I hope you all enjoyed this highly requested brand of pattern reproduction! I know I enjoyed getting to work with such a glorious 1930's evening gown pattern. If you want to check out more from this Vintage vs. Reproduction series, I have a playlist here: ru-vid.com/group/PLaG2bBTXx7U6tf1DHulYw50VgYvJadnUP
Yes! Or at least story from each pattern co as to what changes they make--e.g. body shape standard and foundation changes--from then (pre fast food) & now 😜
@@sus8e462 we aren't as much bigger than people think but undergarments make a massive difference 1930s women would wear a girdle and a very different bra shape. This creates that straight body that was fashionable and the breasts sit at a different height and have a different shape. A modern remake designed to be worn with modern undergarments means moving the bust point and shape to accommodate a modern more rounded bust allowing for extra space at the hips because they aren't being held in by a girdle.
“Hem not allowed” has me picturing ball gowns with silk fraying around the bottom, getting more an more pronounced throughout the evening. It could be a performance piece! Then I realized they were telling you to plan for the hem, however you plan to finish it. Which makes perfect sense as there’s a wide variety of options. Except I wouldn’t think the godet draping would play nice with a deep hem, so I’d think you’re pretty limited actually - but I’ve never sewn a skirt with godets, anything on the bias, or out of slippery material of any type, so that’s pure speculation.
Performance piece, lol! Having made a silky skirt with many, MANY godets (McCall's 7097), a narrow hand rolled hem is the way to go. Very time consuming, but with so much curving both against and with the grain, the fine tuned control of hand sewing is a necessary evil.
I love that you emphasize having period appropriate sewing books on hand for vintage patterns. It makes me feel vindicated for the library I've been building from antique stores for years.
My mom sewed a lot of my clothes too (born in 1955) or I got hand-me-downs from my cousins. Not only mom but my jr and high school teachers discouraged us to use Vogue. My college professor did encourage us to use Vogue after we first had to use Palmer and Pletsch for pants and blouse or dress. I stay mostly with Simplicity because I wait for the 99 cent sale. I do sometimes splurge on McCalls because I like Angela Clayton's designs.
I remember Vogue’s complex reputation. My mum was so incredibly proud of the Vogue summer suit she made ca. 1962. I’ve always wondered what happened to it...it was beautifully designed and made.
My high school sewing teacher said the same thing about vogue patterns. She wouldn't even let students make anything with vogue patterns until they were in the highest level class that my school offered. I'm recently trying out my first ever vogue pattern (a simple short sleeved button up) and while I don't think it's as complex as my teacher made it out to be (though part of that is because button ups are pretty beginner-intermediate level work) I definitely can see why she wouldn't want beginner sewers to use them. There are parts where they don't really say what they actually want you to do (eg they just tell you to sew up the button facing instead of "do xyz then sew along location d"), so if you don't have any experience you're kind of stuck. They also don't tell you which pieces need interfacing in the main body of the pattern instructions, that info is sort of off in its own little corner away from everything else for some reason?? Again, if you've made a shirt or jacket with a collar before you'd probably be able to guess what needs interfacing, but it's still annoying to have to hunt for that info just to be sure.
1957 baby here. My mother took Home Economics in college and was qualified to teach it. She went into elementary ed. ultimately, but was an accomplished sewer. She made many of my clothes, also m.j
I learned to sew as a teen in the early 1970s ... in college I used my first Vogue pattern and never looked back. The styles were much better, the fit worked for me ... and my boyfriend bought me Vogue's "big fat sewing book" so I had explanations of everything ... and I still use that book today. The other three companies seemed to dumb down their patterns, removing darts, shaping seams, and design details. Vogue kept them in, which worked well for my tiny hourglass figure (in college). Even now ... I don't use Big 4 patterns, but I will look through the Vogue online catalog for ideas.
Someday I'd love to see you sew the modern and the vintage outfits per their respective patterns and instructions, and show the differences/advantages of either/both. 😃 Not necessarily *this* dress, but one your many vintage/repro sets.
After watching this I have realized that the reproduction pattern was actually a better fit for my daughter because she has a curvier...(nice wording) figure than what the 1930's figure would have been so the additional widths worked. I had to make adjustments anyway to the length of the whole pattern because she is only 5' 2 inches tall Lol.
I think many of the discrepencies can be explained by the (possibly) differing "neck to waist" measurements in the vintage vs modern patterns. That measurement is aa vital as bust/waist /hip in a properly fitting bodice. Given how many repros seem to be WAAAY off--this one is actually pretty close. The minute differences in grain are often also quite important, though they may not seam so. A slight change in the side bodice or skirt seam may cause those side seams to "twist"--so the newer lines may have been adjusted to accommodate the new bodice changes.
That's what I was thinking. Because we're talking about bias design, those seams may need adjustment to hang right in the end with the other sloping changes for modern fit.
