to be creating a sloper - because, it appears, that's what I'm doing. I wonder how it might translate onto other patterns in the future.

The most fascinating element of this process is how sanguine I appear to be. Maybe it's the vacation. Maybe I've had to develop a new pace and some perspective on account of the injury from which I'm still healing. Who knows? All I can say is, I know I should be moving back to the bra experiment, but that fills me with anxiety and I'm not quite ready. Besides, I'll have to rip up a perfectly nice bra and that's vaguely traumatizing.

I believe that every woman (person) has a certain body part, the shape of which is perplexing. For some it's a round, high ass. For others, the thighs are wide. There are those who just can't figure out how to flatter the arms. My "issue" (and I have chosen not to judge it, I am merely observing) is the boobs. Well, it's the boobs being large while the back and shoulders are narrow and the front torso is about average (relative to my pattern size). I've adapted to the FBA (full bust adjustment). That's a scary alteration, btw. About as complex as it gets. Then all the variables add to the complexities and, before you know it, you're hyperventilating.

This doesn't mean that my lower half is standard issue. I mean, this fitting process is proving that at every stage. But somehow the alterations seem knowable - more linear, in general. When I buy RTW pants, it is not an unpleasant process. Many times, I try on items that are ugly and ill-fitting, but I simply blame the garment and move on. I really don't take it personally. Not like when a blouse with buttons doesn't fit, or when a jacket won't close.

Why is this? I am, apparently, no more physically unusual in my upper body than in my lower body. (And BTW, neither are you.) Do I simply like pants more? Is it a matter of a top-half mental block? Are pants easier (in my books, definitely, but some people swear that they aren't)? Is my spatial reasoning that much improved these days? Is it beginner's romance?

What do you think? Whether you sew, or no, do you have a preferred body part when it comes to fitting and buying or making clothes? Has sewing liberated you from this? Which do you find more difficult to fit - pants or tops?

Updated What I Wore: The New Pants as Jeans

So I made the V1166 pants in denim, following all of the sage comment advice. And I think it worked out pretty well:

This is my public service announcement photo: DON'T wear a pale bra under a dark top when being photographed with a flash. The bra is actually pink - but it's too light for the topper. It's like my boobs are a light source!

Some things to note:

• They're too short (except with my Diesel "runners"). I'm wearing (practically) flat boots in the photo because I can't stand to look at those runners any more.
• This pattern is weird. I feel that there's too much fabric between the top of my pelvis and my pubic bone. That's the "mom" element. It looks less strange with fancy fabric, fyi. I'm either going to have to experiment with the front-crotch length or find myself another pattern that doesn't yield this result. (A fly-front option might be better given my shape?)
  
• The whole "OMG there's a drag line" issue doesn't really upset me. Honestly, pants have to move in a zillion directions. As long as they aren't a sign that things are too tight, I can live with them. The problem is, to get rid of every drag - at least with my current level of expertise - the pants would be too big as they stretched between washings. Even with RTW pants I do experience drag in certain positions.
• I've got to fix the bottom of the zipper - which gave me no end of irritation on assembly.
• I cut them using the same pattern as the previous pair (the modified 14) but I ended up needing to remove an extra inch of fabric from each side?! Ah, the power of stretch.
• Because I'd already stitched 1 inch seams (which went to 1.5 inches), I opted to serge the seams together as a way to cut most of the extra seam fabric off. Otherwise, the (previously serged for edge-finishing, but not together) seam allowances were going to be ridiculously wide.
• I think the waist is too high - esp. given the puff factor of my lower abdomen.

A few questions for the sewists:

• Is it difficult to lower a waistline? Doesn't seem like it would be, but pants are a great unknown.
• Do you hate drag lines - or do you just accept them? Do you see them as a mark of poor construction or a factor of the human form in pants, especially ones that skim?
• Do you find fly front pants to be more supportive and less baggy below the hill of the lower abdomen and the pubic bone? Is this a common issue when making pants?

Update: I've been thinking about this obsessively all night and I've decided to try a couple of things with this (admittedly imperfect, but seemingly improvable) pattern.

• Lower the waist by 2 inches (and extend the waistband accordingly).
• Pinch out some of the size in the front leg, from the centre of the pattern. I won't interfere with the waistband.
• Another alternative is, having lowered the waist, to extend the darts as a way to get rid of that extra room.
• I don't think I'm going to mess with the front crotch depth at this point. I really think the extra fabric in the front leg is what's skewing things.

If any sewists have experience doing any of these things, and you care to weigh in, I'd love to hear your thoughts. Thanks!
So whatcha think?

Shout Out to the Experts: Making Pants with Different Fabrics

Hello Sewist friends (and other friends who don't sew but feel like weighing in on this for kicks):

I finally made this wide-leg pair of pants on the weekend:

Line Drawing:As you can see, they're not fitted. However, in the woven wool (with nice give) fashion fabric, they do fit. In fact, if made without their (stretch-free) lining, I suspect they might be vaguely roomy in the butt/upper leg, despite my muslin minimizing alterations. However, with the lining (and I didn't make the lining seam allowance any smaller than the fashion fabric's) I find them on the edge of too snug at the crotch/upper leg.

Here's my question:

I would like to make these again in a variety of fabrics, to see if I can a) improve the fit and b) enjoy the look. For starters, I'd like to use a stretch indigo denim having 2-way (width) stretch that turns 1 inch length of fabric into 1.5 inches when pulled taut. I do not intend to line the denim pants. They'll be like trouser jeans (or at least that's how it works in my mind). Do you think I'll need to cut some fabric off the side seams (i.e. another .25 inch or more) in order to accommodate the width stretch? I don't want them to be saggy. As an alternate option, could I cut the fabric against the grain i.e. putting the stretch on the length instead of width - or is that asking for trouble?

OK, I seem to be asking lots of questions so I'll just continue. Do you think these pants will look nice in denim, or mom-like? (Yes, I'm implying that mom-like jeans are categorically not nice.)

Thanks so much for feedback - pls. bring it on!