While I do hate wasted paper, I find that well placed white space really helps for those with vision difficulties, or learning challenges that manifest as a tendency to flip instructions. I definitely would find it easier to read the modern instructions rather the tiny ones provided in the original! This pattern review was so informative, thank you!
You are so forgiving Stephanie! I still cannot believe what a huge difference 1/4th of a single inch makes in the fit. The fact that the flounce inserts were such a different shape tripped me out Girl Scout! I loved this. It's also amazing that a pattern would sell for $275 ... incredible. I was really interested to see that this gown is cut on the straight grain and not bias cut ...
It seems like I read quite a while ago, that when the big four pattern companies started doing reproductions of the originals,that they actually tweaked them to fit the current woman’s figure rather than what people technically look like in the original time. Whether this is true or not, you would need to look at probably more than one pattern from different decades just to see how different these are and where the differences are. you were right to mention that the undergarments are different these days so that could be where a lot of the differences on this particular pattern is where women may have been wearing things a little lower than we wear them now Depending on body shape of course.
I would guess "no hem allowed" means that there is no seam allowance on the pattern for the hem, so the seamstress needs to add that in when cutting. I would just really love it though if we could actually get TRUE reproductions of vintage patterns that are actually the SAME pattern and included more directions for the vintage sewing techniques that not many people know anymore and would like to learn. What I like about vintage patterns and clothing is the tailoring and details and I don't think I'm alone in wanting to learn past techniques. It would be great if the pattern companies would hear you on this. I want to make clothing that fits my body well, because seriously, if I see one more modern pattern that is essentially just a bag I'm supposed to cinch up with a belt and expect it to look decent on me I'm going to scream. I am particularly hating modern patterns at the moment, especially the independents, they are setting the bar pretty low lately. Not much creativity going on there at all. Anyhoo, great video & thanks so much!
My thinking exactly ! I can not understand why the pattern companies go to the trouble of producing a "Reproduction" of a vintage pattern and then muck it up and change it. ???
White space is good. Lots has been written about leaving white space to make things easier to read and understand. I like your videos. I found you through A Vintage Vanity when you did the collaboration.
I don’t wear girdles. I’m wondering if that has something to do with it. I have an ulcer and GERD and can’t wear anything tight on my belly. No Shapeware vintage or modern for me.
Oooo can definitely say, yhe reproduction is meant for us who have banished girdles and move a lot more! The vintage as lovely as it is, my only concern it can be restricting for the modern wearer. Ps. The Godets on the vintage is a bit odd for me as my concern with Satin it can look bunched up and awkward at the bottom. I prefer the godet on the modern one as would allow seamless blending in, allowing for a peekaboo effect.
I've noticed that in all these patterns that he waistline never is truly correctly lined up. but i think it does occasionally happen in the vintage patterns too. one way to make sure line measurements line up, take away the seam allowance on the pattern and walk the seamlines from end to end.
It's almost like when they were copying some pieces, they weren't weighted down properly and shifted during processing. The way some of these pieces drift reminds me of when I do a shoddy job when cutting out.
I made the modern pattern with my usual full bust adjustment. It actually sews up fairly close with differences in undergarments. I say fairly close because I've yet to find a pattern I don't need to do a full bust adjustment. I do have a few vintage Vogue patterns, but Grandma P hated how confusing they were/still are.
@@StephanieCanada oh no don't worry, I've learnt how to spit away from electric appliances previously on someone else's video.... Your sarcasm is utterly brilliant! 🤩😂🥰
This was absolutely fascinating!!! I made (tried to make) this dress in high school out of poly satin ... it didn’t go well ... maybe I need to revisit it 🤔
And Vogue carried on with the "pieces without pattern that you make yourself" right into the 1970's at least! How do I know? I'm in the process of making a gorgeous seventies does Edwardian blouse from a vintage pattern. Oh and I'm filming the whole process, it might go up on the RU-vid next week 😉
They have actually changed about 4 times since the 30's. I have a whole video I did exploring that exact topic: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-xHDor9Jdh7Y.html
I like that it has all the pieces and the back of the envelope. As you say, it allows you to potentially re-create the pattern without having the actual pieces. I wonder if this is related to the earlier style of providing ONLY the outline of the actual pattern pieces? I have a historical/theater costuming book like this.
Just agreeing with others in the comments: can't wait to see both of this sewn up and compared💕 this comparison tho didn't go too bad as for the pieces accuracy!
I think you'd get a more true indication of the relative sizes of the pieces if you carefully iron the paper to flatten out all the folds. (That's what my junior high school home ec teacher told us.)
I don’t know how I got here or why I watched the whole thing, but I really thought she would make both dresses and compare them. I mean, maybe the differences are improvements?
Well hi there! Glad you found my tiny corner of the internet. And while I wish I had the time to fully make each of these, with weekly videos, a full time job and a family to take care of it just isn’t quite feasible. I am hoping to be able to in the future though! Hope you come back and check out some of my other videos as well! Have a great night.
Butterick, McCalls, Simplicity and Vogue patterns are all as one now since the early 2000s they formed under the name the McCalls Pattern Company but still operate under the big four names
“No hem allowed” means that the pattern does not have extra length to fold over so you need to add it. Not so strange. Most facings are useless and be replaced with alternative construction methods that are cleaner.
My Mother often made her clothes but swore off Vogue Patterns because the pieces didn’t match up properly. I’m actually interested in your findings because Butterick were her favoured Pattern Makers. I’m talking late 50’s to early 70’s when she saw less time and trouble to buy for occasions.👗
this pattern looks very elegant after watching and hearing the rating of how close the modern is to the original I'm looking it up now to add to a future sewing project
I am glad that you decided to make up the pattern, but please remember there is a real person reading your comments. Calling my line for line comparison “rattling” does actually hurt because I try my best to do these videos justice for those, like you, that want to make the modern patterns.
@@StephanieCanada oh shoot I'm sorry Stephanie. i just read your comment and then got confused and reread mine and realized i had made a spelling error, which literally messed up my comment from a positive to a negative i didn't mean ratting i meant rating I am so sorry i didn't mean for that to sound nasty or rude. I corrected the spelling error so no one else sees that. I apologize again for the spelling error. i didnt mean for it to sound rude.
Would you be able to provide a list of titles or another way to find these vintage sewing books you mentioned? Or point me in the direction of where you have already shared this information? Many thanks!
Your videos have made me realize how old I am 😂🤣😂🤣😂. Cause I need only the pattern pieces & decent pictures of what the garment is supposed to look like (ie the ones on the back of the modern pattern). I do read instructions, but don’t follow them much unless it’s weird (Vogue is often guilty of this). I can do this because I learned to sew at age 8 to make clothes for my Barbie doll. My mom taught me , often by showing me as she made clothes for me. Then I took Home Ec (ie basically cooking & sewing) every year, 7th thru 12th grade. I’m realizing that this is not common at all anymore 😒
I wish you might have given the suggested fabrics for both patterns. I struggle with finding appropriate fabrics for vintage patterns, since not all are still available.
The differences between the vintage and the modern could be for any number of reasons. For example, the vintage may be in error (I have had that happen, with a New York), or assume a difference in fabrics used. How do the recommended fabrics differ? And there are many other possible reasons. Personally, the differences tell me that the company took the trouble to perform a quality control of the pattern, and I would consider that a dress made with the modern would be just as authentic, if you used the same sewing techniques for the period.
I love these breakdowns Stephanie! I found two vogue repro patterns in a charity shop for £1 so I grabbed them because...£1! But I've been nervous about even thinking about making them because of this series 😂 but this one certainly isn't the worst, maybe I'll give it a go... once my schedule allows for sewing again ;___;
Gasp!😍that Dress 😍 that shirt 😍 poor baby no coffee! I literally walked A Marathon (10+km) to get my Grand Kaffe Salted Caramel before lockdown - again ☕
Ive just gotten into sewing this year, and I honestly do not understand.....why not just reproduce these garments exactly???? This really isnt the worst youve covered by far but its close enough that its infuriating to me lmao.
On one level it does make sense- Modern people wear modern undergarments. Probably the type of person who will make their clothes period accurate from the inside out will also seek out original vintage patterns. But on some of the others (cough. Simplicity) It's a bit more baffling.
Bodies have not changed at all, what's different is the undergarments we wear, a modern bra gives you a different shape than a vintage one on the same woman and the pattern has to adjust to that
I don't understand the shade about the instructions. I do not even know if two-sided printing was possible or cost-effective then. And as for showing the pattern pieces and notching - it makes sense when old pattern pieces were not printed but perforated. as to modernizing - I don't think very many people would buy the pattern if they simply reprinted the original. Women - for the most part who sew this are not going to wear vintage undergarments. I just find you to be a bit harsh, and I was so looking forward to the video.
Hi there, this whole series is me diving into the vintage and original patterns. Early on I saw a lot of huge white spaces left by modern instructions, so that is the source of that comment. As to the modernizing, I kindly disagree, I feel like the big 4 have led us to believe that what they are making is a direct “reproduction” of the vintage pattern. This one has definitely been the closest by far, but it still had some changes made. And actually, I know quite a few folks that do wear vintage reproduction undergarments. Sorry that you didn’t appreciate my comparison in this one, I do have other videos on my channel that may be to your liking.
The value comes from if you are actually planning on using these reproduction patterns. New sewers many times dont realize that these repro patterns are not exact reproductions. Sometimes the difference is subtle and doesnt impact too much how you sew it or how it fits. Sometimes the differences are so much that it results in a garment that doesnt look or fit like you were expecting. Her going through and breaking down the differences in piece shape and measurements is really good info to have going into a project. Some of the patterns require so many adjustments to make them work closer to the original and those adjustments are beyond my skill level so her info keeps me from wasting time and money on a project I wont be happy with.
